Strictly speaking, NONE of the three names have been officially given, so to that extent, there is no mystery.
That two have more social media discussion is not official.
The only mission specific item calling for NVG use would appear to me would be the assumption that power is out in DC and blackout conditions are present. Hard to train for unless the grid is purposely taken down for the training. (And THAT would never happen.)Kyle Field Shade Chaser said:
multiple military pilots have said it would NOT be normal to wear night vision in a city environment. not even when in a training flight. would be very unlikely they had the night vision on.
JobSecurity said:
Staff when you delete this can you leave an edit in the post so people stop reposting it because they haven't seen it??
[OK. The post that was removed above is a tweet about the pilot being a trans. People should not repost that tweet unless they want to incur our wrath -- Staff]
Seems like another case of the helo being way above the altitude ceiling for the route they were on. Is it normal for pilots to just ignore the ceilings like that with no repercussions.Kenneth_2003 said:PAT11 repeatedly confirmed Visual Separation to identified traffic.Jbob04 said:
Here is the near miss from the day before the accident.
PAT11 had TWO (edit THREE) Conflict Advisories in that one video. Neither got a callback/response from ATC.
When Brickyard 4514 called the go around they had 800ft separation. TCAS (as I understand) does not give a Resolution Advisory (RA) below 1000ft, but they were still at 1400 and PAT11 was at 600.
txags92 said:Seems like another case of the helo being way above the altitude ceiling for the route they were on. Is it normal for pilots to just ignore the ceilings like that with no repercussions.Kenneth_2003 said:PAT11 repeatedly confirmed Visual Separation to identified traffic.Jbob04 said:
Here is the near miss from the day before the accident.
PAT11 had TWO (edit THREE) Conflict Advisories in that one video. Neither got a callback/response from ATC.
When Brickyard 4514 called the go around they had 800ft separation. TCAS (as I understand) does not give a Resolution Advisory (RA) below 1000ft, but they were still at 1400 and PAT11 was at 600.
This is just me spit-balling and I would love the military pilots here to slap me down if needed, but would there be any chance of them using an NVG analog to allow them to get as close as possible to a blackout evacuation? Something to restrict their view similar to NVGs but without being blinded from the ambient lighting?aggiehawg said:The only mission specific item calling for NVG use would appear to me would be the assumption that power is out in DC and blackout conditions are present. Hard to train for unless the grid is purposely taken down for the training. (And THAT would never happen.)Kyle Field Shade Chaser said:
multiple military pilots have said it would NOT be normal to wear night vision in a city environment. not even when in a training flight. would be very unlikely they had the night vision on.
So am not seeing any reason why NVGs though present were in use given the ambient light present at the time.
Am I missing something?
It was reported yesterday that her body was recovered. That is when it became public knowledge that the pilot was a SHE.GAC06 said:
Haven't they only recovered one if the helo crew? There are processes to follow notifying NOK, declaring them missing then presumed dead if they aren't recovered.
Ellis Wyatt said:It was reported yesterday that her body was recovered. That is when it became public knowledge that the pilot was a SHE.GAC06 said:
Haven't they only recovered one if the helo crew? There are processes to follow notifying NOK, declaring them missing then presumed dead if they aren't recovered.
Looks like they were crossing over Arlington Cemetery transiting from Route 5 to Route 1. NE End of Route 5 looks like 400' ceiling if I read the chart right, and 200' over Arlington Cemetery and 200' on Route 1 until they reach Memorial Bridge where it goes up to 300. If they were at 600, they were 200-400 over the ceiling for their route.Kenneth_2003 said:txags92 said:Seems like another case of the helo being way above the altitude ceiling for the route they were on. Is it normal for pilots to just ignore the ceilings like that with no repercussions.Kenneth_2003 said:PAT11 repeatedly confirmed Visual Separation to identified traffic.Jbob04 said:
Here is the near miss from the day before the accident.
PAT11 had TWO (edit THREE) Conflict Advisories in that one video. Neither got a callback/response from ATC.
When Brickyard 4514 called the go around they had 800ft separation. TCAS (as I understand) does not give a Resolution Advisory (RA) below 1000ft, but they were still at 1400 and PAT11 was at 600.
Have to go back and see what the actual ceilings are. I'm pretty sure the 200 is only off the approach end of RW33
Not the root cause, but was a contributing factor. Root cause appears to be helo flying outside of (west of) and above the ceiling for the approved route.v1rotate92 said:
Controller staffing wasn't the cause. Helo called traffic in sight and requested and was approved visual separation
Controller even queried him/she again. ATC controllers will always request more staffing. It's the nature of bureaucracy. The congestion is an issue and procedure was flawed but the current Breitbart headline is great for the controller union
Stat Monitor Repairman said:
Makes sense from a policy standpoint. We all spoiled over the past decade by the expectation of instantaneous information.
Kenneth_2003 said:
Edited to fix the left/right turn typo...
Yeah, I didn't mention NVG's because I've never seen confirmed they were using them on this portion of the flight though they could have been.
Also, yes PAT25 was not on the East bank. they were at best most likely over the river centerline. A quick Google Maps measurement, projecting RW 33 CL to the CL of the river, shows river CL to East bank to be ~1,800ft. I would be interested to know how "precise" those Route marks are meant to be. My gut/initial reaction would say it means stick to the side of the river the mark is on. The big fat mark on the map would scale up 500-700 feet wide in real life. Either way, again, being closer to the bank vs the CL increases the deconfliction.
The helo crew bears the blame for this tragedy.
There was a discussion of flight hours earlier in the thread (maybe 10-12 pages ago?). Now that we are out of the wars, flight hours are not accumulating as fast as they had been during deployments, so those numbers are probably not as low as they would otherwise seem relative to what was standard 5-10 years ago for an experienced pilot.Whaler said:
Apparently one helicopter pilot had 1,000 hours and the other had 500 hours. That's not a ton of time. But more importantly, I wonder how much time they had in that type of aircraft (Blackhawk Helo) and in those conditions (night). A good chunk of their total time was very likely in fixed wing aircraft and probably not at night... just curious.
It seems pretty clear the helicopter shouldn't have been at that altitude, and in the jet's flight path on final approach. So, pretty sure it was pilot error in the helicopter. Inexperience in those conditions may have played a part.
If a suicide mission, you mean random, in that any plane would have done? It just doesn't seem remarkable.v1rotate92 said:
The RJ flight path is predictable. You know the RJ will be at 6-700ft 2-3 miles from runway touchdown point but I don't think this is a suicide mission. I hope not
probably about as many as it took for it happen in real lifeStat Monitor Repairman said:
Hypothetical question:
If you put a highly skilled pilot in a simulator set-up under identical conditions, how many tries would it take for the Blackhawk pilot to replicate what happened here?
Yeah, mode is just a selection on the transponder. they can go back and forth from S, A, etc. Believe they are number in the hawk, 1,2,3,4,5,S and probably some sub-modes.Tailgate88 said:
Regarding whether Blackhawks have ADSB... this just flew over my house. FWIW.
https://globe.adsbexchange.com/
That's the essence of the argument against this being a pre-planned intentional act.sts7049 said:probably about as many as it took for it happen in real lifeStat Monitor Repairman said:
Hypothetical question:
If you put a highly skilled pilot in a simulator set-up under identical conditions, how many tries would it take for the Blackhawk pilot to replicate what happened here?
Do you mean the Precision Runway Monitored approaches? I thought SFO got rid of those a few years ago.v1rotate92 said:
Simultaneous close parallel approaches at 28L and 28R at SFO gets sketchy sometimes when the aircraft landing 28R overshoots final and not on speed. Check out the SFO procedure on flight tracker.