PSA CRJ-700 AA midair collision

Cory Trevor said:
do NVGs limit your view? I know nothing about the military so I don’t know if they’d be using them. Just curious
Click to expand...

They do. but you scan by looking around. And me personally, I look for traffic from under or out the sides of NVGs, to have color and clarity, and to see certain color LED lights that cannot be seen from the NVGs. Still, if they called the traffic in sight and maintain visual, the question would be one to wonder.

Also, me personally, I don’t generally have NVGs down when flying in brightly lit urban areas. The city lights tends to wash the image out a bit. Better to have them up/stowed, and fly unaided in these areas. Same thing I’ve done when flying this same route out there.
 
TUCKnTRUCK said:
In the video there’s an aircraft preceding it… which would be my guess.

I could be wrong, but Helo’s don’t get RA’s like we do correct? And in that sense if the CRJ is RA inhibit at <1500 feet, would just be a traffic alert for them.
Click to expand...

Nope. No RA. Just TA. Still, in this environment, shouldn’t have been an issue anyway.
 
God this sucks, especially from the video out there. Maybe they werent familiar enough with SOPs there and didnt expect the CRJ to turn onto final ? RA inhibited that low for PSA crew. TCAS Advisory yes, but with crew told the helo will maintain visual theyre likely focused on the turn inbound and expecting the helo to go wide of them and not inside. Hoping they can find some survivors at this point.
 
Kingairer said:
God this sucks, especially from the video out there. Maybe they werent familiar enough with SOPs there and didnt expect the CRJ to turn onto final ? RA inhibited that low for PSA crew. TCAS Advisory yes, but with crew told the helo will maintain visual theyre likely focused on the turn inbound and expecting the helo to go wide of them and not inside. Hoping they can find some survivors at this point.
Click to expand...

If the helicopter was given a visual separation assignment for traffic they called in sight, then the onus is on them for separation. The CRJ is the landing aircraft, less maneuverable, and essentially has right of way over a transiting aircraft. Hence why visual separation would be assigned to the helicopter, not to the CRJ crew.
 
MikeD said:
Nope. No RA. Just TA. Still, in this environment, shouldn’t have been an issue anyway.
Click to expand...
I’ve got to assume they were looking at the preceding and thought they had 3 miles of separation. I hope. Otherwise what did they call in sight?

This sucks. Sorry to all involved.
 
tcco94 said:
Audio of ATC says pass behind the CRJ, why are we giving visual avoidance commands at night right through an active approach? Seems like that’s just a disaster waiting to happen
Click to expand...

Happens all the time, and quite common. Ive gotten same out there, and out here, flying assigned helo routes. The CRJ should’ve been easy to spot, looking low to high from the helo. None of this is rocket science as an evolution. Call traffic in sight. Avoid the traffic you called in sight. Unless the wrong traffic was seen.
 
MikeD said:
If the helicopter was given a visual separation assignment for traffic they called in sight, then the onus is on them for separation. The CRJ is the landing aircraft, less maneuverable, and essentially has right of way over a transiting aircraft. Hence why visual separation would be assigned to the helicopter, not to the CRJ crew.
Click to expand...
Yes, Sop here. We will typically get a point out with helicopters zipping down below well out of range....I havent heard it myself, but on company pages I am told they were issued that clearance. I hate visual separation clearances in general, especially with helicopters, and especially at night.
 
TUCKnTRUCK said:
I’ve got to assume they were looking at the preceding and thought they had 3 miles of separation. I hope. Otherwise what did they call in sight?

This sucks. Sorry to all involved.
Click to expand...

About the only thing I can think. Seeing, and passing behind one traffic, when it was really the one following it.

But, airliners arent exactly in close-trail while landing, their spacing isn’t exceptionally close, so this is somewhat perplexing.
 
Kingairer said:
Yes, Sop here. We will typically get a point out with helicopters zipping down below well out of range....I havent heard it myself, but on company pages I am told they were issued that clearance. I hate visual separation clearances in general, especially with helicopters, and especially at night.
Click to expand...

Visual separation is easier at night than during the day in one primary way: Much easier to see lit up aircraft IF….looking low to high, or even level.

If looking high to low, can be nearly impossible in an urban area though.
 
MikeD said:
About the only thing I can think. Seeing, and passing behind one traffic, when it was really the one following it.

But, airliners arent exactly in close-trail while landing, their spacing isn’t exceptionally close, so this is somewhat perplexing.
Click to expand...
Night time visual behind traffic well typically hold just outside of the 2.5-3.5mi ring on tcas. In the dark I’ve seen people creeping up because distance can be hard to judge off blinking lights.

More so if the CRJ was holding final flaps on the visual circle and had a somewhat temporary overtake.
 
Skåning said:
That's why helos (or any traffic) shouldnt be crossing the approach path at an altitude that would be on that path. They should be way high or way low not at 1000' 3 mi from the extended centerline.
Click to expand...

That’s a function of where TRACON either wants them, or where they must be for airspace reasons. I’m sure this will get a second look.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top