Mid-Air Collision in DC

[uhhello]

6 hours ago, Vetter said:

Why are they withholding the Blackhawk pilot’s name?

She was not recovered according to the timeline I have read.  The other two were recovered and confirmed dead.  The last crew member was listed as DUSTWUN until the release a short while ago.  Not every event that happens in this shitty world is a globalist conspiracy.  Some are.  Most aren't.  

[disgruntledemployee]

Visual separation request issues I see.  Traffic called out to PAT and they asked for visual separation from ATC and was granted.  PAT must identify the traffic in order for visual separation to be granted.  The CRJ was never informed of PAT, nor were they asked to find/identify PAT.  If I remember, seems like all calls like this I've been in, both of us traffics were called out to each of us like SFO and DEN with converging approaches.  So I looked up the FAR, and it says, if the aircraft are on a converging path, both must be notified.  If ATC had done that, maybe the CRJ puts a set of eyes out to find PAT while the other tries to line up on 33.

https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html/chap7_section_2.html  a.2. c, d, and e

2. Pilot-applied visual separation.

  a.  Maintain communication with at least one of the aircraft involved and ensure there is an ability to communicate with the other aircraft.

  b. The pilot sees another aircraft and is instructed to maintain visual separation from the aircraft as follows:

    1. Tell the pilot about the other aircraft. Include position, direction, type, and, unless it is obvious, the other aircraft's intention.

    2. Obtain acknowledgment from the pilot that the other aircraft is in sight.

    3. Instruct the pilot to maintain visual separation from that aircraft.

PHRASEOLOGY-

(ACID), TRAFFIC, (clock position and distance), (direction) BOUND, (type of aircraft), (intentions and other relevant information).

If required,

(ACID), REPORT TRAFFIC IN SIGHT or DO YOU HAVE IT IN SIGHT?

If the pilot reports traffic in sight, or the answer is in the affirmative,

(ACID), MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION

NOTE-

Towers must use the procedures contained in paragraph 3-1-6, Traffic Information, subparagraph b or c, as appropriate.

c. If the pilot reports the traffic in sight and will maintain visual separation from it (the pilot must state both), the controller may “approve” the operation instead of restating the instructions.

PHRASEOLOGY-

(ACID), APPROVED.

NOTE-

Pilot-applied visual separation between aircraft is achieved when the controller has instructed the pilot to maintain visual separation and the pilot acknowledges with their call sign or when the controller has approved pilot-initiated visual separation.

d. If aircraft are on converging courses, inform the other aircraft of the traffic and that visual separation is being applied.

PHRASEOLOGY-

(ACID), TRAFFIC, (clock position and distance), (direction) BOUND, (type of aircraft), HAS YOU IN SIGHT AND WILL MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION.

e. Advise the pilots if the targets appear likely to merge.

[brabus]

More importantly they should immediately stop relying on visual as the primary decon method in busy airspace. I’m not saying kill it everywhere in the NAS, but I have no issue with killing it in class B and within an approach corridor in Class C if an aircraft is on a segment of the approach.
 

Story time: I almost midaired once in class C when the controller gave very shitty description of traffic, I called visual on the wrong traffic (but it correlated based on his description), then missed his “intended” factor traffic only because I continued a visual scan and maneuvered to avoid. Mind you I’m an experienced pilot and this was not a necessarily busy airspace. He tried to violate me, and the FAA ended up violating him and pulling his cert because he used incorrect phraseology and gave a poor traffic point out that correlated with the wrong aircraft. That’s a great example of how visual decon should not be fully relied on. Now take my story and put it in a very congested airspace at night with a ton of cultural lighting, water-based visual illusions, etc. 

[ViperMan]

Having little to no SA on the specifics here, I can say based on my experiences in the military and thus far in the civilian world, ATC is far too comfortable giving visual approaches to passenger aircraft. IMO, they should basically only be given upon request. I think it has become the easy button for them to place responsibility on pilots.

[SurelySerious]

Having little to no SA on the specifics here, I can say based on my experiences in the military and thus far in the civilian world, ATC is far too comfortable giving visual approaches to passenger aircraft. IMO, they should basically only be given upon request. I think it has become the easy button for them to place responsibility on pilots.

Agree. To the point that they get angry when you don’t accept the visual 36.9nm out because due to whatever conditions you can’t see the airport yet.

[Majestik Møøse]

In 2025 it’s unacceptable that we rely on a pilot moving at 100-200 kts to visually acquire another 100-200 kt airborne target based on a 3rd-party visobs talk-on at a third location with no common reference point - in Class B, at night - to ensure flight safety. These are multi-million dollar vehicles and buildings that can’t get a common datalink picture on a screen.

Lots of root causes for lots of problems with equipment, certification, training, manning, etc. Every child playing iPad games has more computing and display power than a lot of aircraft that are allowed in Class B.

[BashiChuni]

2 hours ago, ViperMan said:

Having little to no SA on the specifics here, I can say based on my experiences in the military and thus far in the civilian world, ATC is far too comfortable giving visual approaches to passenger aircraft. IMO, they should basically only be given upon request. I think it has become the easy button for them to place responsibility on pilots.

visual approaches are useful in certain situations. and it does relieve controller workload.

[arg]

52 minutes ago, BashiChuni said:

visual approaches are useful in certain situations. and it does relieve controller workload.

Airline dudes chime in but do a lot of them prefer the visual? Under certain circumstances of course.