A random question for those who might know:

Does requesting (and receiving) "visual separation" absolve the helicopter crew of the obligation to stay within the published heli-route (laterally and vertically)?

I'm trying to think of a reason the Blackhawk would have turned right and started climbing. If they never actually saw the CRJ, thought they were asked to pass behind the aircraft on final for rw01, and their ultimate destination was West of the river..... Could they have turned off the published route 'direct destination', thinking they were in the clear? 

 

DB

Also, here's a decently well-done recreation of what each crew would have seen out the window. 

 

 

Not much else needs to be said other than in the first half of the video, the CRJ looks like it's behind the aircraft on final for rw01 (i.e. in trail) 

 

DB

2 hours ago, DaviiB said:

A random question for those who might know:

Does requesting (and receiving) "visual separation" absolve the helicopter crew of the obligation to stay within the published heli-route (laterally and vertically)?

I'm trying to think of a reason the Blackhawk would have turned right and started climbing. If they never actually saw the CRJ, thought they were asked to pass behind the aircraft on final for rw01, and their ultimate destination was West of the river..... Could they have turned off the published route 'direct destination', thinking they were in the clear? 

 

DB

They were told by ATC to go behind the CRJ which means they could devert from navigating the published route, it is beleived the helicopter crew thought another aircraft was the CRJ was the one they were supposed to go behind. If ATC had said 'go behind the CRJ at your 2 O'Clock' that would have cleared things up for the BH crew.

What is not clear is 'Go Behind' would mean they should have turned away to the left, or east of DCA and instead they turned right towards DCA and climbed, even if they were looking at the wrong aircraft you still wouldn't go right and climb. Lots of questions and it will probably take a year for investigators to give definitive answers. 

Edited February 1, 20251 yr by Matthew Kane

1 hour ago, Matthew Kane said:

What is not clear is 'Go Behind' would mean they should have turned away to the left, or east of DCA and instead they turned right towards DCA and climbed, even if they were looking at the wrong aircraft you still wouldn't go right and climb. Lots of questions and it will probably take a year for investigators to give definitive answers.

What if.... 

The heli crew was expecting the lights they were looking at (the 737) to break off (to the left from the perspective of the Heli crew) and start the circling maneuver for rw33.....and turning right would keep them clear, allowing them to pass behind and continue down the river. 

Look at the video again and ask yourself, if you were looking at the 737, and not the CRJ, expecting it to circle for rw33, which way would you turn to get behind it? 

Speculation, but it kinda makes sense. 

 

DB

Edited February 1, 20251 yr by DaviiB
Edited for clarity

19 minutes ago, DaviiB said:

What if.... 

The heli crew was expecting the lights they were looking at (the 737) to break off (to the left from the perspective of the Heli crew) and start the circling maneuver for rw33.....and turning right would keep them clear, allowing them to pass behind and continue down the river. 

Look at the video again and ask yourself, if you were looking at the 737, and not the CRJ, expecting it to circle for rw33, which way would you turn to get behind it? 

Speculation, but it kinda makes sense. 

 

DB

For me even looking at the 737 down the river for the CRJ would have meant no action or diversion from the course immediately because of the distance, then go left to circle behind and certainly no reason to climb. Why they made a course correction at that time is beyond me, and nothing about that diversion would have meant climbing. The investigators are going to have to rule out intentional as well, not saying it was but when a helicopter makes a turn and climbs right into another aircraft you will have to rule out that possibility as well, and other things like drugs or alcohol etc, they will look at everything. I doubt they even saw the CRJ so not likely intentional, just unfortunate.

2 hours ago, Matthew Kane said:

For me even looking at the 737 down the river for the CRJ would have meant no action or diversion from the course immediately because of the distance, then go left to circle behind and certainly no reason to climb. Why they made a course correction at that time is beyond me, and nothing about that diversion would have meant climbing. The investigators are going to have to rule out intentional as well, not saying it was but when a helicopter makes a turn and climbs right into another aircraft you will have to rule out that possibility as well, and other things like drugs or alcohol etc, they will look at everything. I doubt they even saw the CRJ so not likely intentional, just unfortunate.

Well.... If you're head to head with traffic that's going to eventually go left, and you're told to pass behind, do you continue straight or veer to the right? 

Also (this is heavy speculation), if I was 200ft over water at night, my first instinct would be to climb the second I thought it was safe to do so. In this case, once I was granted visual separation and had eyes on other traffic. 

 

To your other point... This potentially being an intentional act.... that would be some pretty good flying to nail an intercept on an aircraft in a turn at night. (unless its easier than I think) 

 

I say no chance it could have been premeditated, because the CRJ was offered runway 33 at the last minute. If they continued for runway 01 they would have landed before the Blackhawk got there. 

 

DB

21 minutes ago, DaviiB said:

Also (this is heavy speculation), if I was 200ft over water at night, my first instinct would be to climb the second I thought it was safe to do so. In this case, once I was granted visual separation and had eyes on other traffic. 

At no time did the ATC give them an altitude change, their altitude assignment through DCA was 200' no exception

22 minutes ago, DaviiB said:

To your other point... This potentially being an intentional act.... that would be some pretty good flying to nail an intercept on an aircraft in a turn at night. (unless its easier than I think) 

With investigations everything is on the table until you rule it out. I don't beleive this happened I already said I beleive they didn't know where the CRJ was, but when you see a flight path climb and turn into the path of another airplane you have to rule that out, that's what investigations do

I premise my comments by saying that none of us will know exactly what happened until the official investigation is completed.

Based on the available information it looks as though the helicopter pilot screwed up badly.  ATC told them *twice* about the nearby CRJ, and the helicopter pilot acknowledged this and asked for visual separation.  Despite the warnings, for some reason the helicopter pilot climbed to above 200ft, which was prohibited, and then flew right into the path of the CRJ - pretty cut and dry if the information we have is correct.

This could all have been avoided if the authorities didn't allow helicopters to fly around the approach paths of a busy airport.  Like so many things in life, nobody(maybe) warned that this practice was not a good idea, so it was allowed to continue as it had been going on for years with no incidents.  I was surprised that this was going on when I first heard about it.  It's just more evidence IMO of rampant govt. incompetence.  Anyway, now maybe things will change.

Dave

 

I worked in the control tower at an Army heliport of Tan Son Nhat Air base in Vietnam in 1972. I remember it was common to have inbound choppers fly Lima Lima ( low level or nap of the earth) under the approach path of that very busy airport with a variety of military as well as civilian commercial traffic landing. Of course a different time and place but my take away ; US Army pilots the best in the world. Flew with them on many a wild ride any chance I got and wouldn’t hesitate today. Might add they also had about the highest casualty rate due to the mission. Knew some that didn’t make it home. Let’s not cast blame until we know. 

9 hours ago, dave2013 said:

It's just more evidence IMO of rampant govt. incompetence.  Anyway, now maybe things will change.

Dave

 

👍Maybe the air traffic controllers can speak up collectively and improve safety. We sure tried.

13 hours ago, Patco Lch said:

I worked in the control tower at an Army heliport of Tan Son Nhat Air base in Vietnam in 1972. I remember it was common to have inbound choppers fly Lima Lima ( low level or nap of the earth) under the approach path of that very busy airport with a variety of military as well as civilian commercial traffic landing. Of course a different time and place but my take away ; US Army pilots the best in the world. Flew with them on many a wild ride any chance I got and wouldn’t hesitate today. Might add they also had about the highest casualty rate due to the mission. Knew some that didn’t make it home. Let’s not cast blame until we know. 

That was in a war theatre - very different circumstances.  Safety becomes less of a priority in wartime - I know a bit about this as I served overseas during Desert Storm(no comparison to the hardships of the Vietnam War), and all that mattered was accomplishing the mission.

My statement about the helicopter pilot was based on available information.  It may turn out that the pilot was not at fault, but the tracking data shows otherwise.  I agree that U.S. military pilots are the best.  Unfortunately, our military has been compromised for some time now with certain initiatives and policies that have undermined competency and readiness.  This is being corrected as we speak.

Dave

2 hours ago, dave2013 said:

My statement about the helicopter pilot was based on available information.  It may turn out that the pilot was not at fault, but the tracking data shows otherwise.  I agree that U.S. military pilots are the best.  Unfortunately, our military has been compromised for some time now with certain initiatives and policies that have undermined competency and readiness.  This is being corrected as we speak.

Thank God common sense is returning!!!