Crash at Reagan National Airport, DC. Helicopter crash into airliner.

Well, well. Another VIP flight taking in the sights. Who here said PAT flights don't carry anyone?
1000026644.jpg
 
ateamer said:
So why do generals need a helicopter to get around the city? They give up their driver’s license or something and can’t go to work the same way everyone else does?
Click to expand...
It's a power trip for them to have a "personal" taxi service. God forbid they have to sit in traffic like the rest of the plebs
 
...and VASA and the uboob brigade is already there like white on rice, to signal boost the "crisis". Thank heavens for these servant leaders of aviation safety, they do it for the kids you know... like and subscribe!

unrelated to the pearl-clutching du jour, it sounds like homegirl lost the bubble. Was she trained by the omniscient at AUS Twr by any chance? Don't answer that. :rofl:
 
Velocity173 said:
I think we’re overreacting a bit now. Everyone is jumpy because of the accident. An airliner should easily be able to land on 19 while a helicopter orbits at the Pentagon at 200 ft.

Click to expand...
Isn’t this the consequence of not applying visual separation? Class B separation standards would appear to preclude simultaneous 19 (and 15) approaches and Pentagon helo ops.
 
AquaLand said:
Isn’t this the consequence of not applying visual separation? Class B separation standards would appear to preclude simultaneous 19 (and 15) approaches and Pentagon helo ops.
Click to expand...
It is. That’s why I said this is overreacting from the accident. There’s using visual when routes merge such as the accident, then there’s using visual where routes are no factor. In this case, it’s the later. Their knee jerk reaction has created a completely inefficient system.
 
Velocity173 said:
It is. That’s why I said this is overreacting from the accident. There’s using visual when routes merge such as the accident, then there’s using visual where routes are no factor. In this case, it’s the later. Their knee jerk reaction has created a completely inefficient system.
Click to expand...
Somebody is going to lose their job over this one …
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1108.jpeg
    IMG_1108.jpeg
    159.2 KB · Views: 98
Warmi said:
Somebody is going to lose their job over this one …
Click to expand...
The restrictions are poorly worded. Do the restrictions apply to all of DCA airspace or the just along the Potomac? If all airspace, then why isn’t the temporary RA larger?

I couldn’t imagine route 5 being closed and the controller not being aware of that. Really it looks like the controller assumed PAT had landed. Unfortunately, it appears the pad was occupied and they had to circle. Without a landing assured call from PAT, she should’ve sent the arrivals around earlier. She still had approved sep but no way they can maintain that on these routes with the current restrictions. Taking away visual didn’t help matters.
 
Last edited:
My questions are:

Why did Pat 23 not land?

Was the heliport occupied?

Who is the controller for the Pentagon helipad?

Why was Pat 23 not held at Glebe until landing was assured, as the DCA controller requested?

Was PAT 23 using some sort of vision restricting device that prevented them from seeing the helipad?

If vision restricted, how could they request visual separation from airliners?

The controller was wise to issue go arounds with such ambiguity from PAT 23, and past history for military performance.
 
So watching the Captain Steeeve vid this morning on the latest go arounds. He really tore up PAT23 for phraseology but I don’t think it was that egregious.

First, “report landing assured” isn’t official phraseology in any PCG or the .65. It can be in an LOA if they have that with tower but even then, it’s not clear what it means. Common phraseology? Yes, I get it all the time from tower but a definitive meaning? No.

Second, GLEBE wasn’t a clearance limit. They’re operating VFR and told to hold at a VFR reporting point. It’s no different when talking to a tower and being told to hold a point. I’ve never heard anyone report time and altitude for a VFR holding point. If we’re going to call that a “holding fix” or “point which cleared” then the controller is required to issue specific holding instructions for a non published hold. That didn’t happen.

Finally, the whole landing assured thing. Well, if Pentagon tower isn’t allowing PAT23 to land because there’s another aircraft on the pad, they can’t really report landing assured. DCA now has to jump through hoops because now they’re controlling with one hand tied behind their backs (no visual). Here’s a novel idea. How about Pentagon tower call the arrival of PAT23 via landline to tower? Or better yet, if it looks like PAT23 will have to hold for an aircraft in the pad, coordinate that before PAT23 leaves GLEBE.

As far as PAT using “PAT23 go” vs “PAT23 go ahead.” Come on, that’s ridiculous. If we want to talk poor phraseology, there are far worse offenders out there than this.
 
dmspilot said:
You have my deepest sympathy.
Click to expand...
Well I’ve watched a few of his vids and some are ok. You tell though he’s exaggerating events for effect (viewers). Definitely not DG level but it’s obvious he’s trying to get clicks.
 
As a controller I never understood what, "landing assured," accomplished. I don't believe it's in the 7110.65 (but I may have missed it). Terminal controllers seem to like it.
 
PastZTL said:
As a controller I never understood what, "landing assured," accomplished. I don't believe it's in the 7110.65 (but I may have missed it). Terminal controllers seem to like it.
Click to expand...
As a pilot I think it’s dumb. As in epically dumb. Landing is never assured until the aircraft is done flying. As a helo guy that’s roll back to idle at the earliest. Jets it’s the reverser deployment. How’s that beneficial in any way to ATC?? It’s just ****ing dumb.
 
The correct message should have been "Fly direct from Glebe to the helipad and land, no turns. Readback before departing Glebe.
 
I flew into to DCA last week, on the same airline and aircraft type as what was in the collision, and saw two military helicopters in the air as we came in to land.
That was before the two latest encroachments.
 
Maybe it's time for DCA to be redeveloped into a casino or sportsball complex or some other boondoggle. Where are Daley and the Dozers?
 
GeorgeC said:
Maybe it's time for DCA to be redeveloped into a casino or sportsball complex or some other boondoggle. Where are Daley and the Dozers?
Click to expand...
I would like it if they just turned DCA into a huge helicopter base for the myriad of operators running around the area. They can have the place. Move all the airplane traffic to Dulles.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
I would like it if they just turned DCA into a huge helicopter base for the myriad of operators running around the area. They can have the place. Move all the airplane traffic to Dulles.
Click to expand...
I say all arrivals to DCA must do the overhead. That’ll keep them above the helo routes. Problem solved.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
I would like it if they just turned DCA into a huge helicopter base for the myriad of operators running around the area. They can have the place. Move all the airplane traffic to Dulles.
Click to expand...
Yes, the “move all the airplane traffic to Dulles” is certainly a popular fantasy (perhaps 2nd only to Boeing restarting 757 production). The reality is that, while Dulles may have the runway capacity to handle DCA’s traffic if spread out over 24 hours, it does not have the supporting infrastructure.

Each of the 3 DC airports (BWI, DCA, IAD) handle about 12M pax per year. Doubling IAD’s passenger throughput would require $100Ms if not $Bs of infrastructure upgrades. Getting all those additional pax to and from IAD would also be chaotic give the DC area traffic. And, no, Metro is not the solution.

The myth of Dulles being underutilized certainly has some factual basis in the way things used to be when Dulles opened. I remember as a youngster going out to Dulles to pickup relatives in the mid-60s, standing on the observation deck for 30+ minutes and not seeing a single arrival or departure. Just a few 707s and DC-8s scattered around the airport.

Things are different now. During the afternoon international arrival push, Dulles routinely has all 3 N/S runways in operation with the 4th runway used for departures. Drive to Dulles for an AM pax drop-off or a PM pax pick-up and your myth of Dulles being underutilized will be quickly busted.
 
Friends have asked me, as I'm sure they have most of you, if I think air travel is safe. Well I'm flying into DCA, as a passenger, next week. So there's that.

DCA is just like any other commercial airport, except for the close proximity of some prohibited areas which create some additional approach considerations but nothing dangerous.

The only problem is the culture of unrestricted and unregulated low level military ops in the Class B surface area surrounding the airport. To my knowledge, no other airport in the country has quite this bad of an issue. I know my first visit to DC I was amazed at the amount of helicopter traffic flying over the Capitol/Mall area at treetop level. As an aviation junkie, it was cool. As a safety oriented person, I was shocked it was allowed over such a congested area.

DC, not DCA, needs a wake up call and culture change. Unfortunately it will be a battle between the DOT and DOD, as well as our "leaders" versus the rest of us.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
I would like it if they just turned DCA into a huge helicopter base for the myriad of operators running around the area. They can have the place. Move all the airplane traffic to Dulles.
Click to expand...
I drive to DC most of the time to avoid either airport (rather, to avoid the commute from either airport into the District or Bethesda.)
 
Five seconds after the second warning to watch out for the incoming plane, Eaves, the helicopter instructor, told Lobach, “Alright, kinda come left for me ma’am, I think that’s why he’s asking,” to which she replied, “Sure,” the presentation shows.

Eaves then said, “We’re kinda out towards the middle,” and Lobach said, “Okay fine.”

I've never, ever heard a pilot say anything like that (sir/ma'am/rank) to another pilot in my years in H3's or 60's, even if the pilot was a green Ltjg talking to a LTCDR in flight. The "Okay fine" reply was quite telling. There was obviously a serious CRM issue by him being deferential to her despite him being the IP and her the PIC. His head was probably down dinking with the radio and her SA was lacking, being behind the ball.

"Ma'am"ing someone who is in the middle of screwing up is not how to handle dangerous situations that require strict adherence to rules. She received a recent substandard rating and had to requal again.

Lobach is at fault on this crash.
 
If ever there was a case for justifying the mantra of "keep your head on a swivel" and "eyes outside the aircraft" this is it. Especially at night in a traffic pattern with other aircraft airborne. Reads like they're flying IMC, tooling along IFR on an airway...
 
FlightmechH3 said:
Five seconds after the second warning to watch out for the incoming plane, Eaves, the helicopter instructor, told Lobach, “Alright, kinda come left for me ma’am, I think that’s why he’s asking,” to which she replied, “Sure,” the presentation shows.

Eaves then said, “We’re kinda out towards the middle,” and Lobach said, “Okay fine.”

I've never, ever heard a pilot say anything like that (sir/ma'am/rank) to another pilot in my years in H3's or 60's, even if the pilot was a green Ltjg talking to a LTCDR in flight. The "Okay fine" reply was quite telling. There was obviously a serious CRM issue by him being deferential to her despite him being the IP and her the PIC. His head was probably down dinking with the radio and her SA was lacking, being behind the ball.

"Ma'am"ing someone who is in the middle of screwing up is not how to handle dangerous situations that require strict adherence to rules. She received a recent substandard rating and had to requal again.

Lobach is at fault on this crash.
Click to expand...
Meh, the circumstances that made the IP feel the need to defer to her, and those that enable that kind of environment are at fault, and the IP is ultimately at fault for not being more assertive - but one can plainly see he probably thought that would get him in trouble if he felt like he had to call her ma’am.
 
RyanShort1 said:
Meh, the circumstances that made the IP feel the need to defer to her, and those that enable that kind of environment are at fault, and the IP is ultimately at fault for not being more assertive - but one can plainly see he probably thought that would get him in trouble if he felt like he had to call her ma’am.
Click to expand...
Failure analysis rarely shows a single fault causing catastrophe. This is well documented and especially in aviation circles and it’s been known for decades that authority/power dynamics can be deadly in a cockpit. If lives are on the line and you see a superior making a mistake you can’t be afraid to confront them.

Girlboss pilot screwed up. Copilot dude didn’t take control and instead tried to soft pitch a suggestion to veer away.
 
FlightmechH3 said:
Five seconds after the second warning to watch out for the incoming plane, Eaves, the helicopter instructor, told Lobach, “Alright, kinda come left for me ma’am, I think that’s why he’s asking,”

I've never, ever heard a pilot say anything like that (sir/ma'am/rank) to another pilot in my years in H3's or 60's, even if the pilot was a green Ltjg talking to a LTCDR in flight.
Click to expand...
This is part of the Army culture with a mixed cockpit of Warrant Officer and Commissioned Officer…it is normal operations.
 
FlightmechH3 said:
Failure analysis rarely shows a single fault causing catastrophe. This is well documented and especially in aviation circles and it’s been known for decades that authority/power dynamics can be deadly in a cockpit. If lives are on the line and you see a superior making a mistake you can’t be afraid to confront them.

Girlboss pilot screwed up. Copilot dude didn’t take control and instead tried to soft pitch a suggestion to veer away.
Click to expand...
Assuming you're correct, how is that not the IP's fault?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top