Plane crash At Reagan National
- Thread starter Shoreglide
- Start date
Or worse used the wrong pronouns and she went all REEEEEEEE!!!!!!
Guess I'll have to jump in again, although it's not my preference. On page 8 of this thread I posted the detailed preliminary report from the NTSB. I also posted the whole audio from the tower.
For those of you that are prone to conjecture rather than reading I think you should take the time and read. There are a lot of things that are not being mentioned anywhere but on that report, which goes into a second by second the history of the accident.
The interesting part of the "History of Flight" part of this accident starts at Page 5:
5 of 20 DCA25MA108
This information is preliminary and subject to change.
"
At 2046:02, a radio transmission from the tower was audible on flight 5342’s CVR informing
PAT25 that traffic just south of the Wilson Bridge was a CRJ (flight 5342) at 1,200 ft circling to
runway 33.
CVR data from the helicopter indicated that the portion of the transmission stating the CRJ
was “circling” may not have been received by the crew of PAT25. The word “circling” is heard
in ATC communications as well as the airplane’s CVR, but not on the helicopter’s CVR.
At 2046:08, the PAT25 crew reported that they had the traffic in sight and requested to
maintain visual separation. The controller approved the request. At this time, the distance
between the two aircraft was about 6.5 nm. Figure 2 shows each aircraft’s approximate
position at 2046:02, when the controller first advised the crew of PAT25 of flight 5342.
Figure 2. Google Earth image with airplane and helicopter preliminary flight tracks overlaid,
and each aircraft’s approximate position shown at 2046:02."
The Google Earth image above is incredibly telling!! When the PM said "we have a visual" Flight 5342 was 6.5 Nautical Miles away. That's a long ways at night when flooded by a ton of lights everywhere you look, but definitely not impossible...
More importantly though, The white "visual line of sight" between the two aircraft is exactly right over runway 11, at the same time that another similar aircraft had just taken off and was climbing towards the North.
Again, This is not over yet. All speculation and assignment of guilt is way too premature. Which aircraft was PAT25 looking at???
For those of you that are prone to conjecture rather than reading I think you should take the time and read. There are a lot of things that are not being mentioned anywhere but on that report, which goes into a second by second the history of the accident.
The interesting part of the "History of Flight" part of this accident starts at Page 5:
5 of 20 DCA25MA108
This information is preliminary and subject to change.
"
At 2046:02, a radio transmission from the tower was audible on flight 5342’s CVR informing
PAT25 that traffic just south of the Wilson Bridge was a CRJ (flight 5342) at 1,200 ft circling to
runway 33.
CVR data from the helicopter indicated that the portion of the transmission stating the CRJ
was “circling” may not have been received by the crew of PAT25. The word “circling” is heard
in ATC communications as well as the airplane’s CVR, but not on the helicopter’s CVR.
At 2046:08, the PAT25 crew reported that they had the traffic in sight and requested to
maintain visual separation. The controller approved the request. At this time, the distance
between the two aircraft was about 6.5 nm. Figure 2 shows each aircraft’s approximate
position at 2046:02, when the controller first advised the crew of PAT25 of flight 5342.
Figure 2. Google Earth image with airplane and helicopter preliminary flight tracks overlaid,
and each aircraft’s approximate position shown at 2046:02."
The Google Earth image above is incredibly telling!! When the PM said "we have a visual" Flight 5342 was 6.5 Nautical Miles away. That's a long ways at night when flooded by a ton of lights everywhere you look, but definitely not impossible...
More importantly though, The white "visual line of sight" between the two aircraft is exactly right over runway 11, at the same time that another similar aircraft had just taken off and was climbing towards the North.
Again, This is not over yet. All speculation and assignment of guilt is way too premature. Which aircraft was PAT25 looking at???
After reading the NTSB preliminary report with the CVR info from PAT25, I think it is highly likely that PAT25 never saw the CRJ. I think they, or at least the pilot flying was referencing a different aircraft than the circling CRJ. The Pilot Monitoring in PAT25 may have seen the CRJ which may have increased the confusion in the Blackhawk.
Quite possible. Another point that has been made is the they were flying with "NVGs". This I find doubtful because "PAT" army Black Hawks are an elite unit and should be state of the art aircraft. PAT stands for "Priority Air Transport". They are mainly used to transport VIPs and high ranking officers. The crews are select top notch aviators.
Below is an image of one of these helicopters, known as "Gold Tops" (for the paint scheme). You can see a FLIR pod under the chin of the aircraft. That is an incredible and very sophisticated vision system that would negate the use of night vision goggles. The images are displayed on the control panel....
Understand that I'm speaking from a position of a flight-sim nerd, not an actual pilot and I'm not familiar with exactly what was in the Blackhawk in quesiton...
BUT, flying something like an OH-58 in DCS using the MMS FLIR on the MFD's on the dash at night without NVG's is disorienting as hell, especially if they aren't looking in the direction of flight. NVGs are immensely preferable for low altitude navigation and general SA. The only exception to this I would concede maybe is what the AH-64 has with the helmet mounted display that overlays NVG/FLIR over the top of your view in the eyepiece/visor. I don't think they have that sort of system for the Blackhawk but again I'm not intimately familiar with this model/program.
Imagine turning your headlights off at night and putting a FLIR display on an IPAD on your dash from a roof-mounted pan/tilt/zoom thermal and driving that way. You'll run into static objects, let alone other blacked-out vehicles. JMO
BUT, flying something like an OH-58 in DCS using the MMS FLIR on the MFD's on the dash at night without NVG's is disorienting as hell, especially if they aren't looking in the direction of flight. NVGs are immensely preferable for low altitude navigation and general SA. The only exception to this I would concede maybe is what the AH-64 has with the helmet mounted display that overlays NVG/FLIR over the top of your view in the eyepiece/visor. I don't think they have that sort of system for the Blackhawk but again I'm not intimately familiar with this model/program.
Imagine turning your headlights off at night and putting a FLIR display on an IPAD on your dash from a roof-mounted pan/tilt/zoom thermal and driving that way. You'll run into static objects, let alone other blacked-out vehicles. JMO
"Supposed" to be. She had what, like 450 hrs total time (it was reported)? It definitely looks like a forced-fit (DEI, etc) to me.
For the sake of argument, I'm going to disagree....
The Pilot Flying was a relatively low time pilot. Not low skill... but low time. It takes years and years, and several thousand hours to hone one's skills. And even then, it's easy to make mistakes.
I have thousands of hours and decades of experience flying. And I think that running a training flight like PAT25 did, where they did, is mind boggingly stupid.
Aviation is so safe because of layers and layers of redundancy. The way DCA airport and airspace was operated reduces the layers of safety and redundancy considerably. I said it before and I'll say it again... PAT25 flying the route it was on while DCA was landing runway 33 is tantamount to telling someone (even an "elite" driver) to drive the wrong way on the freeway but don't hit anything.
Last edited:
I didn’t know jack shit at 450 hours and when I flew with newbies that had 450 hours, no matter how “sharp” they were, they didn’t know jack shit either.
I used to fly fixed wing air ambulance equipped with FLIR and we almost never used it. They’re fine for recon but it’s not something you’d want to use to aviate.
PAT callsign doesn't necessarily mean "gold top" Blackhawk....that callsign is also used by Army C12 and UC35As.
When I fly with someone that has 450 hours in type (the specific plane I fly), I'm on pretty high alert. I don't consider them new, but low-experience. Keep in mind that to even get to that stage at my job, that person would have at least 1500 total hours, and would likely have been a Captain at a different airline.
Exactly. To be able to be considered for the Blue Angels, you have to have a minimum of 1500 hrs of CARRIER flight time (not total time). Why are they trying to train a pilot with only 450 hrs to fly the POTUS (or other VIPs) out of DC, covertly, in an emergency situation in such a congested environment?
12th Av Bt doesn't fly POTUS, that job falls to HMX1.
There really isn't a comparison between airshow pilots who are arguably the public face of naval aviation and "working" helo pilots. There are plenty of active military pilots out there with less than 450tt, military aviation isn't anything like civilian aviation.
If there's a no-joke emergency requiring actual continuity of government evacuations, passenger air traffic is going to be ground stopped so there's not going to be planes coming and going at DCA...
There really isn't a comparison between airshow pilots who are arguably the public face of naval aviation and "working" helo pilots. There are plenty of active military pilots out there with less than 450tt, military aviation isn't anything like civilian aviation.
If there's a no-joke emergency requiring actual continuity of government evacuations, passenger air traffic is going to be ground stopped so there's not going to be planes coming and going at DCA...
Blue Angels aren't "airshow" pilots. They are hand-picked from "working" carrier pilots with the most experience to demonstrate the precision that Naval Aviation prides itself in. It is an elite slot, just like this helo mission is supposed to be, if I'm understanding it correctly. They only serve two years, and then go back to the fleet. I get that there are a lot of military pilots with less than 450 hrs, but that doesn't mean that any of them are qualified for this mission. Her check pilot had more than double her time. I wonder what the average TT is for other pilots being trained for this mission - I bet it's considerably more, which was my point.
Then why are they practicing it like it is a covert extraction with passenger traffic uninterrupted? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the mission, because it was presented as covertly extracting government VIPs (including the President) without interrupting commercial traffic, so as not to alert the fact that they are being extracted and giving their location away. Why else would they take all this risk to practice it that way? My understanding is that they are to get them out of there without letting anyone know that they got them out of there. Shut DCA down, and everybody is going to figure it out.
"The 12th Aviation Battalion's primary mission is to provide continuous, time-sensitive rotary wing aviation and technical rescue support to the National Capital Region (NCR), according to Army.mil. This includes supporting senior government officials, including the President, Vice President, and Secretary of Defense, with executive transport, aeromedical evacuation, and operational aviation support. The battalion also handles homeland security, contingency response, and emergency operations within the NCR."
Last edited:
This is incorrect. An FA18 pilot would be lucky to have a thousand hours after he finished his 2 for 10 commitment. The blue angels are widely regarded as the best. The thunderbirds don’t hold a candle to them. It’s basically a fraternity. Youre picked, but youre picked from a bunch of guys who literally do a rush to be selected. There’s a shit ton of politics and ass kissing involved.
You are focusing in on the "rescue" part of the 12AB's mission while glossing over the single biggest aspect of it - "executive transport".
That night they might have been doing a checkride for their "rescue" (continuity of government) mission but the overwhelming majority of what they actually do day-to-day is act as rotary wing Uber drivers for government/Pentagon officials. There's only a handful of gold top VH60Ms, the rest are traditional green UH60s which is what the accident aircraft was.
If one believes that the Blue Angels are the very best operational pilots that Naval Aviation has to offer (I'm absolutely not questioning the skill of the Blue Angels, but the mission they train and fly to perfection isn't operational), the Army equivalent wouldn't be 12AB or USAPAT, it would be 160SOAR.
"Navy and Marine Corps F/A-18 demonstration pilots and naval flight officers are required to have a minimum of 1,250 tactical jet hours and be carrier-qualified. Marine Corps C-130 demonstration pilots are required to have 1,200 flight hours and be an aircraft commander.[16]"
My information may be dated, but was correct at the time. The last time I was visiting the Museum at NAS Pensacola, they said 1500 hrs, but that was probably 15 years ago. I used to go there all the time, and that was the figure given every time. It appears that at some time since then they dropped it to 1250.
However, it appears you may be correct in the end, as when I looked it up there were statements that list no specific number of flight hour requirements. Perhaps they have dropped it? I found the 1250 hr requirement in documents as recent as 2016.
The first female F-18 pilot selected for the Blue Angels happened in 2022, so I'm guessing somewhere between 2016 and 2022 the flight hour requirement may have been quietly dropped, because...you know...
And if true, that would fit in well with my point about this particular training mission accident - lowered standards to fill a demographic quota.
Last edited:
Well, yes. I was focusing on the ACCIDENT, and the pilot they were training for that mission at the time. While I don't doubt any of the above, the point was what they were doing on this night, what the training mission was for, and who they were training for it. It appears to me that it was for the rescue mission. And I’ll say again, to ME, it doesn’t seem to be a mission for a 450 hr pilot.
Last edited:
Above it said they didn't even have their altimeters calibrated. Not flying the east bank to stay further out of flight paths. Like, amature hour leading to all those deaths. Fucking clowns.
Or… follow the precedent set by the JAG in Germany and blame a crew chief who saw the Eagle taxi and should have known there was a problem.
Reading the pilots reaction this morning I’m struck with the statement I AM. In my brief stint working in child abuse and foster care, I to often heard; I AM ITS MOTHER. I’ve found this same arrogance in others. It seems that certain women, (not all I might add but too many) have this arrogance once they reach any position in which they feel power or they are being wronged. The position of, they can’t be wrong so you must be, because I AM (put in your own choice; mother, boss, pilot, Commander, etc). They have this determination that they are beyond reproach.
The male warrant officer warned ms ‘I AM” that they were flying at an improper attitude. Obviously “I am” did not listen.
This may not be the case, but it sure sounds like it.
One way or the other, She Fucked UP and a lot of nice people died.
The male warrant officer warned ms ‘I AM” that they were flying at an improper attitude. Obviously “I am” did not listen.
This may not be the case, but it sure sounds like it.
One way or the other, She Fucked UP and a lot of nice people died.
Had the DEI pilot been at the proper altitude, everyone- 67 souls- would still be alive.
Yes but consider this. Had the helicopter come close to the aircraft and the incident documented, Miss DEI would have been haled as a hero and God’s gift to aviation.
She would have been given awards and a medal. People would be tripping over each other in a race to the microphone to sing her praises.
Look at what happened with the New Zealand Navy captain. Her negligence contributed to the ship running aground. Yet she was praised ad nauseam for getting all the crew members off the good ship Lollipop.
From what I have heard they are blaming the altimeter for being faulty. They said that several other aircraft from the squadron were tested and had the same problem.
Disclaimer: I have not watched the hearings or read the report. Just what was on the radio while working.
Disclaimer: I have not watched the hearings or read the report. Just what was on the radio while working.
In all my years, almost 30 now, of flying I have yet to see a single altimeter be faulty. That’s from c150 to p3 to Airbus and everything in between let alone a whole squadron have the same issue. If you put the wrong setting in it will definitely appear faulty but it was really just pilot error
Altimeters were within spec, the spec is just wide.
Regardless, the Evaluator probably should have terminated that checkride as a failure WAY before they flew into the path of that CR7. The PF was doing a shitty job, but the EP was faaaaar more tolerant than they should have been. Because of who the evaluee was? Maybe...
Regardless, the Evaluator probably should have terminated that checkride as a failure WAY before they flew into the path of that CR7. The PF was doing a shitty job, but the EP was faaaaar more tolerant than they should have been. Because of who the evaluee was? Maybe...
The I AM and the OKAY FINE should have been the point to take over the controls and flunk her again. Fuck your feelings should have been in full effect.
Any investigation into whether the instructor was told to pass her because of her snowflake status? I haven’t followed this very closely and just get my info from this thread and I don’t watch the videos.
My wife holds a Multi-Commercial pilot certificate and after reading this article said an exaspirated "what the actual fuck".
I have seen one altimeter fail, but it wasn’t the altimeter, a dirt dauber put a nest inside the pitot tube. I was off the ground before it became apparent, declared an emergency, came around, landed hot and taxied straight to the maintenance hanger. Why I got off the gound that day is an embarrassment.
But, no ill meaning to Darn Yankee UMSC but the report is pure bullshit.
ANY aviator, who has spent more than two hours in the left seat, or in the right seat in helicopters know the two most important rules. 1. No matter what Fly the aircraft. 2. KEEP YOUR EYES OUT OF THE COCKPIT. Regardless of altitude, eyes should have been out and looking, especially in crowded airspace. Others make errors so, we as pilots have to be watching at all times. Airplanes can usually fly themselves pretty good, but idiots, who have no business with a yoke in their hand can really muck up the works, for everybody.
That would be the obvious choice. But ms commander probably would have raised hell with the Warrant Officer.
As long as the military uses experienced jr officers to do check rides, all rank medallion should be removed by both pilot and evaluator before the check ride preliminaries are started.
I still maintain that despite the lack of airmanship of the evaluee, the EP has the greatest responsibility in this accident - regardless of rank.
He was Pilot Monitoring, he asked to maintain visual separation, he twice said he had traffic in sight but clearly did not.
Shitshow all the way around.
I agree the evaluator is as responsible as the pilot flying because they have a duty to take over if the pilot isn’t doing their job
Yeah, ..., there are multiple levels of normalization of deviance, and groupthink involved in this accident.
The practice of allowing the reduced lateral separation when it is not possible to maintain any vertical separation is controlling. All of the rest contributed, but, had there been a hard, inviolate, adherence to IFR lateral separation, this would not, and could not, have happened.
Sometimes you just gotta say NO!
The practice of allowing the reduced lateral separation when it is not possible to maintain any vertical separation is controlling. All of the rest contributed, but, had there been a hard, inviolate, adherence to IFR lateral separation, this would not, and could not, have happened.
Sometimes you just gotta say NO!
Early in my flight instruction, while making a no landing light landing in darkness, I totally lost the aircraft. My instructor immediately took over the aircraft and finished the landing safely. I knew I was in trouble and made no effort to stop him. I learned a lot that night, make sure before any night flight, the aircraft has good landing lights. (This aircraft had good lights but the instructor was trying to teach me how to land when I have had an electrical failure.)
This is typical and In any ordinary pilot / instructor relationship this would be a given. In the Washington airspace situation, I also agree, flunk the pic and get the aircraft back on the ground safely. But this is an unusual situation. The pic outranks the evaluator by a good margin. (Captain vs Chief Warrant Officer 2). Plus the pic is a woman, who would look unkindly to being told, she is doing a very bad job.
I tend to think this was a totally bad situation for the evaluator. Someone above them both screwed up.
A lot of ego here overplaying common sense.
Similar threads
