Two Lessons From The DCA Crash

[N201MKTurbo]

1 hour ago, Aerodon said:

I don't think they were on a circling approach.  Wouldn't the clearance then be 'cleared to DCA via the 01 GPS/ILS/or Other approach with Circling to 33?

They were asked if they could take the 'visual to 33' or something along those lines.  But there is no published visual approach, so they were more or less on their own for routing, altitudes etc., just like we are on virtually every VFR landing day or night.  Yes they could have loaded a RNAV or GPS approach for guidance, but that is not the clearance they got.

Many airlines prohibit VFR approaches, and some prohibit Circling.  It's one way to reduce risk, especially at night.  Pilots trying to be helpful, and now they are dead.

And just the day before a similar situation resulted in a GA and the reason given was 'we got an RA because of a helicopter beneath us'.

My son is learning to fly, and I've already taught him to listen to every radio transmission (tower or airplane) and make an assessment of how it might affect him. And also at least attempt to find them, nothing like getting into the habit of searching.   I feel sorry for the CRJ pilots not being able to hear the transmissions to the helicopter, it would have saved their lives.

There is going to be a lot of would've - should've - could've - didn't at the end of this for all parties involved.

Aerodon

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don’t think you can blame the CRJ pilots for anything. If they had crashed, that would be a different story, but they were hit by a helicopter while on a perfectly fine short final to a major airport. 

[Ibra]

1 hour ago, Aerodon said:

I don't think they were on a circling approach.  Wouldn't the clearance then be 'cleared to DCA via the 01 GPS/ILS/or Other approach with Circling to 33?

You are right, I looked at VASA replay all traffic were on radar/ils initial, before joining visual runway1, some traffic was sent to runway33 (to allow takeoff on runway1? or crosswind?)

The CRJ was at 1200ft on “own routing” to runway33 when ATC passed traffic info to PAT rather than “traditional circle-to-land”…

1 hour ago, Aerodon said:

There is going to be a lot of would've - should've - could've - didn't at the end of this for all parties involved.

Indeed, lot to be learned on how/why after this sad accident !

[Aerodon]

1 hour ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I don’t think you can blame the CRJ pilots for anything. If they had crashed, that would be a different story, but they were hit by a helicopter while on a perfectly fine short final to a major airport. 

Just trying to understand the whole situation.  The day before there was a similar conflict, same red CA with inbound aircraft and helicopter.  Airplane initiated go around because of an RA, even though it was in daytime and everyone had each other in sight, and a 500 ft differential.  (1300 and 800 I think).  Controller sounded slightly miffed, but not too bad.

When does TCAS no longer work, below 1000?  

This CRJ was not informed about the PAT.  And I think they flew a perfectly good visual approach.  But time will tell what their airline rules are for visual and circling approaches etc.     And also what TCAS equipment they had on board, what was displayed, did the PNF miss anything etc.

And blame tends to get spread around a lot, just look at the recent Las Vegas midair where the Malibu flew through the centreline of the correct runway and whacked the poor C172 on the other runway.  Controllers picked up some blame even they asked a couple of times if they were going for the correct runway.  

Aerodon

 

 

[AH-1 Cobra Pilot]

9 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

The highest ranking person on the helicopter was a captain, so I assume she was the pilot in command. News reports say she was extreamly experienced with 450 hours of flying time. That doesn’t sound that experienced to me. I have no idea how good a pilot the captain was or how much recent experience she had. There were numerous news stories about her attending high ranking socal events in DC including escorting foreign dignatries. I don’t think this is typical duty for an army captain. I wonder if these events distracted her from her flying duties?

Much more likely the CWO2 was the PIC.  On average, new Army pilots have around 200 hours.  After you get your wings, figure you only get the controls half the time you log, so she was more equivalent to a 300 hour private pilot.  

Army commissioned officers range from those like me, (as a captain, I already had over 2000 hours, including 1000 in jets and several hundred in helicopters), to absolute knuckleheads who I got the impression really did not enjoy flying.

[AH-1 Cobra Pilot]

9 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

The highest ranking person on the helicopter was a captain, so I assume she was the pilot in command. News reports say she was extreamly experienced with 450 hours of flying time. That doesn’t sound that experienced to me. I have no idea how good a pilot the captain was or how much recent experience she had. There were numerous news stories about her attending high ranking socal events in DC including escorting foreign dignatries. I don’t think this is typical duty for an army captain. I wonder if these events distracted her from her flying duties?

Much more likely the CWO2 was the PIC.  On average, new Army pilots have around 200 hours.  After you get your wings, figure you only get the controls half the time you log, so she was more equivalent to a 300 hour private pilot.  (Extremely experienced, my eye!)  Since a male voice on the helicopter responds to ATC, most likely the captain was flying, per the usual Army crew-coordination.

Army commissioned officers range from those like me, (as a captain, I already had over 2000 hours, including 1000 in jets and several hundred in helicopters), to absolute knuckleheads who I got the impression really did not enjoy flying.  As far as all the “high ranking social events” goes, which do you think?

[toto]

24 minutes ago, AH-1 Cobra Pilot said:

As far as all the “high ranking social events” goes, which do you think?

From an article on cnn.com:

https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/31/us/dc-plane-crash-victims/index.html

[Grant_Waite]

47 minutes ago, toto said:

From an article on cnn.com:

https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/31/us/dc-plane-crash-victims/index.html

This, I think she was a DEI hire in all likelihood hence why Trump has called out DEI could have been a factor. They knew the instant this happened who was flying that helicopter and everything there was to know about them. All makes more sense with the family not wanting to release the info, they knew there was going to be backlash. 

[N201MKTurbo]

I will not make any judgement about her flying abilities. I have no information about it. I just said she was involved in things beyond what would be normal duties of an army captain. I would like to know if she was as current as her contemporaries. 

[AH-1 Cobra Pilot]

12 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

, but they were flying south.

They were probably heading home to Fort Belvoir.

[AH-1 Cobra Pilot]

5 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

Oh, and except for Test Flights, ALL Military flights are training, Don’t know about VIP transport, we didn’t do any of that with Apache’s

I did plenty of non-training flights:  MEDEVAC, fire fighting, border patrol assistance,…

[Sixstring2k]

Blancoliro has done a excellent breakdown of the accident

 

[N201MKTurbo]

6 hours ago, Sixstring2k said:

Blancoliro has done a excellent breakdown of the accident

 

You tube won’t play unless I sign in. That’s weird. I don’t have a you tube account.

[Hank]

7 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

You tube won’t play unless I sign in. That’s weird. I don’t have a you tube account.

That's weird. I didn't have tomsign in, just hit the Play button.

[N201MKTurbo]

2 hours ago, Hank said:

That's weird. I didn't have tomsign in, just hit the Play button.

I was able to find it on YouTube and watch it there.

[Schllc]

All the talk I heard about DEI referred to the inability to hire people because of dei quotas. 
this problem is isolated and systemic at the same time. 

[N201MKTurbo]

I think all this talk about DEI is a red herring. The real problem is flawed procedures that require absolute perfection and have no room for error. 

No visual separations at night on the helicopter routes. I think a 500 foot minimum separation would be reasonable. 

[redbaron1982]

6 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I think all this talk about DEI is a red herring. The real problem is flawed procedures that require absolute perfection and have no room for error. 

No visual separations at night on the helicopter routes. I think a 500 foot minimum separation would be reasonable. 

Yes, 100%; it doesn't make sense to have a published helicopter route that crosses the short final of a class B airport in the same altitude block as any aircraft landing. If everyone had been flying with 0 deviations and with a perfectly accurate baro height, then the helo would be at 200ft and the landing traffic at ~300 ft and descending. 100 ft is the altitude granularity that the controller sees on their screen; it makes no sense at all.

 

[flyboy0681]

18 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

Many of my Neighbors fly for the Airlines, a few Netjets and the like, most are very senior getting close to Retirement, hence the house in a fly in community

What you are saying is not what I have heard from them, but the old guys always think the new ones are worse than they were.

What you and Andy said backed up what I've been saying all along. To listen to some in the media and blogosphere would lead one to believe that they are hired solely based on race and gender, with skills and knowledge taking a backseat. When something goes wrong, the knee jerk reaction is always "DEI hire".

[mike_elliott]

On 1/31/2025 at 11:16 AM, AJ88V said:

This is one of the very busiest times to be flying around DCA.  Not that I was in their airspace, but my old field W32 (with Potomac Field VKX) was roughly in the flight path for the south approach to DCA. 

5:30 - 8:00 pm is an absolute zoo.  Just listen to the tapes!  That's normal!  Add in the practically insane approach and departure routings to avoid flying over parts of WDC, the visual approach on the short rwy 33, and the low altitude helo flyways along the river and we have a recipe for disaster.  So what the h@ll was a military "training flight" even doing in the airspace at the time?  And why were they off altitude?  Call me paranoid, but there's something effed up going on.

Dr. Maltenfort's observations are with authority

[redbaron1982]

The FAR's states for mode C transpoder (91.217 (a) (2)):

"Unless, as installed, that equipment was tested and calibrated to transmit altitude data corresponding within 125 feet (on a 95 percent probability basis) of the indicated or calibrated datum of the altimeter normally used to maintain flight altitude, with that altimeter referenced to 29.92 inches of mercury for altitudes from sea level to the maximum operating altitude of the aircraft"

A serviceable mode C transpoder (I understand that's the altitude reporting equipment on board of the black hawk) would have an error of +/- 125 ft.

 

Edited Monday at 04:25 PM by redbaron1982

[MooneyMitch]

The term common sense applies here...................don't fly in the approach path of other aircraft!  Procedural change details to follow soon.  Seems simple to me.

[Pinecone]

End of runway 33 to the shoreline is 4046 feet (Google map measurement).  So 3 degrees puts them at 212 feet.  

When I flew those helicopter routes, you were over the shoreline between the Thomas Jefferson Memorial and the Wilson bridge.  NOT over the river.

I have encountered traffic ( they used to run the turbo props into 33 or 22 on a regular basis, and while this was day VMC, there did not appear to be any issues.

These helicopter routes are not new.  I was flying them in the early and mid 90s.

[N201MKTurbo]

15 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

End of runway 33 to the shoreline is 4046 feet (Google map measurement).  So 3 degrees puts them at 212 feet.  

When I flew those helicopter routes, you were over the shoreline between the Thomas Jefferson Memorial and the Wilson bridge.  NOT over the river.

I have encountered traffic ( they used to run the turbo props into 33 or 22 on a regular basis, and while this was day VMC, there did not appear to be any issues.

These helicopter routes are not new.  I was flying them in the early and mid 90s.

I’m sure all can continue using the routes, but having ATC insure that there is at least 500 ft separation doesn’t seem like too much to ask. That 500 feet can be up down or sideways. It seems like it could be handled like taxiing across an active runway. They are helicopters after all, they can stop. There could be hold short fixes on either side of the approach path. The tower would issue a clearance to proceed. These would be unusual procedures, but this is unusual airspace.

[Aerodon]

31 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I’m sure all can continue using the routes, but having ATC insure that there is at least 500 ft separation doesn’t seem like too much to ask. That 500 feet can be up down or sideways. It seems like it could be handled like taxiing across an active runway. They are helicopters after all, they can stop. There could be hold short fixes on either side of the approach path. The tower would issue a clearance to proceed. These would be unusual procedures, but this is unusual airspace.

500 vertical is reasonable.  Closing speed of 240 kts is 354 ft/s.  No thanks, I don't want to see a plane passing 1.5 seconds in front or behind.

There are previously reported near misses, some almost identical but for the Helo altitude 'error'.  Cannot be fun having a 'presidential looking helo pass 150 ft underneath us'.

Remind me again on the ratio of incidents vs accidents?

And then - let's force all go GA to get ADSB for safety.  The target trend of traffic on my 760 is fantastic, and I pay attention to it every time.   

But then, no, let's give airlines an exemption because they are always under 'positive control.  And the military don't need it because their training and equipment is so good.  While we are at it, let's let them continue using their own frequencies.

Aerodon

 

 

 

 

 

[AH-1 Cobra Pilot]

2 hours ago, Schllc said:

All the talk I heard about DEI referred to the inability to hire people because of dei quotas. 
this problem is isolated and systemic at the same time. 

No.  It is probably way worse than you think.  Throughout my military career, I have flown with people who would fit the "DEI Hire" profile; most were fine pilots.  It is always the exception that proves the rule.  It was especially bad in the 1970s to early 1980s, (and probably really bad in the last few years).  The incompetents were given every opportunity and advantage to overcome problems that would definitely have sunk any given white male and pushed ahead regardless of their abilities.  There have been many documented incidents of these failures that you can look up.

I always feel worst for the competent people who are proverbially tarred with the same brush.  One day on cruise in the 80s, my friend and colleague Ray entered into a conversation several of us were having about airline jobs.  He noted that it took 1500 hours of jet time to qualify.  While the rest of us contemplated that, he hung his head in shame and added, "And for women and minorities, it is 350."

I am waiting for the cockpit voice recorders data before I make my final judgment.