Pro pilot here. FINALLY, a pilot with some intellect giving an accurate, detailed analysis. For you non-pilots out there, this gentleman’s analysis is right on. The press are utterly clueless. I’m sick and tired of the so called experts who refuse to speculate. For all you other so called “experts”, don’t pretend to be a part of the press, government or military who aren’t allowed to speculate. For those of us with real experience and who know the reality of the situation, it’s our RESPONSIBILITY to speculate and give an accurate, thoughtful analysis based on our experience. Well done sir, well done! I agree 100%.
Thank you so much! I really appreciate that. The civilain public does not understand a stabilized approach to a short runway, and then it was a circle to land to the most instense airspace. I tip my hat to the crews flying this.
@@tironhawk1767 well, for those that don't read federal regulations, FAA order 7110.65 says this analysis is not accurate, though it may be confident and convincing.
you claim no pilot has to worry about helicopters while landing? you'd say that to the loved ones of those who perished? or maybe you didn't watch the news this past week? because YES, pilots and passengers, are DEAD because of a helicopter, *literally* crashing into an airplane. how are so many of you that insensitive and unaware of the reality of what just happened? that's actually sociopathic and I pray the relatives of those lost never see this video of your unkind comment and no discussion about odds will bring those people back to their families.
@@DiandraStarShineyou obviously misinterpreted the OP statement! It’s NOT saying that they didn’t have to worry before or at time of crash but that AFTER procedural changes, that should be the result. You interpreted future conditions as past conditions, in effect. And YOU should be ashamed of yourself for criticizing Cassandra for her asking for improvements!
Bravo! I have watched nearly 50 of these videos since the air collision, and your video is the most precise and coherent one yet. Thank you for bringing understanding to this unfortunate incident.
he is incorrect the other crj had just taken off from runway 1 and thats what reason for the change of the incident plane to be told could you go to 33
Surely the bigger picture is that the commercial traffic should be at Dulles, not mixed up with military/official business. An expanded Dulles ought to be on the agenda.
Life is problem solving but when we get into an environment that refuses to seek out the best people to solve the problem or refuse to be diligent. we will continue to have problems.This video represents how we can solve these problems by having experienced honest discussions with the most experienced and honest people who most likely have the best abilities to dissect the things that need a hard look. thank you for the insight Sir.
I am a pilot. To add to your excellent presentation on this air collision .... it needs to be mentioned that there are many near misses over a year's time (hundreds) that never cme to the public's attention. IMO public needs to put more pressure on the FAA to make commercial flying safe.
Thanks for this video, Sir! Your explanation provides great clarity about traffic pattern design, ATC communications, airline pilot maneuver, and the helicopter pilots vision. A perfect storm of errors. Very sad and although a clear description helps relieve the unknown of how such a tragedy occurred, it does not relieve the pain felt by millions. God Bless the families and victims of the collision.
Excellent presentation, especially on insane procedure crossing over Helicopter Route 4 by fixed wing aircraft on approach to Runway 33. Night makes it worse. Thank you, again.👍
Another commercial pilot said on his channel sometimes they can hear the military aircraft, sometimes not. But that route is insanely close to incoming traffic. Whoever approved that needs to be fired immediately because no one In aviation would say 2 planes with 200ft of separation is safe. The only thing I disagree with is his statement about the atc tower. As he stated the controller asked twice if they had the plane in sight. So even if they were technically understaffed there is nothing the one controller did that was wrong. And even if there was a second controller we don’t know how they assign work so there’s nothing to suggest it affected this crash other than pure speculation.
As a former Air Traffic Controller both Tower and Approach Control and a Army Helicopter Instructor Pilot I have been answering the same questions as you. You however are the first person to get it exactly right. Additionally you graphics are spot on. 1. The entire design of the Rwy 33 approach extended center line crossing Route 4 with only 200’ altitude separation is beyond imagination. 2. As you have stated situational awareness is paramount at all times but especially in airspace with a high density traffic flow. You much know at all times your aircraft’s place in space, location of other air traffic and their intentions. One of the primary ways to help accomplish this is to be able to monitor what instructions ATC giving to other aircraft. Army aircraft do have VHF radios but we’re talking to the tower on UHF radios which, except for specific situations, the air liners do not have. Therefore , unless the tower was broadcasting on both radios simultaneously the aircraft could not hear the transmissions between the controller and the other aircraft . It’s possible that the UH-60 never heard the tower instruct the CRJ to circle to land on Rwy 33 or did hear the exchange but never considered that they might be overflown by the CRJ as he passed over Route 4. Why the UH-60 was above the Cap altitude of 200’ has yet to be determined. All the helicopters that operate in the DC area including the military, Police, EMS, and other authorized users utilize these Routes. If they keep Route 4 it should be day in VFR conditions only and on the same frequency as the civilian air liners. I urge people to be careful what they get in social media and let the NTSB be the final word on the cause and any contributing factors. My heart is broken for the families of the passengers and crew of the CRJ and the UH-60.
Wow, thank you first for your service, Army Vet to Army Vet (7th SFG). Second, thank you for chiming in here. Your expertise is appreciated. One way the helicopter could have been off altitude was by having the wrong altimeter setting. Another, as we both know, is a simple distraction. It can happen. What bothers me most as a pilot is this was a dangerous set up from design. As I said in my video, I would never accept a landing clearance if I knew any aircraft was going to fly underneath me. It is absurd that this was SOP at DCA. Flat wrong for the FAA to put everyone's life at risk for runway 33. It's one of those "What were you thinking?". I feel for the pilots, crews, pax and the ATC. It was a perfect storm, waiting to happen and designed a long time before everyone came on duty.
@gregkeller-xi2pq, Retired airline pilot here. During my 35 year career, I flew with many former and current military helicopter pilots. I remember one helicopter pilot talking about his experience flying over a winding river at night wearing NVGs. They turned on an infrared headlight to light up the path. He said their stealth mission was to not be seen and the infrared light was not visible to the naked eye. The helicopter in this accident would have had his navigation and strobe lights on per FARs, but is it likely that his very visible regular landing light was off?? Do you normally have your bright landing light on when wearing NVGs? Second question is the field of vision wearing NVGs. It’s only about 40 degrees or 20 degrees either side of center, correct?
I really appreciate your analysis. I am not a pilot and have zero experience in flying. But I do see that when two conditions are in place (close proximity of commercial final approach flight path and military helicopter flight path), despite the required altitude separation, statistics will catch up because human factor is involved. The only way to have zero probability of collision is not to allow those two conditions in the first place. Unfortunately, I see that in aviation, sometimes it takes catastrophic event like this for major changes to take place.
13:04 right there. You are the only one I have heard this so far. Many have had great insight, professional experience however just focusing on just one insight or proverbial shoulder shrug of wait and see. Which I do understand though this seems so obvious. You humbly say its your opinion but seems the most logical with all factors we know so far. Which are a lot and unfortunately an accident did happen. I hope and pray the seasoned veterans of aviation will be able to have a voice and get heard. My heart goes out to those that were impacted by this. Thank you 🕊⚘️🙏
It’s remarkable the safety of air travel because of the extremely serious responsibility are airline, industry, respects air travel. It’s an extreme privilege! Thank you for your beautiful insights and everyone involved the high Fidelity aviation industry!
I also think the idea of asking airline crews who are already briefed and setup for an ILS to change at the last minute for circling to another runway needs to be re thought out. Sure, most guys can handle it and wanna help out so the PIC usually says YES, but this accident would not have happened had they not been offered the side step by ATC.
Personally, I look at Circle to Land as an emergency proceedure in IFR conditions. I can see how on a clear night if they are very familar with the airport, they could accept it, but I concur, it is a bad practice. Especially at DCA with all that is going on in that airspace. They went very a stablized approach, to now having to restablish themselves and re-stabilize. That said, the RJ crew did and did so perfectly. The other end of the equation is that the controller and the heli routes put them in harms way. Add all the other factors and you have what happened.
7:55 or 11:21 that dogleg of CRJ 5342 from #1 to #33 was so AA 1630 could take-off on #1 "immediately". That's the jet we all seen tail of going up in first video. ATC had him on hold when PAT25 was at Hain Pt. The H-60 did some zig-zags. ATC got the CA & just said "pass behind". Seems that PAT25 took it as behind 1630 (outbound to Chicago?). The next jet down pass bridge in Alexandria was AA3130 in from New Orleans & (A. Mayorkas' flt in from Dallas?) AA472. I don't think H-60 was looking that far down river. It'd be almost where they were going & took off from at Davison Airfield near Ft Belvoir.
@@allendyer5359 They're deviation from restricted altitude, unfortunately caused this whole disaster. They did not broadcast any emergency, which could have been responsible for them enacting this deviation, therefore it seems the helicopter crew were solely and inexcusably responsible for this tragedy.
I agree with that too, don't think atleast minute to as 5342 to divert to another landing runway, especially nothing that Blackhawk was in the vicinity airspace near runway 33. They should of landed on original ILS runway 1, this would not have had to happened
Tower: "do you see aircraft X" Helicopter: "Yup. Permission for visual separation?" Tower: "A-ok". Question: How could the tower ever be confident that they and Helicopter were referencing the same aircraft in such cramped quarters? I just don't see how the tower could ever be permitted to relinquish control in such circumstances.
my sentiment exactly, 💯%. these people insisting that's it's a reality flying is"safe" are some of the most insensitive individuals ever. seriously, it's actually fairly sociopathic of them to take that mental position when 2 crashes within just a few days JUST happened and so many lives were lost! but they don't seem to care and must be ok with the possibility that family members of those who were killed will find or be pointed to their totally cold videos and comments. #SELFISH
You did hit the main problem with this set up. When accepting a circling app to a rwy that is ~30° off of your initial app you would be VERY concentrated on lining up with the "new" rwy and your visual scanning of the surroundings reduced. Especially approaching a busy airport like this at night you shouldn't have to worry about chopper traffic with (by design) a vertical separation of more or less 100ft. Sounds to me like a concrete wall at the end of a rwy.
Great explanation from a fellow aviation professional. I retired from the airlines 5 years ago. I completely agree with your assessment. I believe the helicopter had the correct aircraft in sight initially but when he swung out to the right over land to align with 33 he was lost in the lights. The helicopter likely was still looking down the river at the subsequent jet. As you know, it is difficult to judge distance with landing lights coming toward you. With the limited field of vision of the NVGs he likely didn’t see the CRJ until it was directly in front of him crossing his path. Again, great video and explanation!
I really appreciate that from a pro airline pilot. My brother is one too and he agreed. I tried to explain it in terms civilians could understand. I am still thinking about this from a pro pilot's perspective. About a minute before landing they were asked to go from a stablized approach, to a circle to land, at night, to a very short runway. I have been told subsequently that at the end of 33 is a brick wall too, not even a fence. They disengaged the autopilot and hand flew the approach, and as far as I can see, nailed it. This could have been any pro pilot doing exactly what they were supposed to do. Crazy that the FAA allowed a 200' vertical separation under an approach, to a short runway. Like what were they thinking; who thought this up. So, bottom-line, I appreciate you chiming in here. Thank you, Don
@CC-xn5xi, When ATC is responsible for aircraft separation they are separated, both laterally and vertically by a greater distance. Visual separation is more efficient but it is imperative that the aircraft accepting responsibility for separation maintains visual contact with the other aircraft and immediately informs ATC if visual contact is lost. To answer your question as to why the instructor pilot in the helicopter requested visual separation, my educated guess is that ATC separation (fly a specific heading and altitude) detracted from the training objective of manually (no autopilot) follow a winding river at night with NVGs. In my experience as an airplane pilot, visual separation is always initiated by ATC. Helicopters are different in that they often have a reason to operate in close proximity to the final approach corridor and ATC separation standards wouldn’t allow aircraft to be that close to each other. I believe it is safe for a helicopter following the east bank of the river at or below 200 feet to request visual separation from an airliner flying opposite direction, straight in, over the river, descending to land on runway 1. The helicopter pilot can accurately predict the flight path of the other aircraft. I don’t believe it is safe to allow visual separation from two aircraft flying in opposite directions when the other pilot is cleared to maneuver as he sees fit to align with runway 33. I also don’t believe it is safe for both helicopter pilots to be wearing NVGs in a high traffic area as peripheral vision is impaired.
I've watched a lot of these, too, have no technical knowledge, and you're the only one I've seen that sees the big picture clearly and makes the most (un)common sense; an accident (unfortunately) waiting to happen. Thankyou!
This is the best analysis that I have seen that explains the reasons why this tragedy happened. We will never know why the helicopter rose to 300-350 ft. above where it should have been.
About the statistic of dying on the way to airport rather than in flight, that’s what my dad told me how his father died. My own grandfather died with massive heart attack slipping on ice/snow and hitting a tree on the way to airport to pick my dad when he was coming home for Christmas break from college (this in Buffalo NY winter) 😢
I am also pilot who has flow the Rwy33 circle to land many times.. Excellent explanation and key graphic. Addressed thee elephant in the room - the design of Helicopter Route 1. Note also, as depicted in radar plots, that the helicopter was not hugging the east coast of the Potomac, but was significantly to the west of its Route 1, and this causing even less vertical separation between the correctly landing plane, and the helicopter, If nothing else, the addition ( and USE) of a compulsory HOLD SHORT line across Route 1 to the NE of Regan, requiring specify ATC clearance to cross, would make the current routing significantly safer.
I disagree with some of his analysis. He claimed that the "powers that be" should allow for the helo's altitude to be off by hundreds of feet. There are two problems with this claim. First, allowing the helo to rise to any altitude would always cause problems (i.e., a crash), so SOME limit is necessary. Second, any landing plane has a altitude restriction to be able to actually land at runway 33 (or any other runway). The landing glide path puts this altitude at about 300-400 ft near the point of impact. So, the alternative is to never allow any plane to land at R33, or ensure that helos stay below 200 ft. Second, this same restriction occurs on our highways, where we must stay in our lanes to avoid oncoming traffic (i.e., we travel with only 4ft between vehicles). Imagine if we allowed cars to vary from their lane by as much as 150 ft. The roads would need to be a half-a-mile wide to accommodate the traffic in busy areas like DC. Where is there space for this much land to accommodate this sort of road design? This is also true of air traffic in the DC area. I agree with him concerning the airplane being on the right path. I disagree with him concerning the altitude at the point of impact. The ATC data shows that the plane and helo were at 300ft. Second, the ATC data shows that the helo had difficulty maintaining its altitude (likely due to the inexperience of the pilot). At the start of the ATC video, the helo was at 300ft. At the 23-second mark, it descended to 200ft (likely due to the instructor's command), then at the 32-second mark, it rose again to the 300ft altitude. So the KEY QUESTION here is Why did the instructor allow the trainee pilot to continuously fail to maintain the proper altitude and continue flying a dangerous route?
Michael, thank you for your thoughts, but I respectfully disagree with your premiss that helicopters should be able to fly under landing planes with a clearance of a few hundred feet (or less). To prove my point, name another airport where this is permitted. Second, to prove it even further, if two aircraft come within a few hundred feet of each other vertically, that is a major BUST on the ATC and/or the pilots. Vertical separation is a cornerstone of IFR safety and it is why we have the systems we have, inclusive of TCAS, and the warnings that ATC gets (and did get on this flight) in the tower. So, I could not disagree with you more. This isn't formation flying. It's a civilian airliner with pax with the rightful expectation of landing safely, and the same goes for the crew, who did a perfect job of flying the approach. Don
@@ioptimizerealty RE: name another airport - There is only one airport near the US Capitol, so this is impossible. Why ask for the impossible? RE: within a few hundred feet of each other vertically - I agree this is undesirable. However, one must be able to permit both helo & airplane traffic in this area. Thus, a "150ft separation" is the named standard. IF it were properly followed, the accident would not have occurred. RE: "This isn't formation flying." / "disagree with your premiss that helicopters should be able to fly under landing planes" - No, it is not formation flying. But let me push back on you on your main point. Rather than just criticizing the solution (i.e., 200ft separation), How do YOU propose to allow both civilian and military traffic in this area (i.e., near our capitol)? IMO - the best solution is to eliminate ALL civilian traffic into DCA. The only purpose this solution has not been considered is that our members of Congress want their comforts, and a long commute to/from the airport impedes this "goal".
@@michaelhall8529 "if" clauses are useful at best inside a computer mainframe. If I am being transported a conveyance outside my control and managing, I do not accept a constraint of hic ergo haec (this then that) as 100% sufficient to assure my successful arrival at a final gate. The "if" clause involved with highway driving cited at least affords me the option to drive defensively. Thus, I chose Traffic Engineering vs. Airport Traffic Control. Highways, railroads, and waterways have fewer degrees of freedom than the fluid world of airplanes .
@@michaelhall8529I and apparently some others would solve this by having a virtual stop sign at Hains Point for southbound helo traffic when an aircraft is on that very final approach to rwy 33, and a similar setup for northbound helo on route 1 at equivalent distance from the standard aircraft path. This would only require a delay of probably a couple of minutes, just like aircraft have to wait on taxiways to cross active runways.
Agree with your points up until the last. It was not an anomaly. There have been near misses all around the country where military helicopters have been buzzing civilian airliners. Many people have complained, saying an accident was only a matter of time. And here it is. Just the first.
Thank you for your clear presentation and analysis of this tragic accident. The graphic greatly assisted my understanding as I found the moving radar rather difficult to interpret. Praying that appropriate steps are taken ASAP to prevent such an incident from ever happening again in this airspace, and that recommendations for global improvements are implemented for the safety of aviation as a whole.
Wow you have said everything here we all needed to know and you are a exceptional 👏 🙌 ❤️ air traffic controller then and now in my books 📚 😉 Awesome 👌 😮 answers for us all a HUGE thanks 😊 ❤
Based on this analysis, in addition to the canopy support frames from both aircraft possibly limiting lateral side views, the two crews may not have seen each other at all. Eerie how the FDR of the CRJ shows a late pull on the yoke. If only this had occurred sooner. RIP
Bingo. The more we learn the more this whole setup was a disaster waiting to happen. I mean, even BEST case, when AA was switched to runway 33 with Pat25 coming south past the end of the same runway, it set up what would probably be an unacceptably close call in any other situation.
I have passionately watched hundreds of aircraft accidents over the last few years and seem to have my own opinions on the original setups that lead to these terrible tragedies. One of my pet peeves is, is that the onus is always put on the pilot, as 'pilot error,' as I believe the consensus is 70%. However, to me, there are many other factors, that if they were avoided, the poor pilot wouldn't have to accept any pilot error comment. That being said, I have to agree with you 100% of your analysis, as, 'an accident waiting to happen,' is a good way to put it. I've been telling friends, that a lot of accidents - in my opinion - are systemic problems, and not just the pilots'. This is a perfect example of the industry pushing the envelope of 'Murphy's Law,' and that is the general phrase I've been handing out to people I've talked to. Thank you again for your very professional, and, informative take - and, candid as well - on this terrible tragic accident
Your graph and explanation are perfect, direct to the target on this sad accident. I believe that military cannot do training using civilians, we didn't sign up for this when we bought a plain ticket. And I also believe that the girl didn't have enough experience to be were she was.
Thank you! Best explanation of the entire situation I've seen yet - although I've heard the elevations a couple of times at least. Blessings and safe flying to you!
Im sure I have heard the controller tell PAT25 that Bluestreak was south of the bridge and going to be taking RW33 for landing. That was the next call immediately after Bluestreak accepted landing on 33. Also I think I have heard that PAT25 acknowledged and stated they had the traffic insight. Yet a minute or so later they mistake an aircraft on the 01 approach just crossing the bridge. It would seem that, being the experienced pilots that they were, PAT25 would have realized they have lost the picture and immediately turned left. Like a go-around. In the end it sounds to me like everyone involved was at or very near sensory overload and the result is this horrible accident.
Watching something that is coming right at you is t he hardest thing to see. They w ere also wearing night vision glasses, which impairs vision in a situation tyhat is ver y brightly lit. At the end of the day, we weren't in that cockpit. I know for a fact they don't let just anyone flight that route. Crucifying the pilot (who was sitting with a flight instructor for a routine evaluatoin) is unprofessional, unethical, and incompetent at this point in teh game.
Night vision in this scenario doesn't make sense to me. I have night vision binoculars. You can't even look at a porch light without frying your retinas. The stars are uncomfortable to look at. You can't use them in high light pollution areas.
very nicely explained and direct to the point .... after viewing so many analysis and videos . this time i got a clear stand on why it happened even without the blackbox ... thnx a lot sir
The helicopter was told exactly where the CRJ was and exactly where it was going and flew straight into it anyway, in spite of being warned a second time. People keep trying to spin this every which way but in my mind The guy who ignored the traffic cop, ran a red light and t-boned the school bus full of kids at the intersection is the one it fault, how do you fix that?
I think a major factor I haven't heard emphasized by anyone is what exercise the military were doing. The Black Hawk was training to evacuate government officials in the case of a catastrophic event. Sounds like they were pretending they had to get through the area as fast as possible. Sure the helicopter path and allowing visual separation are significant risks on their own, but if all aircraft had focused on flying safely I think collision alerts would have been rare and this wouldn't have happened. When they're warned of a jet headed for 33 and request visual separation you'd think it's because they're sure they see the aircraft and not that they're essentially wearing blindfolds and just ask because they don't want to risk ATC telling them to wait. They were probably doing a similar exercise the evening before when they caused an RA making an airplane go around followed by another collision alert with the following plane.
@Phoenix8Rising I don't know. Pretty sure it was also a military helicopter at least, maybe a black hawk. I don't remember. Not sure it matters if it was the same one or not
The altimeter tells the transponder, so the transponder can tell the tower.The altitude if the altimeter is not set correctly , they will not be at the correct altitude
I’m just a regular Joe Schmuckatelly, but I watched another pilot’s analysis video and he touched on setting the altimeter as well. He said something to the effect that if it’s set a hair off, then that could mean 100 foot error. Kind of made sense if the Blackhawk crew may have had that issue, thought they were at 200 and they weren’t.
@DustDevilRage Please clarify: Before making a move on the tarmac during preflight check, the crew makes "settings" corrections to things, like the altimeter, true? Presumably, the vehicle altimeter would then correspond with the published altitude given on the aeronautic chart, true? Explain any anomaly, that might befall the copter, please. A 'given' that atmospheric pressure in Wichita a couple of hours prior would introduce a variant. Care to discuss?
@ genn foster I’m merely echoing what another pilot said about that Blackhawks altimeter. I found it to be a very interesting analysis of this incident. If you would like to watch his video, his channel is called Taking Flight with Rocket. The video thumbnail is the creator of the channel wearing a tan flight suit with a US flag behind him. He would be someone I would ask that question.
Great presentation…BUT. In regard to the tower being understaffed, is there any indication that ATC would’ve done anything differently regardless of how many controllers were in the tower? It sounds like protocol was followed completely. Thanks.
In my view ATC should have denied the helo VFR and told them to maintain IFR and desend to 200 ft due to heavy traffic...the only other option that was NOT available to either crews was the ability to hear each other so both the plane and the helo knew what was going on....a death waiting to happen at some point in time
Good point. I think this was the controllers error, especially after seeing the two a/c covering head-on and the radar flashing CONFLICT ALERT. He should have immediately told helo to turn left and jet to climb and go around. He had 18 secs when the scope flashed. And once the jet accepted landing on 33 the controller should have denied HELO request to see and avoid and have him hold at a certain point till the jet landed.
But honestly, that's so small. The real problem IMO is not the failure of any given individual, in spite of this guy foaming at the mouth to call the pilot incompetent. The problem is that the actual flight plan called for the helicopt and the plane to come withing 100 feet of each other . That's nuts.
The biggest thing I see coming is using rwy 33 for takeoffs only and rwy 1 for landings and departures. An example would be LAX where rwys 24R is a landing rwy and 24L is for departures.
The helicopter spotters group (of which I am a member) is calling to require military aircraft to use civilian transponders. It has not occured to them to crucify an air traffic controller or a military pilot for doing their jobs.
Absolutely agree that the pre-approved helicopter flight routes with 200' to 300' height restriction as they pass a certain bridge across an 😢active runway is an accident waiting to happen. ATC should have had the helicopter hold short of the runway flight path until it past the river.
I viewed a similar video last Thurs. By a pilot, tagged Captain Steeeve. Your pres. is spot on. The Helo pilot lost track of the CRJ when it tracked east towards the Interstate. The CRJs westward turn and descent dipped the Port wing. Neither saw the other before it was too late.
Why did the military need 3 days to scrub the internet of the pilots internet posts? what are they trying to hide? they finally release the pilots name, but she seems to be rehabiltated and never posted anything bad on the internet?
You're barking up the wrong tree. Aviation is all about team work. This helicopter had two pilots (captain and co-pilot) and a third person in the back to check for blind spots. None of them paid any attention to the passenger jet that was about to hit them. None of them paid any attention to altitude. This was rampant negligence and weaponized incompetence. The military knows how the audience (ignorant masses) will react. The masses will blame the female pilot. It's just misogyny. Haters don't care about facts, let alone the truth about what really happened. They just want to find a scapegoat (female pilot) and give the males a free pass. I wish all 3 crew members had been male. People would be forced to focus on the issue at hand (flight safety) and they wouldn't be able to use the DEI card.
The 28 year Old Female Captain may have been qualified "on paper" but were they really "qualified"? 🤔 How does one score not just ONE but TWO sweetheart posts in one? It would seem to me that a newly pinned Lt after passing flight school would go to a "regular" unit to fly and gain more hours vs to DC where it seems she was "allowed to do as she pleased" at the White House as Aide (which is usually an assignment in and of itself). There are rumors her actual flight status had lapsed.... Rumors are swirling that she was a rabid feminist, she was designated unit SHARP, which has much overlap with "E/O"(Equale Opportunity) initiatives.... She might likely be known as someone either "not to cross" or "if you openly critiqued her or harshly" or to remember you in other ways later.... Her low # of flight hours Averages to 7.5/month across 5 years.... I am struggling to find how many years she was an actual pilot.
Thank you for the outstanding analysis. Another aspect, is that the Blackhawk has the ability to transmit on VHF. I’m just a private pilot but most of the Navy aviators (F/A-18 legacy/super Hornet) that I have spoken with have told me that they have switched VHF for a realistic SA during cross country or flights outside their military bases.
NTSB said it was yet to be determined if they were wearing the night vision goggles, I believe is what the latest briefing stated. That regulations allowed for the crossing of the paths of ascending and descending aircraft was an accident that was waiting to happen. It’s absurd to not factor in that quite simply, we humans are mistake makers.
Let's assume they were not wearing night vision at the moment of the crash. But IF they were switching back and forth between night vision and no night vision at different phases of the flight, that might still mess with their perception to an extent.
Gertrude, you are making my point. It was obsurd to think this couldn't happen some day looking at the heli routes and the descent path going into runway 33.
Your higher level analysis is essential here. There is a systemic safety problem at Reagan. The other errors and issues appear to have aligned with this systemic problem to overwhelm the safety redundancy. Because this airport is the pet of the Congress, I am guessing that its oversight is highly politicized. As you noted, sound / noise abatement created a key aspect of the problem- I believe that has been imposed by the federal courts. There is much more to uncover here.
Why can't the public be privy to the discussion within the helicopter betweenthe pilots? What was the discussion within the helicopter? Outside of requesting visual separation,what were they saying to the tower seconds to minutes before the crash? Too many unanswered questions. People have a hard time believing they did not see what was directly in front of them, even with night vision goggles. Thank you for your analysis. I just believe the military should release those recordings. Full transparency.
communication between helicopter and ATC is readily available. Have heard the whole thing. Communication inside the helicopter is unknown and may never be known.
Talking to the helo was a lost cause as Captain Lobach had lost situational awareness and could not recover it, having Aspergers. ATC should have talked with the CRJ telling them to abort and climb to go around. That meant ATC agent accepting he had lost control of the airspace (by ceding it to Captain Lobach). That's a psychological hurdle, plus he was overworked.
While taking the loop to 33...there is a moment in time_distance less than a mile, 5342 shines its landing spotlights straight in the eyes of Hawk while almost being lined up to each other. And for sure in visual
Under ideal conditions the separation between helicopter and plane is 200ft. Planes are separated by a mile to avoid turbulence. I can imagine a larger plane landing on runway 1 causing turbulence issues on a helicopter 200ft away. Am I wrong?
Good morning Don. After some thought, I think they ought to only use Reagan for military. I know it's much easier to get to on the ground. I think it would be better if they worked out of DCA. There is a lot of shuttling of people, dignitaries etc. The helicopter routes are all over the map going down the anacostia River. All different directions. It's dangerous.
After WW2 it was obvious aviation was the future - Large communities built airports to serve their cities - during the 50s - 60s two things happened - Cities grew larger and airplanes became bigger and faster - The Aviation experts said we need to build larger airports further away from the metropolitan areas and close the small outdated downtown airports. IE - Dullas - DFW - and many more were built . Then they said these small airports should be closed - But the community leaders who pulled the strings said “ the downtown airports are SO convenient -don’t close them. So National -Love Field - Hobby - ON and On are all still open - Pull up google map and look at the downtown airport in Kanasa City - That is an accident waiting to happen.
I have failed to understand as to why failure of TCAS(traffic collision avoidance system) is not being discussed which warns much earlier any object coming to collide. It plays pivotal role in mid air collision. Its a lynchpin which is being ignored in all news channels.
I agree. TCAS is a key safety feature. I have it in our jet. It is a life-saver. I heard that the RJ did get an alert. Keep in mind they probably did not expect that while landing. Nor would I, nor would anyone. They must have been laser focused on a difficult landing. 5,204' runway, at night, hand flying (autopilot had to be disengaged to do the circle to land), got to be right on glideslope and right on vref airspeed. Oh, did I mention that there was a brick wall on the other side of 33. Trust me, they were working it and as far as I could see, they were nailing the approach. The last think they expected was ATC to not call out traffic that was coming at them. ATC did not also properly call the traffic to the helicopter in the standard, FAA way. I am not throwing the ATC under the bus here either. He was busy. Working two positions. He is human too. IMO, he too is a victim here. Lots to unpack. Oh BTW, the helicopter did not have TCAS. Add that to the list of links in the accident chain.
In review, when it comes to Visual Separation, "traffic for one; is traffic for all" is the recipe for issuing traffic calls - when the controller granted visual separation after advising the Blackhawk helicopter of the Regional Jet (RJ) traffic, was there ever a traffic call to the RJ about the Blackhawk? If not, outside entities will try to have the FAA shoulder most if not all the responsibility for this terrible tragedy ....this is how lawyers (who are either in the mix now or coming soon) try to "win" these cases .....they will scurry the 7110.65 and MOUs for any speck of missed information by the controller to place blame on the agency (the entity with the most money). Air Traffic Control with 13 years in Air Traffic Quality Control was my life for nearly 40 years. I feel for all involved. God Bless.
David, wow, thank you for sharing. I welcome the input from you ATC people. I too feel for the controller. As I like to say to my daugther, who is learning with me in the cockpit. ATC are typically smart and really on their game, but they are human, and we are a team, and we need to back them up too. Unfortunately, because of the stupidity of the military being on UHF and civilians being on VHF, the RJ crew and the helicopter crew lacked the situational awareness to be really plugged into what was going on. Lots of holes in the swiss cheese and it was not just the ATC.
Retired AF here. Totally agree. There were big holes in the swiss cheese with an unsafe route and understaffing before the pilots even got in their aircraft.
Thank you so much for the video! Could you also chat about your observation on what happened in Philly. I fly very often but as you can imagine have become extremely nervous about flying due to the recent events. Would love to hear your insight on what you think may have happened in Philadelphia. Although not commercial, still concerning as these events happened right behind a huge commercial accident. Again would love your insight
Krishonna, I have been following that too. It was an older Learjet (40+ years). They can be tricky to fly. All we know so far is it certainly got up to speed (about 240 knots) and was initially climbing, but the stopped and turned to the left, instead of the right that they were supposed to. I heard they recovered the "black box", which is actually orange. Hopefully the NTSB can obtain the data from it. There doesn't seem to be much left of the plane because of the vertical impact at approximately 11,000' / minute. Another sad, but rare event. Don
@@ioptimizerealty the airplane only carried a CVR. It was recovered and appeared to be in good condition. Based on video evidence, the Longhorn went in almost vertical out a split "S" and was traveling around 500 ft per second at impact.
Fkn life. Think of the AA5342 pilots, did nothing wrong but died, also those passengers. This is the life, you do nothing wrong, you still could be broke, even die prematurely.
Thank you for an excellent overview. Fully agree with yor comments. Certainly an accident waiting to happen - a number of near misses in recent times including one the day before where a CRJ had to perform a go-around. It turns out that the ADS-B on the Blackhawk was turned off - WHY? Apart from the altitude issue It also appears that the Blackhawk was travelling pretty fast (I have seen reference to 110 knots). That's amazing given that they were approaching the R33 approach path and that ATC had advised them earlier that a CRJ had been cleared to land on R33. RIP to all souls lost and condolences to families and friends of the deceased
Thank-you for this very clear explanation!!! (I feel a little bit better about getting on a plane again after this, just don’t plan on getting on one going to this airport! 😅)
Totally agree with other commenters - I watch Blancolirio, pilot debrief, mentour pilot, and many others…All good but this is the best description and analysis I have seen of this horrible incident.
I know chances are low dying in a plane crash; however, if you do crash and burn, the sheer horror you’ll have to endure in those last few moments before its lights out is unbearable to think about. If my destination is in the continental US, I’ll drive.
Oh, yeah, cos people never crash and burn into their car (spoiler: they do). Makes sense (not). Are you better at driving than your (hypothetical) pilot is at piloting?
Driving is statistically more dangerous. There are so many dangerously unroadworthy vehicles and drivers on the roads. The same can't be said for aviation.
At the time of this video, it was yet to be determined whether or not NVG's were in use. Second, how does our horizontal peripheral vision compare with the vertical is it also 120 degrees? How good is it when the object is not moving in that field of view, as that would be the case when on a collision course?
![[Live] : ONE FIGHT NIGHT 28 วันนี้!! "พระจันทร์ฉาย vs เอลลิส"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LfImEQqfARc/mqdefault.jpg)
![จากรุ่นใหญ่สุดรวยในเกม FIVEM สู่การติดคุกแก๊งแตกในชีวิตจริง [สรุปแก๊งOREO]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Vjj8EX4qpiU/mqdefault.jpg)
Pro pilot here. FINALLY, a pilot with some intellect giving an accurate, detailed analysis. For you non-pilots out there, this gentleman’s analysis is right on. The press are utterly clueless. I’m sick and tired of the so called experts who refuse to speculate. For all you other so called “experts”, don’t pretend to be a part of the press, government or military who aren’t allowed to speculate. For those of us with real experience and who know the reality of the situation, it’s our RESPONSIBILITY to speculate and give an accurate, thoughtful analysis based on our experience. Well done sir, well done! I agree 100%.
🏆
Yes I agree. This is helping me understand this terrible accident.
Thank you so much! I really appreciate that. The civilain public does not understand a stabilized approach to a short runway, and then it was a circle to land to the most instense airspace. I tip my hat to the crews flying this.
@@tironhawk1767 well, for those that don't read federal regulations, FAA order 7110.65 says this analysis is not accurate, though it may be confident and convincing.
@@BenjaminGatti Not accurate as far as? Which part specifically? Regulations and reality aren't always one and the same however.
I understand your explanation fully & I'm a 73 yo. No pilot needs to worry about avoiding helicopters while landing.
Thank you Cassandra and keep on flying!!!
67 people died.
you claim no pilot has to worry about helicopters while landing? you'd say that to the loved ones of those who perished?
or maybe you didn't watch the news this past week?
because YES, pilots and passengers, are DEAD because of a helicopter, *literally* crashing into an airplane.
how are so many of you that insensitive and unaware of the reality of what just happened? that's actually sociopathic and I pray the relatives of those lost never see this video of your unkind comment and no discussion about odds will bring those people back to their families.
@@DiandraStarShineyou obviously misinterpreted the OP statement! It’s NOT saying that they didn’t have to worry before or at time of crash but that AFTER procedural changes, that should be the result.
You interpreted future conditions as past conditions, in effect.
And YOU should be ashamed of yourself for criticizing Cassandra for her asking for improvements!
I think you mean that "no pilot" ...'should have' ..."to worry about avoiding helicopters while landing".
Bravo! I have watched nearly 50 of these videos since the air collision, and your video is the most precise and coherent one yet. Thank you for bringing understanding to this unfortunate incident.
Thank you so much JD. I worked hard to make it as clear as possible. Please share it out then. Don
he is incorrect the other crj had just taken off from runway 1 and thats what reason for the change of the incident plane to be told could you go to 33
i am not bashing the channel just stating for correct information
@@ioptimizerealtyi apologize don just correcting information
Wow loved your short and concise analysis. Respect to you Sir.
I have listened to several other pilots explain the situation, and quite well, but you sir, have done an outstanding job of it! ❤
Thanks so much for the kind words. I really appreciate it.
Surely the bigger picture is that the commercial traffic should be at Dulles, not mixed up with military/official business. An expanded Dulles ought to be on the agenda.
Life is problem solving but when we get into an environment that refuses to seek out the best people to solve the problem or refuse to be diligent. we will continue to have problems.This video represents how we can solve these problems by having experienced honest discussions with the most experienced and honest people who most likely have the best abilities to dissect the things that need a hard look. thank you for the insight Sir.
Great explanation of the key factors that likely contributed to this terrible tragedy. Thank you.
I am a pilot. To add to your excellent presentation on this air collision .... it needs to be mentioned that there are many near misses over a year's time (hundreds) that never cme to the public's attention. IMO public needs to put more pressure on the FAA to make commercial flying safe.
This is why I don't want to fly.
Thanks for this video, Sir! Your explanation provides great clarity about traffic pattern design, ATC communications, airline pilot maneuver, and the helicopter pilots vision. A perfect storm of errors.
Very sad and although a clear description helps relieve the unknown of how such a tragedy occurred, it does not relieve the pain felt by millions. God Bless the families and victims of the collision.
Thank you Will. Don
Thank you for this excellent explanation of this tragic collision!
Many, many thanks and greetings from GERMANY!
Excellent presentation, especially on insane procedure crossing over Helicopter Route 4 by fixed wing aircraft on approach to Runway 33. Night makes it worse. Thank you, again.👍
Your graphic map presentation was the best of all covering this tragedy.
Yes using color coded map really helps someone like me.
As a HelicopterPilot it’s a bit shocking to hear in that airspace that the two aircraft couldn’t hear each other.
Another commercial pilot said on his channel sometimes they can hear the military aircraft, sometimes not.
But that route is insanely close to incoming traffic. Whoever approved that needs to be fired immediately because no one In aviation would say 2 planes with 200ft of separation is safe.
The only thing I disagree with is his statement about the atc tower. As he stated the controller asked twice if they had the plane in sight. So even if they were technically understaffed there is nothing the one controller did that was wrong. And even if there was a second controller we don’t know how they assign work so there’s nothing to suggest it affected this crash other than pure speculation.
As a former Air Traffic Controller both Tower and Approach Control and a Army Helicopter Instructor Pilot I have been answering the same questions as you. You however are the first person to get it exactly right. Additionally you graphics are spot on. 1. The entire design of the Rwy 33 approach extended center line crossing Route 4 with only 200’ altitude separation is beyond imagination. 2. As you have stated situational awareness is paramount at all times but especially in airspace with a high density traffic flow. You much know at all times your aircraft’s place in space, location of other air traffic and their intentions. One of the primary ways to help accomplish this is to be able to monitor what instructions ATC giving to other aircraft. Army aircraft do have VHF radios but we’re talking to the tower on UHF radios which, except for specific situations, the air liners do not have. Therefore , unless the tower was broadcasting on both radios simultaneously the aircraft could not hear the transmissions between the controller and the other aircraft . It’s possible that the UH-60 never heard the tower instruct the CRJ to circle to land on Rwy 33 or did hear the exchange but never considered that they might be overflown by the CRJ as he passed over Route 4. Why the UH-60 was above the Cap altitude of 200’ has yet to be determined. All the helicopters that operate in the DC area including the military, Police, EMS, and other authorized users utilize these Routes. If they keep Route 4 it should be day in VFR conditions only and on the same frequency as the civilian air liners. I urge people to be careful what they get in social media and let the NTSB be the final word on the cause and any contributing factors. My heart is broken for the families of the passengers and crew of the CRJ and the UH-60.
Wow, thank you first for your service, Army Vet to Army Vet (7th SFG). Second, thank you for chiming in here. Your expertise is appreciated.
One way the helicopter could have been off altitude was by having the wrong altimeter setting. Another, as we both know, is a simple distraction. It can happen.
What bothers me most as a pilot is this was a dangerous set up from design. As I said in my video, I would never accept a landing clearance if I knew any aircraft was going to fly underneath me. It is absurd that this was SOP at DCA. Flat wrong for the FAA to put everyone's life at risk for runway 33. It's one of those "What were you thinking?".
I feel for the pilots, crews, pax and the ATC. It was a perfect storm, waiting to happen and designed a long time before everyone came on duty.
@gregkeller-xi2pq, Retired airline pilot here. During my 35 year career, I flew with many former and current military helicopter pilots.
I remember one helicopter pilot talking about his experience flying over a winding river at night wearing NVGs. They turned on an infrared headlight to light up the path. He said their stealth mission was to not be seen and the infrared light was not visible to the naked eye.
The helicopter in this accident would have had his navigation and strobe lights on per FARs, but is it likely that his very visible regular landing light was off??
Do you normally have your bright landing light on when wearing NVGs?
Second question is the field of vision wearing NVGs. It’s only about 40 degrees or 20 degrees either side of center, correct?
Other pilots have complained about this when helicopters passed right under them.
I was surprised to learn this was common practice at DCA.
pilots already complained when copters passed beneath them but the incompetent air controllers never saw it as a threat ... Trump was right DEI
No common sense it seems
I really appreciate your analysis.
I am not a pilot and have zero experience in flying. But I do see that when two conditions are in place (close proximity of commercial final approach flight path and military helicopter flight path), despite the required altitude separation, statistics will catch up because human factor is involved. The only way to have zero probability of collision is not to allow those two conditions in the first place.
Unfortunately, I see that in aviation, sometimes it takes catastrophic event like this for major changes to take place.
13:04 right there. You are the only one I have heard this so far. Many have had great insight, professional experience however just focusing on just one insight or proverbial shoulder shrug of wait and see. Which I do understand though this seems so obvious. You humbly say its your opinion but seems the most logical with all factors we know so far. Which are a lot and unfortunately an accident did happen. I hope and pray the seasoned veterans of aviation will be able to have a voice and get heard. My heart goes out to those that were impacted by this. Thank you 🕊⚘️🙏
It’s remarkable the safety of air travel because of the extremely serious responsibility are airline, industry, respects air travel. It’s an extreme privilege! Thank you for your beautiful insights and everyone involved the high Fidelity aviation industry!
Thank you! Great analysis and a very clear explanation for those of us who are not pilots. I learned a a lot!
Best analysis I've watched that I was able to understand.
Very good analysis I appreciate your viewpoints
Thank you.
Thank you for your presentation and explanation. I agree with you.
I also think the idea of asking airline crews who are already briefed and setup for an ILS to change at the last minute for circling to another runway needs to be re thought out. Sure, most guys can handle it and wanna help out so the PIC usually says YES, but this accident would not have happened had they not been offered the side step by ATC.
Personally, I look at Circle to Land as an emergency proceedure in IFR conditions. I can see how on a clear night if they are very familar with the airport, they could accept it, but I concur, it is a bad practice. Especially at DCA with all that is going on in that airspace. They went very a stablized approach, to now having to restablish themselves and re-stabilize. That said, the RJ crew did and did so perfectly. The other end of the equation is that the controller and the heli routes put them in harms way. Add all the other factors and you have what happened.
7:55 or 11:21 that dogleg of CRJ 5342 from #1 to #33 was so AA 1630 could take-off on #1 "immediately". That's the jet we all seen tail of going up in first video. ATC had him on hold when PAT25 was at Hain Pt. The H-60 did some zig-zags. ATC got the CA & just said "pass behind". Seems that PAT25 took it as behind 1630 (outbound to Chicago?). The next jet down pass bridge in Alexandria was AA3130 in from New Orleans & (A. Mayorkas' flt in from Dallas?) AA472. I don't think H-60 was looking that far down river. It'd be almost where they were going & took off from at Davison Airfield near Ft Belvoir.
He just said number of things went wrong together but the route of copter crossing path anywhere close is totally insane rip
@@allendyer5359 They're deviation from restricted altitude, unfortunately caused this whole disaster. They did not broadcast any emergency, which could have been responsible for them enacting this deviation, therefore it seems the helicopter crew were solely and inexcusably responsible for this tragedy.
I agree with that too, don't think atleast minute to as 5342 to divert to another landing runway, especially nothing that Blackhawk was in the vicinity airspace near runway 33. They should of landed on original ILS runway 1, this would not have had to happened
Tower: "do you see aircraft X" Helicopter: "Yup. Permission for visual separation?" Tower: "A-ok".
Question: How could the tower ever be confident that they and Helicopter were referencing the same aircraft in such cramped quarters? I just don't see how the tower could ever be permitted to relinquish control in such circumstances.
Excellent presentation!
Thank you. I appreciate your kind words.
excellent analysis
Thank you. I tried.
When people say how safe flying is, I always think, tell that to the victims of the crash.
I guess everything is relative. Ostensibly flying is safe, but so is driving, and many other activities.
Tell it to the 300 or so people who died in car crashes since this tragedy.
Percentage wise is great but fatalities pc bit higher then most
I suppose we could walk everywhere.. or just not move. It's certainly safer than driving.
my sentiment exactly, 💯%. these people insisting that's it's a reality flying is"safe" are some of the most insensitive individuals ever.
seriously, it's actually fairly sociopathic of them to take that mental position when 2 crashes within just a few days JUST happened and so many lives were lost!
but they don't seem to care and must be ok with the possibility that family members of those who were killed will find or be pointed to their totally cold videos and comments.
#SELFISH
You did hit the main problem with this set up. When accepting a circling app to a rwy that is ~30° off of your initial app you would be VERY concentrated on lining up with the "new" rwy and your visual scanning of the surroundings reduced. Especially approaching a busy airport like this at night you shouldn't have to worry about chopper traffic with (by design) a vertical separation of more or less 100ft. Sounds to me like a concrete wall at the end of a rwy.
Great explanation from a fellow aviation professional. I retired from the airlines 5 years ago. I completely agree with your assessment.
I believe the helicopter had the correct aircraft in sight initially but when he swung out to the right over land to align with 33 he was lost in the lights. The helicopter likely was still looking down the river at the subsequent jet.
As you know, it is difficult to judge distance with landing lights coming toward you.
With the limited field of vision of the NVGs he likely didn’t see the CRJ until it was directly in front of him crossing his path.
Again, great video and explanation!
I really appreciate that from a pro airline pilot. My brother is one too and he agreed.
I tried to explain it in terms civilians could understand.
I am still thinking about this from a pro pilot's perspective. About a minute before landing they were asked to go from a stablized approach, to a circle to land, at night, to a very short runway. I have been told subsequently that at the end of 33 is a brick wall too, not even a fence.
They disengaged the autopilot and hand flew the approach, and as far as I can see, nailed it. This could have been any pro pilot doing exactly what they were supposed to do.
Crazy that the FAA allowed a 200' vertical separation under an approach, to a short runway. Like what were they thinking; who thought this up.
So, bottom-line, I appreciate you chiming in here. Thank you, Don
Why did the male helicopter pilot request visual separation? Seems unwise.
@CC-xn5xi,
When ATC is responsible for aircraft separation they are separated, both laterally and vertically by a greater distance. Visual separation is more efficient but it is imperative that the aircraft accepting responsibility for separation maintains visual contact with the other aircraft and immediately informs ATC if visual contact is lost.
To answer your question as to why the instructor pilot in the helicopter requested visual separation, my educated guess is that ATC separation (fly a specific heading and altitude) detracted from the training objective of manually (no autopilot) follow a winding river at night with NVGs.
In my experience as an airplane pilot, visual separation is always initiated by ATC.
Helicopters are different in that they often have a reason to operate in close proximity to the final approach corridor and ATC separation standards wouldn’t allow aircraft to be that close to each other.
I believe it is safe for a helicopter following the east bank of the river at or below 200 feet to request visual separation from an airliner flying opposite direction, straight in, over the river, descending to land on runway 1. The helicopter pilot can accurately predict the flight path of the other aircraft.
I don’t believe it is safe to allow visual separation from two aircraft flying in opposite directions when the other pilot is cleared to maneuver as he sees fit to align with runway 33.
I also don’t believe it is safe for both helicopter pilots to be wearing NVGs in a high traffic area as peripheral vision is impaired.
I've watched a lot of these, too, have no technical knowledge, and you're the only one I've seen that sees the big picture clearly and makes the most (un)common sense; an accident (unfortunately) waiting to happen. Thankyou!
This is the best analysis that I have seen that explains the reasons why this tragedy happened. We will never know why the helicopter rose to 300-350 ft. above where it should have been.
About the statistic of dying on the way to airport rather than in flight, that’s what my dad told me how his father died. My own grandfather died with massive heart attack slipping on ice/snow and hitting a tree on the way to airport to pick my dad when he was coming home for Christmas break from college (this in Buffalo NY winter) 😢
Sorry to hear about your Granddad.
I am also pilot who has flow the Rwy33 circle to land many times.. Excellent explanation and key graphic.
Addressed thee elephant in the room - the design of Helicopter Route 1.
Note also, as depicted in radar plots, that the helicopter was not hugging the east coast of the Potomac, but was significantly to the west of its Route 1, and this causing even less vertical separation between the correctly landing plane, and the helicopter,
If nothing else, the addition ( and USE) of a compulsory HOLD SHORT line across Route 1 to the NE of Regan, requiring specify ATC clearance to cross, would make the current routing significantly safer.
I disagree with some of his analysis. He claimed that the "powers that be" should allow for the helo's altitude to be off by hundreds of feet. There are two problems with this claim.
First, allowing the helo to rise to any altitude would always cause problems (i.e., a crash), so SOME limit is necessary. Second, any landing plane has a altitude restriction to be able to actually land at runway 33 (or any other runway). The landing glide path puts this altitude at about 300-400 ft near the point of impact. So, the alternative is to never allow any plane to land at R33, or ensure that helos stay below 200 ft.
Second, this same restriction occurs on our highways, where we must stay in our lanes to avoid oncoming traffic (i.e., we travel with only 4ft between vehicles). Imagine if we allowed cars to vary from their lane by as much as 150 ft. The roads would need to be a half-a-mile wide to accommodate the traffic in busy areas like DC. Where is there space for this much land to accommodate this sort of road design? This is also true of air traffic in the DC area.
I agree with him concerning the airplane being on the right path. I disagree with him concerning the altitude at the point of impact. The ATC data shows that the plane and helo were at 300ft. Second, the ATC data shows that the helo had difficulty maintaining its altitude (likely due to the inexperience of the pilot). At the start of the ATC video, the helo was at 300ft. At the 23-second mark, it descended to 200ft (likely due to the instructor's command), then at the 32-second mark, it rose again to the 300ft altitude.
So the KEY QUESTION here is Why did the instructor allow the trainee pilot to continuously fail to maintain the proper altitude and continue flying a dangerous route?
Michael, thank you for your thoughts, but I respectfully disagree with your premiss that helicopters should be able to fly under landing planes with a clearance of a few hundred feet (or less).
To prove my point, name another airport where this is permitted.
Second, to prove it even further, if two aircraft come within a few hundred feet of each other vertically, that is a major BUST on the ATC and/or the pilots.
Vertical separation is a cornerstone of IFR safety and it is why we have the systems we have, inclusive of TCAS, and the warnings that ATC gets (and did get on this flight) in the tower.
So, I could not disagree with you more. This isn't formation flying. It's a civilian airliner with pax with the rightful expectation of landing safely, and the same goes for the crew, who did a perfect job of flying the approach. Don
@@ioptimizerealty RE: name another airport - There is only one airport near the US Capitol, so this is impossible. Why ask for the impossible?
RE: within a few hundred feet of each other vertically - I agree this is undesirable. However, one must be able to permit both helo & airplane traffic in this area. Thus, a "150ft separation" is the named standard. IF it were properly followed, the accident would not have occurred.
RE: "This isn't formation flying." / "disagree with your premiss that helicopters should be able to fly under landing planes" - No, it is not formation flying. But let me push back on you on your main point. Rather than just criticizing the solution (i.e., 200ft separation), How do YOU propose to allow both civilian and military traffic in this area (i.e., near our capitol)?
IMO - the best solution is to eliminate ALL civilian traffic into DCA. The only purpose this solution has not been considered is that our members of Congress want their comforts, and a long commute to/from the airport impedes this "goal".
@@michaelhall8529 "if" clauses are useful at best inside a computer mainframe. If I am being transported a conveyance outside my control and managing, I do not accept a constraint of hic ergo haec (this then that) as 100% sufficient to assure my successful arrival at a final gate. The "if" clause involved with highway driving cited at least affords me the option to drive defensively. Thus, I chose Traffic Engineering vs. Airport Traffic Control. Highways, railroads, and waterways have fewer degrees of freedom than the fluid world of airplanes .
@@michaelhall8529I and apparently some others would solve this by having a virtual stop sign at Hains Point for southbound helo traffic when an aircraft is on that very final approach to rwy 33, and a similar setup for northbound helo on route 1 at equivalent distance from the standard aircraft path.
This would only require a delay of probably a couple of minutes, just like aircraft have to wait on taxiways to cross active runways.
One of the most outstanding explanations, thank you 🙏
Thank you.
Agree with your points up until the last. It was not an anomaly. There have been near misses all around the country where military helicopters have been buzzing civilian airliners. Many people have complained, saying an accident was only a matter of time. And here it is. Just the first.
The military should start monitoring their compliance to the flight restrictions their helicopters are flying VFR
Thank you for the very clear and concise explanation. Most helpful!
You are most welcome!
Well done on the graphics.
Thank you. I tried. I had to put it together quickly.
Graphics helped me a lot. Other videos weren't as easy to follow. Thank you pilots for all you do
@ioptimizerealty Anent my other contribution. You have excelled far beyond expectations in your presentation and responses.
As an Army veteran, I appreciate your analysis of this unfortunate incident.
Hooah!
Thank you for your clear presentation and analysis of this tragic accident. The graphic greatly assisted my understanding as I found the moving radar rather difficult to interpret. Praying that appropriate steps are taken ASAP to prevent such an incident from ever happening again in this airspace, and that recommendations for global improvements are implemented for the safety of aviation as a whole.
Thank you. And I agree. This should never happen again.
Wow you have said everything here we all needed to know and you are a exceptional 👏 🙌 ❤️ air traffic controller then and now in my books 📚 😉 Awesome 👌 😮 answers for us all a HUGE thanks 😊 ❤
Pilot 😮 or controller which ever 🤔 you got my vote 🗳 😉 ❤
Glad it was helpful!
The helicopter was told to pass BEHIND the incoming jet. That should have caused them to slow down until the jet passed, then cross their path.
They believe that they were watching another aircraft.
It was still above them..a lot of people think they were looking at another plane nearby which was taking off..
Based on this analysis, in addition to the canopy support frames from both aircraft possibly limiting lateral side views, the two crews may not have seen each other at all. Eerie how the FDR of the CRJ shows a late pull on the yoke. If only this had occurred sooner. RIP
Bingo. The more we learn the more this whole setup was a disaster waiting to happen. I mean, even BEST case, when AA was switched to runway 33 with Pat25 coming south past the end of the same runway, it set up what would probably be an unacceptably close call in any other situation.
I have passionately watched hundreds of aircraft accidents over the last few years and seem to have my own opinions on the original setups that lead to these terrible tragedies. One of my pet peeves is, is that the onus is always put on the pilot, as 'pilot error,' as I believe the consensus is 70%. However, to me, there are many other factors, that if they were avoided, the poor pilot wouldn't have to accept any pilot error comment.
That being said, I have to agree with you 100% of your analysis, as, 'an accident waiting to happen,' is a good way to put it. I've been telling friends, that a lot of accidents - in my opinion - are systemic problems, and not just the pilots'. This is a perfect example of the industry pushing the envelope of 'Murphy's Law,' and that is the general phrase I've been handing out to people I've talked to.
Thank you again for your very professional, and, informative take - and, candid as well - on this terrible tragic accident
Thank you Doug.
Your graph and explanation are perfect, direct to the target on this sad accident.
I believe that military cannot do training using civilians, we didn't sign up for this when we bought a plain ticket. And I also believe that the girl didn't have enough experience to be were she was.
One of the altimeters was off...which one though?🤔
Excellent ;the clearest explanation I have seen
Thank you so much for the explanation. Simply heartbreaking for all who lost their lives.
It is truly a tragedy. I hope this video helps people understand what happened.
Thank you! Best explanation of the entire situation I've seen yet - although I've heard the elevations a couple of times at least. Blessings and safe flying to you!
Thanks, I appreciate it!
Im sure I have heard the controller tell PAT25 that Bluestreak was south of the bridge and going to be taking RW33 for landing. That was the next call immediately after Bluestreak accepted landing on 33. Also I think I have heard that PAT25 acknowledged and stated they had the traffic insight. Yet a minute or so later they mistake an aircraft on the 01 approach just crossing the bridge. It would seem that, being the experienced pilots that they were, PAT25 would have realized they have lost the picture and immediately turned left. Like a go-around.
In the end it sounds to me like everyone involved was at or very near sensory overload and the result is this horrible accident.
Watching something that is coming right at you is t he hardest thing to see.
They w ere also wearing night vision glasses, which impairs vision in a situation tyhat is ver y brightly lit.
At the end of the day, we weren't in that cockpit. I know for a fact they don't let just anyone flight that route. Crucifying the pilot (who was sitting with a flight instructor for a routine evaluatoin) is unprofessional, unethical, and incompetent at this point in teh game.
Night vision in this scenario doesn't make sense to me. I have night vision binoculars. You can't even look at a porch light without frying your retinas. The stars are uncomfortable to look at. You can't use them in high light pollution areas.
I totally agree. The plane and the copter should be able to hear each other and communicate as necessary.
Cross the northern border bro. French and English on ATC frequency. Good luck understanding what's going on.
Thank you for your explanation
Thanks for your thoughts. Outstanding. Terrible accident... 😢
very nicely explained and direct to the point .... after viewing so many analysis and videos . this time i got a clear stand on why it happened even without the blackbox ... thnx a lot sir
The helicopter was told exactly where the CRJ was and exactly where it was going and flew straight into it anyway, in spite of being warned a second time. People keep trying to spin this every which way but in my mind The guy who ignored the traffic cop, ran a red light and t-boned the school bus full of kids at the intersection is the one it fault, how do you fix that?
Thank you. Great video.
I’m glad you found it helpful!
I think a major factor I haven't heard emphasized by anyone is what exercise the military were doing. The Black Hawk was training to evacuate government officials in the case of a catastrophic event. Sounds like they were pretending they had to get through the area as fast as possible. Sure the helicopter path and allowing visual separation are significant risks on their own, but if all aircraft had focused on flying safely I think collision alerts would have been rare and this wouldn't have happened. When they're warned of a jet headed for 33 and request visual separation you'd think it's because they're sure they see the aircraft and not that they're essentially wearing blindfolds and just ask because they don't want to risk ATC telling them to wait.
They were probably doing a similar exercise the evening before when they caused an RA making an airplane go around followed by another collision alert with the following plane.
Was that the same helicopter in the day before's near miss?
@Phoenix8Rising I don't know. Pretty sure it was also a military helicopter at least, maybe a black hawk. I don't remember. Not sure it matters if it was the same one or not
The altimeter tells the transponder, so the transponder can tell the tower.The altitude if the altimeter is not set correctly , they will not be at the correct altitude
Exactly Occum's Razor
I’m just a regular Joe Schmuckatelly, but I watched another pilot’s analysis video and he touched on setting the altimeter as well. He said something to the effect that if it’s set a hair off, then that could mean 100 foot error.
Kind of made sense if the Blackhawk crew may have had that issue, thought they were at 200 and they weren’t.
@DustDevilRage Please clarify: Before making a move on the tarmac during preflight check, the crew makes "settings" corrections to things, like the altimeter, true? Presumably, the vehicle altimeter would then correspond with the published altitude given on the aeronautic chart, true? Explain any anomaly, that might befall the copter, please.
A 'given' that atmospheric pressure in Wichita a couple of hours prior would introduce a variant. Care to discuss?
@ genn foster
I’m merely echoing what another pilot said about that Blackhawks altimeter.
I found it to be a very interesting analysis of this incident.
If you would like to watch his video, his channel is called Taking Flight with Rocket.
The video thumbnail is the creator of the channel wearing a tan flight suit with a US flag behind him.
He would be someone I would ask that question.
The helicopter routes have been suspended for 30 days.
Well that is a step in the right direction. It is too bad that it took a tragic accident for the powers that be to see what a danger this setup was.
…and if they ever resume, “request visual separation” ought not be granted.
Only that specific one.
@@ioptimizerealtyI read it as indefinitely suspended except for medical or law enforcement reasons.
There must have been some reason for the deviation from the route.
Great presentation…BUT. In regard to the tower being understaffed, is there any indication that ATC would’ve done anything differently regardless of how many controllers were in the tower? It sounds like protocol was followed completely. Thanks.
In my view ATC should have denied the helo VFR and told them to maintain IFR and desend to 200 ft due to heavy traffic...the only other option that was NOT available to either crews was the ability to hear each other so both the plane and the helo knew what was going on....a death waiting to happen at some point in time
Good point. I think this was the controllers error, especially after seeing the two a/c covering head-on and the radar flashing CONFLICT ALERT. He should have immediately told helo to turn left and jet to climb and go around. He had 18 secs when the scope flashed.
And once the jet accepted landing on 33 the controller should have denied HELO request to see and avoid and have him hold at a certain point till the jet landed.
They could have warned the pilot about a possible collision.
But honestly, that's so small. The real problem IMO is not the failure of any given individual, in spite of this guy foaming at the mouth to call the pilot incompetent. The problem is that the actual flight plan called for the helicopt and the plane to come withing 100 feet of each other . That's nuts.
@@loosilu Which guy was “foaming at the mouth to call the pilot incompetent”?
I don’t know how pilots hear Those frequencies. They’re inaudible. I give them credit how they can keep up with it all
The biggest thing I see coming is using rwy 33 for takeoffs only and rwy 1 for landings and departures. An example would be LAX where rwys 24R is a landing rwy and 24L is for departures.
You are probably right Tom
The helicopter spotters group (of which I am a member) is calling to require military aircraft to use civilian transponders.
It has not occured to them to crucify an air traffic controller or a military pilot for doing their jobs.
You're asking pilots to accept a 5000ft runway for takeoff when a 7000ft runway is available? NNOOOooo!
33 is too short for most planes and there is not enough taxiways to make a conga line.
@@loosiluReally? If military carried civilian transponder anyone, including terrorists and enemies, could track them? Wouldn't that be a problem?
Simply the system was seriously flawed. How it was ever put in place is the question
Absolutely agree that the pre-approved helicopter flight routes with 200' to 300' height restriction as they pass a certain bridge across an 😢active runway is an accident waiting to happen. ATC should have had the helicopter hold short of the runway flight path until it past the river.
I viewed a similar video last Thurs. By a pilot, tagged Captain Steeeve. Your pres. is spot on. The Helo pilot lost track of the CRJ when it tracked east towards the Interstate. The CRJs westward turn and descent dipped the Port wing. Neither saw the other before it was too late.
I like Captain Steve. I haven't seen his take on this yet though.
Why did the military need 3 days to scrub the internet of the pilots internet posts? what are they trying to hide? they finally release the pilots name, but she seems to be rehabiltated and never posted anything bad on the internet?
what would have been "bad" for her to post?
You're barking up the wrong tree.
Aviation is all about team work. This helicopter had two pilots (captain and co-pilot) and a third person in the back to check for blind spots. None of them paid any attention to the passenger jet that was about to hit them. None of them paid any attention to altitude. This was rampant negligence and weaponized incompetence.
The military knows how the audience (ignorant masses) will react. The masses will blame the female pilot. It's just misogyny. Haters don't care about facts, let alone the truth about what really happened. They just want to find a scapegoat (female pilot) and give the males a free pass.
I wish all 3 crew members had been male. People would be forced to focus on the issue at hand (flight safety) and they wouldn't be able to use the DEI card.
@@pirate9154 💯
@@kfor47 oh so we are the ignorant masses? And who are you exactly?
The 28 year Old Female Captain may have been qualified "on paper" but were they really "qualified"? 🤔
How does one score not just ONE but TWO sweetheart posts in one? It would seem to me that a newly pinned Lt after passing flight school would go to a "regular" unit to fly and gain more hours vs to DC where it seems she was "allowed to do as she pleased" at the White House as Aide (which is usually an assignment in and of itself).
There are rumors her actual flight status had lapsed....
Rumors are swirling that she was a rabid feminist, she was designated unit SHARP, which has much overlap with "E/O"(Equale Opportunity) initiatives....
She might likely be known as someone either "not to cross" or "if you openly critiqued her or harshly" or to remember you in other ways later....
Her low # of flight hours Averages to 7.5/month across 5 years.... I am struggling to find how many years she was an actual pilot.
Thank you for the outstanding analysis. Another aspect, is that the Blackhawk has the ability to transmit on VHF. I’m just a private pilot but most of the Navy aviators (F/A-18 legacy/super Hornet) that I have spoken with have told me that they have switched VHF for a realistic SA during cross country or flights outside their military bases.
Thank you for noting that. I have learned that.
SA?
NTSB said it was yet to be determined if they were wearing the night vision goggles, I believe is what the latest briefing stated.
That regulations allowed for the crossing of the paths of ascending and descending aircraft was an accident that was waiting to happen. It’s absurd to not factor in that quite simply, we humans are mistake makers.
Let's assume they were not wearing night vision at the moment of the crash. But IF they were switching back and forth between night vision and no night vision at different phases of the flight, that might still mess with their perception to an extent.
Gertrude, you are making my point. It was obsurd to think this couldn't happen some day looking at the heli routes and the descent path going into runway 33.
Thank you❤
Seems ridiculous to have two routes like that. Heard another pilot say they’ve been hollering to the FAA about this. Helped a lot sir!
Your higher level analysis is essential here. There is a systemic safety problem at Reagan. The other errors and issues appear to have aligned with this systemic problem to overwhelm the safety redundancy. Because this airport is the pet of the Congress, I am guessing that its oversight is highly politicized. As you noted, sound / noise abatement created a key aspect of the problem- I believe that has been imposed by the federal courts. There is much more to uncover here.
Why can't the public be privy to the discussion within the helicopter betweenthe pilots? What was the discussion within the helicopter? Outside of requesting visual separation,what were they saying to the tower seconds to minutes before the crash?
Too many unanswered questions. People have a hard time believing they did not see what was directly in front of them, even with night vision goggles.
Thank you for your analysis. I just believe the military should release those recordings. Full transparency.
communication between helicopter and ATC is readily available. Have heard the whole thing. Communication inside the helicopter is unknown and may never be known.
That controler should told that helicopter to turn around and get the hell out of that fly zone immediately, but nobody wants to hear that , do they !
Talking to the helo was a lost cause as Captain Lobach had lost situational awareness and could not recover it, having Aspergers. ATC should have talked with the CRJ telling them to abort and climb to go around. That meant ATC agent accepting he had lost control of the airspace (by ceding it to Captain Lobach). That's a psychological hurdle, plus he was overworked.
While taking the loop to 33...there is a moment in time_distance less than a mile, 5342 shines its landing spotlights straight in the eyes of Hawk while almost being lined up to each other. And for sure in visual
I wonder why the Blackhawk didn’t stay east on the water bank it maneuvered in the middle of the water as the airplane was descending to land.
Under ideal conditions the separation between helicopter and plane is 200ft. Planes are separated by a mile to avoid turbulence. I can imagine a larger plane landing on runway 1 causing turbulence issues on a helicopter 200ft away. Am I wrong?
Visual separation erases all hard numbers, 91.111 takes over.
This is the best illustration of what happened that I've seen so far. Thank you! Still scared to fly.
Thank you and don't be too scared.
@ioptimizerealty I'll try not to. Thanks for your reply.
Good morning Don. After some thought, I think they ought to only use Reagan for military. I know it's much easier to get to on the ground. I think it would be better if they worked out of DCA. There is a lot of shuttling of people, dignitaries etc. The helicopter routes are all over the map going down the anacostia River. All different directions. It's dangerous.
The politicians want this airport because it's close to the Pentagon and Capitol Hill. They always get their way
That is an idea. However, the politicians will want to use it too and what will they tell their voters. Let's see how this plays out.
After WW2 it was obvious aviation was the future - Large communities built airports to serve their cities - during the 50s - 60s two things happened - Cities grew larger and airplanes became bigger and faster - The Aviation experts said we need to build larger airports further away from the metropolitan areas and close the small outdated downtown airports. IE - Dullas - DFW - and many more were built . Then they said these small airports should be closed - But the community leaders who pulled the strings said “ the downtown airports are SO convenient -don’t close them. So National -Love Field - Hobby - ON and On are all still open - Pull up google map and look at the downtown airport in Kanasa City - That is an accident waiting to happen.
Who's on first?
Excellent explanation why changes are necessary
Many thanks Capetians for doing this, Absolutely Spot On Sir!!✅
Thank you.
I have failed to understand as to why failure of TCAS(traffic collision avoidance system) is not being discussed which warns much earlier any object coming to collide. It plays pivotal role in mid air collision. Its a lynchpin which is being ignored in all news channels.
I agree. TCAS is a key safety feature. I have it in our jet. It is a life-saver. I heard that the RJ did get an alert. Keep in mind they probably did not expect that while landing. Nor would I, nor would anyone. They must have been laser focused on a difficult landing. 5,204' runway, at night, hand flying (autopilot had to be disengaged to do the circle to land), got to be right on glideslope and right on vref airspeed. Oh, did I mention that there was a brick wall on the other side of 33. Trust me, they were working it and as far as I could see, they were nailing the approach. The last think they expected was ATC to not call out traffic that was coming at them. ATC did not also properly call the traffic to the helicopter in the standard, FAA way. I am not throwing the ATC under the bus here either. He was busy. Working two positions. He is human too. IMO, he too is a victim here. Lots to unpack. Oh BTW, the helicopter did not have TCAS. Add that to the list of links in the accident chain.
Great report. Spot on
Excellent explanation!
Glad it was helpful!
Very well explained! Thank you Sir! 👍🙏
Thanks! I appreciate it!
In review, when it comes to Visual Separation, "traffic for one; is traffic for all" is the recipe for issuing traffic calls - when the controller granted visual separation after advising the Blackhawk helicopter of the Regional Jet (RJ) traffic, was there ever a traffic call to the RJ about the Blackhawk? If not, outside entities will try to have the FAA shoulder most if not all the responsibility for this terrible tragedy ....this is how lawyers (who are either in the mix now or coming soon) try to "win" these cases .....they will scurry the 7110.65 and MOUs for any speck of missed information by the controller to place blame on the agency (the entity with the most money). Air Traffic Control with 13 years in Air Traffic Quality Control was my life for nearly 40 years. I feel for all involved. God Bless.
David, wow, thank you for sharing. I welcome the input from you ATC people. I too feel for the controller. As I like to say to my daugther, who is learning with me in the cockpit. ATC are typically smart and really on their game, but they are human, and we are a team, and we need to back them up too. Unfortunately, because of the stupidity of the military being on UHF and civilians being on VHF, the RJ crew and the helicopter crew lacked the situational awareness to be really plugged into what was going on. Lots of holes in the swiss cheese and it was not just the ATC.
Thank you,well explained.
Glad it was helpful!
Excellent presentation. Thank you
Thanks for the kind words. It’s a subject that needs to be explored.
btw.. do the ATC staff need to have experience to sit at cockpit as to make them feelnthe real environment or just enough on a simulator?
Excellent summary of the factors that coincided and led to this tragic crash. Pay attention to his suggestions for safety improvement.
Retired AF here. Totally agree. There were big holes in the swiss cheese with an unsafe route and understaffing before the pilots even got in their aircraft.
Thank you so much for the video! Could you also chat about your observation on what happened in Philly. I fly very often but as you can imagine have become extremely nervous about flying due to the recent events. Would love to hear your insight on what you think may have happened in Philadelphia. Although not commercial, still concerning as these events happened right behind a huge commercial accident. Again would love your insight
Krishonna, I have been following that too. It was an older Learjet (40+ years). They can be tricky to fly. All we know so far is it certainly got up to speed (about 240 knots) and was initially climbing, but the stopped and turned to the left, instead of the right that they were supposed to. I heard they recovered the "black box", which is actually orange. Hopefully the NTSB can obtain the data from it. There doesn't seem to be much left of the plane because of the vertical impact at approximately 11,000' / minute. Another sad, but rare event. Don
@ioptimizerealty thank you so much for the response!!
@@ioptimizerealty the airplane only carried a CVR. It was recovered and appeared to be in good condition.
Based on video evidence, the Longhorn went in almost vertical out a split "S" and was traveling around 500 ft per second at impact.
Fkn life. Think of the AA5342 pilots, did nothing wrong but died, also those passengers. This is the life, you do nothing wrong, you still could be broke, even die prematurely.
Thank you for an excellent overview. Fully agree with yor comments. Certainly an accident waiting to happen - a number of near misses in recent times including one the day before where a CRJ had to perform a go-around. It turns out that the ADS-B on the Blackhawk was turned off - WHY? Apart from the altitude issue It also appears that the Blackhawk was travelling pretty fast (I have seen reference to 110 knots). That's amazing given that they were approaching the R33 approach path and that ATC had advised them earlier that a CRJ had been cleared to land on R33. RIP to all souls lost and condolences to families and friends of the deceased
Thank-you for this very clear explanation!!! (I feel a little bit better about getting on a plane again after this, just don’t plan on getting on one going to this airport! 😅)
Glad you found it helpful! I think our airports are quite safe, with the exception of DCA.
Totally agree with other commenters - I watch Blancolirio, pilot debrief, mentour pilot, and many others…All good but this is the best description and analysis I have seen of this horrible incident.
Wow. That is a very high complement. I too watch Blancoliro, Pilot Debrief and Mentor Pilot. They are terrific. I am humbled. Thank you, Don
I like this presentation. Thank you.
I know chances are low dying in a plane crash; however, if you do crash and burn, the sheer horror you’ll have to endure in those last few moments before its lights out is unbearable to think about. If my destination is in the continental US, I’ll drive.
I've had some scary moments on long distance car trips. The perception that driving is safer is deceptive.
Oh, yeah, cos people never crash and burn into their car (spoiler: they do).
Makes sense (not).
Are you better at driving than your (hypothetical) pilot is at piloting?
Driving is statistically more dangerous.
There are so many dangerously unroadworthy vehicles and drivers on the roads. The same can't be said for aviation.
At the time of this video, it was yet to be determined whether or not NVG's were in use. Second, how does our horizontal peripheral vision compare with the vertical is it also 120 degrees? How good is it when the object is not moving in that field of view, as that would be the case when on a collision course?