Air Traffic Controllers Warned US Army Helicopter Ahead Of Crash

Yes, not nearly keeping up with real inflation. It even less than than what it should be in the cheap cost of living regions, which should be around $50K +, probably lot higher now with the Biden inflation scams now running amuck.
Fascism, doesn't work. Price controls don't work.
 
I'm saying that controlling the air traffic is the air traffic controller's job and responsibility. Prior to the collision, the air traffic controller needed to be controlling the air traffic by expressly informing the helicopter pilot that he was on a collision course and how specifically to adjust course. If the air traffic controller had done that, and the helicopter pilot had simply ignored the controller, then it would have been the helicopter pilot's fault. As it stands, the air traffic controller did not control the air traffic and allowed a collision. The DEI hires don't appear to have any wiggle room.
Trump never blamed the crash on DEI.
 
I acknowledge that the helicopter pilot made an error. Nonetheless, we're not talking about who's at fault for the pilot flying visual; that would be the helicopter pilot. We're discussing who's at fault for the collision. That falls squarely on the ATC who was responsible for controlling that traffic.


He should have been told to change course.
The fault appears to be BOTH. Of course, the NTSB investigation will enlighten what happened. The helicopter was VFR and should've changed course already.
 
in what ATC manual are you getting that supposed directive from?????
He is partially correct. JO 7110.65

ATC has strict phrasing in warning of traffic in the vicinity, and they should use that phrasing (they didn't, apparently).
ATC also has strict procedures in handling traffic in critical proximity. They should use those procedures, which IBdaMann correctly pointed out. They didn't.

The helicopter was operating VFR, placing the pilot of that aircraft responsible to see and avoid all traffic. She didn't.
It WAS operating inside a class B airspace, putting ATC also at responsibility for failing to follow procedure and issue proper traffic advisories and warnings.
 
They did provide the appropriate response. The helicopter pilot requested visual separation and confirmed they saw the flight. There was literally nothing ATC could have done.
Blatant lie. ATC is REQUIRED to follow proper procedures. It didn't.
She clearly fucked up, yes, by requesting visual separation and claiming she saw the flight. Not ATC's failure here
ATC is partially to blame. They failed to follow proper procedures. They failed to issue a traffic advisory correctly. They AGAIN failed to issue a course change advisory.
 
thanks. and you don't think that the verbal instruction to follow BEHIND the aircraft would be considered within that policy???
No.

Telling ANY aircraft to 'follow behind' another is not only an incorrect traffic advisory or traffic warning, it CAN cause a mid-air. It's not the first time that sort of thing has happened!

The helicopter was not landing at DCA, and would not use the same landing pattern as any other aircraft even if they were. It's a HELICOPTER!
The helicopter was transiting DCA airspace, operating VFR (pilot responsible for maintaining safe separation), and in contact with ATC (because it was in class B airspace). ATC accepted the service, making them RESPONSIBLE for any errors in traffic advisories such as phrasing or procedures. IBdaMann is correct. The line of authority for the operation of any aircraft is VERY clearly specified in the FAA regulations.
 
Fascism, doesn't work. Price controls don't work.

Yes, corporatism fails too;' it's just another form of socialism. They like socializing the costs while privatizing the profits, hence why the U.S. has a long history of crime, poverty, and union agitation. The Red Chinese get along great with the owners of the big multi-nationals and retailers like Walmart; they all see eye to eye when it comes to labor racketeering and monopolies, being technocrats. Right wingers will continue to lose to left wingers and corporatists as long they insist on screwing over workers and small businesses. They really hate real competition and proles.
 
Yes, corporatism fails too;' it's just another form of socialism.
A corporation is not fascism. Redefinition fallacy.
They like socializing the costs while privatizing the profits,
A corporation is not fascism. Obviously you know nothing about price discovery.
hence why the U.S. has a long history of crime, poverty, and union agitation.
Every nation has a long history of crime and poverty. Unions are thuggery.
The Red Chinese get along great with the owners of the big multi-nationals and retailers like Walmart;
Most items at Walmart are domestically produced. International trade is not fascism. Redefinition fallacy.
they all see eye to eye when it comes to labor racketeering and monopolies, being technocrats.
Labor is not racketeering. Walmart is not a monopoly. Monopolies are inherently unstable in the market. It won't be long before they get out maneuvered by smaller startups. Do you know what a 'techocrat' is??
Right wingers will continue to lose to left wingers
They didn't. Trump was elected President. Vance was elected Vice-President. The Supreme Court is primarily conservative. Both the House and the Senate have Republican majorities. Most of the governors in the United States are not republicans. Most State legislatures in the United States are not Republican controlled.

The Left lost, dude, more than at any other time in history!
and corporatists as long they insist on screwing over workers and small buinesses.
Many small businesses ARE corporations. I'm one of them!
I don't screw over my workers. They are paid market rates for what they do and they do their job quite well. I don't tolerate slackoffs.
They really hate real competition and proles.
EVERY business is in competition. Even monopolies!
 
I acknowledge that the helicopter pilot made an error. Nonetheless, we're not talking about who's at fault for the pilot flying visual; that would be the helicopter pilot. We're discussing who's at fault for the collision. That falls squarely on the ATC who was responsible for controlling that traffic.


He should have been told to change course.
Yes...ATC screwed up. So did the helicopter pilot.
 
The controller cant fly the aircraft, and it all breaks down if there is no trust.....lying to the controller was the original sin here in my opinion based upon what I know.

I will continue to take in and process information.
WRONG! ATC failed to follow proper procedure. No lie by anyone was indicated.
 
This was either copter pilot incompetence/hubris or this was a terrorist attack.....for sure the copter lied to the controller who has to be able to trust what the pilots say unless he can be sure that they are lying....I am not willing to blame the controller for this.
The NTSB investigation will likely put part of the blame on ATC...for a reason. ATC apparently failed to provide any proper traffic advisory or traffic conflict advisory.
 
This was either copter pilot incompetence/hubris or this was a terrorist attack.....for sure the copter lied to the controller who has to be able to trust what the pilots say unless he can be sure that they are lying....I am not willing to blame the controller for this.
No terrorist attack. BOTH pilot and controller share blame.
 
US Department of Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
Order JO 7110.65W

Chapter 2. General Control
Section 1. General
2−1−1. ATC SERVICE
The primary purpose of the ATC system is to prevent a collision between aircraft operating in the system and to provide a safe, orderly and expeditiousflow of traffic, and to provide support for National Security and Homeland Defense.

Section 1. General
2−1−2. DUTY PRIORITY
a. Give first priority to separating aircraft and issuing safety alerts as required in this order. Good judgment must be used in prioritizing all other provisions of this order based on the requirements of the situation at hand.

Section 1. General
2−1−6. SAFETY ALERT
Issue a safety alert to an aircraft if you are aware the aircraft is in a position/altitude that, in your judgment,places it in unsafe proximity to terrain, obstructions,or other aircraft.
NOTE−1. The issuance of a safety alert is a first priority (see para 2−1−2, Duty Priority) once the controller observes and recognizes a situation of unsafe aircraft proximity to terrain, obstacles, or other aircraft.


Chapter 3. Airport Traffic Control− Terminal

Section 2. Visual Signals
3−2−2. WARNING SIGNAL
Direct a general warning signal, alternating red and green, to aircraft or vehicle operators, as appropriate,
when: NOTE− The warning signal is not a prohibitive signal and can be followed by any other light signal, as circumstances
permit.

a. Aircraft are converging and a collision hazard exists.

Pilot/Controller Glossary
PCG A−1
A
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SERVICE [ICAO]− A service provided for the purpose of a preventing collisions: 1. Between aircraft; and 2. On the maneuvering area between aircraftand obstructions. b. Expediting and maintaining an orderly flow of air traffic.

RESOLUTION ADVISORY−A display indication given to the pilot by the traffic alert and collisionavoidance systems (TCAS II) recommending amaneuver to increase vertical separation relative to an intruding aircraft. Positive, negative, and verticalspeed limit (VSL) advisories constitute the resolutionadvisories. A resolution advisory is also classified as corrective or preventive

SAFETY LOGIC SYSTEM ALERTS−a. ALERT− An actual situation involving two real safety logic tracks (aircraft/aircraft, aircraft/vehicle, or aircraft/other tangible object) that safety logic has predicted will result in an imminent collision, based upon the current set of Safety Logic parameters.
Visual signal is not required if the aircraft is in radio contact with ATC, which the helicopter was.
Ch2 prevails.
 
Back
Top