ATC Page: 3 of 31

Timmy Tomkins
January 30, 2025, 13:48:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817257

For ATC people a question. Would it be standard to preface the "can you see it?" with an indication of where the CRJ was? IE "Your traffic is one o'clock 2 miles...report visual etc"

Subjects ATC CRJ

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

island_airphoto
January 30, 2025, 13:54:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817261

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toruk Macto

Read somewhere the helicopter was a training flight ? If true is a high density , high workload and high threat environment really the place to do training ? I don’t know military training environment but this flight needed good crew crm, one operating , one looking out and working as a team . Full concentration on co ordinating ATC with traffic avoidance . If it was anything than a route famil with good crm and level command gradient it could have added to the outcome ?

When I was working as a CFI out of VKK, literally right outside the DCA Class B, we did training flights at DCA. It was not unusual, how were the students supposed to learn to deal with it if we never went there? One lesson was the "Big 3", going to DCA, IAD, BWI, and back home. ATC was happy enough, they surely didn't want n00bs blundering around there on their own with a fresh license and no clue.

Subjects ATC DCA

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

2 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

ATC Watcher
January 30, 2025, 13:57:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817266

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timmy Tomkins

For ATC people a question. Would it be standard to preface the "can you see it?" with an indication of where the CRJ was? IE "Your traffic is one o'clock 2 miles...report visual etc"

sequence is not important . What is is the difference between passing traffic information and delegating separation . . in the US limits are being "pushed" to use a politically correct term in order to allow more traffic than the rules would allow . That is the issue here . Not the phraseology .
Same as using "side step " , a procedure made for parallel runways , here they do with with runways 30 degrees apart . etc..etc..

Subjects ATC CRJ Phraseology (ATC) Separation (ALL)

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

2 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Toruk Macto
January 30, 2025, 13:59:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817269

Quote:

Originally Posted by island_airphoto

Simulators , industry has moved away from training high risk simulated failures in an aircraft and introduced loft sessions to avoid training in high work load environments. Then a route check . No one saying send up an inexperienced crew to avoid intense training but just do it in a simulator .

Subjects ATC DCA

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

1 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

dragon6172
January 30, 2025, 14:10:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817272

Quote:

Originally Posted by visibility3miles

The helicopter\x92s right turn was directly over a golf course, not a residential neighborhood. It was probably done for noise abatement reasons, because it then turned left and proceeded down more directly over the river.

The golf course is on a peninsula in the river, so the helicopter was flying over water before and after it made the two turns.

The track in your image is not an accurate representation of PAT25s actual flight path. The leaked ATC radar track here and the VASAviation recreation here are more representative. There was no sharp RH turn to cross over the Potomac Park golf courses, it was a gentle RH turn to follow the published Route 1 to Route 4 helicopter transition around DCA.

Subjects ATC DCA Radar Route 4

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

1 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

visibility3miles
January 30, 2025, 14:32:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817282

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragon6172

My bad. The image was published online by the Washington Post, which is obviously covering the story, and elsewhere.

You could contact them if you want and tell them it\x92s wrong. No offense intended.

Even if it wasn\x92t a sharp turn, it was done over a golf course and their flight path was probably dictated by noise abatement reasons, as are those flown by jets flying into DCA.

Subjects ATC DCA Radar Route 4

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

MLHeliwrench
January 30, 2025, 14:36:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817284

Blackhawk comms

Some of the ATC recordings and YouTube videos don\x92t show the Blackhawk responding to ATC instructions. The Blackhawk does acknowledge more than once they have the traffic in sight - just on a different frequency, likly UHF which commercial planes do not use generally.

It\x92s easy to look now and be like - who would allow a helicopter highway 300 feet below a final approach path????

but this has been completely routine in that area for years and years. Helicopter Pilots who have flown the route have felt wake turbulence when scooting under/behind.

also - the use of 33, especially by CRJ size jets is completely normal and should of been expected by any helicopter crew as a possible traffic issue. In the VAS channel ATC video linked above. There are other jets using 33.

Subjects ATC Blackhawk (H-60) CRJ Traffic in Sight

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

3 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Upside Down
January 30, 2025, 14:37:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817285

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATC Watcher

This is done everywhere around the world, not the same as crossing 1 Nm before the threshold at 300 feet .with a guy above on the glideslope as our case here.

Special VFR is about weather minima's, nothing to do with our accident here .

yes apologies\x85 I\x92m mixing up \x93Special VFR\x94 with \x93VFR in Controlled Airspace\x94\x85. (it\x92s been a long time !).
my earlier point related to responsibility for separation\x85. and that the helo would be VFR (if following the low-level transit Route 4) and the airliner IFR. I was unsure if there was a special category for VFR at night\x85
apologies for sowing any confusion\x85\x85

Subjects ATC IFR Route 4 VFR

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

canyonblue737
January 30, 2025, 14:44:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817292

Quote:

Originally Posted by SINGAPURCANAC

Shouldnt it be:
Pat 25 traffic at 11 o clock 3 miles, crj following ils for rwy 33, report in sight
??

yes. if you look at the longer transcripts his initial call of the traffic was exactly that format and the helicopter acknowledges the traffic in sight and is approved visual separation. they some time later 30-60 seconds at least (maybe more) there are the more common published transcripts where the controller uses non standard phraseology in quick succession to attempt to point out and ask he helicopter to pass behind the traffic. the non-standard phraseology and voice is clearly stressed because its the moment in time the ATC controller becomes first concerned by the proximity of the helicopter and airplane and clearly he is making a quick call to try to see if the helicopter still "has him in sight" or if he needs to take action (like sending the CRJ around). unfortunately after the second quick non standard call the helicopter again responds they have the traffic in sight and will maintain visual separation. perhaps 10-15 seconds later the midair occurs. detailed audio long before and after the incident is here:

Subjects ATC CRJ Pass Behind Pass Behind (All) Phraseology (ATC) Separation (ALL) Traffic in Sight Visual Separation

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

2 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Pilot DAR
January 30, 2025, 14:55:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817305

My first of a number of startling events relating to "seeing" traffic announced to me by ATC taught me a valuable lesson: I was told to pass behind two F-4 Phantoms on long final, 2 Phantoms in sight, and I watched them, 'cause they were cool... Then two more blasted right across in front of me! Adequately safely distant, but scary! Lesson for pilots, once you see and report in sight, ask yourself if there could be another you have not seen yet - and leek looking, checking back on the one you've spotted, particularly if you have a second pilot with you! For ATC, sure announce to presence of traffic which may be in conflict, but also state other relevant (distracting/misunderstandable) traffic if time permits. That ATC was not busy, and could have told me that there were four Phantoms total. My tactic to see, acknowledge, then keep looking more aircraft elsewhere, has rewarded me many times since, even once as third jumpseat observer. This is a simple safety skill in any visual flying environment, particularly at night, and in a busy lights area...

Subjects ATC Pass Behind Pass Behind (All)

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

7 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

biigD
January 30, 2025, 14:56:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817306

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locked door

The whole USA aviation sector needs root and branch reform, there have been so many near misses in recent years that this accident was inevitable, it was just a question of when.

As a US pilot that flies worldwide, I don't disagree (although I've never witnessed a culture of selecting TA only or disregarding an RA), but wholesale change will never happen. There'll be a bunch of 'thoughts and prayers' and pearl clutching by talking heads, and maybe the FAA will change the way ATC separates traffic visually at night, but it'll take a lot more than a crash every couple of decades to get anyone to actually spend money on staffing and infrastructure.

Subjects ATC Close Calls FAA

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

5 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

JG1
January 30, 2025, 15:00:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817307

Quote:

Originally Posted by WideScreen

I think, it's pretty early to call out this to be an ATC issue. Not to say, the whole issue is just built into the system being used in crowded airspaces, with very limited reserves for human mistakes.

ATC's paramount role, it's predominant, principal reason for existing is separation. In the US, controllers are much too eager to pass that buck over to the pilots. Far too eager to hand off their traffic onto a visual approach, often intimidatingly so. It happens nowhere else.

Subjects ATC Separation (ALL)

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

8 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Luc Lion
January 30, 2025, 15:04:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817309

In my understanding, the minimum safe separation in altitude is 500 feet.
As the approach to R33 crosses IDTEK (over the East bank of the river) at about 490 feet MSL, there is no way another aircraft can safely pass underneath at 200 feet MSL.
Thus, I think, the helicopter route RT 4 must be closed whenever an approach (visual or RNAV) to R33 is underway.
If a southbound traffic request a clearance for RT 4 in such a circumstance, they should be ordered to hold at Hains Point or North of it, or be redirected via routes RT 2 and RT 3 to Wilson Bridge.

And the helicopter route chart precedes the route descriptions with the comment "ALL ROUTES MAY BE ALTERED AT PILOT'S REQUEST OR AS DIRECTED BY ATC".

Last edited by Luc Lion; 30th January 2025 at 15:12 . Reason: more info

Subjects ATC Separation (ALL)

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

4 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

JG1
January 30, 2025, 15:04:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817310

"Do you have the CRJ in sight?"
Honestly, at night? A light is a light. Which CRJ, where?
ATC have had a large input into a lot of past accidents. Briefed as one of our biggest threats, especially in the US and the 3rd world. Curiously, never in the UK.

Subjects ATC CRJ

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

1 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Climb150
January 30, 2025, 15:10:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817312

Quote:

Originally Posted by JG1

It's easy Do you see the traffic? Yea or no. If there is an ounce of uncertainty you say no. This guy either thought he did or he didn't see it but said he did.

Subjects ATC CRJ

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

ALTSELGREEN
January 30, 2025, 15:12:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817313

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locked door

The whole USA aviation sector needs root and branch reform, there have been so many near misses in recent years that this accident was inevitable, it was just a question of when.

The majority of people inside the system don\x92t realise how bad it is because it\x92s all they\x92ve ever known. We have American contributors here who routinely tell us it\x92s ok to switch to TA only to avoid \x93nuisance\x94 RA\x92s, who will not follow an RA as they have the traffic in sight, who will accept visual separation at night (day is bad enough) or very late visual switches, who think LAHSO is a good idea. USA ATC think it\x92s acceptable to \x93slam dunk\x94 a heavy jet, get shirty when foreign operators refuse a questionable clearance, literally forget about an aircraft once it has accepted visual separation. The system allows uncontrolled VFR traffic within 500ft of commercial operations which is madness.

I operated the 747-400 around the planet for over a decade, the USA was one of the most threat laden environments we went to. Lovely people, just insane procedures. In that time I experienced a TCAS RA on vectors to JFK, was sent around and put in the hold as punishment on short final in Miami for refusing LAHSO, had multiple super high workload approaches to SFO combined with the crazy policy of pairing aircraft on approach. I witnessed a Singapore aircraft being refused a diversion to Boston from JFK fifteen minutes after they stated what time they would be leaving the hold and where they would be going resulting in a fuel mayday and an unplanned diversion to a regional airport. I lost count of the times I was chastised for refusing a visual approach and visual separation in congested airspace or a very late visual switch.

On most of the planet the human is the last line of defence in a multi layered safety environment. In the USA the human is often the only line of defence, while the environment they are in is super high workload significantly reducing their capacity to trap safety issues.

Unless there is a marked attitude shift in all parties involved in aviation in the USA this will happen again, potentially quite soon.

Stay safe out there

LD

What a terrible, avoidable accident brought about by woefully inadequate procedures.
Couldn\x92t agree more with everything you say. I\x92m sure we have probably shared a flightdeck in years gone by judging by your experiences. It\x92s this kind of chaos that I have to say I miss very little!!

Subjects ATC Close Calls Land and Hold Short Separation (ALL) TCAS (All) TCAS RA Traffic in Sight VFR Visual Separation

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Mozella
January 30, 2025, 15:23:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817324

Quote:

Originally Posted by PerPurumTonantes

Heli route 4 is at or below 200ft if I read the chart correctly.

Approach traffic seems to be approx 400-500ft at this point.

Which turnip decided it would be OK to allow vertical separation of 300ft on a busy approach path? And allow it VFR at night?

This accident was baked in. Bound to happen at some point.

But it's worse than that. The approaches to DCA are only moderately complicated; however, unlike most airports, DCA is surrounded with frustrated people just waiting to call the FAA if you deviate from the published procedure by the slightest amount. Nobody want's to do a rug-dance in the Chief Pilot's office because some Senator's aide gets his/her panties in a wad, or worse, get a violation from the FAA because you flew over someone working for the Secretary of Transportation. I always enjoyed flying in and out of DCA because it was challanging, but I was always on my toes, constantly checking my altitude, position (both visually and via instruments), airspeed, etc. because it is so easy to get your teat in the wringer at DCA.
In this case, the aircraft was flying an approach to one runway with a circle-to-land on RW-33. Ask any pilot; a circle to land in itself ups the work load. The margin for error of any kind at DCA is small and the 5200 foot runway isn't all that long. Even on a simple landing where none of these considerations are an issue, at some point the pilots reduce their "see and avoid" efforts and concentrate their efforts on achieving the proper line up and glide slope, rate of descent, aircraft configuration, flap setting, etc. etc. etc. In other words, the complicated routine required to safely land an airliner these days is already close to task overload even when things are going well. Add in the fact that it's night time at a very busy airport and looking out the window gets shoved pretty far down the "to do" list. But generally speaking, the system works because big busy airports pretty much operate using IFR rules and nearly all the aircraft are under close control. I other words, even on a crystal clear day under VFR flight conditions, someone is keeping a very close eye on the airliners coming and going from major airports. If a pilot makes a mistake and levels off at the wrong altitude, for example, there is a very good chance a controller will catch that error immediately even on a sunny VFR day. And that's a good thing because truth-be-told, when an airliner is seconds from touch down these days, there isn't much "see and avoid" going on. That's just the way it is.

But apparently DCA routinely has all sorts of helo traffic buzzing around under modified VFR flight rules. The pilots are talking to a controller but without being under the same sort of close control which is usually associated with how airliners operate. And they do that night and day, trusting the helo pilots to not make a mistake. But it looks like someone DID make a mistake last night and nobody caught it in time.

Subjects ATC Circle to Land (Deviate to RWY 33) DCA FAA IFR Route 4 See and Avoid Separation (ALL) VFR Vertical Separation

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

4 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Magplug
January 30, 2025, 15:39:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817332

Just listened to the audio. The tower controller seems to have issued some sort of a 'semi-conditional' clearance to the helicopter for which there was no response from the pilot..... So what clearance were they following? The controller did not even establish that the helo pilot had the traffic visual before allowing him to cross the 33 approach. R/T discipline in the USA is normally poor but this was pitiful and I suspect will prove to be a primary factor.

BTW.... I have used NVGs. How the hell can you operate in downtown Washington, with so much that is either lit... or floodlit? The NVG image will be flared out every time you turn your head towards a light.

Subjects ATC Night Vision Goggles (NVG)

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

4 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

clearedtocross
January 30, 2025, 15:41:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817334

When and where I learned to fly (and on each new rating, refresher and check ride) we had to prove that we knew airspace classification. DCA is listed as class B airspace (and special rules on top).

Quote:

Class B. IFR and VFR flights are permitted, all flights are provided with air traffic control service and are separated from each other.

That should apply worldwide, not just in EASA land.
It seems to be a US speciality that ATC can delegate the separation to aircrews (visually) and this at night! And how the hell can ATC separate vertically near the ground when mode S transponders report pressure altitude in steps of 100 feet only?
I dont know the rules of vertical separation by heart but its certainly not less than 500 feet for crossing paths. Is one last digit more or less a separation? This heli crew should have been told by ATC to hold until the aircraft(s) on final have safely passed. It's one of the benefits of a helicopter that it can hover.

Subjects ATC DCA Hover IFR Separation (ALL) VFR Vertical Separation

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

4 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Lascaille
January 30, 2025, 15:44:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817336

Because presumably military helicopters are sometimes going to do what they need to do and may not be able to check in with ATC.

Providing a conflict-free path for them to do that is the most consistent solution.

However the ultimate issue is traffic density, and the control workarounds (that have been discussed at great length upthread) that the US has normalised to shoehorn huge movement numbers into tiny spaces.

This is probably one of those situations where there should be a military/very limited commercial use airport in the current location and the 'real' airport should be hanging off the end of a high-speed rail line about 50 miles away q.v. Hong Kong.

Subjects ATC

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

2 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Posts about: "ATC" [Posts: 614 Page: 3 of 31]¶