What do you think happened? How could a fixed wing pilot ram a helicopter from behind on a perfectly clear day?

What do you think happened? How could a fixed wing pilot ram a helicopter from behind on a perfectly clear day?

Looking down too much perhaps?

Initial reports seem to suggest that the fixed wing pilot simply did not see the helicopter, but whether that was because he was not looking out, or that the helicopter was below his cowling and thus not visible even if he was looking, is anybody's guess really, and we will probably never know the answer to that. There are certainly many things to look at and distract one on a flight in that kind of area, and with family members on board, conversation can be a distraction too.Apparently someone radioed the helicopter from its base and warned the pilot that a fixed wing craft was coming up behind him, but got no response from the pilot of the chopper, which doesn't necessarily mean he did not hear the call of course, but who knows? In such circumstances, what do you do anyway - maintain your course to allow someone room to steer around you, or change course in case they haven't seen you?The widely-publicised picture of the collision seems to depict that the wing of the aircraft has taken off one of the helicopter's main rotor blades, severing the wing in the process, which can be seen spilling fuel vapour. So whether that indicates that the aircraft was in a last second bank to try an avoid colliding is really one for any eye witnesses, but I'd speculate that might account for the impact being of that nature. I'd guess that the aircraft passed at a much higher speed, for if not, more than one rotor would likely have been damaged, since they'd all rotate into the path of the aircraft and collide with it. The fact that the aircraft is inverted in the picture shows that it still had plenty of flying speed, since the remaining wing has begun autorotating the craft, and the severed wing is spinning from the unstable lift and probably from the energy of the impact too.It's very sad indeed, and unfortunately I've known several pilots who have been killed in collisions, which is why I am a big advocate of keeping a lookout for other craft, but like the crashes in which people I've known have been killed, the answers invariably go to the grave.Al

... There are certainly many things to look at and distract one on a flight in that kind of area, and with family members on board, conversation can be a distraction too.Al

Exactly. I did many hours of flying in that area and I can tell you that my proverbial head was on the proverbial swivel all the time. In that high density traffic environment there is no such thing as being too vigilant.According to the head of NTSB in a news conference shortly before I made the opening post, it was not an ATC failure though she did not say this directly. What she said was that the fixed wing pilot had been handed off from Teterboro to Newark but never checked in with Newark.

Exactly. I did many hours of flying in that area and I can tell you that my proverbial head was on the proverbial swivel all the time. In that high density traffic environment there is no such thing as being too vigilant.According to the head of NTSB in a news conference shortly before I made the opening post, it was not an ATC failure though she did not say this directly. What she said was that the fixed wing pilot had been handed off from Teterboro to Newark but never checked in with Newark.

Possibly dialing in the Newark frequency and therefore not seeing the helicopter, thus impacting it?

Possibly dialing in the Newark frequency and therefore not seeing the helicopter, thus impacting it?

Now that sounds plausible...

Possibly dialing in the Newark frequency and therefore not seeing the helicopter, thus impacting it?

Perhaps so but he really should have been looking regardless. I'm also partial to Chock's analysis of the impact, which suggests to me the following possibility ...I have the impression that the helicopter took off from the New Jersey side, which is the side of the river where the collision took place. Perhaps it climbed into the path of the fixed wing, which may have been in a turn as Chock suggests. It was a low-wing aircraft so maybe the pilot's view of the helo was obstructed.

Perhaps so but he really should have been looking regardless. I'm also partial to Chock's analysis of the impact, which suggests to me the following possibility ...I have the impression that the helicopter took off from the New Jersey side, which is the side of the river where the collision took place. Perhaps it climbed into the path of the fixed wing, which may have been in a turn as Chock suggests. It was a low-wing aircraft so maybe the pilot's view of the helo was obstructed.

Yeah, I haven't really see enough to make any determinations. A few bits of TV reporting (we all know how good that is) and a couple links to discussions online. It does seem, based on what I've heard, and, if the animation is correct on Passuer, that the plane was banking and might not have seen the helicopter. Plus, if he was changing frequency, then that adds to the workload. I'm not saying it's an excuse, but you have to realize that accidents are a result of imperfection. How much of the sky could he really see? Can he look in all directions at once? No. He has to scan instruments as well, and that's all it really takes for a mid-air to happen. Look down, scan airspeed, altitude, and other relevant data, then look up a split second later and see a chooper in his way, provided he could even see it at the last second anyhow.

Yeah, I haven't really see enough to make any determinations. A few bits of TV reporting (we all know how good that is) and a couple links to discussions online. It does seem, based on what I've heard, and, if the animation is correct on Passuer, that the plane was banking and might not have seen the helicopter. Plus, if he was changing frequency, then that adds to the workload. I'm not saying it's an excuse, but you have to realize that accidents are a result of imperfection. How much of the sky could he really see? Can he look in all directions at once? No. He has to scan instruments as well, and that's all it really takes for a mid-air to happen. Look down, scan airspeed, altitude, and other relevant data, then look up a split second later and see a chooper in his way, provided he could even see it at the last second anyhow.

In a low wing airplane you have a serious blind spot where the wing is. From the news reports I heard the helicopter used had a similar blind spot in the above department. Kinda like the classic high wing low wing collision that happens when the two collide due to the high wing pilot having a blind spot above and the low wing pilot having one below.One of the reasons I just upgraded my Zaon mrx to a xrx-they work great and are helpful for hopefully avoiding this type of tragic accident. I've been surprised how many times the Zaon has pointed out close traffic that atc has not-even while on an ifr flight plan. From what Mike reports, it sounds like this plane was on one-or at least using atc.Now if the media would just put the accident into perspective by reporting the number of deaths from car collisions that day.

In a low wing airplane you have a serious blind spot where the wing is. From the news reports I heard the helicopter used had a similar blind spot in the above department. Kinda like the classic high wing low wing collision that happens when the two collide due to the high wing pilot having a blind spot above and the low wing pilot having one below.One of the reasons I just upgraded my Zaon mrx to a xrx-they work great and are helpful for hopefully avoiding this type of tragic accident. I've been surprised how many times the Zaon has pointed out close traffic that atc has not-even while on an ifr flight plan. From what Mike reports, it sounds like this plane was on one-or at least using atc.Now if the media would just put the accident into perspective by reporting the number of deaths from car collisions that day.

Yes, I don't fly unfortunately, but the aspect of the wing, either above or below, would be annoying. They most likely never saw each other. These things happen and will likely never be 100% avoidable. Interesting info on the Zaon. I'd never heard of it. Glad something inexpensive exists for GA pilots.

Hello,I quote:http://www.pprune.org/rotorheads/384390-mi...new-york-5.html

According to the NTSB's latest conference the Piper was cleared to from Teterboro after taking off from 19 to contact Newark (and thus not to enter the VFR corridor).Newark contacted Teterboro to inform them the Piper had not contacted them, and asked them to contact the Piper and advise them to head 220 and contact Newark.TEB advised they could not get hold of the Piper and that they had lost radar contact.From the above it appears the Piper had not planned / (requested to depart TEB airspace) to enter the VFR corridor and that for intents and purposes it should not have been operating there.

Map:http://skyvector.com/#51-119-3-2480-1257Regards.Gus.

In a low wing airplane you have a serious blind spot where the wing is. From the news reports I heard the helicopter used had a similar blind spot in the above department. Kinda like the classic high wing low wing collision that happens when the two collide due to the high wing pilot having a blind spot above and the low wing pilot having one below.One of the reasons I just upgraded my Zaon mrx to a xrx-they work great and are helpful for hopefully avoiding this type of tragic accident. I've been surprised how many times the Zaon has pointed out close traffic that atc has not-even while on an ifr flight plan. From what Mike reports, it sounds like this plane was on one-or at least using atc.Now if the media would just put the accident into perspective by reporting the number of deaths from car collisions that day.

Landing at my (then uncontrolled) home airport of Princeton New Jersey one day, I taxied the FBO's Cherokee to the tie down area as usual. A C-172 parked next to me, the pilot informing me that I had touched down just in front of him.I knew nothing about it. Comparing notes we figured that somehow we flew the pattern together with me above him, unable to see him because of my aircraft's low wing. He was unable to see me because of his high wing. Neither of us saw the other enter the pattern ... and he wasn't monitoring Unicom so he didn't hear me announce my entry into the left downwind leg of the pattern.Why didn't one of us see the other? We had no idea. We also had no idea how close we came to colliding in midair. All we knew for sure was that I touched down just in front of him, barely clearing his aircraft.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxThis incident is one of the reasons I stopped flying -- because no matter how vigilant a pilot I thought I was, by definition I wasn't vigilant enough. Other incidents have left me completely unwilling to ride with anyone but major carriers, and then only in aircraft that are 737s or larger.

The media did say that the corridor over the Hudson is 3/4 of a mile wide and rather restricted in height due to incoming/outgoing traffic from LaGuardia and JFK.

The media did say that the corridor over the Hudson is 3/4 of a mile wide and rather restricted in height due to incoming/outgoing traffic from LaGuardia and JFK.

In her news conference head of the NTSB said that the uncontrolled airspace is at 1100 feet and lower. From listening to JFK tower I can tell you that helicopter traffic in that part of the city, mostly police, is always treated as IFR traffic by pilots and controllers alike and is invariably cleared through at 500 feet. I have no idea what the Newark and Teterboro policies are, if any.

Seems that zone is more uptight than Condoleeza Rice during a Congressional hearing. Wasn't that the same zone in which that Cirrus (?) was supposed to fly when it veered off and into a tall building a few years back?