Plane crash at DCA

[ionel]

1 hour ago, fishbane said:

A few seconds before the collision is not enough time.  The Blackhawk pilots might not have even had time to read the instruction back.  

  If not the extra controller was not what broke the chain of errors. 

I'm sure there will be discussion on staffing as a contributing factor in the final report, but a helicopter and a plane could come into conflict at a time when 1 controller was handling both.  

Yes data seems to show the hit 10 - 15 sec after the "pass behind" instruction.

My original point is it takes generally  takes 3 things to cause the accident chain.  The first single controller didn't cause it but two controllers might have broke the chain, just like any of the other 3 could have broke it.  What if they'd recieved instruction 30 sec earlier?

23 minutes ago, fishbane said:

What basis would the pilots of the plane have to reject the request and say "unable 33?"

Using the earlier math the helicopter would have been 10 mi away from the plane and not directly on front of it either. 

Its not like the pilots have radar in the cockpit showing the position of the helicopter.  The only way for them to know it was there was if they spotted it 10mi away looking outside.

 

 

A pilot can always say "unable" its just you might be asked to make a phone call later to explain.  It's always better to still be around to explain.  The two CRJ pilots discussed before they accepted.

Even small planes have tech in cockpit showing other traffic its just not going to work for traffic at 200' agl.  Also have had for long time tech that shows where you will be in 5, 10 etc minutes.  Tower has it too.

The CRJ had been cleared & accepted circle to land 33 and then cleared to land which means cleared all the way to the ground not just 400'.

[ionel]

Btw:  I had a case sw wind cleared for left downwind 22 and left base which took me over 32.  Regional CRJ type out of Chicago announces "on base"  didn't say what runway.  I immediately asked tower for position (this before new tech) informed as was fine continue close base "clear to land".  Well the regional was turning off base for final 32r  Tower had to make the regional go around cause I was already cleared.  Got a "call tower phone #" after shut down.  Usually you don't want that.  He just wanted to apologize.  I'd have liked to heard the other conversation cause the regional did not make proper position reports.  

I've been into DCA but pre 911.

[fishbane]

1 hour ago, ionel said:

Yes data seems to show the hit 10 - 15 sec after the "pass behind" instruction.

My original point is it takes generally  takes 3 things to cause the accident chain.  The first single controller didn't cause it but two controllers might have broke the chain, just like any of the other 3 could have broke it.  What if they'd recieved instruction 30 sec earlier?

I think adding extra people will could help catch a mistake especially if it just one person doing the job.  It may have changed things, but if this wasn't a mistake and how ATC normally handles the helicopters around DCA then maybe not.  There was a near miss the day before with a helicopter maintaining visual separation which may indicate this kind of handling was routine by ATC.

30s could make a difference.  The initial visual separation request was more than 30s before the crash.  The helicopter likely didn't see the plane then either, so I'm not sure being told to pass behind at that time would make a difference.  If they were in fact looking at the wrong plane they might not do anything different.  If ATC told the helicopter to turn left as you suggested earlier that would avoid a collision if the helicopter turned.  Would it be a normal instruction for a ATC to have a helicopter turn off one of the helicopter paths down the river and to the left would be the city/white house/ect.

2 hours ago, ionel said:

A pilot can always say "unable" its just you might be asked to make a phone call later to explain.  It's always better to still be around to explain.  The two CRJ pilots discussed before they accepted.

Even small planes have tech in cockpit showing other traffic its just not going to work for traffic at 200' agl.  Also have had for long time tech that shows where you will be in 5, 10 etc minutes.  Tower has it too.

The CRJ had been cleared & accepted circle to land 33 and then cleared to land which means cleared all the way to the ground not just 400'.

Certainly they could reject runway 33 and they could have executed a go round after accepting 33.  The NTSB said the pilots briefly discussed the decision to accept 33, but haven't released the CVR transcript.  Wouldn't such discussion be more or less whether the plane was capable of stopping on the runway in the conditions?  A helicopter 10+ miles away wouldn't come up.

The information they would have had displayed regarding the helicopter's position would have been supplied by the helicopter.  It's possible this information was incorrect.  The NTSB said that ATC's display had the CRJ at 200ft, but that they found the plane to be at 325+/-25ft at the time of the collision, so 200ft was clearly incorrect.  Also at the same NTSB press conference the plane's CVR contents were discussed and a TCAS traffic advisory was heard in the cockpit 18s before the collision.  Isn't this late?  I thought TCAS was supposed to issue a TA 40s before a potential collision and an RA 25s before a collision.  

[Tripnsweep]

Glad to see Trump is handling business.

https://apnews.com/article/doge-faa-air-traffic-firings-safety-67981aec33b6ee72cbad8dcee31f3437

[headshuck]

The FAA turned away qualified air traffic controllers based on race. Hiring on merit has already begun.

[mspart]

It is a tough job for sure.   Hopefully they are getting good candidates.  

mspart

[red viking]

2 hours ago, Tripnsweep said:

Glad to see Trump is handling business.

https://apnews.com/article/doge-faa-air-traffic-firings-safety-67981aec33b6ee72cbad8dcee31f3437

More complete incompetence

[1032004]

3 hours ago, Tripnsweep said:

Glad to see Trump is handling business.

https://apnews.com/article/doge-faa-air-traffic-firings-safety-67981aec33b6ee72cbad8dcee31f3437

Seems like this is just a part of him firing tons of probationary workers.  Which seems like a questionable idea to begin with, they probably get paid the least and do more actual work

[headshuck]

Media again fails to tell a complete story. Every day public trust in the media drops.

[Le duke]

Media again fails to tell a complete story. Every day public trust in the media drops.

WWII era? Really?

The ASR-11 is the most common radar at major airports and military airfields in the US and it wasn’t even developed until 1998, and fielded in 2002. DCA is provided data by multiple radars in the area, including multiple -11s and even more -9s.




Last I checked, WWII ended in 1945.

Maybe SEC Duffy isn’t being very honest here…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[headshuck]

Where does he say anything about radar? Air traffic control software is more than radar.

The real misrepresentation by the media here is the layoffs, not the generation of software.

[Le duke]

Where does he say anything about radar? Air traffic control software is more than radar.

Ok, I’ll bite:

The interrogator function on a modern radar, the one that makes the aircraft transponder send out data? Yeah, that’s pretty new. Given that the transponder is coupled with GPS, which didn’t become available for civilian use until the mid-80s.

Software written during WWII isn’t processing GPS-enabled transponder data.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[headshuck]

Might be an interesting thread of its own, but the primary topic is the dozens of copycat media stories “Trump begins firings of FAA staff just weeks after fatal DC plane crash.”

Misleading.

[headshuck]

[Tripnsweep]

5 hours ago, headshuck said:

Might be an interesting thread of its own, but the primary topic is the dozens of copycat media stories “Trump begins firings of FAA staff just weeks after fatal DC plane crash.”

Misleading.

It's not misleading. It's exactly what he did. Because now instead of having people in place who can handle the issues that led to the crash, they're going to have to find new people. Which is going to take more time, and it shows that him or his administration don't really care about air safety. 

[headshuck]

I’ll assume the people in charge reviewed what these few hundred probationary employees were doing and decided they weren’t needed. Training someone not needed or qualified takes away from something else.

[1032004]

8 hours ago, headshuck said:

Might be an interesting thread of its own, but the primary topic is the dozens of copycat media stories “Trump begins firings of FAA staff just weeks after fatal DC plane crash.”

Misleading.

What’s misleading?  The link @Tripnsweep shared doesn’t say they fired air traffic controllers, it says they fired “FAA staff.”   Seems odd that the line from the administration is “zero critical personnel were fired” without defining what determines if someone is critical.

And as I said above, the probationary employees aren’t saving them much anyway since I’m sure they made the least amount of money.   If anything the misleading part of the story is focusing on the FAA when probationary employees are being fired across the entire government.   I can’t find a specific number, but have seen reports of “nearly all” of the over 200k that hold that status - https://apnews.com/article/trump-federal-workers-layoffs-doge-406752da1614755b8fabe9c94e0c71a8

 

[headshuck]

The original article Trip shared was updated from opinion to include some facts.

[1032004]

53 minutes ago, headshuck said:

The original article Trip shared was updated from opinion to include some facts.

You sure it originally claimed air traffic controllers were fired?  Here is the Press Secretary quoting the author of the article’s post from almost 24 hours ago, which includes a direct quote from the current article which does not say that air traffic controllers were fired:

 

Looks like the only edits to the article I can tell are about the DOGE Facebook page, as it originally said someone was harassed by “the official DOGE Facebook page” but it has been updated to “an account labeled the Department of Government Efficiency but it is unclear who operates it.”  This particular page if not official is a pretty good impersonation, even directing people to PM DOGE at confirmed accounts on x.

https://www.facebook.com/share/16DKNdGLDe/?mibextid=wwXIfr

Edited Tuesday at 01:53 PM by 1032004

[headshuck]

Scroll up to see the headline and theme of original (now modified) story Trip shared. I’m done with this thread.