Sven Sixtoo Page: 1 of 1

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by clearedtocross

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.

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.

Sven Sixtoo
February 02, 2025, 17:44:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11819956

Quote:

Originally Posted by mahogany bob

I assume that the RJ and the helo both definitely had the same pressure setting ( airfield QNH ) set on their altimeters.

Baesd on my experience, the helo crew would most likely have been operating on radalt with QNH on a baro alt as a secondary. However, when we were doing coupled low-level flight overwater, we (RAF SAR) used to set the baralt to match the radalt at 200 ft before descending.

Subjects QNH

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.

Sven Sixtoo
February 02, 2025, 19:56:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11820054

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lost in Saigon

I have 2 questions regarding DCA ATC procedures.(they are probably related)

1) If PAT25 had said they were unable to identify the inbound CRJ, how would ATC have dealt with it?

2) Why was PAT25 requesting \x93Visual Separation\x94? What advantage did that give to PAT25?

Having done slightly similar things in the London Heli-routes (and once, in emergency, flat out across LHR at 150 ft) LHR would in case 1 have given me a mandatory heading to incresase separation as fast as possible, and (speculation: I've never been a professional civilian fixed-wing pilot) likely told the conflicting traffic to go around, and in case 2 if I could not guarantee visual separation I would again have been told to leave by whatever route resulted in maximum rate of increase in separation; thus by acknowledging I could see the aircraft referred to in the clearance, enabling me to get on with what I wanted to achieve. But of course one is not allowed to hang around in the immediate vicinity of LHR at 200 ft in a helicopter. The last time I crossed LHR north to south, my clearance was "at 1000 ft, behind the landing Concorde". The last time east to west was "We're shut to traffic, cleared as you require on 28R", which was an invitation to fly the length of the place at about 10 ft at 2am.

Subjects ATC CRJ DCA PAT25 Separation (ALL) 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.

Sven Sixtoo
February 02, 2025, 20:30:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11820088

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Brigadier

The CRJ700 was likely approaching Runway 33 at a heading of approximately 330 degrees, meaning it was moving northwest. The UH-60 Black Hawk may have been traveling at a heading roughly 240 to 270 degrees (west or southwest), which would place it on a near-perpendicular course relative to the plane.

If the aircraft were at a close to 90-degree intersection, then the CRJ700 would have been moving across the field of vision right in front of the helicopter, thus making the collision all the more perplexing, not withstanding night vision goggles (if indeed worn) interfere with depth perception. Of course there also remains the reported disparity in flying height, with the UH-60 100 feet above it's flight ceiling

With respect, I think you overly simplify: the flightpath of (at least) the helicopter; and the geometry of a collision, which requires that the opposing vehicle has no apparent vertical or horizontal motion relative to the other.

Subjects Blackhawk (H-60)

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.

Sven Sixtoo
February 16, 2025, 19:55:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11829425

Unlikely to be of much help, and have you (or the poster suggesting this) worked on the process to get a new electronic device cleared for use on a military aircraft?

Subjects: None

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 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. 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.
Sven Sixtoo February 02, 2025, 17:44:00 GMT permalink Post: 11819956	Quote: Originally Posted by mahogany bob I assume that the RJ and the helo both definitely had the same pressure setting ( airfield QNH ) set on their altimeters. Baesd on my experience, the helo crew would most likely have been operating on radalt with QNH on a baro alt as a secondary. However, when we were doing coupled low-level flight overwater, we (RAF SAR) used to set the baralt to match the radalt at 200 ft before descending. Subjects QNH 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.
Sven Sixtoo February 02, 2025, 19:56:00 GMT permalink Post: 11820054	Quote: Originally Posted by Lost in Saigon I have 2 questions regarding DCA ATC procedures.(they are probably related) 1) If PAT25 had said they were unable to identify the inbound CRJ, how would ATC have dealt with it? 2) Why was PAT25 requesting \x93Visual Separation\x94? What advantage did that give to PAT25? Having done slightly similar things in the London Heli-routes (and once, in emergency, flat out across LHR at 150 ft) LHR would in case 1 have given me a mandatory heading to incresase separation as fast as possible, and (speculation: I've never been a professional civilian fixed-wing pilot) likely told the conflicting traffic to go around, and in case 2 if I could not guarantee visual separation I would again have been told to leave by whatever route resulted in maximum rate of increase in separation; thus by acknowledging I could see the aircraft referred to in the clearance, enabling me to get on with what I wanted to achieve. But of course one is not allowed to hang around in the immediate vicinity of LHR at 200 ft in a helicopter. The last time I crossed LHR north to south, my clearance was "at 1000 ft, behind the landing Concorde". The last time east to west was "We're shut to traffic, cleared as you require on 28R", which was an invitation to fly the length of the place at about 10 ft at 2am. Subjects ATC CRJ DCA PAT25 Separation (ALL) 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.
Sven Sixtoo February 02, 2025, 20:30:00 GMT permalink Post: 11820088	Quote: Originally Posted by The Brigadier The CRJ700 was likely approaching Runway 33 at a heading of approximately 330 degrees, meaning it was moving northwest. The UH-60 Black Hawk may have been traveling at a heading roughly 240 to 270 degrees (west or southwest), which would place it on a near-perpendicular course relative to the plane. If the aircraft were at a close to 90-degree intersection, then the CRJ700 would have been moving across the field of vision right in front of the helicopter, thus making the collision all the more perplexing, not withstanding night vision goggles (if indeed worn) interfere with depth perception. Of course there also remains the reported disparity in flying height, with the UH-60 100 feet above it's flight ceiling With respect, I think you overly simplify: the flightpath of (at least) the helicopter; and the geometry of a collision, which requires that the opposing vehicle has no apparent vertical or horizontal motion relative to the other. Subjects Blackhawk (H-60) 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.
Sven Sixtoo February 16, 2025, 19:55:00 GMT permalink Post: 11829425	Unlikely to be of much help, and have you (or the poster suggesting this) worked on the process to get a new electronic device cleared for use on a military aircraft? Subjects: None 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.

Posts by user "Sven Sixtoo" [Posts: 5 Total up-votes: 5 Page: 1 of 1]¶