UHF is even more line of sight than VHF, and subject to blockages by obstacles and terrain.
It's a lot easier to fly a helicopter when you have some forward airspeed. Over 50kts or so it behaves pretty much like a fixed wing.
verticalmag.com
Not familiar with the DC lighting environment, but it has enough cultural lighting that false horizons shouldn't really be a problem. The problem is the HV diagram.
You train for that, good crew coordination helps a lot. Again, you won't be hovering at 200 or 400ft, and at low altitudes you have other visual cues, mostly looking around the NVGs.
Not sure where you heard that from. UHF is far better in urban areas with buildings / terrain over VHF.UHF is even more line of sight than VHF, and subject to blockages by obstacles and terrain.
What disadvantages VHF on a helicopter is poor antenna installations, with less than ideal ground planes. Especially on military birds where VHF is an afterthought.
It's a lot easier to fly a helicopter when you have some forward airspeed. Over 50kts or so it behaves pretty much like a fixed wing.
Takes less power, allowing you to continue flying if an engine goes on strike. Also easier to deal with a tail rotor failure. Plus, a heavy helicopter can end up in a situation where it can hover in ground effect, but not out of it.
Helicopters have a Height/Velocity diagram - you can be slow or you can be low, but low and slow can be deadly.
At 200ft you can't hover safely, in case something goes wrong you're dead.
View attachment 137761
Good article about HV diagrams:
Understanding 'The Dead Man’s Curve'
There’s never a good time for an engine failure, but limiting your time in the “avoid” area of the height-velocity diagram increases your chances of a safe escape.
Not familiar with the DC lighting environment, but it has enough cultural lighting that false horizons shouldn't really be a problem. The problem is the HV diagram.
You train for that, good crew coordination helps a lot. Again, you won't be hovering at 200 or 400ft, and at low altitudes you have other visual cues, mostly looking around the NVGs.
www.globeair.com
The trainee was a supervisor trainee, not a trainee controller. So, there were a supe, a supe trainee, a ground controller, a local controller, and a "local assist" controller - NOT a trainee. I haven't heard of local assist before, but it sounds somewhat like a "D-side" for a radar position - Someone that's there to not talk on the radio at all, but to monitor the situation and take care of various side tasks to take workload off the guy on the radio.
Nope... There was a "verbal reaction" in the cockpit that corresponded to the pitch up, and they collided one second later.
I'm thinking of things I've read, so something that's public. Or presumably, public enough for us nerds who read accident reports all the time.
Sorry, it appears there was a misunderstanding. I'll have to go back and check my wording. I didn't mean the toughness thing would ever be in a report, it's just an attitude thing that happens in and out of the military as well as in and out of aviation. It's a challenge for anyone who is in charge of safety to create the right culture, and there are "macho man" attitudes out there that tend to cast safety in a negative light, and the more macho men there are around, the easier that attitude spreads and the more people avoid following procedures that are there for safety and take shortcuts that cause accidents.
Only those of us who received the mandatory covid "vaccine."
I'd like to see a simulator video of a 140 KIAS approach that stays over the water near the east shore to see if "swinging it out" is really required. Where's @Crashnburn when you need him?
That won't work. It would have them turning final at around 200' AFL. We don't do that in transports.
Again, this is not tolerated at DCA. Minimum separation standards are 1-1/2mi laterally and 500' vertically. That's why the helicopter crew requested visual separation. Without it, ATC would have had to hold them north of the Rwy 33 Final until the airplane had passed. With visual separation, they can visually maneuver to pass behind the airplane and avoid a conflict. For some reason, they didn't. Why they didn't is a big part of what the NTSB will try to find out.
You only have about a 45° change in heading if you follow the shoreline, assuming you will land into the wind. An extended centerline crosses the east shore at, what, 4500 ft or so? So, you actually begin banking with that much distance plus the radius (
200' max altitude is the "law" for those helicopters. PAT 25 hit the RJ mainly because they were at the wrong altitude.
geezer, very good points. Like almost all tragic accidents, there's a confluence of
As a former Fettermobile driver, I can confirm. IYKYK.They have allowed fixed wing aircraft on some of those routes, but the PIC had to sit in the right seat.
Yes but if the helicopter was given visual separation can they get closer to the other aircraft, less than 500’ and 11/2 miles?
Yes. If it wasn't, what would be the point of using visual separation?
"...For SA, maybe we should be getting a controller to put everyone on the same frequency when they're combined. If there is too much frequency congestion, maybe there needs to be another controller too..."
There's no such procedure as VISUAL 1. I suspect you're talking about the Mount Vernon Visual Runway 1. But you are right, the last altitude is a "1600 recommended" 5.9 miles south of the airport (BADDN fix). It's just follow the river to the airport after that. Of course, the moment they were told to circle to 33, they ceased to be following that loosy goosy procedure.
According to the NTSB, the helicopter was reporting 200' and the plane was reporting 325'. Are you sure you know which was incorrect?
How do you figure? Runway 33 is on the airport, no?
Right turns especially, if memory serves.
Gyroscopic precession?
VGF?
Because that is where they fly in their day to day missions. So, you think they should practice at say KMRB with little traffic, then fly VIP passengers on the DC helicopter routes?
So....what happens when "training" goes bad? I don't think you want to train on the "battle field".
Runway 33 is not served by the "MT VERNON VISUAL Rwy 1" approach.
In anything less nimble than my Navion, how are you going to follow the river to land on 33? You'd be flying a base leg pointed right at the threshold. The Potomac isn't very wide at that point. Runway 1 is nicely aligned with the river coming north.
