The 318 used to have a special \x93steep approach button\x94 - among other things in essence the approach is flown with the speedbrakes out, flare law is modified and you get \x93stand by\x94 and \x93flare\x94 annunciated.
Same plan as we had in Challengers and Globals. We had AFM supplements for steeper approaches-3,5 and up to 4.5 degrees.
Subjects:
None
No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').
I can think of one: you apply IFR separation standards (the minimum in the US is 1.5nm/500\x92?), at least for night operations. If two routes come closer to each other than that in either dimension, e.g. DCA RW33 approach and helicopter route 1, then traffic must be actively kept apart.
If two aircraft are converging on the same runway or look like they are going to occupy it simultaneously, then one of them has to give way. Why should it be any different for a small volume of sky?
1.5 nm or 500\x92 is separation for IFR/VFR traffic, not IFR separation. So, an IFR aircraft in VMC might only have those separation distances with a VFR, not IFR aircraft.
SubjectsDCAIFRSeparation (ALL)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').
At night, pretty near impossible to distinguish a CRJ from another set of lights in the stream unless you know the landing light configuration of each type. During the day, maybe a couple of miles. Otherwise, it’s all about, “At your 11 o’clock, 3 miles and third in the stream”, then you can identify them, not by type but by “third on final”. The Army crew is just whistling Dixie when they accept visual separation with an CRJ seven miles away at night.
Last edited by galaxy flyer; 23rd February 2025 at
20:28
.
I’d love to know the reported ceiling was that day? There are ceiling and visibility minimums for visual approaches and I really doubt BWI traffic is stooging around in the weather calling “visual”; too easy to get caught.
Subjects:
None
No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').
I like healthy food but this much word salad would choke a horse.
Helo is going to be using radalt. Everything is radalt when the heights are below ~1000ft because the alternative is often fatal. This has been covered extensively. As to the rest... Wat?
well, the Army pilot in the Mover and Gonky video referenced here said, they\x92d be on Baro altimeters because RADALT would be bouncing around too much to be useable, over water, over land, over bridges, etc. Second, he stated that 200\x92 was the procedure altitude\x97no higher but no lower, either. Top for traffic, bottom for noise, I\x92d guess. He also stated the holding at Hains Point was common a few years ago.
Way back on Feb 7, I posted this:"I remember reading from a number of sources years ago that Members of Congress do not like having to travel the distance to/from Dulles and that is a kind of pressure that it is not wise to resist".
Aviation Week letters section in the current issue as well as information on DCA's own website provides some relevant information:
1 DCA is over capacity by 40%
2. 01/19 is the busiest runway in the country for commercial operations
https://www.flyreagan.com/sites/flyr...%20Graphic.png
, and of course there are some other operations
3. Nonstop services at the airport are supposed to be limited to 1,250 mi, but Congressfolks like nonstop flights to their destinations [without having to go all the way to Dulles).
4. Congressional legislation "empowers" [and we all know what that really means] the Transportation Dept. to issue exemptions to this limit.
5. Between 2000 and 2012, Congress added an additional 54 daily slots exempt from the policy. In 2024 10 more exemptions were added, "over the strong opposition of the Airports Authority". [[url]https://www.flyreagan.com/about-airport/aircraft-noise-information/dca-reagan-national-slot-perimeter-rules].
Now add in a large number of helicopter operations...
KIAD isn\x92t in Kansas, it\x92s not that far away and Herndon/Reston has become quite built up. Lots of DCA flying could move to the airport that was built to reduce traffic at DCA.
SubjectsDCA
Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.
“The Perimeter Rule is a federal regulation established in 1966 when jet aircraft began operating at Reagan National. The initial Perimeter Rule limited non-stop service to/from Reagan National to 650 statute miles, with some exceptions for previously existing service. By the mid-1980s, Congress had expanded Reagan National non-stop service to 1,250 statute mile“
SubjectsDCA
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').
Any number of the denizens of DC still believe KIAD is found somewhere between “DC and Pluto”. Truth is in the 60s, the B727 and DC-9 were the only jets operating and they weren’t going much farther than 650 sm and included NY, BOS, DTW and CLT. At the the time, the US population was much more centered on the northeast, so the rule worked. DC in 1966 was also a much smaller city—nearly zero business, just politics and government. It wasn’t the wealthiest area in the country. I flew out of KIAD in the early 80s and it could have been uncontrolled for the tiny amount of traffic there.
Subjects:
None
No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').
And that's not counting inhibited TA/RAs at low level
NASA and company safety departments may be collecting and shelving reports, but shouldn't there be a central collation to enable identification of hot spots so they can be mitigated?
who's keeping an eye on the data trends and developing threats?
i believe it’s run by the MITRE Corp for the FAA. When I ran a corporate flight department, our FOQA data went in monthly, anonymously. I’ve gone into the ASIAS website for “meat” for safety briefings, etc. There’s a good pile of data including FOQA, unstable approaches, TCAS, CFIT near misses. Now who and how is the data used, I cannot say.
One example, after the KBED G IV accident, the NTSB went to the NBAA asking for help in better use of FOQA data increase compliance with flight control checks. Remember, this the G IV crew who tried to take-off with locked controls. ASIAS has tens of thousands of flight control checks and compliance data. Focused on that, measure it, problem mostly solved.
GE Digital’s FOQA programs also have a tremendous data bank. For example, KTEB has an easily the highest rate of TCAS encounters for corporate operators. How it compares to KDCA, I again cannot say. The airlines have the KDCA data for their operations. They know how many and where TCAS events occur. More evidence of normalization, I suppose.
SubjectsClose CallsFAAKDCANTSBTCAS (All)
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').
"\x85 to everyone in safety: look at the DCA midair collision given info in urgent action letter from NTSB. Widespread systems issues, total breakdown of proactive safety; repeats history from Herald of Free Enterprise to Challenger, Columbia etc. see my chapters on (Columbia testimony to Congress, RE book 2006 & 2005 Organization at the Limit book). Highlights real issues of multiple sometimes conflicting goals over multiple jurisdictions/perspectives, signals discounted in the face of ongoing production pressures, etc. Also note the reactions to failure. All well understood in 3 books capturing the new look work of the 80's -- 1990 (Reason) / 1994 (Woods etal) /1997 (Reason)."
Yet here we are all over again. All over again.
Where did you see the David Woods statement, as quoted? Link, perhaps.
SubjectsDCANTSB
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').
To give an example. I live in the northeast. Some of roads are old and not built to modern standards. In particular sometimes the overpasses have limited clearance. This is unsafe. You could even describe such overpasses as accidents waiting to happen. Nevertheless if you are driving a truck and you don't plan your route properly, you ignore the signs saying no trucks on the expressway, you ignore the signs saying low clearance ahead you disregard the fact that you are about to try to drive under an overpass which is lower than your truck is high and you plow into it at sixty miles an hour then you were negligent. And you don't escape legal liability because the road was badly designed.
Slow down, cowboy. Drive across the Cross Bronx Expressway at any time of day in your 13\x926\x94 truck. Damned near every underpass on those few miles and there\x92s a lot of them marked something between 12\x926\x94 and 13\x922\x94. I never noticed it until a trucker mentioned it.
SubjectsAccountability/Liability
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').
There's two counterpoints there, though. Road safety has a much lower safety target than aviation safety (more a comment on a car-centric world than anything else), and the chance of that accident being fatal (especially fatal to an uninvolved party) are much much lower. I'd also hazard a guess that a number of those bridges have warning systems that trigger some kind of stop signal if approached by an overheight vehicle.
Surely you jest on overheight warning systems\x97I\x92ve never heard of or seen. You around for videos of truck-overpass collisions. As a permit load trucker told me, \x93you can swerve but you can\x92t duck\x94. I looked at the CBE traffic and couldn\x92t count the number of 13\x926\x94 trucks going under12\x928\x94 overpasses.
Subjects:
None
No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').
If the US Army has to keep its flights on published routes in the nation\x92s capital \x93secret\x94 and turn off ADS-B (not saying ADS-B would have saved the day here); we\x92ve already lost the \x93war\x94. There\x92s simply no need for this training\x97in a national emergency where continuation of government mission is necessary\x97there won\x92t be any civilian traffic at DCA. We\x92re talking 9/11 or nuclear war, not \x93do you I need to get to the Pentagon for PowerPoint briefing now, CWO\x94.
SubjectsADSB (All)DCA
Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.
Unfortunately the RJ crew would not have known that the other traffic had them in sight and were looking to avoid because, if I recall correctly, they were on a different frequency to the helicopter. If I get a traffic alert in my personal aircraft (I don't get RAs, just traffic warnings), I'm taking action to increase the altitude difference between me and the conflicting traffic. As others have said: Hoping the other aircraft has me in sight to avoid is not a foolproof plan of action.....
That\x92s perhaps a VFR response and appropriate here, but you cannot deviate from a clearance on just TA. TCAS training since its adoption has been to not maneuver for a TA, only for an RA.
