DC helicopter/plane crash

[Jess from VA]

And here's another thing about changing DCA to all or no military aircraft.

Modern civilian jets are very quiet.  They have to be.

Military aircraft does not have to be quiet, and a good deal of it is very loud and noisy.

I live right in the flight path for DCA, and I hear the commercial jets, but they are nothing at all like it was when I lived on UASF bases near and right on the flight-line.  

Stick full squadrons of military aircraft at DCA, and the predominantly democrat locals will howl, picket and protest, lobby their congressmen and sue in courts.

(And if you don't know it, my area probably has more lawyers per square mile than any other place in the Country ).  

A case can be made for military protection of DC, but all those requirements can be met with bases further out and away from DC.  

Also, enemy ICBMs (nukes) may target DC, and they also target strategic military bases, but it is much less likely they target civilian airports.

[Rams]

There are plenty of other airports in the area - it's a question of taking Congress's favorite airport away from them. And I wouldn't be counting on that being broken anytime soon, personal opinion stated....

 As our favorite barrister in Alexandria has stated, it's more likely that Congress tells the military to find somewhere else to fly and leave the Civilian airport alone....

Agreed but I can foresee several members of Congress now demanding special military aircraft to transport them because their time is too valuable to have to be transported 30 minutes to where they can catch a flight.  Once that starts by the privileged, all will want that.

I have no issues with all helicopters being denied flight routes close to that airport.   I also have no issues if that airfield is taken over my the military but, I doubt that's ever going to happen.

Rams

[Jess from VA]

I haven't heard a single helicopter since the accident, so I asked my computer a question.

The FAA has limited helicopter flights on routes along the Potomac River between the Woodrow Wilson Bridge and the Memorial Bridge, and over the airport itself.

There are exemptions for medical emergency flights, active law enforcement and air defense, or presidential transport missions that must operate in the restricted area.

The restrictions will remain in place at least until the NTSB completes its preliminary investigation into why the collision between an American Airlines regional jet and a US Army Black Hawk helicopter occurred. The NTSB has said it expects to release a preliminary report in about four weeks.

Authorities say they have recovered the remains of 41 (of 67) people who died in Wednesday's mid-air collision.  28 of the 41, have been positively identified.

The NTSB has recovered the black box from the Black Hawk helicopter, and the cockpit voice recorder and flight data recorder from the jet.

Two of the three runways remain closed at DCA as the investigation and recovery operations continue.  About 100 flights were canceled Friday because of the reduced capacity.

The three Army Blackhawk guys were a Capt, CWO, and SSgt, an experienced crew, on an annual proficiency training flight.

[Jersey mike]

The name of the female pilot is being withheld from the public at the family’s request.

She had 500 hours, the training pilot had 1000 hours.

I’m still curious as to why, before the crash there was a call to the helicopter to immediately return to base.

I posted this on the previous page, the audio, visual of altitude record and video of helicopter path are on this video.

The host begins his breakdown at the 3 minute mark.

https://rumble.com/v6f3n5y-the-urgent-call-to-return-to-base-this-crash-makes-no-sense.html

[Rams]

The name of the female pilot is being withheld from the public at the family’s request.

She had 500 hours, the training pilot had 1000 hours.

I’m still curious as to why, before the crash there was a call to the helicopter to immediately return to base.

I posted this on the previous page, the audio, visual of altitude record and video of helicopter path are on this video.

The host begins his breakdown at the 3 minute mark.

https://rumble.com/v6f3n5y-the-urgent-call-to-return-to-base-this-crash-makes-no-sense.html

Mike,
There are some things in the video that conflict with what I've researched but, I'll accept (with caution).  Although I am not familiar with the specific flight rules of the DC area, I will say that the altitude variations can (possibly) be explained with flight restrictions to achieve a certain altitude from takeoff (pulling pitch) to certain points along a planned route and then to descend along that route as the aircraft nears the airfield.   Most likely, that would be due to noise restrictions placed due to the route flying over places where excessive noise from rotors is not appreciated.   Then, dropping in altitude as the helicopter nears the landing approaches.   

It's obvious that the Blackhawk did not get down to the appropriate altitude.

Reference the variations in the track, the information provided in that video conflicts with what I've heard and read but, I can't agree or disagree with.   

Reference the possibility of a "remotely controlled" Blackhawk being flown within the DC controlled airspace, that's one I can't swallow but, have no evidence to prove that didn't happen.

I also can't explain why the Blackhawk crew was asked to return to base.   That is not something I've heard or read about previously and admit, that does concern me but, again nothing I can put my finger on.   

I'm still of the opinion that ATC played a major role in why this happened but, until the investigation is completed, we won't know if, we ever really know.

I'm also wondering why the female pilot has not been identified, we're being told the family requested that information not be advertised but, I'm not buying that's the whole reason.   That information/name is eventually going to come out, why the delay?

Rams

[Jersey mike]

The name of the female pilot is being withheld from the public at the family’s request.

She had 500 hours, the training pilot had 1000 hours.

I’m still curious as to why, before the crash there was a call to the helicopter to immediately return to base.

I posted this on the previous page, the audio, visual of altitude record and video of helicopter path are on this video.

The host begins his breakdown at the 3 minute mark.

https://rumble.com/v6f3n5y-the-urgent-call-to-return-to-base-this-crash-makes-no-sense.html

Mike,
There are some things in the video that conflict with what I've researched but, I'll accept (with caution).  Although I am not familiar with the specific flight rules of the DC area, I will say that the altitude variations can (possibly) be explained with flight restrictions to achieve a certain altitude from takeoff (pulling pitch) to certain points along a planned route and then to descend along that route as the aircraft nears the airfield.   Most likely, that would be due to noise restrictions placed due to the route flying over places where excessive noise from rotors is not appreciated.   Then, dropping in altitude as the helicopter nears the landing approaches.   

It's obvious that the Blackhawk did not get down to the appropriate altitude.

Reference the variations in the track, the information provided in that video conflicts with what I've heard and read but, I can't agree or disagree with.   

Reference the possibility of a "remotely controlled" Blackhawk being flown within the DC controlled airspace, that's one I can't swallow but, have no evidence to prove that didn't happen.

I also can't explain why the Blackhawk crew was asked to return to base.   That is not something I've heard or read about previously and admit, that does concern me but, again nothing I can put my finger on.   

I'm still of the opinion that ATC played a major role in why this happened but, until the investigation is completed, we won't know if, we ever really know.

I'm also wondering why the female pilot has not been identified, we're being told the family requested that information not be advertised but, I'm not buying that's the whole reason.   That information/name is eventually going to come out, why the delay?

Rams

One thing I found that didn’t sound rigt was the host of that show said the last recorded altitude of the helicopter was 400’. I could swear I read or heard the altitude for that training flight was supposed to be 200’. This may have been why President Trump said in one of his first statements that the helicopter was too high.

[Rams]

The name of the female pilot is being withheld from the public at the family’s request.

She had 500 hours, the training pilot had 1000 hours.

I’m still curious as to why, before the crash there was a call to the helicopter to immediately return to base.

I posted this on the previous page, the audio, visual of altitude record and video of helicopter path are on this video.

The host begins his breakdown at the 3 minute mark.

https://rumble.com/v6f3n5y-the-urgent-call-to-return-to-base-this-crash-makes-no-sense.html

Mike,
There are some things in the video that conflict with what I've researched but, I'll accept (with caution).  Although I am not familiar with the specific flight rules of the DC area, I will say that the altitude variations can (possibly) be explained with flight restrictions to achieve a certain altitude from takeoff (pulling pitch) to certain points along a planned route and then to descend along that route as the aircraft nears the airfield.   Most likely, that would be due to noise restrictions placed due to the route flying over places where excessive noise from rotors is not appreciated.   Then, dropping in altitude as the helicopter nears the landing approaches.  

It's obvious that the Blackhawk did not get down to the appropriate altitude.

Reference the variations in the track, the information provided in that video conflicts with what I've heard and read but, I can't agree or disagree with.  

Reference the possibility of a "remotely controlled" Blackhawk being flown within the DC controlled airspace, that's one I can't swallow but, have no evidence to prove that didn't happen.

I also can't explain why the Blackhawk crew was asked to return to base.   That is not something I've heard or read about previously and admit, that does concern me but, again nothing I can put my finger on.  

I'm still of the opinion that ATC played a major role in why this happened but, until the investigation is completed, we won't know if, we ever really know.

I'm also wondering why the female pilot has not been identified, we're being told the family requested that information not be advertised but, I'm not buying that's the whole reason.   That information/name is eventually going to come out, why the delay?

Rams

One thing I found that didn’t sound rigt was the host of that show said the last recorded altitude of the helicopter was 400’. I could swear I read or heard the altitude for that training flight was supposed to be 200’. This may have been why President Trump said in one of his first statements that the helicopter was too high.

The flight restrictions for the section of the route near the airport is reported to be 200 feet Above Ground Level (AGL).  That altitude restriction is to provide altitude separation between aircraft on final approach and/or take offs.  Everything I've researched indicates the Blackhawk was approximately 400 feet AGL.   As previously said, there's rarely only one reason such accidents occur.

I don't believe there's any doubt the Blackhawk wasn't at the altitude required.   As to why, well that's a different question.

Rams

[h13man]

And now a crash in Pennsylvania last night. Somebody hacking on board systems?

[f6john]

One fact that can’t be disputed, they were both at the same altitude when they collided. The videos I’ve seen sure don’t appear to my untrained eye to show aircraft at 200 feet for sure.

[0leman]

Since they recovered all the "Black Boxes", we may have to wait to see what the "experts" come up with.

[Alien]

And now a crash in Pennsylvania last night. Somebody hacking on board systems?

Maybe.  Sometimes though, things just suck and there's no greater reason.

[Jersey mike]

Just reading about the helicopter call sign being called into question. Call sign for this flight was PAT25.

Not sure if it means anything but apparently the PAT is typically designated to Priority Air Transport which is typically used for VIP transport or having officials onboard. And why exactly was the helicopter be told to return immediately to Dulles by the (Army?) air traffic controller for the helicopter.

I found this because after reading several articles, while going through the comments of those articles comments questioning the PAT call sign for a training flight was not typical and out of the ordinary.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14343039/black-hawk-helicopter-call-sign-dc-plane-crash.html

There was a third aircraft in the vicinity that had taken off which the pilot may have interpreted as the plane to pass behind.



https://www.newsweek.com/new-angle-black-hawk-crashing-plane-raises-questions-2024199

[carolinarider09]

There was a third aircraft in the vicinity that had taken off which the pilot may have interpreted as the plane to pass behind.

I heard that as well, yesterday I think.  But, (again not being qualified to fly), the crux of the matter would seem to be the altitude of the Helicopter.  If 200 feet is max in that are why were they at 400 feet?

[Rams]

There was a third aircraft in the vicinity that had taken off which the pilot may have interpreted as the plane to pass behind.

I heard that as well, yesterday I think.  But, (again not being qualified to fly), the crux of the matter would seem to be the altitude of the Helicopter.  If 200 feet is max in that are why were they at 400 feet?

Whole heartedly agree on the altitude.   Where I have confusion is why the ATC controller didn't advise the Blackhawk pilots on the location of the airliner that he wanted them to pass behind.   In my entire flying career of flying into and out of Controlled Airspace, I've never heard anything like that that wasn't IDing the location of the aircraft I was to pass behind.

It was always, Army 12345 traffic at 9 o'clock at 3000 feet first given.   That way, I knew where to look for the traffic.   While I may be wrong, I believe the eyes on the Blackhawk were looking to their right at the departing aircraft.   The lack of a response from the Blackhawk may have been because they were looking for that traffic.

I have no idea why the military tower was telling the Blackhawk to return to base.   Impossible to know at this time.

Rams

[Rams]

The Black Hawk crew, using night vision goggles, flew the training mission along the Potomac River on a path known as Route 4. As the Army comes under scrutiny for operating at night near a busy airport, officials have pointed to the battalion's sensitive operations.
"Some of their mission is to support the Department of Defense if something really bad happens in this area, and we need to move our senior leaders," said Jonathan Koziol, the chief of staff of the Army's Aviation Directorate.

https://www.reuters.com/wor...eadiness-2025-02-01/

Won't lie about it, I am absolutely shocked and amazed if this report is accurate.
This was sent to me by a friend, I have no way to verify it.   I don't subscribe to Reuters.
Rams

[Serk]

Fixed URL to Ram's link:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/crashed-us-army-black-hawk-unit-was-responsible-doomsday-readiness-2025-02-01/

[Skinhead]

Fixed URL to Ram's link:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/crashed-us-army-black-hawk-unit-was-responsible-doomsday-readiness-2025-02-01/

Thank you.

[Serk]

Listening to NTSB update briefing live, they do NOT know if night vision was being utilized at the time of the impact.

[Rams]

Fixed URL to Ram's link:

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/crashed-us-army-black-hawk-unit-was-responsible-doomsday-readiness-2025-02-01/

Thank you.  After posting I tried to get there but the link didn't work.   I wasn't sure why.

Rams

[Rams]

Rebecca Lobach ID’d as female soldier inside doomed Black Hawk during DC crash

https://www.aol.com/news/rebecca-lobach-id-d-female-222954653.html

Rams

[carolinarider09]

I just heard the tail end of the NTSB news conference.   

I noted one thing that, while not specifically relevant to the event, is to me relevant to the quality of the NTSB and that is, "Repeating the Question".

We were trained to do that as well in the "nuclear world".  It provides a process of total closure for the question and answer.  Repeating the question ensures that the information provided in the answer is germane to the question asked.  And it ensures the question asked was properly understood.

It, as I noted above, supports the notion of the NTSB being a highly skilled and competent group.

[Jess from VA]

The Black Hawk crew, using night vision goggles, flew the training mission along the Potomac River on a path known as Route 4. As the Army comes under scrutiny for operating at night near a busy airport, officials have pointed to the battalion's sensitive operations.
"Some of their mission is to support the Department of Defense if something really bad happens in this area, and we need to move our senior leaders," said Jonathan Koziol, the chief of staff of the Army's Aviation Directorate.

https://www.reuters.com/wor...eadiness-2025-02-01/

Won't lie about it, I am absolutely shocked and amazed if this report is accurate.
This was sent to me by a friend, I have no way to verify it.   I don't subscribe to Reuters.
Rams

Ron, my earlier research said this:  The three Army Blackhawk guys were a Capt, CWO, and SSgt, an experienced crew, on an annual proficiency training flight.

Is annual proficiency training something that would include using night vision goggles?   

Would night vision goggles be part of the gear routinely carried aboard all these flights?

And if using night vision at the time of this accident, would they in any way contribute to flying at 400 feet instead of 200 feet?

It seems that if they were being used, it could absolutely be part of why they didn't see the jet (though ATC seems to have done a poor job helping them find/see it).   

[Rams]

Quote author=Jess from VA

Ron, my earlier research said this:  The three Army Blackhawk guys were a Capt, CWO, and SSgt, an experienced crew, on an annual proficiency training flight.

Is annual proficiency training something that would include using night vision goggles?   Yes, annual training and Proficiency Check Rides
Would night vision goggles be part of the gear routinely carried aboard all these flights? That depends (Not normally carried but worn.) on the mission being flown, NVGs mount to the top/front of the helmet, I wore them when required but, never while conducting test flights.

And if using night vision at the time of this accident, would they in any way contribute to flying at 400 feet instead of 200 feet? My understanding (now) is that NVGs have advanced greatly so, I can't really say, the NVGs I used would have greatly enhanced/magnified the available light and would not have allowed pilot see anything they were looking at, too much light and the googles would have "whited out".  So, all I can really say is, I don't know.

It seems that if they were being used, it could absolutely be part of why they didn't see the jet (though ATC seems to have done a poor job helping them find/see it).    At this point, I'm still in shock that NVGs were (possibly) in use at this point in the mission.   With that, I can only respond with, I honestly don't know.  The NVGs I wore/flew with in that much ambient light would not have helped see much of anything.   But as this story plays out it's apparent that I'm behind and not current with NVGs.

Regardless of the NVG issue, I still believe most of the blame appears to be on ATC, less than normal manning and failure to tell the Blackhawk crew where the aircraft they were supposed to pass behind was located.  I can visualize those pilots looking for the intersecting aircraft and not knowing where it was.

Rams

[Jersey mike]

One thing I read initially which I haven’t read since; why there wasn’t another person in the back to help with navigation and air traffic?

I don’t know what is standard for helicopter personnel at this level or mission for the crew.

[Rams]

One thing I read initially which I haven’t read since; why there wasn’t another person in the back to help with navigation and air traffic?

I don’t know what is standard for helicopter personnel at this level or mission for the crew.

The Crew Chief (Staff Sgt) would be in the back and looking for things outside normally, assisting assuming he wasn't also under NVGs.   His ability to see in front would be limited though.  It's very unlikely he would be assisting with navigating.

Rams

[Rams]

Preliminary DC plane crash flight data shows conflicting altitude readings: investigators

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/preliminary-dc-plane-crash-flight-data-shows-conflicting-altitude-readings-investigators/ar-AA1yk3BX?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=537d464d81d9490791478074f0782bea&ei=27

Preliminary flight data from the deadly plane crash in Washington, D.C., shows conflicting readings about the altitudes of a passenger jet and Army helicopter that collided near Reagan National Airport and killed everyone on board the two aircraft, investigators said over the weekend.

Data from the American Airlines flight recorder showed an altitude of 325 feet, plus or minus 25 feet, when the collision happened Wednesday night, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) officials told reporters on Saturday. Data in the control tower, though, showed the Black Hawk helicopter at 200 feet, the maximum allowed altitude for helicopters in the area.

The roughly 100-foot altitude discrepancy in the data has yet to be explained.

Investigators are working to retrieve data from the helicopter’s back box, which is taking more time because it became waterlogged after submerging into the Potomac River, in hopes of reconciling the difference. They also said they plan to refine the tower data, which could be less reliable.

"This is a complex investigation," said Brice Banning, NTSB investigator in charge. "There are a lot of pieces here. Our team is working hard to gather this data."

Banning detailed the last moments from the jet's two black boxes, which captured sound in the cockpit and flight data just before what became the deadliest U.S. aviation accident since 2001.

"The crew had a verbal reaction," Banning said, with the data recorder showing "the airplane beginning to increase its pitch. Sounds of impact were audible about one second later, followed by the end of the recording."

Investigators did not say whether that change in angle meant that pilots were trying to perform an evasive maneuver to avoid the crash.

The collision happened around 9 p.m. EST while the regional jet was preparing to land at the airport. The jet from Wichita, Kansas, was carrying 64 people onboard, while three soldiers were on board the helicopter, which apparently flew into the jet’s path. No one survived the crash.

NTSB member Todd Inman expressed frustration to reporters, noting that the board has made "several hundred" recommendations to improve aviation safety that have not been acted upon.

"You want to do something about it? Adopt the recommendation of the NTSB. You’ll save lives," he said, adding that he has spent hours with victims' families since the crash. "I don’t want to have to meet with those parents like that again."

Families of victims visited the crash site on Sunday and divers scoured the submerged wreckage for more remains after authorities said they've recovered and identified 55 of the 67 people killed.

Officials said they are confident all the victims will be recovered from the chilly Potomac River.

NTSB investigators hope to have a preliminary report within 30 days, though a full investigation could take at least a year.

This is the first I've heard of the airliner being low on altitude.   Setting the altimeter to the correct Density Altitude prior to take off from the departing airport and then resetting it to the destination was standard procedure.   With Army helicopters and the shorter distances covered between those two locations is not normally as big of an issue as it could/would be with commercial flights normally covering much greater distances with significantly different conditions.   I'm not suggesting that wasn't done, it could be the airliner pilot allowed their aircraft to settle to below minimums if the above information is accurate.  

The Blackhawk does appear to be higher than 200 feet (to me) and as stated in the article, Control Tower "estimates" aren't always accurate but, this story only emphasizes the need for either less traffic at that airport or other changes.   It does appear that there should have been a second controller on duty versus a single controller directing traffic for both the fixed wing and rotary aircraft.

Rams

[carolinarider09]

From the message above:

Preliminary flight data from the deadly plane crash in Washington, D.C., shows conflicting readings about the altitudes of a passenger jet and Army helicopter that collided near Reagan National Airport and killed everyone on board the two aircraft, investigators said over the weekend.

Data from the American Airlines flight recorder showed an altitude of 325 feet, plus or minus 25 feet, when the collision happened Wednesday night, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) officials told reporters on Saturday. Data in the control tower, though, showed the Black Hawk helicopter at 200 feet, the maximum allowed altitude for helicopters in the area.

The roughly 100-foot altitude discrepancy in the data has yet to be explained.

Investigators are working to retrieve data from the helicopter’s back box, which is taking more time because it became waterlogged after submerging into the Potomac River, in hopes of reconciling the difference. They also said they plan to refine the tower data, which could be less reliable.


I saw this yesterday.  I read it many times.  I do not understand.

Here is what it says.


Data from the American Airlines flight recorder showed an altitude of 325 feet, plus or minus 25 feet,

That implies that the Jet Aircraft (not the helicopter)was at an altitude of 325, plus or minus 25 feet.  Or between 300 feet and 350 feet.

Next:

Data in the control tower, though, showed the Black Hawk helicopter at 200 feet, the maximum allowed altitude for helicopters in the area.

That implies that the Black Hawk helicopter was at 200 feet.   That is 100 feet below reported (above) altitude of the Jet Aircraft.

Again, a difference in 100 feet or more (depending).   Not a lot, but maybe enough to avoid a crash. 

Next:

The roughly 100-foot altitude discrepancy in the data has yet to be explained.

What discrepancy in the data????????? 

The tower showed the Black Hawk at 200 Feet. 

The Jet Airliner's black back showed the Airliner was at 325 feet (plus of minus 25 feet). 

Again, what 100 foot altitude discrepancy????????  What????

[Rams]

Based on what is said in that report, one must assume no fault on the Blackhawk and the collision was due to the airliner being below minimums.   Visually, it doesn't appear that way (to me) but, I don't have the data NTSB has. 

Rams

[Willow]

Stupid question for our resident helicopter pilot:  With the airliner drawing in large amounts of air if the helicopter crossed the path slightly ahead of and below the jet airliner could the air movement have pulled the copter up?

[scooperhsd]

Normally, when coming in for an approach, you would get the information for the airport via ATIS. This would include the altimeter setting, as well as the Duty runway, and current winds. Then when the tower makes the initial contact with the approaching aircraft, they would would give the current altimeter setting , which you would repeat while setting it. "2992" is standard for sealevel under standard temperature and pressure, but it can vary depending on location and existing conditions. When flying above 18000 feet ((Flight Level (FL)), you would also set to 29.92. If you think about it , 18000 feet and FL180 could be off , which would mean that they would not necessarily be at the same altitude.. That wouldn't be the issue here, though.

[scooperhsd]

Carl, there are reasons that big airliners have sufficient space before a smaller plane would takeoff behind them, but I do not believe that it would have that much effect  while flying.

[Rams]

Stupid question for our resident helicopter pilot:  With the airliner drawing in large amounts of air if the helicopter crossed the path slightly ahead of and below the jet airliner could the air movement have pulled the copter up?

This isn't a Stupid Question.  Having never been in such a situation, I surmise that any effect would more likely be located directly behind that airliner if the helicopter were to fly through that air which would be turbulent and could result in control issues but, that's not applicable to this.

Normally, when coming in for an approach, you would get the information for the airport via ATIS. This would include the altimeter setting, as well as the Duty runway, and current winds. Then when the tower makes the initial contact with the approaching aircraft, they would would give the current altimeter setting , which you would repeat while setting it. "2992" is standard for sealevel under standard temperature and pressure, but it can vary depending on location and existing conditions. When flying above 18000 feet ((Flight Level (FL)), you would also set to 29.92. If you think about it , 18000 feet and FL180 could be off , which would mean that they would not necessarily be at the same altitude.. That wouldn't be the issue here, though.

Agreed   (Never been to FL180 in a helicopter, that would have required oxygen which we didn't have.)

Carl, there are reasons that big airliners have sufficient space before a smaller plane would takeoff behind them, but I do not believe that it would have that much effect while flying.

Agreed, depending on how the aircraft intersected, wing tip vortices would have a greater effect but, in this case, both being at almost the same altitude, little to no effect in my opinion.  Wing tip vortices are the reason modern aircraft have the wing tips (almost) vertical.   Not being a Commerical large aircraft pilot, I can't suggest how that effects the flight characteristics of those A/C.   oldfishguy would be a better resource for that.

Rams

[Jess from VA]

Different altimeter readings is weird, and disturbing.

That they met midair at the same altitude (or within feet) is conclusive.

They are narrowing it down, maybe to the principle cause, but they're not there yet.

125 feet is not "good enough for government work".  


I quit ever flying again because of how I was treated on my last commercial flight, some years ago.  Not for fear of flying.  

I once got a ride in an F16B (with back seat).  I'd do that again (fat chance), but not in or out of Reagan National.

This is not me.  My base wing commander O6 was my pilot.  I will never forget him telling me over the intercom on roll-out.... "Captain, you see that yellow handle between your legs that says eject on it?  If you pull that for any other reason other than I've had a heart attack, and we survive, I'll have you before a general court-martial."

Sir, yes sir.

[scooperhsd]

I did several training flights (as well as 3 F15 rides) where there were ejection seats. and on every single one , the Pilot said "Don't touch the ejection handles unless I tell you to". And the command set control was set to Pilot command.

And my F15 rides were out of Lambert St Louis airport. We were stationed at the Government Plant rep Office (at the time, NAVPRO) and the plane contractor was McDonnald Douglas. ATC wanted us out of the airport airspace ASAP when we were taking off, so most takeoffs were " High performance" - gear up, nose up in full afterburner to 8500 feet - by the end of the runway.

[scooperhsd]

And I quit flying shortly after TSA became a thing .

[Jess from VA]

ATC wanted us out of the airport airspace ASAP when we were taking off, so most takeoffs were " High performance" - gear up, nose up in full afterburner to 8500 feet - by the end of the runway.

That's exactly how my one flight went out of Incerlik AB Turkey (in the south, on the Med).  

Full afterburner, nearly straight up.  My G suit fully inflated and squeezed the hell out of me, and I still almost greyed (passed) out.  As soon as he leveled off, the suit let go, and I got my senses back right away.  I was thinking... this guy is right about 50yo, and I must be in better shape than him in my 30's.  And I could hear him grunting in my headset, and remembered from my little 3 hour preflight school a few days earlier about bearing down to counter high Gs.  He obviously had a lot more experience and practice than I did.

We flew up over and around the spectacular Taurus mountain range then out over the Mediterranean.  

Most fighter backseat rides went to NCO aircraft techs who were seen as most deserving, and I put in for a ride several times before I got one (near the end of my tour).  



I also was given priority to fly in the two USAF Twin Beach King Air C12s in country when assigned as defense counsel for all USAF in Turkey (17 total locations, three main bases).  Daily work was mostly done on the phone, but courts martial I had to go to them.  Though most trials were at the largest base at Incirlik where I was stationed.  I also moved around Turkey in C130s and around Europe in C 141s.

[Rams]

While at Ft. Sill, we did some fast mover downed pilot training.   The goal was for the Airforce pilots to guide us to their location via their emergency radios.   As Operations Officer, I always grabbed one of the slots for this mission, I mostly flew a desk so, no one minded me doing that.   At the end of our slated training, I always allowed rides of both Pilots and Enlisted Air Force team members as long as we had the time and fuel to do it.   Due to that, I was offered a fast mover back seat ride several times but, could never get away from that desk long enough to go.   But, I sincerely appreciated the offer.  Also got offered rides to places unknown in KC 135s.

We had NOE courses at Tinker, Altus and Sheppard Airforce bases back then.   We would usually take those fast mover pilots on the NOE courses and scare the hell out of them.   They didn't like flying in the trees, they weren't used to doing that.  Just as I'm sure had I been able to take a ride in a fast mover, I'd have puked my guts up.   Just not the environment I was trained for.  Never did go on that fast mover ride, wish I had.

Rams

[Jess from VA]

I also got space A (duty) travel in KC 135 and KC 10 tankers.  And got to watch refueling in both.  In the KC 10, it was done sitting at a console, but in the KC 135, you laid on your belly and looked out a window in the back floor of the plane.  Sometimes that refueling boom got very damn close to fighter windscreens.

KC135








KC10

[scooperhsd]

Those boom operators are very skilled at their jobs...

[Jess from VA]

The height of luxury in web seats on a C141, sometimes for 8-10 hours.  For free, what do you want?


Cold and drafty as hell back there too.