DC Black Hawk vs Plane crash.

#52
#52
Looking at the approach plate to Rwy 33, the recommended altitude at 2.0 miles from the landing runway threshold is 710 ft. That checks since the American CRJ was at 350ft, so that says they were about one mile from the approach end of the runway, well inside the final approach fix.

It is common to see military helicopters flying up and down the Potomac. In this instance, with an aircraft on final to that runway, not sure why the helicopter would have been that close to the approach end of the runway at the same time as the RJ after being told to maintain visual separation. Need to know more about what was being communicated between crew members on the army helo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbh and StarRaider
#54
#54
jwells said:
Andy Ogles is wondering if it's DEI. This f****ng guy can't get rode out on ethics soon enough.
Click to expand...
Obviously a completely inappropriate question at this point and all the focus should be on those poor lost souls and the reasons why this particular helo collided with this particular jet.

Ogles question concerning a higher accident rate among military DEI pilots is an issue per 2 of the military pilots I know personally. Obviously not a big enough sample size to prove anything, but no possibilities should be removed from making air travel safer including highest standards required for all pilots regards of race, gender, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbh and StarRaider
#55
#55
walkenvol said:
Obviously a completely inappropriate question at this point and all the focus should be on those poor lost souls and the reasons why this particular helo collided with this particular jet.

Ogles question concerning a higher accident rate among military DEI pilots is an issue per 2 of the military pilots I know personally. Obviously not a big enough sample size to prove anything, but no possibilities should be removed from making air travel safer including highest standards required for all pilots regards of race, gender, etc.
Click to expand...
What's a DEI pilot? I have seen nothing that says standards have at all been lowered for pilots based on DEI.

I would think Elon not pressuring the head of the FAA to resign, Trump freezing Air Traffic Controller hiring, etc are bigger threats to our air safety.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#56
#56
Vol737 said:
Looking at the approach plate to Rwy 33, the recommended altitude at 2.0 miles from the landing runway threshold is 710 ft. That checks since the American CRJ was at 350ft, so that says they were about one mile from the approach end of the runway, well inside the final approach fix.

It is common to see military helicopters flying up and down the Potomac. In this instance, with an aircraft on final to that runway, not sure why the helicopter would have been that close to the approach end of the runway at the same time as the RJ after being told to maintain visual separation. Need to know more about what was being communicated between crew members on the army helo.
Click to expand...
If it’s accurate as stated on page 1 of this thread that the allowed helo ceiling is 200 feet in that location then why was the helo at apx 350’ for the crash? Seems like that’s the core issue here?
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary
#59
#59
jwells said:
What's a DEI pilot? I have seen nothing that says standards have at all been lowered for pilots based on DEI.

I would think Elon not pressuring the head of the FAA to resign, Trump freezing Air Traffic Controller hiring, etc are bigger threats to our air safety.
Click to expand...
I can only speak to my limited personal experience. Many of the military pilots are academy grads. Upon graduation the available career paths are selected by the grads based mainly on class ranking. Aviation billets are in high demand and snatched up quickly. When both the ones I know graduated, their class rank was such that they went aviation. Some of those billets were reserved to go to the highest ranked graduating females. I believe this is the DEI reference being made. I’m not in military aviation and only have this very limited knowledge of 2 academy grads who did go aviation. TIFWIW

PS. Both of these military aviators said in their world the female pilots have a higher rate of training accidents/ near accidents. The females weren’t forced to bomb out of flight training for the same mistakes the males were disqualified due to understood requirements within the military to diversify their pilot officers. Again TIFWIW which is only 2 people’s point of view and not a scientific study.
 
Last edited:
#65
#65
jwells said:
Never let a tragedy go to waste.

Hell of a piece of ******** by a man who has apparently placed a freeze on ATC hiring.
Click to expand...
The urge to blame every single bad thing on "DEI", in other words "there were minorities/women working there, and I say they were unqualified and this is their fault," is depressing
 
#67
#67
walkenvol said:
If it’s accurate as stated on page 1 of this thread that the allowed helo ceiling is 200 feet in that location then why was the helo at apx 350’ for the crash? Seems like that’s the core issue here?
Click to expand...
Altimeter setting possibly could have been dialed in incorrectly by the Army helo, but they still shouldn't be crossing a final approach course of an active runway at that altitude that close to the approach end. Also, required vertical separation is 1,000 ft. That's why ATC told them to maintain visual lateral separation since the vertical separation could not be provided or maintained with one aircraft assigned an altitude and the other aircraft had been cleared for an approach.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StarRaider and walkenvol
#68
#68
NashVol11 said:
The urge to blame every single bad thing on "DEI", in other words "there were minorities/women working there, and I say they were unqualified and this is their fault," is depressing
Click to expand...
A guy on FB the other day let slip "if they'd just hired the white guy...." and when called out on it claimed he didn't say that, but instead said he meant the most qualified. Then deleted the white guy post. It's easy to read through the dog-whistles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NashVol11
#70
#70
85SugarVol said:
Is literally everything a conspiracy to you?
Click to expand...
Is literally nothing a conspiracy to you? especially after the last decade of insanity? What angers you about people finding unusual circumstances, unusual and asking questions? Why do you always knee jerk defend the status quo? This was an extremely odd set of events, and hopefully those investigating it have a little bit more ability to ask questions then blindly accepting any and everything they hear from the MSM or official sources. This very well may just have been an accident. But if so it's a one in a million set of events.

A "Conspiracy" is merely 2 or more individuals conspiring to achieve an objective. There is nothing irrational or odd about the word. It is literally the process on which the majority of human history has taken place. The American Revolution was a conspiracy. We did in fact conspire to leave the British Empire and create a new country. 9/11 was a conspiracy regardless of who you beleieved was responsible. Covering up alternative treatments in order to push MRNA experiemental medication under emergency provisions was a conspiracy wether or not you think that was a good or bad thing. It is irrefutable that censorship was used to stifle questions, and any other form of treatment in order to push a treatment that was highly profitable, but ultimately not tested, or safe. The Russian hoax was very much a conspiracy and involved many intelligence and politicans LYING openly in order to politically work against a candidate. There is nothing wrong with the word "conspiracy" ...or unsuaul about it. Anyone who studies history understands more often then not conspiracies guide history. Anyone who keeps track of buisiness sees conspiracies every day....call it "wheeling and dealing", but it's the same idea, men of power will make plans in secret in order to achieve desired results. The weaponization of the word "conspiracy" or "conspiracy theory" can be demonstrably shown to have been a policy and propoganda line by the CIA to squelch questioning the events of the JFK assassination. before that "conspiracy theory" was hardly ever used. Their own documents show this was a tactic to shut people up. hilariously they literally used a conspiracy that is public knowledge now "Operation mocking bird" to push that phrase. You now proudly weild that phrase to deride and mock people questioning a narrative.

I did not actually state anything about a conspiracy here. Rather I posted a topic on the crash as it is news and the very unusaul circumstance, as i think there are valid questions to be asked. My literal statement was to the effect "this seems fishy". Really went out on a limb didn't I? when even the pilot expert on CNN said the same. My real question is why is your natural tendency to mock any questioning of main stream narrative? Why are you annoyed by people finding suspicious circumstances suspicious? What does it matter to you? Why do you feel obligated to attack questioning narrative by a media conglomoration that has for the past decade constantly tried to bend politics and narrative for political gain? I'm not out of pocket here... I find it weird some people's need to defend being naive. Sorry if questioning events hurts your feels. Get over it.
 
Last edited:
#71
#71
Have they confirmed or released the names of the American team members on board? My wife follows skating and is asking. I haven't seen any listed.
 
#72
#72
Sgt_Nick_Fury said:
Is literally nothing a conspiracy to you? especially after the last decade of insanity? What angers you about people finding unusual circumstances, unusual and asking questions? Why do you always knee jerk defend the status quo? This was an extremely odd set of events, and hopefully those investigating it have a little bit more ability to ask questions then blindly accepting any and everything they hear from the MSM or official sources. This very well may just have been an accident. But if so it's a one in a million set of events.

A "Conspiracy" is merely 2 or more individuals conspiring to achieve an objective. There is nothing irrational or odd about the word. It is literally the process on which the majority of human history has taken place. The American Revolution was a conspiracy. We did in fact conspire to leave the British Empire and create a new country. 9/11 was a conspiracy regardless of who you beleieved was responsible. Covering up alternative treatments in order to push MRNA experiemental medication under emergency provisions was a conspiracy wether or not you think that was a good or bad thing. It is irrefutable that censorship was used to stifle questions, and any other form of treatment in order to push a treatment that was highly profitable, but ultimately not tested, or safe. The Russian hoax was very much a conspiracy and involved many intelligence and politicans LYING openly in order to politically work against a candidate. There is nothing wrong with the word "conspiracy" ...or unsuaul about it. Anyone who studies history understands more often then not conspiracies guide history. Anyone who keeps track of buisiness sees conspiracies every day....call it "wheeling and dealing", but it's the same idea, men of power will make plans in secret in order to achieve desired results. The weaponization of the word "conspiracy" or "conspiracy theory" can be demonstrably shown to have been a policy and propoganda line by the CIA to squelch questioning the events of the JFK assassination. before that "conspiracy theory" was hardly ever used. Their own documents show this was a tactic to shut people up. hilariously they literally used a conspiracy that is public knowledge now "Operation mocking bird" to push that phrase. You now proudly weild that phrase to deride and mock people questioning a narrative.

I did not actually state anything about a conspiracy here. Rather I posted a topic on the crash as it is news and the very unusaul circumstance, as i think there are valid questions to be asked. My literal statement was to the effect "this seems fishy". Really went out on a limb didn't I when even the pilot expert on CNN said the same. My real question is why is your natural tendency to mock any questioning of main stream narrative? Why are you annoyed by people finding suspicious circumstances suspicious? What does it matter to you? Why do you feel obligated to attack questioning narrative by a media conglomoration that has for the past decade constantly tried to bend politics and narrative for political gain? I'm not out of pocket here... I find it weird some people's need to defend being naive. Sorry if questioning events hurts your feels. Get over it.
Click to expand...
Sugar's question checks out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85SugarVol and NashVol11
#74
#74
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and StarRaider
#75
#75
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary and VOLS INC.
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top