Mid-Air Collision in DC

[Vetter]

24 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

 

Punishment works, as long as it's for something that should be punished. Crossing an active runway without clearance should at least get your license suspended. And if it's just because you were heads-down, sorry, that's not a good reason. 

 

The unions have taken a lot (almost all) of the punishment for bad behavior away at the company level. That's fine, the companies behave badly all the time. But the FAA has gotten lax too. 

 

Some things need harsh punishments to keep them rare.

Spot on.

[disgruntledemployee]

2 hours ago, Sua Sponte said:

 

Time to make a video game.

Greetings, Starfighter. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Xur and the Ko-dan Armada.  Get Ready.  Prepare for blastoff.

[StoleIt]

5 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

The R model tanker engines are super low to the ground, and pod-scrapes are one of the highest risks of landing it. Happened a bunch, until they started giving a Q-3 to anyone who did it (at least according to the old farts). Suddenly, pod scrapes are very, very rare. 

 

Punishment works, as long as it's for something that should be punished. Crossing an active runway without clearance should at least get your license suspended. And if it's just because you were heads-down, sorry, that's not a good reason. 

 

The unions have taken a lot (almost all) of the punishment for bad behavior away at the company level. That's fine, the companies behave badly all the time. But the FAA has gotten lax too. 

 

Some things need harsh punishments to keep them rare.

Fine, but I'd also like to Q3 the requirements branch that bought the R model engines without flat bottoms. The AF decided it was cheaper to Q3 people than add some breathing room to landing a, looks at calendar, 80 year old airplane.

So if we hold the pilots responsible than I also want everyone else in the stupidity tree to be held to the same standard.

[Clark Griswold]

On 2/28/2025 at 3:54 PM, StoleIt said:

Fine, but I'd also like to Q3 the requirements branch that bought the R model engines without flat bottoms. The AF decided it was cheaper to Q3 people than add some breathing room to landing a, looks at calendar, 80 year old airplane.

So if we hold the pilots responsible than I also want everyone else in the stupidity tree to be held to the same standard.

Side note - they bought CFM 56s with the aforementioned lower accessories drive unit because the good idea fairy thought they could quick change them on the ramp because airlines that do 20x more flying than the AF does just weren’t that smart and couldn’t see the need for that capability 

[Smokin]

On 2/28/2025 at 2:54 PM, StoleIt said:

So if we hold the pilots responsible than I also want everyone else in the stupidity tree to be held to the same standard.

This.  When a pilot screws up, he gets a violation filed.  When a controller screws up, it is almost always glossed over.  When an FAA procedure is substantially to blame, as I think is the case for the DC incident, what happens to the people that created and approved the procedure?  I'm betting absolutely nothing.  Very easy for the FAA guys to yell 'throw the book at them' and 'I have a number for you to call' when they know that they will never be held to the same standard when they make mistakes on the same level of magnitude.

I've worked on a first name basis with FAA people for years as the military point of contact for a facility and have worked on pilot deviations that that resulted in filed violations.  I've also talked with them about ATC problems that resulted in just as, if not more, dangerous of a situation as the pilot deviations and nothing happened to the controllers.  It was always a "we'll talk about it and address it in our training".

[JimNtexas]

On 2/20/2025 at 11:02 AM, Biff_T said:

You ask for specific routes or zones with tower prior to executing them.  Example: "Tower, Biff 28 Cabin John, 1, 4, 3 to Andrews". 

From what I remember, there were only military,  gov agency and police helicopters.  No tourists.   

Balt-Wash_Heli (2).pdf 63.65 MB · 16 downloads

 

   Thanks for posting the chart .  Note that all altitudes are specified as MSl.

 

To me this whole airspace design was normalized deviance .  This crash was baked right into the airspace design.

if this event had gone perfectly the airliner could have passed 125 feet over the helicopter.

That is insane and would be a reportable near miss anywhere else.

 

 

[StoleIt]

NTSB Released today:

Read the Investigation Preliminary report.

Read the NTSB's urgent recommendation report on mitigating the risk of midair collisions at DCA.

Some highlights that popped out to me:

• At 2047:40, the crew of flight 5342 received an automated traffic advisory from the airplane’s traffic alert and collision avoidance system (TCAS) system stating, “Traffic, Traffic.” At this time, the aircraft were about 0.95 nm apart, as shown in Figure 3. 
• At 2045:30, PAT25 passed over the Memorial Bridge. CVR data revealed that the IP told the pilot that they were at 300 ft and needed to descend. The pilot said that they would descend to 200 ft.
• The PAT25 FDR indicated that the radio altitude of the helicopter at the time of the collision was 278 ft and had been steady for the previous 5 seconds.
• At 2047:58, or 1 second before impact, flight 5342 began to increase its pitch. FDR data showed the airplane’s elevators were deflected near their maximum nose up travel.
• And the airplane rolled about 450°, impacting the water in an approximate 45° nose- low attitude with a left roll about 90°. 

PAT was at least 60 feet high...not sure if those helicopter routes are supposed to be AGL or MSL, but DCA is only 14 ft field elevation but either way they were high.

The CRJ must have seen the PAT too late and applied full deflection.

How terrible that must have been for the passengers and crew before impact.
 

Edited March 11 by StoleIt

[icohftb]

It's insane that had the Blackhawk been at 200' they would have passed 69' apart...

[GrndPndr]

Related free article:

Helicopter Restrictions to Stay in Place at Reagan National Airport, Following Crash

[Dapper Dan Man]

Data from the report for ops at DCA between Oct 2021 to Dec 2024:

15,214 occurrences where commercial airplanes and helicopters separated by less than 1 NM laterally and less than 400 ft vertically.

85 occurrences with less than 1500 ft lateral separation and less than 200 ft vertical separation. Averaged out, this happened a little over twice per month in that 3 year time frame.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[raimius]

1 hour ago, Dapper Dan Man said:

Data from the report for ops at DCA between Oct 2021 to Dec 2024:

15,214 occurrences where commercial airplanes and helicopters separated by less than 1 NM laterally and less than 400 ft vertically.

85 occurrences with less than 1500 ft lateral separation and less than 200 ft vertical separation. Averaged out, this happened a little over twice per month in that 3 year time frame.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, that's pretty bad.

 

The NTSB recommendations make a lot of sense.

[Springer]

18 hours ago, raimius said:

Yeah, that's pretty bad.

 

The NTSB recommendations make a lot of sense.

I'd say most of us airline types and probably ALPA Safety never knew this marginal separation was going on until now. Only landed on Rwy 33 once in the Bus due to x-winds on Rwy 01.  Currently fly out of South St Paul airport VFR to the south and pass thru MSP Rwy 30L&R final with 1,000' separation which seems close under the Class B shelf.

[raimius]

Clearing traffic on RT4 while landing 33 wasn't the intent of the route, but no one forbid it officially...

[Pitt4401]

Earlier in this disaster, when it came out the MP was a White House Mil Social aide, I had the hunch this was a junior officer that was too enamored with the shiny opportunities in D.C. (and elsewhere) to the detriment of her primary duties.

Add to that, MP's whopping 450hrs of flight time in almost six years of service--the majority likely from her time at Rucker...

Add to that, the medical school she applied to gave her honorary, posthumous acceptance.

https://www.instagram.com/icahnmountsinai/p/DGv2jegpcB8/

I am beginning to think my hunch is fairly accurate.

[busdriver]

39 minutes ago, Pitt4401 said:

I am beginning to think my hunch is fairly accurate.

Stop.  You don't know anything about the Army or what an RLO's primary duties are.  You don't know what a "normal" amount of flight hours for an Army officer are in right now.  You don't know anything about this person.  You are pulling your un-informed, vapid internet opinions out of your ass.

 

 

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, busdriver said:

Stop.  You don't know anything about the Army or what an RLO's primary duties are.  You don't know what a "normal" amount of flight hours for an Army officer are in right now.  You don't know anything about this person.  You are pulling your un-informed, vapid internet opinions out of your ass.

 

 

Agreed, except for the hours part. Sorry, but we shouldn't pretend like just because the Army does something as a lazy habit, that it somehow imparts upon them a superhuman ability to attain proficiency faster than the rest of us mortals. 

 

460 hours is dog shit. Doesn't matter if you're flying helicopters, Jets, or learning to crochet. That is a tiny number of hours for someone operating aircraft that requires high levels of proficiency and a safety emphasis. Obviously we are dealing with the same problem in the Air Force. When I got out we were sending guys to IP School after their first assignment and all they knew was flights out of the Died. But that's more of the same "normalization of deviance" that created the DC problem in the first place. 

 

I'm not going to comment on her as a person because I know nothing else about her. But as a pilot she was, by definition, inexperienced if all she had was ~469 hours. Doesn't matter if it's "normal." 

 

No one should be assuming her motives, because she's dead and it's a courtesy to the family, but we also shouldn't lie about her experience level in an attempt to lionize the fallen. 

[SurelySerious]

Agreed, except for the hours part. Sorry, but we shouldn't pretend like just because the Army does something as a lazy habit, that it somehow imparts upon them a superhuman ability to attain proficiency faster than the rest of us mortals. 
 
460 hours is dog shit. Doesn't matter if you're flying helicopters, Jets, or learning to crochet. That is a tiny number of hours for someone operating aircraft that requires high levels of proficiency and a safety emphasis. Obviously we are dealing with the same problem in the Air Force. When I got out we were sending guys to IP School after their first assignment and all they knew was flights out of the Died. But that's more of the same "normalization of deviance" that created the DC problem in the first place. 
 
I'm not going to comment on her as a person because I know nothing else about her. But as a pilot she was, by definition, inexperienced if all she had was ~469 hours. Doesn't matter if it's "normal." 
 
No one should be assuming her motives, because she's dead and it's a courtesy to the family, but we also shouldn't lie about her experience level in an attempt to lionize the fallen. 

Agreed, except for the hours part. Sorry, but we shouldn't pretend like just because the Army does something as a lazy habit, that it somehow imparts upon them a superhuman ability to attain proficiency faster than the rest of us mortals. 
 
460 hours is dog shit. Doesn't matter if you're flying helicopters, Jets, or learning to crochet. That is a tiny number of hours for someone operating aircraft that requires high levels of proficiency and a safety emphasis. Obviously we are dealing with the same problem in the Air Force. When I got out we were sending guys to IP School after their first assignment and all they knew was flights out of the Died. But that's more of the same "normalization of deviance" that created the DC problem in the first place. 
 
I'm not going to comment on her as a person because I know nothing else about her. But as a pilot she was, by definition, inexperienced if all she had was ~469 hours. Doesn't matter if it's "normal." 
 
No one should be assuming her motives, because she's dead and it's a courtesy to the family, but we also shouldn't lie about her experience level in an attempt to lionize the fallen. 

Isn’t that what the instructor is for? Pitt is acting like this crew airplane was flown single seat by one inexperienced crew member…it was not. Most facets of crewed aviation involve an experienced pilot and an inexperienced one.

[Smokin]

All those are problems that should be fixed, but let's not forget that they were within 100' of their assigned altitude while hand flying at night on NVGs and crossing bridges.  Anyone that's flown low level at night on NVGs and always been exactly on altitude, raise your hand..... yeah, that's what I thought.  Zero people, ever.

Yes, they should have been at their assigned altitude, but the real problem here was the FAA allowing helos to fly directly under landing aircraft.  No reasonable person should have looked at that procedure for five seconds and thought that was ok.  Maybe that's not what the procedure was designed for, but that is apparently how it was used.  Procedures need to be developed with a buffer under the assumption that aircraft will be a little off airspeed/altitude/position without causing a safety of flight issue.

[busdriver]

52 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

Words.........No one should be assuming her motives, 

Except that is exactly what Pitt was doing.  When actual evidence is to the contrary.

 

[Lord Ratner]

4 hours ago, busdriver said:

Except that is exactly what Pitt was doing.  When actual evidence is to the contrary.

 

Which is why I started my post with "Agreed"

Edited March 16 by Lord Ratner

[Lord Ratner]

5 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

Isn’t that what the instructor is for? Pitt is acting like this crew airplane was flown single seat by one inexperienced crew member…it was not. Most facets of crewed aviation involve an experienced pilot and an inexperienced one.

It is. But the implication I was disagreeing with (while agreeing with the rest of the post) was this: 

7 hours ago, busdriver said:

You don't know what a "normal" amount of flight hours for an Army officer are in right now.

In media she's being described as experienced. She's not. That matters in a discussion about what went wrong and what to do to fix DC.

4 hours ago, Smokin said:

Yes, they should have been at their assigned altitude, but the real problem here was the FAA allowing helos to fly directly under landing aircraft.  No reasonable person should have looked at that procedure for five seconds and thought that was ok.  Maybe that's not what the procedure was designed for, but that is apparently how it was used.  Procedures need to be developed with a buffer under the assumption that aircraft will be a little off airspeed/altitude/position without causing a safety of flight issue.

1,000%

Way back in the beginning of the thread I said this was the fault of the FAA for allowing the dumpster fire of DC to persist. But a secondary causal factor is the military continually reducing the experience of its pilots. Partly because you're going to be off altitude more often when you are inexperienced, and partly because you're absolutely not going to know when to refuse a procedure that, even if permitted, is retarded. 

[busdriver]

34 minutes ago, Lord Ratner said:

In media she's being described as experienced. She's not. That matters in a discussion about what went wrong and what to do to fix DC.

Ok fine, ignoring Pitt, and not arguing with a heavy guy about flight hours. 

Nothing about this accident screams "caused by inexperience."  Your point is the procedure is dumb, which it is.  Because it's fucking dangerous no matter how experienced the crew is.  Her hours are irrelevant.

 

[Lawman]

Where do you think 460 hours as a captain would fall within the current Army aggregate of experience?


I got news for everybody, the days of 1000 hours in a deployment have been over for a decade. Her hours are completely in line with the average for her year group as well as the wider seen average across the combined Warrant/RLO company pilot population.

There was nothing abnormal about this crew mix and as you said it was entirely procedural produced risk we had learned to live within and normalize.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lord Ratner]

6 hours ago, busdriver said:

Ok fine, ignoring Pitt, and not arguing with a heavy guy about flight hours. 

Nothing about this accident screams "caused by inexperience."  Your point is the procedure is dumb, which it is.  Because it's fucking dangerous no matter how experienced the crew is.  Her hours are irrelevant.

 

I don't think it's a coincidence that a regional crew and a low-hours Army crew crashed. That doesn't mean it was the primary cause, but the Swiss cheese model for safety has always suggested that many failures line up to create a mishap. Lack of experience is one of them.

 

No way I would have accepted that circling clearance. I've refused similar at other airports far less congested than DCA. And the guys a fly with are in the same boat. Experience isn't just about maintaining altitude. It's about knowing when to say "no."

 

4 hours ago, Lawman said:

Her hours are completely in line with the average for her year group as well as the wider seen average across the combined Warrant/RLO company pilot population.

I believe you. That means you have a largely inexperienced corps of helicopter pilots. 

 

This isn't about dick waving or which service is better or really anything other than accepting the reality that normal ≠ experienced. You simple cannot be experienced with those hours. You can be hot shit, you can be talented and confident and all sorts of other things, but not experienced. 

 

Pretending otherwise is exactly what military leadership has been doing to justify reducing the training and currency of pilots. 

 

That doesn't mean you can't get the mission done. I certainly did. But there's no fucking way 500-hour-LordRatner made better decisions than 6,000-hour-LordRatner does. I'm honestly not sure how this is controversial. Would *you* have flown that close to a regional aircraft landing at DCA, at night, on nogs?

 

Is this some sort of White Knight defense of the military pilot? I don't fault her for the DCA procedures, and I don't fault her for her own experience. The former is the fault of the FAA and the latter is the fault of the Army. Again, I do not agree with people picking apart her career and motivations with no knowledge of them. But we do have direct knowledge of her experience, and commenting on it is fair game. 

Her instructor pilot had what, 1,000 hours? If that's true then he was barely experienced, and certainly not an experienced instructor. Again, not his fault.

[brabus]

4 hours ago, Lord Ratner said:

Her instructor pilot had what, 1,000 hours? If that's true then he was barely experienced, and certainly not an experienced instructor.

Depends on the community. I can’t speak for Army RW, but a 1000 hr IP in a fighter is fairly experienced. Flight hours cannot necessarily be compared across communities to determine comparable experience/capability levels.