The instructor evaluator would take the aircraft as they are likely considered the PIC. I know my buddies in the Air Force will say rank doesnt mean anything, within reason, in regards to operating the aircraft. They have specific aircraft commander qualifications. They could have a full bird in the right seat new to the aircraft with a LT in the left seat as A/C commander. The LT is in charge during operations of the a/c. I think the Army has the same so a CWO, even though subordinate to a commissioned officer, could/would be the aircraft commander. In the case we are discussing im pretty sure the CWO was the aircraft commander as he was acting as an instructor/evaluator.
Plane crash At Reagan National
- Thread starter Shoreglide
- Start date
The instructor evaluator would take the aircraft as they are likely considered the PIC. I know my buddies in the Air Force will say rank doesnt mean anything, within reason, in regards to operating the aircraft. They have specific aircraft commander qualifications. They could have a full bird in the right seat new to the aircraft with a LT in the left seat as A/C commander. The LT is in charge during operations of the a/c. I think the Army has the same so a CWO, even though subordinate to a commissioned officer, could/would be the aircraft commander. In the case we are discussing im pretty sure the CWO was the aircraft commander as he was acting as an instructor/evaluator.
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.
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...
Similar threads
