15 minutes ago, DaviiB said:

I understand the part about being on a heli-route, but isn't the whole point of an established route to automatically deconflict traffic?

i.e. There should be no need for ATC to say "pass behind XX aircraft". That should happen as a result of the heli being on the route.

I guess I'm making your point for you.

DB

Or reinforcing my point🙂

Even if the heli hadn't hit the aircraft can you imagine the potential wake turbulence as it passed behind the landing traffic.

It all seems very dodgy to me. An accident waiting to happen. And it did sadly.

Edited January 30, 20251 yr by TrafficPilot

37 minutes ago, kangoat said:

TCAS doesn't give alerts that close to the ground near airports. Listening to the ATC audio, ATC did have an alert come up but it seems to have been too late to do anything.

If I may share, TCAS has nothing to do with "near airports." I believe you should familiarize yourself with its operation and the ATC tools available to prevent conflicts. It will require a lot of reading on your part to understand.

2 minutes ago, LRBS said:

If I may share, TCAS has nothing to do with "near airports."

Well it does if you're landing at one. TCAS alerts are inhibited below a certain altitude. On approach to an Airport.

(At least it does in my C-42 - maybe it's different in an airliner...;)

Edited January 30, 20251 yr by TrafficPilot

My thought is that the heli pilot had a visual on the lights of another aircraft or mistook a set of lights as the CRJ. The chopper flight path shows no deviation from the CRJ flight path. One thing for sure - changes coming to the low altitude heli flight paths at DCA. The latest I have heard was the tower being under staffed at the time. One person doing 2 jobs. This will be significant if true.

A few points about this tragic, and entirely avoidable, incident:

1. ATC should have been closely monitoring these aircraft and issued appropriate warnings. Either one of the pilots screwed up, or ATC did, or both.

2. It's probably not a good idea to have helicopters or any aircraft traversing an approach corridor this close to the airport.  Even though the helicopter was supposed to remain below a certain altitude, anything can happen, IE the approaching aircraft may be lower than normal or the traversing aircraft higher for any number of reasons.  Best to just avoid this situation altogether.

3. DCA should have been closed years ago.  It is an old airport with very short, dangerous runways in a very urban and congested area.  My guess is that there are too many "consulting" firm executives and politicians who like to use it for their luxury jet travel, so it stays open.  All DC traffic should go to Dulles or Baltimore.

Dave

11 minutes ago, TrafficPilot said:

Or reinforcing my point🙂

Even if the heli hadn't hit the aircraft can you imagine the potential wake turbulence as it passed behind the landing traffic.

It all seems very dodgy to me. An accident waiting to happen. And it did sadly.

I don't think the wake of a CRJ would affect a Blackhawk much, they might notice it, but would definitely survive....  either way, yes, dodgy. 

Update

 

Just now, DaviiB said:

I don't think the wake of a CRJ would affect a Blackhawk much, they might notice it, but would definitely survive....  either way, yes, dodgy. 

You would think that but a twin-engined jet in that configuration (full flaps, undercarriage down, landing thrust) can cause a whole lot of issues for anyone behind and slightly below it. I've been there. On my first solo in 2006 I had to "go around" due to turbulence from a helicopter that had departed 2 mins before I approached. Not nice.

18 minutes ago, kangoat said:

ATC did ask the heli pilot if they had the CRJ in sight a couple of times, and the heli pilot confirmed they did. They very likely had the wrong aircraft in sight though.

They asked if they "had the CRJ" in sight. All airliners look like blobs of light at night. 

I'm making the same assumption that the heli crew was looking at the wrong aircraft (likely the AA 737 on final for rw01).... Maybe the CRJ was behind a post in the cockpit, or off-angle so it wasn't as obvious. 

That's why the direction, altitude and distance information in the traffic call might have alerted the heli crew that they were looking in the wrong place. 

 

DB

 

 

7 minutes ago, TrafficPilot said:

You would think that but a twin-engined jet in that configuration (full flaps, undercarriage down, landing thrust) can cause a whole lot of issues for anyone behind and slightly below it. I've been there. On my first solo in 2006 I had to "go around" due to turbulence from a helicopter that had departed 2 mins before I approached. Not nice.

Agreed, but wake turbulence from a helicopter is way worse than from fixed wing (pound for pound). 

I've been rocked myself in light aircraft behind airliners. 

A CRJ in landing configurarion (as opposed to heavy-weight, on departure with less flaps out) shouldn't be the end of the world for something as heavy as a Blackhawk. 

I wouldn't want to be there myself, but I'd still expect to survive. 

 

DB

27 minutes ago, TrafficPilot said:

Well it does if you're landing at one. TCAS alerts are inhibited below a certain altitude. On approach to an Airport.

(At least it does in my C-42 - maybe it's different in an airliner...;)

I'm not familiar with this C-42. However, reading and familiarizing yourself with TCAS will help you understand how it works. I mentioned in a previous post the difference between TA and RA; it doesn't matter if you are near an airport or not. Its functionality is not related to airports. Sorry, but you need to study what TCAS does. 

I will say if that helicopter was were it was supposed to be that would have been 200' AGL with that CRJ passing at 300' AGL so that is a 100 foot seperation, the jet wash from that CRJ isn't intense but when you only have 200 feet below you that isn't a lot of space for recovery if something went wrong.

The Helicopter was right (west) of where it was supposed to be and climbed up to 300' and into the CRJ so clearly not where they were supposed to be, they were told to go behind the CRJ which would mean turn left (east), they were turning right

Edited January 30, 20251 yr by Matthew Kane

12 minutes ago, Matthew Kane said:

I will say if that helicopter was were it was supposed to be that would have been 200' AGL with that CRJ passing at 300' AGL so that is a 100 foot seperation, the jet wash from that CRJ isn't intense but when you only have 200 feet below you that isn't a lot of space for recovery if something went wrong.

The Helicopter was right (west) of where it was supposed to be and climbed up to 300' and into the CRJ so clearly not where they were supposed to be, they were told to go behind the CRJ which would mean turn left (east), they were turning right

Yup. If you weren't blown down into the water I think you'd be very lucky. 

But that's not really relevant to this incident. 

Swiss cheese theory..

1: Heli comms on UHF not VHF so neither aircraft can hear each other. Not good for situational awareness.

2: CRJ accepts a late "circle to land" request from controller. Challenging approach made even MORE challenging with late RW change.

3: TCAS alerts inhibited on final approach so CRJ does not hear a warning. 

4: Heli climbs above the height restriction of 200 FT

Any others?

 

EDIT:

Should add

5: Heli accepts visual separation with incorrect traffic identified (which is ANOTHER CRJ on approach further back).

Edited January 30, 20251 yr by TrafficPilot

37 minutes ago, LRBS said:

I'm not familiar with this C-42. However, reading and familiarizing yourself with TCAS will help you understand how it works. I mentioned in a previous post the difference between TA and RA; it doesn't matter if you are near an airport or not. Its functionality is not related to airports. Sorry, but you need to study what TCAS does. 

The C-42 is a light aircraft made by Ikarus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ikarus_C42

Re TCAS I think you may have misunderstood my post. I know what TCAS is and how it works but in relationship to this collision TCAS alerts would have been inhibited at this stage of approach. I believe they may have received a "TRAFFIC TRAFFIC" VISUAL alert but no VERBAL alert as they were below 500ft. We'll find out when they recover the "black boxes".

Edited January 30, 20251 yr by TrafficPilot

50 minutes ago, dave2013 said:

3. DCA should have been closed years ago.  It is an old airport with very short, dangerous runways in a very urban and congested area.  My guess is that there are too many "consulting" firm executives and politicians who like to use it for their luxury jet travel, so it stays open.  All DC traffic should go to Dulles or Baltimore.

Spoken like someone who never lived in the Washington D.C. area. 😄 I lived in Arlington for 8 years. 

Any time there's an incident involving that airport the media is all over the story proclaiming DCA to be one of the most dangerous airports in the world. We don't believe these reports any more than we believe anything else mainstream media says. If it's not obvious, there is some politics involved concerning Dulles and it's never been pretty.

Hook