Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
It all works at 200 feet as long as no one is landing on 33.
PSA CRJ-700 AA midair collision
- Thread starter swakid8
- Start date
yup. dunno why 33 ops would allow that transition, if its noise abatement keeping them over the water then I think it’s time to reconsider priorities
GolfChuck
Trustworthy Source
I'm still catching up so forgive if for the potential barrage of replies from older posts or if this has already been pointed out...
In normal class B airspace, the VFR to IFR separation standard in this situation would be 1.5nm at the same altitude, or 500 ft vertical. When the traffic is called and at least one aircraft has the other in sight, the onus to maintain separation falls solely on the pilot maintaining visual. There is no separation standard besides "see and avoid" at that point. As the pilot, if you are unsure you have the correct traffic, or you lose the traffic, it is up to you to let the controller know so that action can be taken to prevent a collision. Especially if you know that traffic will be manuevering and not on a straight course. A quick "hold north of hains point," had the controller known to do so, would have also prevented this. That could be a hover or a circle for a helo.
It was a very short climb, remaining up there just long enough for the traffic to pass, then back down. Could’ve been for the particular times I experienced it and not common, but I don’t know as I was only there on temp duty flying missions out there.
JDean3204
Well-Known Member
For anyone else that has listened to the ATC, does it seem there was some attempted coms that were stepped on? I can’t gather if that’s bleed over, quality of the recording media or legit blocked communication of maybe the controller following up to make sure the helo does in fact have the traffic in sight.
GroundPilot
Well-Known Member
To me it sounded like it
NovemberEcho
Dergs favorite member
It’s cause the feed is 2 different frequencies. The river VFR traffic has its own freq. the controller was using both.
JDean3204
Well-Known Member
Oh okay, thank you for explaining that
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
Crew identified:
Pilot and first officer of the doomed American Eagle revealed
The pilot and first officer of the crashed American Airlines flight that was collided with by a military helicopter and split in two has been identified.
www.dailymail.co.uk
phill1174
Well-Known Member
That's can be a big threat too. Thankfully last year for CQ we really harped on going missed in special situations like this or on RNP's.
phill1174
Well-Known Member
At night its pretty benign. During the day you're hoping everyone is on their A game and no one overshoots the turn to base.
HeyEng
Well-Known Member
A few comments note that the ATC "traffic alert" are so common place, it's routinely ignored. Ironically an in flight collision in 1978 over California (PSA flight 182 and a Cessna 172) a similar/same alert was issued and was summarily ignored. Lesson *not* learned.
"Approach control on the ground picked up an automated conflict alert 19 seconds before the collision, but did not relay this information to the aircraft because, according to the approach coordinator, such alerts were commonplace even when no actual conflict existed. The NTSB stated: "Based on all information available to him, he decided that the crew of Flight 182 were complying with their visual separation clearance; that they were accomplishing an overtake maneuver within the separation parameters of the conflict alert computer; and that, therefore, no conflict existed."
en.m.wikipedia.org
"Approach control on the ground picked up an automated conflict alert 19 seconds before the collision, but did not relay this information to the aircraft because, according to the approach coordinator, such alerts were commonplace even when no actual conflict existed. The NTSB stated: "Based on all information available to him, he decided that the crew of Flight 182 were complying with their visual separation clearance; that they were accomplishing an overtake maneuver within the separation parameters of the conflict alert computer; and that, therefore, no conflict existed."
Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 182 - Wikipedia
Last edited:
WacoFan
Bigly
Does the Cerritos mid-air over LA in the 80's not count because it was Aeromexico and not an American carrier? Not a snark question - just wondering why it seems many have memory-holed that one and skip directly to PSA.A few comments note that the ATC "traffic alert" are so common place, it's routinely ignored. Ironically, the last in-flight collision of a commercial airliner in the US happened in 1978 (PSA flight 182 and a Cessna 172) this alert was issued and was summarily ignored. Lesson *not* learned.
"Approach control on the ground picked up an automated conflict alert 19 seconds before the collision, but did not relay this information to the aircraft because, according to the approach coordinator, such alerts were commonplace even when no actual conflict existed. The NTSB stated: "Based on all information available to him, he decided that the crew of Flight 182 were complying with their visual separation clearance; that they were accomplishing an overtake maneuver within the separation parameters of the conflict alert computer; and that, therefore, no conflict existed."
Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 182 - Wikipedia
arkflyr
Well-Known Member
Vas has this up with the UHF from PAT25, they reported traffic in sight and requested to proceed with visual separation.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r90Xw3tQC0I
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r90Xw3tQC0I
Last edited by a moderator:
arkflyr
Well-Known Member
Maybe because in the Cerritos case the pilot of the Cherokee wasn't talking to ATC and violated the LAX TCA, whereas with PSA in SAN and now here both aircraft were in contact with ATC as well as informing the controllers that they would maintain visual separation.
My memory is a bit rough on those accidents so I may be a bit off though.
I could be spitballing too, but I think the image of PSA 182 that was captured right after the collision being one of the most iconic news photos of that era contributes a little bit. I can’t remember if there’s a similar image of the Cerritos crash.
arkflyr
Well-Known Member
Vas has this up with the UHF from PAT25, they reported traffic in sight and requested to proceed with visual separation.
Don't know why that was changed but VASAviation has two of those up, that being the older one and the one I linked has the UHF transmissions from the crew of the helicopter.
WacoFan
Bigly
My bad. I was reviewing and saw the pic and thought it was the same. send me the link and I will put it back
Mod note: political discussion on this accident is now here:
https://jetcareers.com/forums/threads/political-discussions-re-psa-crj-700-aa-midair-collision
https://jetcareers.com/forums/threads/political-discussions-re-psa-crj-700-aa-midair-collision
Last edited: