DC Airline Disaster

[mtdjed]

How could it not happen? Air Controller overload, Interlapping military and commercial flights at nearby airports, military night training flights in overloaded commercial airport landing paths. Government, congressional, executive desire for easy transport from midtown DC. Time for some intelligent decisions. Eliminate overlapping flightpath air facilities. It will not get better unless a major shift is made. Don't allow congress or executive civilians to influence decisions for convenience

[BrianL99]

How could it not happen? Air Controller overload, Interlapping military and commercial flights at nearby airports, military night training flights in overloaded commercial airport landing paths. Government, congressional, executive desire for easy transport from midtown DC. Time for some intelligent decisions. Eliminate overlapping flightpath air facilities. It will not get better unless a major shift is made. Don't allow congress or executive civilians to influence decisions for convenience


There is no "overlapping flight paths" or "interlapping flights". What's an "executive civilian" ?

The airspace in that area is well known and specific. This crash will mostly likely end up being attributed to simple human error. Based on the current information, the Blackhawk was in the wrong place and erroneously informed ATC that they had the CRJ in view.

That BH was manned by 3 professionals, at least 2 of which were qualified pilots. To mis-identify a commercial aircraft under those circumstances, is inexcusable. ATC and both aircraft should have received a CA warning (Collision Avoidance) and both ATC & the BH should have taken immediate action. It appears the CRJ was exactly where it was supposed to be and not in a position to take evasive action. Also, with a Separation Error of that magnitude, there was likely a audible warning in the tower (at least that's how it used to work.)

In my opinion, all this noise about the "system", is simply that ... noise. The system usually works perfectly fine, it's the people who fail. ATC for assuming the BH pilots actually had the CRJ in view (even though he had a CA warning) and the BH pilots for not being vigilant.

[Boffin]

107278

[Bill14564]

There is no "overlapping flight paths" or "interlapping flights". What's an "executive civilian" ?

The airspace in that area is well known and specific. This crash will mostly likely end up being attributed to simple human error. Based on the current information, the Blackhawk was in the wrong place and erroneously informed ATC that they had the CRJ in view.

That BH was manned by 3 professionals, at least 2 of which were qualified pilots. To mis-identify a commercial flight under those circumstances, is inexcusable. ATC and both aircraft should have received a CA warning (Collision Avoidance) and both ATC & the BH should have taken immediate action. It appears the CRJ was exactly where it was supposed to be and not in a position to take evasive action. Also, with a Separation Error of that magnitude, there was likely a audible warning in the tower (at least that's how it used to work.)

In my opinion, all this noise about the "system", is simply that ... noise. The system usually works perfectly fine, it's the people who fail. ATC for assuming the BH pilots actually had the CRJ in view (even though he had a CA warning) and the BH pilots for not being vigilant.

A few assumptions there that have yet to be proven.

In the end, it is almost always human error. The “system” is there to try to remove as many chances for human error as possible and to reduce their impact if they do occur. If parts of the system are removed then more errors can occur with serious effects.

The second controller, fewer flights to reduce workload, and more of a buffer between allowed airspace would all have helped.

I wonder if the collision avoidance mentioned is effective or even active on final approach and under 500 feet.

[golfing eagles]

A few assumptions there that have yet to be proven.

In the end, it is almost always human error. The “system” is there to try to remove as many chances for human error as possible and to reduce their impact if they do occur. If parts of the system are removed then more errors can occur with serious effects.

The second controller, fewer flights to reduce workload, and more of a buffer between allowed airspace would all have helped.

I wonder if the collision avoidance mentioned is effective or even active on final approach and under 500 feet.

I guess the real question, and probably the proximate cause of the collision, is why was the BH with a celling of 200 feet at 350 feet?

[Bill14564]

I guess the real question, and probably the proximate cause of the collision, is why was the BH with a celling of 200 feet at 350 feet?

And why wasn’t that noticed and both aircraft alerted?

[golfing eagles]

And why wasn’t that noticed and both aircraft alerted?

Which then goes to the unanswered question: Who was the air traffic controller responsible, what was his qualifications and experience level?

[opinionist]

I watched a video of the crash.
It looked like a helicopter under remote control being used as a missile.

[Caymus]

The airport is very small for the passenger volume and is landlocked so is unlikely to expand. It has been years since I used it, but I remember my flights taking off at steep angles to meet regulations.

[Bassdeer]

I watched a video of the crash.
It looked like a helicopter under remote control being used as a missile.

That's a reach. Blackhawk wrong altitude, not enough eyes in control tower.

Close case.:bigbow:

[Blueblaze]

As a pilot myself, it's inconceivable that tower would give clearance to cross an active runway's glidepath under any conditions, much less at night, with a commercial airliner on short-final to an airport practically down-town in the nation's capital -- and to a military helicopter on a night-training mission wearing night-vision goggles that restrict peripheral vision 80%!

No tower would give me that clearance on a clear day in Tulsa, if I was the only thing on radar!

But apparently that's considered routine at Reagan International. And whichever gooberment moron approved that should do hard time for the manslaughter of 67 innocent lives.

[mtdjed]

[QUOTE=BrianL99;2406053]There is no "overlapping flight paths" or "interlapping flights". What's an "executive civilian" ?

No Overlapping flight paths? Two AC Crash into each other. Latitude and longitude within their prescribed path, but one was too high due to human error. Same type issue happened previous day but no crash.

Yes, human error either in AC or Controller direction. Nighttime training mission. If you look at how to minimize the impact of Human error, wouldn't you eliminate possibility that an error of 200 feet could cause a disaster.
This airport is in the right place for Executive civilians such as congress and government. But for safety, shouldn't be in a place where 200 foot human error kills people.

[Taltarzac725]

How could it not happen? Air Controller overload, Interlapping military and commercial flights at nearby airports, military night training flights in overloaded commercial airport landing paths. Government, congressional, executive desire for easy transport from midtown DC. Time for some intelligent decisions. Eliminate overlapping flightpath air facilities. It will not get better unless a major shift is made. Don't allow congress or executive civilians to influence decisions for convenience

That airport gets a lot of traffic. This kind of accident rarely happens. It is a tragedy.


Hopefully the investigation can find the cause and do something concrete to prevent this from happening.

[golfing eagles]

That airport gets a lot of traffic. This kind of accident rarely happens. It is a tragedy.


Hopefully the investigation can find the cause and do something concrete to prevent this from happening.

Well, I would think that helicopters staying below their 200 foot ceiling would be a good start

[Taltarzac725]

Well, I would think that helicopters staying below their 200 foot ceiling would be a good start

Why did it do that would be my question.

[asianthree]

Why did it do that be my question.

Ugly rumors on X, hopefully have been reported and removed

[Arctic Fox]

I expect it will be shown to be "Human Error", but why have a set-up like this that makes the likelihood of a human error so high?

With Dulles being less than 30 miles from Ronald Reagan, why aren't all of the "commercial" flights limited to that airport?

Most capital cities now have a high speed rail connection between the city center and the nearest major airport.

[manaboutown]

Reagan has been a busy airport for many years. In the late 1960s I worked as a Patent Examiner on the 10th floor of a building in Crystal City. My office overlooked the airport and it was busy even back then. Dulles went into service in 1962 but members of Congress wanted to keep Reagan open as it was very convenient for them. They even had their own private parking lot there - probably still do. During Commencement in June of 1970 on the Georgetown campus lawn it was very difficult to hear the speakers as planes taking off from Reagan (National back then) kept flying over.

[BrianL99]

Reagan has been a busy airport for many years. In the late 1960s I worked as a Patent Examiner on the 10th floor of a building in Crystal City. My office overlooked the airport and it was busy even back then. Dulles went into service in 1962 but members of Congress wanted to keep Reagan open as it was very convenient for them. They even had their own private parking lot there - probably still do. During Commencement in June of 1970 on the Georgetown campus lawn it was very difficult to hear the speakers as planes taking off from Reagan (National back then) kept flying over.


Reagan is the 26th busiest airport in the US, according to Top 100 US Airports FlightRadar24 | Plane Flight Tracker (https://www.planeflighttracker.com/2014/02/top-100-us-airports-flightradar24.html) (which tracks in real time). The real problem isn't that Reagan is so busy, but that the Washington/NY corridor is the busiest air space in the USA.

Washington DC itself, probably being the most congested (& complicated) in the world.

[BrianL99]

I expect it will be shown to be "Human Error", but why have a set-up like this that makes the likelihood of a human error so high?

With Dulles being less than 30 miles from Ronald Reagan, why aren't all of the "commercial" flights limited to that airport?

Most capital cities now have a high speed rail connection between the city center and the nearest major airport.


LaGuardia & Kennedy are only 8 miles apart and they're both busier than Reagan. People don't realize how many airports are out there and how close they are.

When I took off from my home base airport, when I was at 6B6, if I climbed to 10,000 feet (2 miles) and lost an engine, there were at least 8-10 airports I could glide to.

[Moderator]

It is intolerable to make any derogatory comments about any person based on religion, race, age, gender, etc.

Please remember this is a large community with many members from all parts of the world, representing all people.

Please refrain from posting messages that contain potential hot topics known as polarizing arguments.

A tone of “kindness” is appreciated for all discussions.

[npwalters]

I'm a former Army helicopter pilot qualified in all models of the Blackhawk. I have over 8000 flight hours and a significant number of NVG hours.

It is difficult under NVGs to determine how far away an observed light is. That is particularly true in an environment where there are many light sources - such as the DC area. If the crew was unaided the risk factors increase. An additional factor is that (contrary to news reports) this was not a highly experienced crew.

My GUESS, based on what I've read and seen, is that the Blackhawk pilot saw a light source that he thought was the airliner but was not. He reported to ATC that he had the aircraft in sight and would avoid it (pass behind or slow and let the airliner pass by). That took the onus off of ATC to direct a turn for either aircraft. The responsibility shifted to the Blackhawk and no deviation was required of the airliner.

The tower could (perhaps) have given better notice of where the RJ was and what runway he was approaching. It is unclear right now, but unlikely, that the Blackhawk had TCAS or ADS B which can give situational awareness of other aircraft.

The airliner was in a descent and apparently above the helicopter. That is a blind spot to the helicopter pilot(s) and likely to the airliner since the Blackhawk was near and below the RJ. The end to the tragedy was that the two aircraft collided - probably with the airliner descending into the helicopter.

In answer to another comment, it is very common to have helicopter low level routes below airport approach paths. It is done to keep the relatively slow helicopters out of the airspace used by larger - and faster -aircraft while allowing the rotorcraft to complete their mission. This particular route is inside the DC capital area and is VERY tightly controlled and available only to a very small set of aircraft.

It is certainly a tragic event. It is likely the Blackhawk crew was at fault (based on news reports). It is understandable - to me - how it happened. I, and every other pilot, have made a similar mistake that only by the grace of God did not end up in an accident.

[Blueblaze]

Why did it do that be my question.

An airliner on final at 350' is about 30 seconds from wheels down. It doesn't make one damn bit of difference if that chopper was at 200' or 350'. The legal vertical separation at ALL altitudes is 500 FEET! And that chopper shouldn't have be crossing the active runway's glidepath at ANY altitude lower than 14,500', anyway. That's the typical ceiling of class B airspace under the control of a major towered airport.

I don't care what altitude it was at, crossing a commercial airliner's glidepath on short final is idiotic and ordinarily illegal. Doing it at night with night vision goggles is stupid squared. ATC granting clearance to do such a dumbass thing is criminal, and whoever told that controller it was OK for the army to play in traffic near the nation's capital airport should be liable for 67 counts of criminally negligent manslaughter.

[Bill14564]

An airliner on final at 350' is about 30 seconds from wheels down. It doesn't make one damn bit of difference if that chopper was at 200' or 350'. The legal vertical separation at ALL altitudes is 500 FEET! And that chopper shouldn't have be crossing the active runway's glidepath at ANY altitude lower than 14,500', anyway. That's the typical ceiling of class B airspace under the control of a major towered airport.

I don't care what altitude it was at, crossing a commercial airliner's glidepath on short final is idiotic and ordinarily illegal. Doing it at night with night vision goggles is stupid squared. ATC granting clearance to do such a dumbass thing is criminal, and whoever told that controller it was OK for the army to play in traffic near the nation's capital airport should be liable for 67 counts of criminally negligent manslaughter.

You should have tried to get at least a few facts correct before spending so much time typing your rant.

[BrianL99]

I'm a former Army helicopter pilot qualified in all models of the Blackhawk. I have over 8000 flight hours and a significant number of NVG hours.

It is difficult under NVGs to determine how far away an observed light is. That is particularly true in an environment where there are many light sources - such as the DC area. If the crew was unaided the risk factors increase. An additional factor is that (contrary to news reports) this was not a highly experienced crew.

My GUESS, based on what I've read and seen, is that the Blackhawk pilot saw a light source that he thought was the airliner but was not. He reported to ATC that he had the aircraft in sight and would avoid it (pass behind or slow and let the airliner pass by). That took the onus off of ATC to direct a turn for either aircraft. The responsibility shifted to the Blackhawk and no deviation was required of the airliner.

The tower could (perhaps) have given better notice of where the RJ was and what runway he was approaching. It is unclear right now, but unlikely, that the Blackhawk had TCAS or ADS B which can give situational awareness of other aircraft.

The airliner was in a descent and apparently above the helicopter. That is a blind spot to the helicopter pilot(s) and likely to the airliner since the Blackhawk was near and below the RJ. The end to the tragedy was that the two aircraft collided - probably with the airliner descending into the helicopter.

In answer to another comment, it is very common to have helicopter low level routes below airport approach paths. It is done to keep the relatively slow helicopters out of the airspace used by larger - and faster -aircraft while allowing the rotorcraft to complete their mission. This particular route is inside the DC capital area and is VERY tightly controlled and available only to a very small set of aircraft.

It is certainly a tragic event. It is likely the Blackhawk crew was at fault (based on news reports). It is understandable - to me - how it happened. I, and every other pilot, have made a similar mistake that only by the grace of God did not end up in an accident.

Nice to hear from someone who knows what he's talking about.

I think you're right in everything you typed, other than I believe ATC has to share some of the fault with the BH pilots (I thought I read there were at least 2, if not 3 "pilots" on that aircraft, at least one of which, was an "Instructor"?)

If the facts are as presented in all the news reports are accurate, ATC had a CA alert. The Controller was apparently satisfied in his own mind, that the BH really had the CRJ in sight and wasn't mistaken. The Controller didn't rely on his own equipment, which indicated there was something amiss.

It's sort of the like the guy who refuses to rely on his instruments, because he sees it differently, outside the window.

(You don't think the BH had TCAS or ADS-B?)

[bmcgowan13]

Although this occurred in DC it is deeply personal to many in the aviation community. Military, commercial, corporate, GA pilots and controllers of every sort truly "felt" this. They are shaken by the events. This is never supposed to be able to happen...

This was posted by an air traffic controller online....

"An aircraft accident happened over the Potomac river tonight. If you know me then you understand that a tragedy like this resonates across the country and strikes at the heart of all air traffic controllers across the nation. I feel deeply for the families that lost loved ones this night. There aren’t words that my profession can offer to heal the pain, but I hope you know that we’ve lost a part of ourselves tonight. We exist to serve you in silence and we take it to heart when events like tonight come to fruition. We live in this pain and will carry it for all of our lives. Please think about those that you cannot relate with. Understand that our job comes with consequences and a penalty that cannot be understood by those that do not do this unforgiving job. By no means is this an excuse. This is the testimony of a man who cares and does his best every single day that you trust him to do so. My colleagues are one and the same."

[Boffin]

I was taught to trust my instruments.

[bob47]

I'm a former Army helicopter pilot qualified in all models of the Blackhawk. I have over 8000 flight hours and a significant number of NVG hours.

It is difficult under NVGs to determine how far away an observed light is. That is particularly true in an environment where there are many light sources - such as the DC area. If the crew was unaided the risk factors increase. An additional factor is that (contrary to news reports) this was not a highly experienced crew.

My GUESS, based on what I've read and seen, is that the Blackhawk pilot saw a light source that he thought was the airliner but was not. He reported to ATC that he had the aircraft in sight and would avoid it (pass behind or slow and let the airliner pass by). That took the onus off of ATC to direct a turn for either aircraft. The responsibility shifted to the Blackhawk and no deviation was required of the airliner.

The tower could (perhaps) have given better notice of where the RJ was and what runway he was approaching. It is unclear right now, but unlikely, that the Blackhawk had TCAS or ADS B which can give situational awareness of other aircraft.

The airliner was in a descent and apparently above the helicopter. That is a blind spot to the helicopter pilot(s) and likely to the airliner since the Blackhawk was near and below the RJ. The end to the tragedy was that the two aircraft collided - probably with the airliner descending into the helicopter.

In answer to another comment, it is very common to have helicopter low level routes below airport approach paths. It is done to keep the relatively slow helicopters out of the airspace used by larger - and faster -aircraft while allowing the rotorcraft to complete their mission. This particular route is inside the DC capital area and is VERY tightly controlled and available only to a very small set of aircraft.

It is certainly a tragic event. It is likely the Blackhawk crew was at fault (based on news reports). It is understandable - to me - how it happened. I, and every other pilot, have made a similar mistake that only by the grace of God did not end up in an accident.

Just curious, based on your experience, how could the helicopter crew not see the airplane? In the more recent videos of the crash, the airplane landing lights are a blinding light coming straight at the camera. It's hard to imagine that the helicopter crew wouldn't see this if they even glanced to their left.

[CarlR33]

Reading the various comments above I would think when large numbers of lives are at stake that commercial aircraft would have their own space as the helicopter can land anywhere? I heard the air traffic controllers were cut back (from 2 to 4?) which again given the number of lives at stake is simply inexcusable especially since I heard they may have been distracted. Unacceptable.

[BrianL99]

Just curious, based on your experience, how could the helicopter crew not see the airplane? In the more recent videos of the crash, the airplane landing lights are a blinding light coming straight at the camera. It's hard to imagine that the helicopter crew wouldn't see this if they even glanced to their left.

I have no where near as many hours in the cockpit as others who have posted, but I do have enough to know that pilots primarily rely on their peripheral vision, which is better able to distinguish "movement", thus the words "scanning for traffic". In an airplane, your head has to be on a slow swivel when searching for traffic. It's usually the only way to pick out a "small speck", 2 miles away. I haven't been in the cockpit since ADS-B was mandated, but I can't imagine it's changed much, as it's primarily "out-going", I believe?

Apparently the 2 pilots in the BH were wearing night-vision googles, which I've been told are something like looking at the world through a toilet paper roll ... little or no peripheral vision.

Coincidentally, I also have some experience in the ATC world and made a post regarding that, but it was deleted by the Moderators. That's fine, that's their right and I'm not going to argue the point. I am going to make a similar point, but hopefully without the specifics that caused that post to be deleted.

Like many other challenging employment positions in today's world, the standards have been lowered, simply to put "bodies in seats". It's not an easy task, as X number of people are needed and if you can't hire enough of the "best and the brightest", you have to take what you can get.

Some folks want to attribute lower standards to a specific political or social agenda. In the ATC world, that's simply not the case. It's the reality of the job marketplace. There's a severe shortage of available and competent Controllers and the FAA over the last few years has lowered their admission standards.

At the same time, the technology has improved dramatically and the hope has always been that the improved technology would make up for the lower standards. I think in this instance, as myself and a number of others have mentioned, ATC is going to take part of the blame and rightly so, in my opinion. With today's technology, two 100% operational aircraft shouldn't collide in the sky.

[Taltarzac725]

My uncle was one of the fire chiefs responding to the crash of Flight 191 on May 25, 1979. My heart goes out to the responders and other people involved in finding the cause and dealing with the trauma caused by this tragic accident.

My uncle was quite upset as he told me about his memories dealing with American Airlines Flight 191.

The facts will come out with this Potomac River crash. You have a lot of people digging for how this happened.

[manaboutown]

Gray News) - The Army has identified the third soldier who was inside the Black Hawk helicopter involved in Wednesday’s deadly DC plane crash that killed 67 people.

Officials identified the soldier as Cpt. Rebecca M. Lobach of Durham, North Carolina.

Lobach served as an aviation officer in the Army from July 2019 and had around 500 hours of flying time in the Black Hawk under her belt.

From: ‘We are devastated’: Cpt. Rebecca Lobach identified as third Black Hawk pilot who died in DC plane crash (https://www.fox8live.com/2025/02/02/we-are-devastated-cpt-rebecca-lobach-identified-third-black-hawk-pilot-who-died-dc-plane-crash/)

[Tvflguy]

I have no where near as many hours in the cockpit as others who have posted, but I do have enough to know that pilots primarily rely on their peripheral vision, which is better able to distinguish "movement", thus the words "scanning for traffic". In an airplane, your head has to be on a slow swivel when searching for traffic. It's usually the only way to pick out a "small speck", 2 miles away. I haven't been in the cockpit since ADS-B was mandated, but I can't imagine it's changed much, as it's primarily "out-going", I believe?

Apparently the 2 pilots in the BH were wearing night-vision googles, which I've been told are something like looking at the world through a toilet paper roll ... little or no peripheral vision.
the specifics that caused that post to be deleted.
take what you can get.

At the same time, the technology has improved dramatically and the hope has always been that the improved technology would make up for the lower standards. I think in this instance, as myself and a number of others have mentioned, ATC is going to take part of the blame and rightly so, in my opinion. With today's technology, two 100% operational aircraft shouldn't collide in the sky.

From what I have seen/heard so far, I believe the key factors to this incident will be:
-BH pilots using night vision in a potentially congested area
-non-specific comms from ATC to BH pilots re visual on Regional jet - there was actually 2 RJs in the immediate area.
-Did the ATC view/respond to instrument/radar tracking of the BH critically on a line to the Regional jet?

[BrianL99]

According to this report: Who Was Black Hawk Helicopter Pilot in DC Plane Crash? What We Know - Newsweek (https://www.newsweek.com/blackhawk-helicopter-pilot-what-we-know-2024107)

All 3 people in the Black Hawk were pilots? 2 with "hundreds of hours" and 1 with "over 1000 hours"?

How could 3 qualified pilots, all in communication with each other, not properly identify an airplane in the air? There was another similar airplane in the air space and on the approach, but for all 3 to make the same mistake?

[Taltarzac725]

According to this report: Who Was Black Hawk Helicopter Pilot in DC Plane Crash? What We Know - Newsweek (https://www.newsweek.com/blackhawk-helicopter-pilot-what-we-know-2024107)

All 3 people in the Black Hawk were pilots? 2 with "hundreds of hours" and 1 with "over 1000 hours"?

How could 3 qualified pilots, all in communication with each other, not properly identify an airplane in the air? There was another similar airplane in the air space and on the approach, but for all 3 to make the same mistake?

How many seconds are involved in all this happening? Not very many. The helicopter was too high for some reason. Maybe that reason will come out; maybe it will not. Depends on what the physical evidence shows. Or does not. Facts do not lie. Now some people lie some of the time. Others all the time. If it quacks like a duck it probably is not a swan.

[BrianL99]

How many seconds are involved in all this happening? Not very many. The helicopter was too high for some reason. Maybe that reason will come out; maybe it will not. Depends on what the physical evidence shows. Or does not. Facts do not lie. Now some people lie some of the time. Others all the time. If it quacks like a duck it probably is not a swan.

The part about the helicopter being too high, I get it. Not every one in the BH is necessarily looking at the Instruments and at least one person in the "back" probably couldn't even see the instruments (being at 350' instead of 200', isn't readily obvious by looking out the window).

Identifying another aircraft in the area, is just a basic, human activity. Everyone in the aircraft was privy to ATC communications. Human nature suggests that when they were asked if the "have the CRJ in view", all 3 would have looked for it and confirmed to ATC and each other, they have it in sight. They confirmed a visual, twice.

BTW, for those who haven't seen a professional recap of what happened, you can find it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzQe6W7vcu4. Pilot Debrief is one of the most respected sources for information on aircraft accidents.

[Taltarzac725]

The part about the helicopter being too high, I get it. Not every one in the BH is necessarily looking at the Instruments and at least one person in the "back" probably couldn't even see the instruments (being at 350' instead of 200', isn't readily obvious by looking out the window).

Identifying another aircraft in the area, is just a basic, human activity. Everyone in the aircraft was privy to ATC communications. Human nature suggests that when they were asked if the "have the CRJ in view", all 3 would have looked for it and confirmed to ATC and each other, they have it in sight. They confirmed a visual, twice.

BTW, for those who haven't seen a professional recap of what happened, you can find it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RzQe6W7vcu4. Pilot Debrief is one of the most respected sources for information on aircraft accidents.

My guess is that they were looking at the other plane in the sky and not in what could have been a blind spot above them. We are talking about a few seconds to notice that plane.


Personally I do not think helicopters should be anywhere near flight paths of planes.

[Cuervo]

As many have stated they do not have all the facts as yet.
The one fact that does exist is that there is always an unexpected accident waiting around the corner.
It's good for them to investigate exactly what happen to see if it can be prevented in the future.
But to investigate to place blame on someone is a waste of time, that will not bring those lost people back.

[Topgun 1776]

There is no "overlapping flight paths" or "interlapping flights". What's an "executive civilian" ?

The airspace in that area is well known and specific. This crash will mostly likely end up being attributed to simple human error. Based on the current information, the Blackhawk was in the wrong place and erroneously informed ATC that they had the CRJ in view.

That BH was manned by 3 professionals, at least 2 of which were qualified pilots. To mis-identify a commercial aircraft under those circumstances, is inexcusable. ATC and both aircraft should have received a CA warning (Collision Avoidance) and both ATC & the BH should have taken immediate action. It appears the CRJ was exactly where it was supposed to be and not in a position to take evasive action. Also, with a Separation Error of that magnitude, there was likely a audible warning in the tower (at least that's how it used to work.)

In my opinion, all this noise about the "system", is simply that ... noise. The system usually works perfectly fine, it's the people who fail. ATC for assuming the BH pilots actually had the CRJ in view (even though he had a CA warning) and the BH pilots for not being vigilant.

Totally agree! One thing I'd add - I've been given a course deviation from ATC 100s of times around a busy active runway or area. I can't figure out why ATC didn't just give the BH a deviation 3 miles east or the runway to vector him around the approach end of the runway!?!?!? Makes no sense to me when it happens everywhere else hundreds of times daily to GA aircraft.

[MorTech]

In that congested DCA area, Collision Avoidance signals are considered false positives. They should make DCA a military base and make the DC Parasites fly into Dulles. The Helicopter was flying too high for some reason...that was the error.

[BrianL99]

In that congested DCA area, Collision Avoidance signals are considered false positives.

By whom?

Certainly not by ATC or a qualified pilot.

[DPWM21]

I have 35 years experience in this field. Comments about DEI are cruel and untrue. It often takes three years to complete on-the-job site specific certification. Nothing to do with skin or gender, either one is deemed capable. Or not. Dividing nation with untrue statements is irresponsible.
As to ‘ground radar’ when an aircraft is low, it takes a moment to ‘acquire’ on radar. Longer if ‘ground clutter’ is present (permanent structures that present on radar. We have an agency to sort out ‘why’s’. Maybe we should consider how safe and overworked the system is and has been during tenure of all past administrations. Once again, assumptions and listening to ‘one source’. God give peace to families and ATC staff who will have to live with this forever, even when found (if so) as no contributing factor to event. Listen, pause, think, wait. Assumptions are often cruel

[coleprice]

A military and civilian aviation veteran explains Wednesday night's crash.
The author’s name is J.R. Rudy. He raises several issues I haven’t heard before, including the crosswinds that were swirling Wednesday night and the lack of a safety observer on the Black Hawk’s training mission. Beyond that - I’d rather let him speak for himself, unedited. - Alex Berenson
'I am responding to your recent note about input from pilots regarding the DCA crash.
I could go on for hours about this but will condense it the best I can without too much unsupported speculation.
I am a retired aviation professional with nearly 40 years of flying experience. The first 8 years I served as a Fighter Pilot flying the F-14 in the US Navy from aircraft carriers. Collateral duties included service as a Landing Signals Officer (the tower for the carrier) a Standardization Officer. I was one of the primary investigators into the mid-air collision of a TopGun F-16 and one of my squadron's F-14s. No jets or lives were lost.
After leaving the Navy, I flew domestically and internationally for Delta Air Lines for over 30 years, the last 20 out of JFK.
I have flown into DCA [Reagan National] countless times as a pilot, though not recently. I did land there about a week ago at 1130p, as a passenger, landing to the south flying the River Visual 19 approach. Challenging but fun, hand flown approach with a great view of DC from the port window seat.
I have ridden in but never piloted a helo, nor have I flown in one anywhere in the DCA helo corridor. Like other pilots and boaters on the Potomac, I have often seen helicopters there.
It is readily evident that the Army Blackhawk was flying visually, headed south on Helo Route 1, then transitioning to Route 4 abeam DCA. On the chart, there is a max altitude restriction of 200' from the Key Bridge to the Wilson Bridge on these two routes, inclusive of the area of the crash.
UH-60A and subsequent Black Hawks have VHF radios, just like commercial jets so separate UHF communication should not have been an issue.
Below there is a link to the Helo chart for the DC area below, showing the VFR helo corridor paths and altitude restrictions.
The accident appears to be a classic CRM "swiss cheese" multiple failure event, as are most aircraft accidents.
Any one of the following interventions could have prevented this accident:
-More timely, accurate and positive confirmation of traffic by an overtasked ATC [air-traffic control] controller.
-Adequate staffing in ATC tower.
-Black Hawk copilot/evaluator/instructor taking command of the aircraft or issuing timely instructions to correct altitude deviation.
-Observation/safety observer pilot aboard who is not wearing NVGs.
Not doing military training missions in busy airport approach corridor when a much safer less congested one is available to the south of DCA
-Use of collusion avoidance technology by the Black Hawk. Airliners have this and can visualize on screen potential threats, although this is low altitude inhibited.
-and most importantly, adherence to published altitudes.
-If the American commuter pilots had not accepted the side-step on the Mount Vernon Visual Approach from RW1 to RW 33 there would be no collision.
-If a single pilot was not wearing NVGs, the plane might have been visible.
-If the helo was on altitude, they may have been able to discern the aircraft lights unobscured in the night sky looking up rather than looking level into lights on the west shoreline.
From the limited info available I am able to draw a few conclusions.
1. The helo was flying higher than the max permitted 200'. Had they adhered to this altitude restriction the accident would not have happened.
2. The ATC controller apparently did not provide timely, accurate, complete advise to the helo of the commercial airline traffic on approach to DCA.
3. The ATC controller apparently was task-saturated, performing dual roles, perhaps at the end of a long shift when attentiveness wanes.
4. The American jet may have been belly up to the helo in the final part of his turn or in subsequent corrections to centerline due to #5.
5. Strong, gusty crosswinds winds of 25 knots may have necessitated to a steep turn of the American jet to prevent overshoot of centerline and also affected helo altitude control.
6. NVG use by both pilots may have rendered the American jet invisible due to oversaturation of background lighting emanating from the west side of the Potomac.
7. The helo exhibited an erratic flight path, executing two near 90 degree turns, turning west off course, crossing Haines Point and heading directly to the north end of DCA airport before turning back south along the river. Given the airspace, this is indicative of inexperience, unfamiliarity and possibly even incompetence.
8. The inability of the pilot to maintain altitude, especially on a clear night is highly indicative of aircraft unfamiliarity, lack of recent flying, and gross incompetence, likely exacerbated by the unpracticed use of NVGs.
9. Military pilots love to do low level flying, especially in cool places like up the Potomac River by DCA and the Capital at night and take risks.
10. The Warrant Officer instructor pilot may have had a possible hesitancy to correct a (new?) female Captain of unknown qualifications and experience and higher rank.
11. There appears to be zero accountability of the American commuter pilots in the accident. They were exactly where they should have been on the MV 01 approach and sidestep to the RW 33 visual approach.
The DCA Potomac corridor is not one to be used in training new and inexperienced pilots, who are not current and highly experienced with NVGs.
It is my sincere hope that the female pilot flying the helo earned her place in this unit, based on merit, and there are no DEI factors involved. This unit is a highly competitive, desired assignment that has traditionally been awarded to the best of the best for a non-combat tour.
I know this because my Army helo pilot brother-in-law was going to be assigned to this unit as a bonus tour following the completion of his helo instructor tour in Iran in 1979. This deployment ended poorly, given the revolution. He was killed in a military C-12 plane crash when escaping Iran. I believe his transport was shot down. If so, it was covered up by the Carter Administration to avoid fanning the flames of war, but that is another issue.
Disclaimer: I have used night vision scopes and a monocular, but have never worn military or civilian NVGs either when flying or on the ground.'

[mraines]

I guess the real question, and probably the proximate cause of the collision, is why was the BH with a celling of 200 feet at 350 feet?
You all seem to say "human error". What about mechanical error? According to what I heard at the press conference last night, all the facts are not in and something said the BH was at 200 feet. Something may not have been calibrated correctly. And why is someone saying only two of the BH pilots were qualified? All three would have to be to be on that copter.

[mraines]

I'm a former Army helicopter pilot qualified in all models of the Blackhawk. I have over 8000 flight hours and a significant number of NVG hours.

It is difficult under NVGs to determine how far away an observed light is. That is particularly true in an environment where there are many light sources - such as the DC area. If the crew was unaided the risk factors increase. An additional factor is that (contrary to news reports) this was not a highly experienced crew.

My GUESS, based on what I've read and seen, is that the Blackhawk pilot saw a light source that he thought was the airliner but was not. He reported to ATC that he had the aircraft in sight and would avoid it (pass behind or slow and let the airliner pass by). That took the onus off of ATC to direct a turn for either aircraft. The responsibility shifted to the Blackhawk and no deviation was required of the airliner.

The tower could (perhaps) have given better notice of where the RJ was and what runway he was approaching. It is unclear right now, but unlikely, that the Blackhawk had TCAS or ADS B which can give situational awareness of other aircraft.

The airliner was in a descent and apparently above the helicopter. That is a blind spot to the helicopter pilot(s) and likely to the airliner since the Blackhawk was near and below the RJ. The end to the tragedy was that the two aircraft collided - probably with the airliner descending into the helicopter.

In answer to another comment, it is very common to have helicopter low level routes below airport approach paths. It is done to keep the relatively slow helicopters out of the airspace used by larger - and faster -aircraft while allowing the rotorcraft to complete their mission. This particular route is inside the DC capital area and is VERY tightly controlled and available only to a very small set of aircraft.

It is certainly a tragic event. It is likely the Blackhawk crew was at fault (based on news reports). It is understandable - to me - how it happened. I, and every other pilot, have made a similar mistake that only by the grace of God did not end up in an accident.
What is your source that the crew was not experienced?

[talonip]

A few assumptions there that have yet to be proven.

In the end, it is almost always human error. The “system” is there to try to remove as many chances for human error as possible and to reduce their impact if they do occur. If parts of the system are removed then more errors can occur with serious effects.

The second controller, fewer flights to reduce workload, and more of a buffer between allowed airspace would all have helped.

I wonder if the collision avoidance mentioned is effective or even active on final approach and under 500 feet.
They did get a “traffic traffic” warning on TCAS. Almost too late to respond. Below 1000 ft the RA feature is inhibited. I am a retired Blackhawk pilot and 33 year airline pilot and have done that approach many times.

[npwalters]

What is your source that the crew was not experienced?

I said they were not HIGHLY experienced. 1000 flight hours as an instructor pilot (IP) is just an average or maybe less than average point and the 450 flight hours the co-pilot (PI) had is a fairly low experience point, especially when one considers that the co-pilot had been rated for a few years. I'm not saying they were not qualified - just that they were not a "been there done that" crew.

BTW, some on this thread have referred to a third pilot in the cabin. That is incorrect. The third crewmember was a crew chief, a non-rated crewmember. He would have been listening to the comms and had a primary duty to observe the environment and alert the pilots of any traffic and potential hazards. That is, of course, a shared responsibility with the pilots.

To expand on other points. As another poster stated, it is easy to lose a specific light source - the airliner - when there are many light sources in the area (light saturation). This is especially true when wearing NVGs and is why experienced goggle pilots sometimes look under the NVGs to get better situational awareness by looking for the red and green lights associated with aircraft.

Secondly, standard equipped Army helos do not have collision avoidance systems. IF this Blackhawk had TCAS or ADS B it would have been an addition made by that specific unit. I have not seen anything reported to indicate it was so equipped.

[nn0wheremann]

How could it not happen? Air Controller overload, Interlapping military and commercial flights at nearby airports, military night training flights in overloaded commercial airport landing paths. Government, congressional, executive desire for easy transport from midtown DC. Time for some intelligent decisions. Eliminate overlapping flightpath air facilities. It will not get better unless a major shift is made. Don't allow congress or executive civilians to influence decisions for convenience
The airspace is three dimensional. The approach to runway 33 is VFR. Using the VASI the aircraft is at 400 to 500 feet agl over the river. The rotorcraft flyway is below 200 agl. No conflicts if everyone follows the rules. Someone did not follow the rules. At a descent rate of 700 feet per minute the airplane was about 43 seconds from a perfect happy landing. When time is up, it’s up.

[DonnaNi4os]

Everyone can speculate all they want. It will likely take the NTSB a good year to have any definitive answers as to what caused the accident. Please remember to pray for the families that have lost their loved ones. In an accident like this they will likely not be able see their loved one again on this side of Heaven. I have been there. My husband was killed in a fiery plane crash 32 years ago. Not being able to physically see him made believing he was really dead very difficult and especially difficult for our four children. It makes “closure” pretty much impossible. So while you are speculating please remember to pray for all of the people who have completely lost life as they knew it in a blink of an eye.

[Gettingoutofdodge]

There is no "overlapping flight paths" or "interlapping flights". What's an "executive civilian" ?

The airspace in that area is well known and specific. This crash will mostly likely end up being attributed to simple human error. Based on the current information, the Blackhawk was in the wrong place and erroneously informed ATC that they had the CRJ in view.

That BH was manned by 3 professionals, at least 2 of which were qualified pilots. To mis-identify a commercial aircraft under those circumstances, is inexcusable. ATC and both aircraft should have received a CA warning (Collision Avoidance) and both ATC & the BH should have taken immediate action. It appears the CRJ was exactly where it was supposed to be and not in a position to take evasive action. Also, with a Separation Error of that magnitude, there was likely a audible warning in the tower (at least that's how it used to work.)

In my opinion, all this noise about the "system", is simply that ... noise. The system usually works perfectly fine, it's the people who fail. ATC for assuming the BH pilots actually had the CRJ in view (even though he had a CA warning) and the BH pilots for not being vigilant.
It’s not noise, people are tired of the Airline industry’s poor performance. This time people died.

I flew to MCO from Newark on 12/28 and it was the strangest of all my past experiences. I have been delayed many times, rerouted to different cities, like Buffalo and held over. This time we were told to keep all the shades down for the entire flight. The flight was delayed 40 minutes to put needed supplies through the back of the plane. The flight could not take off without these “supplies”. We were asked to check our carry ons. Then the flight was delayed on the runways because there was too much traffic. The shades were not allowed to be opened at any time. Airline delays and cancellations are the normal now.
This was not the case 3 years ago when I moved to The Villages. Next rime I go to NY I’m taking a roomette on Amtrak. I am about done with flying.
I don’t know what the problems are, but there are problems. Time for the airline industry to make changes because what is happening now is inexcusable.

[BrianL99]

Actually the Newsweek article said exactly what I said. The third person was a non-rated crewmember (crew chief). That same article said the female pilot was the Pilot in Command. That COULD be true but is very unlikely. It is definitely NOT true if the instructor pilot (IP) was functioning as an IP. A person functioning as an instructor (IP) is always the pilot in command for that flight. Unlike most commercial flights - Army pilots can be qualified as a pilot in command but function as the co-pilot (PI) on a specific flight. Each flight has a PC designated by the approving authority.

If the pilots had on NVGs the crew chief also was wearing NVGs. All crewmembers wear NVGs on a flight so designated. We (the pilots) want the crew chief to see all that we do. NVGs allow the crew to see MUCH more than the unaided eye. That is critical and allows us to fly low in tactical environments. Unfortunately, NVGs can get light saturated where there are many light sources. It takes some experience to learn how to cope with this.

The article didn't say the 3rd crew-member wasn't Rated. The Chief of Staff for Army Aviation said he had "100's of hours of flight time".

The Chief of Staff of Army Aviation apparently disagrees with your contention that the Instructor was the PIC. He specifically said that the "Evaluated Pilot" was PIC (according to the press reports).

Also, there was no directive to wear NVG's. According to Retired CWO Jonathan Koziol who's been attached to the Unified Command Post to coordinate the investigation, the Army doesn't know if they were in use for the flight, but they were available in the aircraft.

https://6abc.com/post/army-black-hawk-crew-involved-dc-crash-made-top-pilots-thousands-hours-experience/15849913/

Accuracy matters and we all know the press accurately reports the facts.

[npwalters]

The article didn't say the 3rd crew-member wasn't Rated. The Chief of Staff for Army Aviation said he had "100's of hours of flight time".

The Chief of Staff of Army Aviation apparently disagrees with your contention that the Instructor was the PIC. He specifically said that the "Evaluated Pilot" was PIC (according to the press reports).

Also, there was no directive to wear NVG's. According to Retired CWO Jonathan Koziol who's been attached to the Unified Command Post to coordinate the investigation, the Army doesn't know if they were in use for the flight, but they were available in the aircraft.

https://6abc.com/post/army-black-hawk-crew-involved-dc-crash-made-top-pilots-thousands-hours-experience/15849913/

Accuracy matters and we all know the press accurately reports the facts.


Wow, I get the feeling you just scanned what I wrote so that you can disagree. The third crewmember WAS identified as the crew chief (non-rated crewmember), as would be normal.

"In a briefing with reporters on Thursday, Jonathan Koziol, chief of staff for Army aviation, said that the pilot commanding the flight was female with more than 500 hours of flight time. The male instructor pilot had over 1,000 hours of flight time, and the crew chief also had hundreds of hours of flight time."

That report of that briefing did say the female pilot was the PC. I'm curious if he said A PC or THE PC. As I carefully explained, one can be qualified as a PC but act as a PI on any particular flight. In any case, I was careful to say that IF the IP was INSTRUCTING then he was the PC. I stand by that comment. I can direct you to the paragraph in
AR 95-1 that directs this.

I can't imagine why a crew would have NVGs onboard and authorized and not use them but I suppose that is possible. I do not know if they were using them - nor do you.

One more thought. Kozoil's statements seem to me like he is polishing the turd. Spoken like a true desk jockey. I disagree with several of his statements but given his position he will be believed. Such is life.

From your post "Accuracy matters and we all know the press accurately reports the facts." Is that intended as sarcasm?

[kkingston57]

There is no "overlapping flight paths" or "interlapping flights". What's an "executive civilian" ?

The airspace in that area is well known and specific. This crash will mostly likely end up being attributed to simple human error. Based on the current information, the Blackhawk was in the wrong place and erroneously informed ATC that they had the CRJ in view.

That BH was manned by 3 professionals, at least 2 of which were qualified pilots. To mis-identify a commercial aircraft under those circumstances, is inexcusable. ATC and both aircraft should have received a CA warning (Collision Avoidance) and both ATC & the BH should have taken immediate action. It appears the CRJ was exactly where it was supposed to be and not in a position to take evasive action. Also, with a Separation Error of that magnitude, there was likely a audible warning in the tower (at least that's how it used to work.)

In my opinion, all this noise about the "system", is simply that ... noise. The system usually works perfectly fine, it's the people who fail. ATC for assuming the BH pilots actually had the CRJ in view (even though he had a CA warning) and the BH pilots for not being vigilant.

Agree that this is probably pilot error and can not disagree with the poster. No doubt that this is congested air space which makes the pilot error more likely to cause an accident.