DC helicopter/plane crash

[RP#62]

[Jess from VA]

Awe come on, can't we at least try to shoot their hats off? 

[scooperhsd]

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

With what experiance I had in flying, The usual sequence for the airliner (altimeter settings only)
1. Altimeter set to airport departing from (in this case Wichita)
2. When going above 18000 feet / FL180, set to 29.92
3. While flying the jet routes to DC, it would stay at 29.92
4. coming in before starting the approach, pilot / copilot would tune up ATIS and get the information provided.
5 When Checking into Approach control, (and descending below 18000 feet), Approach may give an updated altimeter. Aircrew should repeat this as they are setting their altimeter to what is given. If no updated altimeter from approach, as you go below 18000 feet set altimeter to ATIS information.
6.  Fly the approach to landing / waveoff / missed approach.

Flying an approach can be a very demanding task, especially so at a busy airport (ala Reagan Natl). Night / bad weather only makes it worse. Everybody knows this, so changes are held to a minimum.

[Oldfishguy]

I’m reluctant to add to this, because early guesses are typically only the tip of an iceberg, but first here is an unofficial transcript:



Then the approach the CRJ was flying:



Then the runway (s) layout:

[Oldfishguy]

It appears just a lot of things went just slightly wrong for this accident to happen.  But first, the idea of closing this airport because of the proximity to things.  Just not going to happen, too much money involved in many areas.  First, the airlines themselves own the landing/departure slots once they are awarded by the government.  And as efficiency improves they have awarded more and more slots to various airlines and routes.  These slots can be sold and bought by other airlines but seldom become available because of the higher premium yield for DCA versus Dulles and Baltimore.  And this is not the only airport with theses traffic congestion issues in cities . . . LaGuardia (also a slot controlled airport), San Francisco with two parcel runways so close together that landing in pairs is common several hundred feet apart (yes, passengers are quickly briefed over the PA), San Diego with a damm parking garage built on the approach path so the angle to the runway is steeper, etc.  A lot of airports have issues, but pilots train for many of these airports in simulators.  The worst of them, before a new Captain can fly in to them they have to ride with an experienced Captain into and out of the airport.  All regulated by the FAA and watched over by them constantly.  If you ever see a guy/gal in a pretty cheap blazer standing up by the cockpit before departure it is probably an FAA individual making a surprise ride along on a leg.  Very, very common on our airlines.

Now, what went wrong, I believe a few things.  The only altimeter I’m interested in is the Blackhawk.  With several onboard at least one will be stuck at impact, but that doesn’t tell the whole story.  As I said before, the circle to runway 33 is challenging.  As is normally the case here, it comes late in the game and the crew has to decide quickly.  I’ve never flown a CRJ like this, but I know the approach speeds are similar to an airliner twice its size because it has no leading edge devices to provide additional lift at slow speeds like a large airliner has.  Hence 125knots in the flare is common . . . and now your on a short, short runway for those speeds.  And B737’s and A320’s do this routinely as well.  So the CRJ rounds the corner on short final and is going to be focused on a runway lighting system to provide a proper glide path.  If the CRJ pilots are on top of their game they are on the lower end of that lighting system glide path.  Remember, short runway . . . plant the airplane with little flare and stop the airplane.  Nothing has to do with altimeters on short final like this, it is all visual . . . inside airspeed, outside lights of glidepath (repeat 10 times a second).  And then, the barking of the collision avoidance system was hopefully going full blast.  And then did the CRJ pilots hear the half conversation the controller was having with the Blackhawk while they were doing the circle??

The Blackhawk pilots were following the river south in a haphazard way, the communication with the tower was professional . . .  but yet . . .i wonder did they really know what the CRJ was doing in the circle to runway 33?? I’m starting to think they did not know the flight path the CRJ was taking.  And then they confused some other lights with the CRJ and thought they were well behind it. 

The controller was counting on the Blackhawk to pass behinds the CRJ.  When a pilot responds “in sight” and will pass visual behind that alleviates the controller of separation.  The controller is visual with outside but would have a small radar scope near them for additional situational awareness at this level of airport.  The controller questioned the Blackhawk pilot a second time if they had the CRJ because he/she could see the conflict.

So, the controller assumed the Blackhawk pilot knew the CRJ route but should have said “traffic 11’clock 2miles, pass behind as traffic passes left to right in front of you”. The controller “assumed’’ the Blackhawk pilots knew the route the CRJ was flying, a dangerous game. 

So, the Blackhawk pilots probably did not know the airspace they were operating in well enough.  But much of that only comes with experience, not book work. And that Blackhawk crew was probably on the lower end of experience; qualified and sharp pilots but just not seen everything DCA can throw at one.  If there was a moment of doubt in their minds they should have asked for some guidance from the controller.  (It is quite common and not frowned upon at all generally.  But yet the IP had the more senior officer flying as copilot.  Did that make him more hesitant to ask for directions??)

So, the CRJ, if that TCAS system was barking at them on short final, and you see a predator on the screen near you . . . go around and get away from the threat . . . Now!  easy to say, though to do and abandon an approach.  A second or two earlier on the go around and it would just be “a near miss paperwork shuffle”. 

Anyone of these and everyone lives. 

The aviation industry, like all highly skilled trades has seen a lot of turnover since Covid ended.  Not sure if that has any influence on this accident.

This is not for publication beyond this forum, and should be considered as just an unapproved/unqualified observer of the news.

[Jess from VA]

Thank you for that good write up. 

[Rams]

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

While the Air Force is accommodating in allowing others to ride along, I agree with the crowded conditions.   They really pack folks in there.  I was so upset about that a couple of times, myself and the rest of my platoon exited the aircraft while in flight versus waiting until the aircraft landed.

Rams

[Jess from VA]

I've been an adventurous risk taker most of my life, and thought about parachuting (in my youth), but decided to never jump out of a perfectly good airplane. 

It also cost a lot of money and you had to go to school (which I'd had enough of). 

[0leman]

I've been an adventurous risk taker most of my life, and thought about parachuting (in my youth), but decided to never jump out of a perfectly good airplane. 

It also cost a lot of money and you had to go to school (which I'd had enough of). 

In my younger working days, was in a number of small aircraft doing smoke pratol.  Looking for fires.  Got to do it several times a week as one of those "other jobs as assigned".  Would never think of leaving a perfectly good aircraft.  Allways thought those who did jump on smokes were a bit strange.  I always managed to take the 6 am flights after spending a flight in the 4 pm flight.  Have not gotten sick in an aircraft bumping and jumping around in the thermals but it was awfully close.

[Serk]

Not exactly germane to the topic, but oh well, conversations tend to ebb and flow naturally....

Everyone should jump out of a perfectly good airplane once. It really is an experience that needs to be experienced...



For me it was a one and done sort of thing. The spousal unit is coming up on her 500th and the elder spawn has around 30...

[carolinarider09]

So, the Blackhawk pilots probably did not know the airspace they were operating in well enough.  But much of that only comes with experience, not book work. And that Blackhawk crew was probably on the lower end of experience; qualified and sharp pilots but just not seen everything DCA can throw at one.  If there was a moment of doubt in their minds they should have asked for some guidance from the controller.  (It is quite common and not frowned upon at all generally.  But yet the IP had the more senior officer flying as copilot.  Did that make him more hesitant to ask for directions??)

So, the CRJ, if that TCAS system was barking at them on short final, and you see a predator on the screen near you . . . go around and get away from the threat . . . Now!  easy to say, though to do and abandon an approach.  A second or two earlier on the go around and it would just be “a near miss paperwork shuffle”. 

Anyone of these and everyone lives. 

The aviation industry, like all highly skilled trades has seen a lot of turnover since Covid ended.  Not sure if that has any influence on this accident.

This is not for publication beyond this forum, and should be considered as just an unapproved/unqualified observer of the news.

Your response, which I partially quoted above, was excellent.  Thank you for the well written response and data about what the expectations were and your educated thoughts on what might have happened.   

[Rams]

It appears just a lot of things went just slightly wrong for this accident to happen. 

An excellent post, thanks.   The question of NVGs still exists though.

Rams

[old2soon]

     Couple times I flew off the Yorktown Pilots and Crew talked After launch. On recovery Aitcrew did NOT talk and the Pilots mostly Listened as the bird was guided back by the L S O aboard and catch a wire. And we were NOT the Only Aircraft coming back in. Never ceased to amaze me How Busy the Pilots were on launch and recovery or a trap. And I've known for a long time 2 objects can NOT occupy the same place.
                                                            RIDE SAFE.

[3fan4life]

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

While the Air Force is accommodating in allowing others to ride along, I agree with the crowded conditions.   They really pack folks in there.  I was so upset about that a couple of times, myself and the rest of my platoon exited the aircraft while in flight versus waiting until the aircraft landed.

Rams

Every time that I got a ride on a C 141, I nearly froze to death!

I got a ride in the top section of a C5-A once, that was just like flying commercial.

[Rams]

NTSB chair claims Black Hawk helicopter crew wore night vision goggles before midair crash

NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy says preliminary data suggests the Black Hawk helicopter crew was wearing night vision goggles before colliding with a commercial jet last week.

Rams

[Chrisj CMA]

NTSB chair claims Black Hawk helicopter crew wore night vision goggles before midair crash

NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy says preliminary data suggests the Black Hawk helicopter crew was wearing night vision goggles before colliding with a commercial jet last week.

Rams

That’s what I heard at the very beginning. Thought it was a terrible idea and may have been partly the cause of the collision. The only thing that makes sense is that it was for qualification so they had to keep them on.

[Rams]

NTSB chair claims Black Hawk helicopter crew wore night vision goggles before midair crash

NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy says preliminary data suggests the Black Hawk helicopter crew was wearing night vision goggles before colliding with a commercial jet last week.

Rams

That’s what I heard at the very beginning. Thought it was a terrible idea and may have been partly the cause of the collision. The only thing that makes sense is that it was for qualification so they had to keep them on.

Well, it's still preliminary but, one would think that it would not have been mentioned if there wasn't a strong possibility.   Admittedly, I am shocked if, they were actually using NVGs.  I've also spoken with two current Army pilots who agree with me but, that doesn't mean I am right.  It's going to be a while before the actual final report is issued, I'm saving that CROW until then.

Rams

[h13man]

So another incident but not tragic.

https://www.nationalworld.com/travel/travel-news/seattle-airport-crash-japan-airlines-and-delta-plane-collide-on-runway-4977799

[Serk]

ADS-B was disabled, for a training mission?

Is that... normal?

https://www.foxnews.com/us/black-hawk-crew-likely-wearing-night-vision-goggles-before-deadly-dc-midair-crash-ntsb

[Chrisj CMA]

ADS-B was disabled, for a training mission?

Is that... normal?

https://www.foxnews.com/us/black-hawk-crew-likely-wearing-night-vision-goggles-before-deadly-dc-midair-crash-ntsb

Seems like to me that ADS-B was turned off as part of a scenario they were flying for training.  Also seems the required radio call was NOT made to notify controllers they were flying “un-aided” which lends even more credence to the notion they were flying with NVGs at the time of the crash.

[carolinarider09]

I don't know how it really works, but when we were doing training and or "testing" with a real live 3,000 Megawatt Thermal Nuclear Reactor, we always had someone in the background watching to make sure we did not have an "event".

In other words if I was about to operate the wrong switch, someone would be there, aware of what I was doing and take actions to prevent a "mishap".   In the control room it usually took several highly skilled and trained people to ensure security.

Would this not seemly be the case on any training missing were the possibility of error was highly present???? (flying in a congested area at night wearing Night Vision Equipment)?   It does not disrupt the training.  It is there to save lives.  

[Jess from VA]

I think that's what the senior guy in the right seat was supposed to be doing Bill.

If it was NVGs or other safety features turned off for training, it needs to never be done again within 10 miles of DCA.  

[old2soon]

     I've NEVER used NVGs. I Know the ambient light is Increased a lot how much Exactly I do Not Know. O K a Google search stated NVGs increadee light 50000 times. So even a candle close at night would be like looking at an arc welser? Having been around Military airfields when Not at sea it was still fairly bright at night with the active runway and active taxiway lights operating. With That much ambient light at night be a hinderance while using NVGs in that eviroment? And WHY would that training sylabus nat NVGs in use in That much light? As a W A G investigators are asking more questions than opur forum is. RIDE SAFE.

[John Schmidt]

One thing I learned from a friend regarding NVG is if flying/operating over a fully lit city the goggles tend to wash out with the extra light coming in...wash out was his term. He then added that it makes it difficult to distinguish images at times. I have numerous hours of night flying while at the controls and can't imagine having to use NVG, especially over a city.

[carolinarider09]

Vital helicopter tracking system was turned off at time of plane collision in DC, Cruz says

Some text from the link below:

More information has emerged in the investigation into the mid-air collision over the Potomac River between an American Airlines jet and an Army Black Hawk helicopter, as a lawmaker reveals the chopper had turned off a vital tracking system prior to the collision.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, addressed reporters following a closed-door briefing with federal authorities investigating the collision that killed 67 people.

Cruz said the chopper had turned off its Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast system.
The Federal Aviation Administration describes the system as “advanced surveillance technology that combines an aircraft’s positioning source, aircraft avionics, and ground infrastructure to create an accurate surveillance interface between aircraft" and air traffic control.

The technology is considered more “precise than radar.”

The senator questioned why the system was turned off prior to the collision, given the nature of the flight operations.

“This was a training mission so there was no compelling national security reason for the ADS-B to be turned off,” Cruz told reporters.

Now regarding the “training mission” comment.  As I understand it, this was a “continuation of government” training mission.  Dealing with ensuring that our government leaders are kept safe in certain times.

However, I don’t understand what benefit it would have been for the Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast system to be turned off in the condition being tested.  Does it send out signals???  Can it increase the ability of someone to track the helicopter. 

So many questions. 

https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/plane-crash-helicopter-key-tracking-system-was-turned-time-collision

[Rams]

However, I don’t understand what benefit it would have been for the Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast system to be turned off in the condition being tested.  Does it send out signals???  Can it increase the ability of someone to track the helicopter. 

So many questions. 

https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/plane-crash-helicopter-key-tracking-system-was-turned-time-collision

This updated system wasn't available when I was flying, but I was also never in a high profile unit like the one involved in the accident.   My units were always combat aviation units.   I also have no idea why that was turned off in such a congested area.   Simply doesn't make sense to me.   Just as the allegation that the pilots were under NVG at the time of the crash. 

Hopefully we'll find out sooner than later.

Rams

[carolinarider09]

Found another "source" with a little more information. 

https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/helicopters-safety-system-was-off-before-deadly-crash-near-reagan-airport-officials-say-national-transportation-safety-board-dca-federal-aviation-administration-commerce-committee-senator-ted-cruz?fbclid=IwY2xjawIVyDJleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHa57XMPXhyX4EzzxJR0YPQNkUxVpw6YogGHgWMuGIVoyrjH1p3D1XSF1bg_aem_ILUs04hnVe8AKpdfsedaTA

Some information from the link above:

According to the NTSB, the helicopter was flying too high.

The flight traffic data that NTSB had obtained confirms that the helicopter was flying at 300 feet according to the air traffic control display, which is 100 feet more than it should be flying in the nation's capital.

ADS-B is advanced technology that helps track aircraft location, which according to Cruz is more accurate than what appears on a radar.

As of tight now, Ronald Reagan National Airport is seeing 26 flights fly out per hour, rather than the 28 flights it previusly saw.

The FAA is also reviewing other airports that receive large volumes of air traffic.

According to a new FAA Advisory, helicopters are not allowed to be in the same area as civilian planes around Ronald Reagan National Airport until late February.

[Jersey mike]

It appears just a lot of things went just slightly wrong for this accident to happen.  But first, the idea of closing this airport because of the proximity to things.  Just not going to happen, too much money involved in many areas.  First, the airlines themselves own the landing/departure slots once they are awarded by the government.  And as efficiency improves they have awarded more and more slots to various airlines and routes.  These slots can be sold and bought by other airlines but seldom become available because of the higher premium yield for DCA versus Dulles and Baltimore.  And this is not the only airport with theses traffic congestion issues in cities . . . LaGuardia (also a slot controlled airport), San Francisco with two parcel runways so close together that landing in pairs is common several hundred feet apart (yes, passengers are quickly briefed over the PA), San Diego with a damm parking garage built on the approach path so the angle to the runway is steeper, etc.  A lot of airports have issues, but pilots train for many of these airports in simulators.  The worst of them, before a new Captain can fly in to them they have to ride with an experienced Captain into and out of the airport.  All regulated by the FAA and watched over by them constantly.  If you ever see a guy/gal in a pretty cheap blazer standing up by the cockpit before departure it is probably an FAA individual making a surprise ride along on a leg.  Very, very common on our airlines.

Now, what went wrong, I believe a few things.  The only altimeter I’m interested in is the Blackhawk.  With several onboard at least one will be stuck at impact, but that doesn’t tell the whole story.  As I said before, the circle to runway 33 is challenging.  As is normally the case here, it comes late in the game and the crew has to decide quickly.  I’ve never flown a CRJ like this, but I know the approach speeds are similar to an airliner twice its size because it has no leading edge devices to provide additional lift at slow speeds like a large airliner has.  Hence 125knots in the flare is common . . . and now your on a short, short runway for those speeds.  And B737’s and A320’s do this routinely as well.  So the CRJ rounds the corner on short final and is going to be focused on a runway lighting system to provide a proper glide path.  If the CRJ pilots are on top of their game they are on the lower end of that lighting system glide path.  Remember, short runway . . . plant the airplane with little flare and stop the airplane.  Nothing has to do with altimeters on short final like this, it is all visual . . . inside airspeed, outside lights of glidepath (repeat 10 times a second).  And then, the barking of the collision avoidance system was hopefully going full blast.  And then did the CRJ pilots hear the half conversation the controller was having with the Blackhawk while they were doing the circle??

The Blackhawk pilots were following the river south in a haphazard way, the communication with the tower was professional . . .  but yet . . .i wonder did they really know what the CRJ was doing in the circle to runway 33?? I’m starting to think they did not know the flight path the CRJ was taking.  And then they confused some other lights with the CRJ and thought they were well behind it. 

The controller was counting on the Blackhawk to pass behinds the CRJ.  When a pilot responds “in sight” and will pass visual behind that alleviates the controller of separation.  The controller is visual with outside but would have a small radar scope near them for additional situational awareness at this level of airport.  The controller questioned the Blackhawk pilot a second time if they had the CRJ because he/she could see the conflict.

So, the controller assumed the Blackhawk pilot knew the CRJ route but should have said “traffic 11’clock 2miles, pass behind as traffic passes left to right in front of you”. The controller “assumed’’ the Blackhawk pilots knew the route the CRJ was flying, a dangerous game. 

So, the Blackhawk pilots probably did not know the airspace they were operating in well enough.  But much of that only comes with experience, not book work. And that Blackhawk crew was probably on the lower end of experience; qualified and sharp pilots but just not seen everything DCA can throw at one.  If there was a moment of doubt in their minds they should have asked for some guidance from the controller.  (It is quite common and not frowned upon at all generally.  But yet the IP had the more senior officer flying as copilot.  Did that make him more hesitant to ask for directions??)

So, the CRJ, if that TCAS system was barking at them on short final, and you see a predator on the screen near you . . . go around and get away from the threat . . . Now!  easy to say, though to do and abandon an approach.  A second or two earlier on the go around and it would just be “a near miss paperwork shuffle”. 

Anyone of these and everyone lives. 

The aviation industry, like all highly skilled trades has seen a lot of turnover since Covid ended.  Not sure if that has any influence on this accident.

This is not for publication beyond this forum, and should be considered as just an unapproved/unqualified observer of the news.

That was laid out very well. I don’t fly and I understood what you were talking about.

[Jersey mike]

Vital helicopter tracking system was turned off at time of plane collision in DC, Cruz says

Some text from the link below:

More information has emerged in the investigation into the mid-air collision over the Potomac River between an American Airlines jet and an Army Black Hawk helicopter, as a lawmaker reveals the chopper had turned off a vital tracking system prior to the collision.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, addressed reporters following a closed-door briefing with federal authorities investigating the collision that killed 67 people.

Cruz said the chopper had turned off its Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast system.
The Federal Aviation Administration describes the system as “advanced surveillance technology that combines an aircraft’s positioning source, aircraft avionics, and ground infrastructure to create an accurate surveillance interface between aircraft" and air traffic control.

The technology is considered more “precise than radar.”

The senator questioned why the system was turned off prior to the collision, given the nature of the flight operations.

“This was a training mission so there was no compelling national security reason for the ADS-B to be turned off,” Cruz told reporters.

Now regarding the “training mission” comment.  As I understand it, this was a “continuation of government” training mission.  Dealing with ensuring that our government leaders are kept safe in certain times.

However, I don’t understand what benefit it would have been for the Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast system to be turned off in the condition being tested.  Does it send out signals???  Can it increase the ability of someone to track the helicopter. 

So many questions. 

https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/plane-crash-helicopter-key-tracking-system-was-turned-time-collision

The only thing I can think of would be it’s not part of requalification.

[da prez]

  Question for our (older) chopper pilots.  If a chopper was say 100 feet below a commercial jet path at takeoff , could the back wash(?) from the jet cause problems for the chopper. 

                                                 da prez

[Rams]

  Question for our (older) chopper pilots.  If a chopper was say 100 feet below a commercial jet path at takeoff , could the back wash(?) from the jet cause problems for the chopper. 

                                                 da prez

Well, I probably qualify (although I hate admitting it).

Having never done that, I'm only offering an opinion (a SWAG).   

There are too many variables to consider but, it's doubtful in my opinion but, much would be determined by the environmental conditions and the intersect/courses, speed and a lot of other factors I may not have considered of the two aircraft.   

My only (very different similarity) would be flying a Scout helicopter (small and light weight) near a Chinook.   I have actually seen the rotor wash of a Chinook hovering past a Scout that was running but sitting firmly planted on the ground being spun around due to that rotor wash.    Scared the heck out of the Scout Pilot.

So, IMHO such an encounter would not in all probability other than similar to flying through a bit of turbulence which is pretty normal just flying a helicopter.  Although, having such a near miss would definitely get my attention.

Rams

[semo97]

This is my take, had to wait until most all tried to figure it out. Rams has very good thoughts on it. Being a chopper pilot you get a better out look. I did not pilot, i was a crew chief , scout on a Loach in Nam.. Did nighthawk  on a Huey with night vision which was just a shadow or figure. Was not good equipment. My point to all this, why was there not 4 crew members on the Blackhawk. It was made for 2 pilots and 2 crew chiefs. Another set of eyes on the other side would have been looking, just maybe, where that plane was. Why would you fly in that congested air space with only 75% vision. 25% more would have made a big difference. We never left the ground with out 100% crew. When they said there was 3 military deaths I asked my wife where is number 4. Someone dropped the ball. common sense is uncommon.

[semo97]

The prop wash even from our high bird a cobra would get your attention. When we would be heading out our cobra pilots waited until we were clear or in the air. Never fly close behind one on take off because we went balls to wall most of the time. We had the best job no brass or news folks screwed with us.

[Rams]

The prop wash even from our high bird a cobra would get your attention. When we would be heading out our cobra pilots waited until we were clear or in the air. Never fly close behind one on take off because we went balls to wall most of the time. We had the best job no brass or news folks screwed with us.

Agreed, the down wash of a rotor system would get one's attention.  Chinooks were by far the most dangerous to hover around, once in flight (if you were trail) staying above and/or behind a Chinook a couple rotor discs was normally safe.

Reference flying close behind that commercial jet should have provided some turbulence but nothing a good pilot couldn't handle.  That's just my opinion, I've never tried anything like that.  

Rams

[Serk]

Very near miss this morning in Chicago...

ATC radio traffic released. Surprisingly very calm and no cussing. I suspect the cockpit voice recorder would tell a different story... O.o


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6Mp9aUJaTY

[Jess from VA]

I reported earlier, that all those helicopters going to and from Davison Army Airfield fly right over (or very close) to my house, to and from DCA or the Pentagon, for years.  Since the big accident, I've only noticed 2 or 3 helicopter flights at all.   

[carolinarider09]

I just heard this (well read it on the news ticker) on Newsmax.  

"Helicopter route has been permanently closed near D. C. airport"

I assume (yes I know) this is related to the route used by the Helicopter that was involved in this accident.

Updated March 29, 2025:  I cannot verify this is a correct statement.  In fact, last night, I heard that they had changed something but not prevented or closed the "Helicopter Route" in question.

[Jess from VA]

I'm a patriotic guy and unflinchingly support our military, but it's kind of nice not having them fly over my house all the time (anymore).  The very occasional helicopters going by are well away from my house, and I'm guessing are going to the Pentagon.  Course I still have the big airliners overhead going to and from DCA all the time, but they are higher and much quieter.

[Hook#3287]

I watch the show "Air Disasters" and it's pretty much turned me off of air transportation.

I do realize statistically speaking, it's the safest form of travel, but still.

It's an interesting show on the research and methods of the NTSB and foreign governments agencies in determining crash causes.

Lately their have quite a bit of new content to explore, unfortunately.

I do look forward to the D.C. Crash, if the military will let them do it.

[Jess from VA]

There will be two investigations, a 'safety investigation' aimed only at involved aircraft safety, and an 'accident investigation' aimed at causes, fault and blame.  The Army and civilian authority may work together on them, or they may be done separately.  Most, but not all of them, will be made public when completed.

I worked as legal advisor on several USAF accident investigations, but never on a safety investigation which doesn't need a legal advisor.  Dealt with money damage claims against the USAF on them too.