It’s interesting. The clear difference between DCA and London is that DCA will allow visual separation on user request, whereas London will not. So this is actually less about route design (although that could certainly use a fresh set of eyes), it’s about the practical application of airspace policies. If DCA had not allowed visual separation the helicopter would have had to hold short of the tidal basin for a gap in traffic most of the way to the Wilson bridge.
Other than the Kings Flight, there aren’t really any operators in London with the clout of the Priority Air Transport Unit. The UK CAA has a pretty jaundiced view of (most) private helicopter operators, and I’m sure that would have informed their approach to airspace policy. The result is an efficient, but highly controlled route system.
DCA I suspect allow very few private operators to use this routing, so they have one client with a lot of clout calling the shots, or certainly one client whose employees are incentivised to explore all flexibility open to them.
There’s an interesting parallel between this collision and the 2014 collision between a helicopter and a crane in central London (Butchers Bill 67 vs 2). The CAA threw the book (probably rightly) at the (dead) pilot, and set about dismantling the operator. Not an option with the DCA accident, although there are some signs that legislators are taking an interest in encouraging the FAA to examine the other heliroutes in the USA for similar pitfalls.
Here’s hoping.
Last edited by Wide Mouth Frog; 19th February 2025 at 17:07.
Reason: Not just 33 traffic, ALL traffic inbound.