Blackhawk (H-60) Page: 2 of 9

NWstu
January 30, 2025, 17:33:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817448

From my son-in-law, who flies Apaches: An obnoxious amount of annoying Monday morning armchair quarterbacks / conspiracy theorists out there regarding the DC crash with the army blackhawk and the american airlines flight, so i’ll say this:

Very tragic event. I listened to the air traffic control tape and nobody was doing anything wrong. Usually in busy airspace (DC is a great example) they’ll have physical, identifiable routes that helicopters can use to transit the airspace. This allows the Air traffic control to control the flow of traffic while allowing all air traffic to stay separated in time and space.

Since that is a Bravo airspace (the busiest) the army copter had to have approval to be flying there, which they did. The blackhawk was very likely flying an approved transition along the river (though a transition like that isn’t commonly approved since it comes so close to the approach threshold of the runway at an altitude the commercial traffic would essentially be at to land. We have one transition like it in Honolulu but i can never get an approval to conduct it because commercial traffic is always landing). Air traffic control asked the blackhawk if they were visual that traffic at one point bd they said yes and they collided.

Though Identifying neighboring aircraft traffic may seem self explanatory, when you’re flying at night your depth perception is decreased and it can be hard to tell which light in the sky is an aircraft 15 miles away or 1 mile away since night vision goggles are image intensifying and make all lights much brighter. Stars and neighboring towers lights also drown out the neighbors aircraft lights so it can become difficult. My guess is they called “visual” on the wrong traffic.

It appears everyone was doing the right thing, but **** happens. Very tragic event for all the families involved.

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60)

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.

MichaelKPIT
January 30, 2025, 19:09:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817549

In a horrible irony, the father of the First Officer involved is a former Black Hawk pilot. Although I knew the names of the crew last night I held off saying anything, but this is now in the public domain: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-revealed.html

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60)

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.

Genghis the Engineer
January 30, 2025, 19:17:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817558

Quote:

Originally Posted by BRUpax

Non-pilot here with a simple question please. Do military helicopters have CVRs?

The answer to that is non-simple. They *may*.

I worked on a Lynx fatality a few years ago where they definitely did, and a Black Hawk is a similar scale helicopter, but obviously a different country. It is possible that it did, but not certain.

G

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60)

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.

TachyonID
January 30, 2025, 20:39:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817633

Comms

Since the Blackhawk pilot was on a different (military) band is it possible he thought AA5342 was landing on 1, not 33?
He may have missed the landing permission to 33 for 5342, even as he lost SA being focused on a plane further out on approach to 1.
He clearly heard the instructions of the LC and responded to the LC, but was badly out of position WRT the approach to 33.
The recreation makes it appear that he was staying parallel to the 1 approach, probably waiting for the "next in line", the landing lights he probably was fixated on.

Subjects AA5342 Blackhawk (H-60) Situational Awareness

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.

WITCHWAY550
January 30, 2025, 20:56:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817645

AA5432 Down DCA

Terrible and tragic. If the Blackhawk crew did not or was not made aware of the landing patterns at DCA at that time they would then never expect to see an aircraft in front of them. I understand they had experience and expertise but if at that time they did not brief or discuss the terminal area traffic flow then I am not sure they were fully aware of their situation. All speculation...

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60) 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.

KRviator
January 30, 2025, 21:42:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817677

Quote:

Originally Posted by TachyonID

What makes you think the BlackHawk crew were on UHF, not VHF? Every military aircraft I've ever flown in - and there's been a few - speak to civilian controllers on civil VHF frequencies.

Subjects AA5342 Blackhawk (H-60) Situational Awareness

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.

shared reality
January 30, 2025, 22:11:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817695

Quote:

Originally Posted by photonclock

Yes, I saw that. Why wasn't ATC more specific, ie, do you see the traffic at your 1 o'clock, etc? Still, the question stands: ATC sees both aircraft, so why is ATC putting them on a collision course with AA setup to turn in front of the helicopter with almost no separation? The clock was ticking and ATC wasn't reacting with instructions \x96 ATC was just asking questions. Is that SOP?

Listening to the ATC transcript on YouTube, one can clearly hear ATC receive a conflict warning as the CRJ and the Blackhawk get close. Why on earth didn't ATC immediately instruct the helo simply to "PAT25 turn left hdg xxx IMMEDIATELY, I say again ..." , instead he again asked for verification that PAT 25 had the CRJ in sight?

In such close distance, on a collision course, there is no place for a question, but an INSTRUCTION, as ATC is the only one with a clear overview of the situation.
Not trying to put blame here, but the controller needs to step up once he gets a conflict warning and act, and ask questions later.

RIP to all involved, a truly sad and avoidable event.

Subjects ATC Blackhawk (H-60) CRJ PAT25 Separation (ALL)

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.

CayleysCoachman
January 30, 2025, 22:14:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817697

Quote:

Originally Posted by shared reality

in a place where controllers give headings to aircraft flying visually well below MSA, perhaps, but no such place exists. Controllers provide a service, they are not an authority.

Subjects ATC Blackhawk (H-60) CRJ PAT25

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.

TachyonID
January 30, 2025, 22:14:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817698

Quote:

Originally Posted by KRviator

What makes you think the BlackHawk crew were on UHF, not VHF? Every military aircraft I've ever flown in - and there's been a few - speak to civilian controllers on civil VHF frequencies.

The VASaviation (and other) ATC clips have specifically mentioned that LC for KDCA transmitted back to the Helo on their separate assigned frequency, as well as the civil approach frequency. Basically dual transmit.
The audio is stitched back together.
But that's why nobody picked up the responses from the Helo crew, despite the LC clearly hearing and getting acks.
Complicating matters in that TRACON is that the military A/C also have their own controller on the assigned frequency. This is probably essential given the comings and goings at the Pentagon and local bases.

Given the track for the helo? It sure appears they expected the aircraft they were waiting on was lined up for 1, not 33. Given this, it is at least possible that they were watching the lights coming from the inbound AC from the Localizer for 1 (a A319 AA plane), not the CRJ descending through their position towards 33.

It's all conjecture, but the use of a separate frequency for the Pentagon-adjacent traffic is cited in several reputable reports as of this AM. Juan Brown's just uploaded an update with further information on the frequency split.
It seems clear from that the the CRJ likely could not hear the Blackhawk. And, with less certainty, that the Blackhawk probably didn't hear transmissions from the CRJ.

Last edited by TachyonID; 30th January 2025 at 23:14 . Reason: Clarify sources for statement about AC on two different frequencies.

Subjects ATC Blackhawk (H-60) CRJ KDCA

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.

Mozella
January 31, 2025, 05:18:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817928

Quote:

Originally Posted by KRviator

What makes you think the BlackHawk crew were on UHF, not VHF? Every military aircraft I've ever flown in - and there's been a few - speak to civilian controllers on civil VHF frequencies.

My experience is just the opposite from yours. I can't speak about this BlackHawk but I can say that every military aircraft I've ever flown, and there have been many, spoke to civilian controllers on UHF manly because they were not equipped with VHF radios. I've never been helicopter qualified (thank the Lord) but I've ridden in a few military helos and they were also strictly UHF.
Of course, this BlackHawk might be different. I don't know if it had UHF or VHF communication or perhaps both; however, quite a few reports claim that the helo was communicating on UHF so that both the RJ and the helo could hear the same controller, but they couldn't hear each other. That is quite common in my experience, but that is not to say that it's a good thing since it has the potential to reduce situational awareness.

Subjects ATC Blackhawk (H-60) Situational Awareness

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.

clearedtocross
January 31, 2025, 07:45:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817970

Quote:

Originally Posted by fdr

Helicopters avoid stopping unless landing or undertaking a task that requires a fixed position such as rappelling (sometimes...) winching (almost always). Power requirement goes way up, control is more interesting, and the H-V curve come into play, particularly if a SE helicopter. To do a quick stop at night, over water, low level, is an interesting maneuver, the chance of ending up with a splash is above zero. rapid deceleration and sharp turns add to the pleasures of low flying at night with an indistinct horizon, varied lighting, NVG or not. If that is the plan to avoid a disaster, then they really need to rethink the plan.

Sorry fdr, I humbly disagree. While it is near impossible to stop a light heli manually like a Robinson R22 without proper ground reference, those big junks used for all-weather rescue operations all have hover-capable autopilots. Press the button and the thing holds position even in strong winds. I am sure a Blackhawk has this feature too. And hover og at sea level is not an issue here. And I am sure you should not be allowed to fly a heli at night if you cannot perform a reasonable 360 flown shy above transition speed. Another question is if you should be allowed to fly at 200 feet at night over a built up area. But that's another story. There are so many risks staring at you with these procedures it's a wonder an accident did not happen before.

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60) Hover Night Vision Goggles (NVG)

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.

fdr
January 31, 2025, 08:52:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818002

Quote:

Originally Posted by clearedtocross

Did you ever read the UTTAS LOADS report? A quick stop with a tail wind, at low level at night over water, the issues are not dependent on whether you have franks rotor head or not, nor if you have a SAS system capable of entry into a hover. A level 180 with a confined radius at low level at night is also hardly a great option, one that puts the helo belly up to the traffic to remain over water, or doing a break into the traffic which is towards obstacles. I do not see that this flight path has been safe at any time, irrespective of how lucky the operators have been. If this is the de-confliction plan they need a new plan.

As an aside, the RHC is quite maneuverable, our low level / ag ratings using it require competency in torque turns, pedal turns which are entertaining but hardly beneficial to a UH-60 crew doing 115KGS towards a jet doing 130 KTS GS.

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60) Hover

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.

PPRuNeUser134364
January 31, 2025, 09:48:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818051

Quote:

Originally Posted by clearedtocross

Do you have a lot of time on a 'big junk'? Randomly coming to the hover at night is not like stopping your car at a red light. And not all 'big junks' have auto-hover, particularly free-air hover capability. Even if the Blackhawk does have auto-hover, it may well have limitations and it's not always just a simple case of pressing a button. e.g. is the surface (water or land) suitable for rad alt hold? What are the rad alt height limitations? Is the auto-hover based on doppler? If so, is there a max altitude for its use? The 'big junk' I am familiar with even has a min speed on instruments (not that this was instrument conditions, but it was night which has some similar characteristics).

Despite what some people appear to be suggesting here, in my experience it's not normal just to stop a helicopter to wait for a passing aircraft to fly by.

And maybe even more importantly, why would you stop if you have no reason to suspect that the flightpath isn't clear?

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60) Hover

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.

henra
January 31, 2025, 13:41:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818215

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rarife

It is really like that? Yes, I have seen the map but honestly I don't know how it works in real life. Do they really just fly bellow aircraft on final with vertical separation like 100-200 ft or they have to avoid them, let's say cross behind. What is too close in this case?

That's what I'm also wondering. And assuming a standard 3\xb0 glideslope the vertical separation at that point would be even rather less than 100ft. I can't really fathom crossing 50-100ft above the whirly bits of a Blackhawk being a regularly executed standard procedure !? What is the 'normal' way of doing this in DCA?

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60) DCA Separation (ALL) Vertical Separation

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.

Lonewolf_50
January 31, 2025, 13:47:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818224

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mozella

Welcome to more modern times. The last Seahawks I flew (Late 1990s) had radios that could do both UHF and VHF. The last T-34C trainers I flew as an instructor had VHF installed (mid to late 90's) to overcome that very issue, and to allow Instructors and Students to do approaches to and land at more airfields than just military ones. The last Black Hawk (L) I flew (early 00's) had radios that allowed us to transmit and receive on VHF. Since that Black Hawk Battalion does VIP flights in the DC area a lot, I seriously doubt that they do not have VHF radios equipped.

Quote:

Originally Posted by clearedtocross

Press the button and the thing holds position even in strong winds. I am sure a Blackhawk has this feature too. And hover og at sea level is not an issue here.

The SH-60B Seahawks I flew had that feature, which required a doppler system to work like that. (If I recall the NATOPS terms correctly, it's called a coupled approach and you entered it well below 90 knots). The Black Hawks I flew (UH-60L) did not have that feature as they did not have the doppler system installed, and thus no collective inner loop actuator. (One of many differences between Seahawks and Black Hawks). Can't say if the UH-60Ms do or do not, but I doubt it. Added weight that hardly helps their core mission, and with GPS some of what that system does for nav stability is taken care of anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by n5296s

As for hovering, I've twice been asked by ATC to hover, once in the traffic pattern at Palo Alto KPAO and once flying the heli transition at Heathrow, both times in an R44.

My most common instruction from tower when I had requested clearance to cross the extended centerline of a runway (on a VFR helo route through their ATA) was either "cleared as requested" or "Do a left 360 for spacing"... they never asked me to go into a hover . (My clearest memory of this comes from flying in the Tidewater region of Virginia (Norfolk, Hampton Roads, etc).

I am not sure what local rules, MOUs, and agreements that Army flying unit had, or has, with the ATC and Reagan tower, but I suspect that they are more involved than just the helo routes already discussed in this extended thread. Given that they habitually fly across the river in pursuit of their mission, and that Reagan/National is used to them being there on a daily basis, there may be MOUs and special procedures pre-agreed (Probably under an MOU or formal letter) and signed off by the FAA.
I know that we had a couple of such letters (a couple of decades ago) for the various MOAs and operating areas in Texas, but that was a different kind of flying. It will be interesting to see what the investigation turns up.

Subjects ATC Blackhawk (H-60) FAA Hover VFR

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.

Lascaille
January 31, 2025, 14:56:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818271

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonewolf_50

Since that Black Hawk Battalion does VIP flights in the DC area a lot, I seriously doubt that they do not have VHF radios equipped.

They're audible on the ATC radio transcript ergo of course they are equipped with (and are using) standard VHF radios to communicate with civ ATC and are audible to other aircraft. Unless you think someone's spliced different radio channels together to make a youtube video. Which is, you know, a reach.

Noticed a few 'they weren't using standard radio frequencies' comments upstream of this.

Let's fix in our minds that they were clearly audible on the civilian ATC frequency and routinely communicating with civilian ATC - to avoid being misled.

Subjects ATC Blackhawk (H-60)

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.

henra
January 31, 2025, 15:07:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818276

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lascaille

Also, why were they above the 200ft route ceiling?

When measuring the length of the Blackhawk in that CNN vid vs. the height above the Potomac I end up at ~250 - 280ft. In this case surely tragic but 50ish ft high does not really seem a lot, especially at night in a high workload situation possibly on goggles.

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60) CNN

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 31, 2025, 15:25:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818288

Quote:

Originally Posted by A I

Unless it has changed (I am very old) ATC are still responsible for separation if an aircraft is making a visual approach. An approach under VFR is different and not allowed in the UK at night. Sorry if I am out of date.

In the USA VFR at night is fine, there is no rule against it. Some maybe EU based posters here seem to equate VFR with no traffic services. Landing at any Class B you get separation services IFR or VFR. The helos running around at 200 feet is a very odd thing, I guess I never realized how odd until this crash.
I expect the current system will not last, at the very least they'll go back to a dedicated helicopter controller that could have devoted his full attention to vectoring the Black Hawk somewhere else. I expect an overloaded controller will mentally dump a helo pilot that says he sees the other traffic and will go behind it from his top worry if he has airplanes too to deal with as well.

Subjects ATC Blackhawk (H-60) IFR Pass Behind Pass Behind (All) Separation (ALL) VFR

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.

Dominator2
January 31, 2025, 18:01:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818422

biscuit74 Your quite right that this was not the environment to be using NVGs. Of course, at present it has not been confirmed that the helicopter crew were on NVGs.
I have flown many hundreds of hours on NVGs, all be it fast jet, down at 250ft. With the amount of lighting in a city centre the NVGs would have been unusable and detrimental to Flight Safety. I don't know if Black Hawk pilots fly with the same helmet as the Apache with all instrument information "Head Up". If not their workload to maintain 200ft or below would have been immense
As I have said previously, the procedures should not have allowed the helicopter to be in that airspace at that time!!!.

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60) Night Vision Goggles (NVG)

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.

Sven Sixtoo
February 01, 2025, 14:50:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11819070

Quote:

Originally Posted by clearedtocross

I have about 5500 hours, much of it at night low level over water, on a type with zero-visibility-rated auto let-down to the autohover. Yes, you "press the button" and it comes to a stop all on its own - eventually. But it's a complex checklist to set up for pressing the button, the programme to get you to the hover takes time to run (in the Sea King 78+/- 4 seconds) and the process requires the full attention of both pilots and either a crewman on radar or, if practicing in visual conditions in daylight, a crewman augmenting the very limited lookout capability of the pilots.

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60) Hover Radar

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: "Blackhawk (H-60)" [Posts: 170 Page: 2 of 9]¶