- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: As an airline pilot, my opinion on the airline crash.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 3:10 pm to Lsut81
Posted on 1/30/25 at 3:10 pm to Lsut81
quote:Nah, it’s common to get instructions to “maintain visual separation” from aircraft you have in sight.
That "pass behind" or whatever they were told was not standard protocol.
Any truth to that Tusc? I know you're a pilot
The problem is, they had the wrong aircraft “in sight.”
0
Posted on 1/30/25 at 3:10 pm to bhtigerfan
Full Post with audio video
quote:
POV from someone who has actual flown Helo Route 4 thru DC.
MAX altitude for that segment is 200'.
Crash appears to have occurred at 350'.
Jet was cleared to land RW33 and in a good position to do so.
Tower had called out to PAT25 (helo) multiple times asking if he saw the jet. Cleared the helo to continue behind the jet. [Routine calls]
My 2cents, I think the helo was actively trying to avoid and turned into it while trying to go behind.
Nighttime airport environments are extremely disorienting. Losing/gaining 150' at night over water takes only seconds of inattention.
The cockpit recorders will tell what happened in the helo.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 3:17 pm to tigerfoot
quote:I made those instructions up, but it’s an accurate example of how they give traffic alerts so you can get a visual on the traffic.
Like, “PAT25, your traffic is a CRJ, 8 o’clock, 4 miles descending thru 600 feet on visual approach to runway 33. Call traffic in sight.”
im not educated enough to have an opinion. But it seems in this case the instructions were pretty vague.
Tuscaloosa typed the actual traffic instructions from ATC on the previous page. It was, “PAT25, traffic just south of the Woodrow Bridge, a CRJ, it's 1200 feet setting up for runway 33.”
That’s standard info for visually locating traffic, type of aircraft, location, altitude and intentions.
This post was edited on 1/30/25 at 3:22 pm
Posted on 1/30/25 at 3:18 pm to bhtigerfan
quote:
bhtigerfan
From someone seeking to understand all of this I really appreciate you taking the time to share your professional opinion. —cheers
Posted on 1/30/25 at 3:39 pm to Lsut81
quote:
That "pass behind" or whatever they were told was not standard protocol.
“Pass behind” or “follow” instructions are pretty common, but rely on the pilot to maintain visual separation.
In this case, the helo pilots responded confidently that they saw the traffic they were sequenced behind. Unfortunately, they were apparently looking at the wrong airplane.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 3:41 pm to bhtigerfan
quote:
Not sure what plane he saw, but yes, the CRJ they crashed into would have been at his 8 to 10 o’clock position.
The CRJ would have been to the Blackhawks 2-3 o'clock position wouldn't he? They were traveling opposite direction and controller told the BH to get behind the CRJ. Two issues with the Blackhawk that were the problem, the first is the reported altitude was 100' higher, two it appears the BH is further west than the normal corridor. If Blackhawk is at 200' and along the eastern shore of the river, the CRJ flies over him and there is no conflict. It happens every day around that area.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 3:42 pm to Tuscaloosa
quote:
Tuscaloosa
Do you know if the airline crew based out of Charlotte? I read that somewhere, but can't find it now
Posted on 1/30/25 at 3:42 pm to Tuscaloosa
quote:
“Pass behind” or “follow” instructions are pretty common, but rely on the pilot to maintain visual separation.
In this case, the helo pilots responded confidently that they saw the traffic they were sequenced behind. Unfortunately, they were apparently looking at the wrong airplane.
We need to see pictures of the female pilot before we can make any assumptions.
Also, are we using LGBTQ terminology or Trump terminology?
Also, no training teaches you to run right into whatever is in front of you, in the daytime or nighttime if you can believe that.
This post was edited on 1/30/25 at 3:43 pm
Posted on 1/30/25 at 4:00 pm to jizzle6609
It's quite possible they had the correct aircraft in sight, but when the CRJ made his final turn to RWY 33, they lost sight. In that left turn, the only thing visable to the approaching traffic would have been the underside beacon light. That turn was maybe a 1-3 minute turn.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 4:10 pm to AirbusDawg
The controller in communication with PAT 225 may not have done anything wrong, followed procedures in place.
Per a Helo pilot on Bongino today however the practice of allowing helos to be cleared for visual separation so close to commercial flights so frequently is inherently dangerous and may be the biggest contributing factor.
Who is responsible for putting that procedure into place to begin with is a question that needs to be asked.
Per a Helo pilot on Bongino today however the practice of allowing helos to be cleared for visual separation so close to commercial flights so frequently is inherently dangerous and may be the biggest contributing factor.
Who is responsible for putting that procedure into place to begin with is a question that needs to be asked.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 4:15 pm to Kjnstkmn
quote:I have zero knowledge about ATC but it kinda seems to me that if you get the helo to say yeah on the visual separation, you've kinda passed the buck. And the responsibility. Humans being who they are, I can see that happening.
Who is responsible for putting that procedure into place to begin with is a question that needs to be asked.
I heard on the radio that ATC can't monitor military vhf. They were talking to the helo but may have missed some responses?
Posted on 1/30/25 at 4:16 pm to Bass Tiger
quote:
1) Why is a Blackhawk helicopter flying low altitude routine training flights in one of the most congested airspaces in the US?
exactly
Posted on 1/30/25 at 4:23 pm to mikeytig
and at night
Posted on 1/30/25 at 5:12 pm to bhtigerfan
Posted on 1/30/25 at 6:08 pm to bhtigerfan
I have not seen this posted yet but is the radar imagery with the tower radio communications.
My question to you, is it common for the tower to talk to a Helo and not get a response? And just say visual separation? How do they even know that the Helo got the instructions? I don't see any communications back?
Audio and Radar Video sync'd
My question to you, is it common for the tower to talk to a Helo and not get a response? And just say visual separation? How do they even know that the Helo got the instructions? I don't see any communications back?
Audio and Radar Video sync'd
Posted on 1/30/25 at 6:13 pm to NorCali
Ground all military aircraft….
Posted on 1/30/25 at 6:16 pm to NorCali
It's a matter of differing radio modes. Commercial aviation = VHF
Military aviation = UHF
Tower = Both
That recording was of VHF ONLY. There were acknowledgements by Blackhawk on UHF.
Military aviation = UHF
Tower = Both
That recording was of VHF ONLY. There were acknowledgements by Blackhawk on UHF.
Posted on 1/30/25 at 6:23 pm to IvoryBillMatt
Ok thanks, that makes sense.
Still seems like the tower was a bit late to check the second time with the Helo approaching.
Still seems like the tower was a bit late to check the second time with the Helo approaching.
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News