PSA CRJ-700 AA midair collision

bbmikej said:
Ok, after a night of sleep, maybe not close completely but lower the slots and get rid of 33 so they only have 01/19
Click to expand...
I am really curious what DCA ATCer restrictions are when using 33 for VFR trafffic on the river. I think 33 is beneficial to DCA ops, but I dont think a circle to 33 clearance should have been given with traffic heading southbound down that river.
 
I would be interested to hear the PAT's initial call up. I would imagine some sort of blanket call like "traffic, multiple aircraft landing DCA RWY1 and RWY33" would have been given when the helicopter was approved for that route. From the pilot side that would put me on high alert in the vicinity of the airport, but from the controller side it would de-prioritize in my mind, the need to make individual traffic calls.
 
AM011309 said:
Yikes..someone is getting fired for recording and posting that. Not sure where it was first posted but that is a big no-no.
Click to expand...
meh, Falcon replays get posted all the time on youtube. That video on VASAviation is an actual radar feed. I'd love to know how he gets those, especially since I believe he is based in France.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JEP
greg1016 said:
meh, Falcon replays get posted all the time on youtube. That video on VASAviation is an actual radar feed. I'd love to know how he gets those, especially since I believe he is based in France.
Click to expand...
This one first went on Twitter last night. I saw it and then it spread like wildfire. Same with the crash videos
 
  • Like
Reactions: JEP
Cory Trevor said:
With the collision alert going off. I swear I hear that thing a lot in the background
Click to expand...

CA’s go off so often that it’s nothing unusual anymore. They go off for traffic that in no universe could possibly be a factor, theyll go off if you climb/descend fast with traffic above/below they altitude you’ll stop at, they’ll go off 2 miles after you’ve already passed someone, they’ll go off routinely for aircraft on final with an airport underneath them, and they’re practically non-stop in VFR corridors. So hearing a CA and not taking action (especially with someone saying they’ll maintain visual) is absolutely nothing I would raise an eyebrow at in normal circumstances.
 
Rosstafari said:
Most controllers have a poor understanding of how difficult it is to visually acquire and avoid traffic. Radar controllers don’t see aircraft at all, of course, and in the tower cab, you get to know exactly where to look to correlate the picture on your radar display with what you’re seeing outside - and then get to subconsciously thinking it must be that easy and fast for the pilots as well.

“The CRJ on final for 33 out of (altitude)” may’ve been better, but nighttime visual separation below 10,000 just doesn’t work, imo. Few people outside of DCA certified controllers are qualified to offer a fully informed opinion, but personally I would not have been comfortable issuing that clearance. Day or night.
Click to expand...
Thinking more...Not only did that poor or vague phraseology hurt the PAT H-60, it didnt allow the CRJ crew any situational awareness that they were in close prox with a helicopter either. Had the Tower had a more descriptive point out, it would have queued the CRJ crew in that they should be aware of the H60 as well even if not directly spoken too.
 
I noticed watching the replay that the helicopters altitude is all over the place, and so I read the description on the DCA Helo chart. I don't know where it departed, but the description of route 1 says departing the Pentagon or south of the memorial bridge maintain at or below 200 and the description of route 4 says north of the Wilson bridge at or below 200
 
greg1016 said:
I noticed watching the replay that the helicopters altitude is all over the place, and so I read the description on the DCA Helo chart. I don't know where it departed, but the description of route 1 says departing the Pentagon or south of the memorial bridge maintain at or below 200 and the description of route 4 says north of the Wilson bridge at or below 200
Click to expand...
200 feet plus or minus some, wouldve been great and no conflict for any departing traffic, and any traffic landing 1, but 33 is an an obvious conflict. I am wondering if the ATC forgot about that when issued the circle to 33 clearance. I gotta believe that is against their SOP to circle an aircraft to 33 with helo traffic southbound.
 
tcco94 said:
Just a reminder the airlines fought pretty damn hard for more DCA slots and they gave them more. So unless that changes, we will all be looking at more DCA flying
Click to expand...
IMHO the FAA has cut corners on safety at several airports by not standing up and saying “no” to airlines when the airspace/staffing shouldn’t allow for the amount of tin the airlines want to push. I think in particular of San Diego, which is already 10 lbs of poo in a 5 lb bag and is getting another new terminal, all of NYC airspace where controllers are working mandatory 6 day weeks, Seattle any time there is a cloud in the sky…I’m sure users can come up with more.
 
ahw01 said:
Plenty of vfr corridors and approaches use the river - we had our own mishap in london a few years back. I think Ops under an approach should be a no-no, particularly under final... Vauxhall helicopter crash - Wikipedia
Click to expand...
That would shut down all VFR corridor traffic in the NYC area. It has been operating safely for decades, and when there are mishaps it only involves the bug smashers. It would increase controller workload tenfold from all the VFR bravo clearances [edit: if you took the corridors away].
 
EDUC8-or said:
I went through my old logbook this morning, lots of flights in 709PS. This one really hits close to home. Such a sad day. 😥

I've heard the argument to never call preceding traffic. But how many times have you heard "The helicopter has you in sight and is maintaining visual separation."?
Click to expand...
One of the few ASAPs I filed at my last job was exactly that on approach to BFI, we got an RA off a helo that had us in sight. Fortunately we were still high enough to get an RA.
 
greg1016 said:
That would shut down all VFR corridor traffic in the NYC area. It has been operating safely for decades, and when there are mishaps it only involves the bug smashers. It would increase controller workload tenfold from all the VFR bravo clearances [edit: if you took the corridors away].
Click to expand...

I will say the skyline route is shut down when LGA is on 13. You can still do the SFRA though.
 
I saw now, where the ATC calls out traffic to PAT well before the one prior to impact. The traffic is pointed out when the CRJ is at 1200 feet and called that he is manuever for 33. PAT calls in sight. The 2nd call was more of a "you sure"?
Kingairer said:
Going through all the stages with this. But this is also lazy phraseology, “do you have the CRJ in site”? What CRJ? Which one? Where should I be looking ? In the plane that just took off? The lights I see way out there in the distance? A better call could have saved everyone, not sure what is required of them there legally, but dang. What say you ATCers ?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top