Originally Posted by
Musician
What was the rationale behind putting the helicopter route that low anyway?
not intending to be cynical, but it makes the helos blend in nicely with the background, sort of out of the way for rwy 01/19 traffic (=95% of total)
I wonder how many pilots on rwy 01/19 really perceived this section of the routing as unsafe (when flown correctly = hugging the shoreline at max 200ft).
A nuisance, undoubtedly. And the whole helicopter traffic surrounding DCA, pretty unsafe, I can understand.
And then we have nighttime...
Originally Posted by
Musician
Shouldn't aircraft have 1000 ft ground/obstacle clearance in built-up areas, in general? and 500 ft. otherwise?
§ 91.119 d 1:
A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA
Originally Posted by
Musician
That route forced helicopters below 200 ft., how can that not be unsafe?
taking the nearby airport out of the equation, I wonder if any of the professional operators on this route 4 section, ever felt that this low-level flying was (unnecessarily) unsafe