What Caused This? A Deal Was Made.
Вставка
- Опубліковано 9 лют 2025
- Please sign the petition! The head position at the FAA is Vacant! There is no one driving this bus! Is it possible? Send in your vote to let Dan have a shot at this! Signing this petition is free and easy, we can at least have some fun. Who knows, in this new political environment, anything is possible! I would love to do it! chng.it/yBwSQn...
HELP! Your $1 or $2 donation to these ad free videos is appreciated, but certainly not required. SUPPORT FOR THIS CHANNEL: Thanks for all your help! I do NOT monetize or place ads on my UA-cam videos! If you are seeing ads as you play this video, it's not me, and I don't get any money. I also "don't" do:
1) Sponsorships,
2) Go Fund Me,
3) Patreon, or
4) any UA-cam Advertising.
These videos take a lot of effort. If you are able to offer support, we very much appreciate it. If not, that is OK too! Most of all, learn and understand the concepts presented. I work on these videos and travel to locations as I am able. I pay all my own expenses as I go. Help if you can! If you liked this video and my effort, you can donate a very small amount ($1 or $2) direct to Dan for helping to travel make this aviation content possible. See the web site below for that. Please keep donations to my cause "small" and ONLY participate if I helped you, or if you appreciate the work I did to bring you this special aviation content, or especially if you learned something that can help you stay alive!
All electronic transactions are safe and secure via the four mobile banking applications listed below. All electronic donation support is received 100% in full, with no fee's or transaction percentages lost! Thank you! Dan Gryder
Free Speech Fund gofund.me/60b9... (IRS approved donation)
DTSB SuperFund www.gofundme.c... (IRS approved donation)
Venmo @DanGryder
PayPal Dan@DanGryder.com (or) www.paypal.com...
Zelle Dan@DanGryder.com
CashAPP $DanGryder
The mission of FAA and NTSB is a looking backwards view, trying to figure out “what did just happen.”
I propose to prevent these accidents with a forward looking view, “what is about to happen”
I started this petition well before this crash. I have the experience and forward vision to implement immediate change at FAA. Please read the petition, sign and comment if able. www.change.org/p/please-help-dan-fix-our-faa-problem-dan-gryder-for-administrator-of-faa
The next airline collision is imminent. Both the current acting FAA administrator and the chairman of the NTSB are “not” pilots, have no flight experience, and cannot possibly see forward into the next tragedy.
Chairman Homendy at NTSB lists her highest transportation credential as being the holder of an M2 motorcycle endorsement (That’s a moped in Virginia)
We cannot possibly fly a plane looking out the tail at where we’ve been. We cannot possibly prevent the next airliner collision by taking three years to figure out what has already happened.
I ask for your support.
Dan Gryder
ATP ASMEL CFI CFII MEI AGI
16,500 flight hours
91, 135, 121 operations
A former communications instructor, I appreciate your take on this issue. Would love to hear you play that banjo or trombone, though. Perhaps create UA-cam shorts? Cheers.
@@christophergagliano2051 So the AA plane really had an alert? Would 18 seconds have been enough in a commercial airliner? Still..they had an alert...
Yeah but how else can they destroy the country under the guise of "virtue"? They're stunning and brave, lol.
@@cindykauffman8294
L'avion a tenté de monter à la dernière minute.
Comme il était en virage, l'hélicoptère à touché l'aile qui était la plus basse : l'aile gauche.
L'avion tombe en ayant toujours son aile droite.
@@mariepascale6921 It won't translate to English for me so I can't read your reply.
As a professional helicopter pilot with over 40 years and have flown into National a numbers of times …… you don’t break the 200 feet requirement and to get your head and eyes looking outside and playing with crap in the cockpit and not having conversation with everybody in the Aircraft… You pay attention to what’s in front of you… to allow yourself to get that close to another Aircraft is horrible piloting technique.
Amen
EXACTLY! The probable cause was twofold: (1) The failure of the helicopter to maintain visual separation, and to hold altitude below maximum 200 feet AGL altitude. (2) The willful failure of ATC to exercise due diligence, to avoid the imminent collision of two aircraft in the assigned ATC control area, when ATC knew such a collision was imminent in advance. ATC willfully failed to protect the safety of a passenger jet and it's passengers, after giving that passenger jet a landing clearance for runway 33, and not advising that jet of an imminent collision threat to that same jet, of which ATC was aware.
orchestrated crash.. im in aus. even i know it was a set up..
100% Not on ATC at all, chopper broke 200ft and said they had traffic in sight. Plane has the right of way so many reason it’s not ATC. ATC was the final possible stopgap to the accident but it wasn’t their fault it occurred.
@@harrywalker5836I guess people are not very smart in Australia! Do you have any idea how difficult it would be to hit a CRJ traveling 130 knots from left to right? No one is that good, sorry but there is no conspiracy here.
The aircraft did not hit the helicopter. The helicopter ran into the side of the CRJ and split it in half. The airspace was the CRJ’s. The Black Hawk was at fault. Period.
Did you listen to the video?
What's sad is everybody's just trying to get some monetization and make a few bucks by making a video and using clickbait like the thumbnail. You can watch the video and you can see the blackhawk flying right into the side of the plane. But hey let's keep trying to make 💰💰💰
No one here gives a 💩 about preventing this in the future lol. "I made content give me money"
Click bait. Helicopter PIC was totally and completely at fault. Period.
a biden dei and aide she should of never been in control of the helo.
@@joel6427Give me a break.
As a former US Army Blackhawk Pilot (2,600 Hour's ) during training we flew restricted altitude corridors at night. A 200 ft altitude breach could be disastrous for incoming and outgoing traffic. Having flown the route discussed ... The altitude of both aircraft at time the time of impact will reveal the determination of responsibility, but it certainly looks like the HH-60 breached their restricted altitude. Tragic.
thanks for sharing
Some copter pilot said the altimeter way have been set wrong. I assumed that was a guage like a fuel guage? No preset. Is this true or not?
Woman pilot was an attention seeking, grinning jackass that viewed piloting a helicopter on the same level of an amusement park ride. Bet she was taking selfies.🤳
Pilot a bien entitled aid, thought she was invisible carrying out whatever her deleted manifesto had.
@@robertgill448 why do you say that
I still think it's 100% pilot error. Heli pilot should never say they have a visual if they didn't. They were also out of their 200ft max zone.
@@marksears558 I agree. They lied about seeing a plane they never saw. I’m betting that the investigation will show this to be a common practice with them. The pilot on the radio didn’t hesitate a second to look for the plane. He just immediately said he had it in sight and requested visual separation. I think they just like to be left alone by ATC.
Pilot error yes, never were restricted to any altitude… the helicopter route just happen to be there. They never were instructed to follow it, and for a bit, they looked like they were not following it.
@Time-Traveller-2025 that's what the route is there for. It's for them to follow and they have to maintain 200 ft or below until they get past the bridge and then it's 400ft I believe. Those are heli highways that they have to abide by and they have to treat that altitude like we do the speed limit, but they don't get to go over.
@ there are airways and routes everywhere in the world… just because it is there doesn’t mean they must use it.
Further… PAT25 made a turn west at Haines point where route 6 is located… 1500 ft restriction. there was no instruction to fly any route or any altitude. It is a side show bob, for the uneducated and inexperienced.
I think from watching the video... the helo pilot knew exactly where they were flying and appeared to fly directly into the jet on purpose!
From an ex Corp pilot, I disagree! The main blame goes to the crew of the helicopter, a very close second goes to the controller. The helicopter is in the air and should be aware of their surroundings and location at ALL times, and the also have the ability to make such control changes needed to correct altitudes and headings. The controller is on the ground, watching a screen. The controller did not hit the aircraft (on approach), I may add. The Helicopter who had absolutely NO REASON even being in the approach/landing cone in the first place did!
and to top it off, the procedure being utilized for years of flying these VFR low level routes underneath Class B airspace is an accident waiting to happen, which it eventually did.
exactly and its proof by previous near misses she could NOT, No matter how hard she tried to wrap her mind around how to correctly fly the blackhawk safely~ she just did not have the correct mental capacity to do such and was clearly unqualified but still trying to fit in.
Ever at the Quantico air field?
@@lifehealth489 What was the instructor doing all this time?
@@steveo4749 exactly this is how many males are they give the controls trust etc to females like a role play of some sort , and that are unqualified etc because they are " being the nice guy" .. It was his last nice guy routine .
The concept, design, and implementation of the DCA Helicopter Route "system", especially near National Airport & the Potomac River, is FATALY FLAWED right out of the gate!
Agreed. From what I understand, ATC almost always has helicopters hold or slow down for landing traffic on 33. That should have been a mandatory rule.
@@relaxingwindow6137 Yep...by all appearances, the DCA tower doesn't want to be "bothered" by VFR helicopter traffic.
Military V.I.P. passengers who are too important to be forced into enduring several extra minutes of transit time in their busy days is why the Pentagon insisted that the FAA allow for the establishment of V.I.P. helicopter flight routes 1 and 4 that transit the center of the Potomac River smack dab in front of Runways 1 and 33 at Reagan National Airport. *SHEER INSANITY!*
@ikefork2606 do you know how many helicopter flights have made the same trip without incident. Keep altitude below 200
@@michaelspinelli350 Oh ….that’s reassuring to the families and friends of the 67 people killed last week.
question from a non military/pilot - why would a helicopter being used for training be operated in a busy airport - would not military air bases make more sense until more experience is gained?
Experience I think.
It was a gold top. Google uh-60 gold top.
The mission of that Blackhawk unit was to shuttle government and military VIPs to various locations in Washington DC . So they normally operated on those flight paths and that’s why they trained there. They also have a mission to shuttle government big shots to safe locations in emergency crisis such as WWIII and terrorist attacks etc.
Thanks fo the info
Exactly. Surely training shouldn't put the regular flights and the public at risk, it doesn't make sense.
You can’t get past the 200’ ceiling restriction… Still Blackhawk pilot’s fault.
Since the U.S. Army is a branch of the U.S. Government, is there a basis for a lawsuit that might capture some money, or is there sovereign immunity here on the govt's fault?
35 years ago. Wife and i on a commercial jet to Jamaica
Another commercial airliner went by us wing tip to wing tip no more than 300 feet. I told my wife , we almost just got killed. The plane shuttered and only us on the left side windows saw it. I was in a wing seat...it went by so fast words cant tell it
I knew somebody was not doing their job very well. In my mind ..it feels like yesterday
they smokin too much ganja in their pineapple hut ATC
@ncjohn3429 Glad you survived that! Not telling you what to do in hindsight. This is for people ongoing from now. People need to report it to FAA, air authority of airliners involved,the airline company and the media. Always upload video to social media and the cloud storage 1st. I'm thinking passengers videotaping out the window the whole flight is a necessity. Airliners should have black box for numerous video cameras around the aircraft.
@@Cat955H great advice. I would just add if possible to download a copy of video to a separate hard drive storage. I have mysteriously had videos and pic completely disappear from my phones photos, messages, and cloud.
@@FrenchCocoa369 Thanks. USB storage is excellent. Lots of financial🤑🤑🤑reasons for stuff to go missing and the censorship reason!
My husband was on a commercial flight and saw a type of fighter jet go by so close he could see the pilots face in shock himself. This was maybe 30 years ago. Horrifying
Dan, I retired from the Army in 2016. My MOS was 153M, MH60M pilot and earlier 152E as an Apache pilot. During my 32 years, I have flown the DC corridor dozens of times, night and day. I performed duties as a check (training) pilot, as a pilot flying civilian and government personnel and flights as part of planned exercises. I generally flew the L model of the UH60 for training missions. The L model has less sophisticated instrumentation as compared to the M series. Round gauges versus flat screens, minimal autopilot versus full axis authority. The accident Blackhawk was the L model.
I can’t possibly count the times that I recommended to Senior Command to amend the flight corridor near the approach paths to Reagan. My suggestion was to make a rule to avoid that busy airspace by making an eastern turn at fix FONVI, a turn to south again after 5 miles and fly well east of airliner traffic. The turn would avoid restricted Capitol airspace. Flight altitudes would be higher for obstacle avoidance at 600 to 800 feet but still well below traffic inbound for 19,33 or 22. This change never happened and now we see the tragic result.
One of the issues facing pilots flying low, 200 feet over the river are unpredictable buffets which result in instantaneous rises and falls in altitude. Winds are generally strong, and crosswind flight is common. This adds to pilot workload, especially at night. Since incoming approach traffic crosses the river at 350 to 400 feet, there is very little margin for error. Since the L model does not have an altitude hold autopilot, it’s all up to the pilot to maintain safe clearances.
ATC asking for visual separation, at night was a mistake. Conducting helo flights so close to approach traffic was a disasterous mistake, tragically demonstrated last week.
well said. As I recall there was a sigmet out for low-level turbulence the night of the accident, so a stray wind gust on the river was quite possible
ATC did not ask for visual separation, the heli crew did.
Thank you for your service. My grandson now flies APACHES
Strong gusty quartering tailwinds, I don't believe helicopters fancy those conditions.
Leo, thanks for the post. Frustrating when it seems so obvious to you but others don’t see it. Maybe now they will. So your thoughts on the fact that they were not only too close to approach traffic…… but that they were flying there while wearing NODs? And how much of a factor do you think that could have been?
That is all true and correct but what I after 55 years of flying can’t comprehend is how the two pilots in helicopter failed to see airliner with landing lights, rotating beacons, navigation lights, and strobes blazing.
Maybe---No one was in Helicopter?
@@dorothylewis1207 Or worse.
good question, next question, tell me which is which
@@dorothylewis1207 They pull three bodies out of the helicopter.
@@mikeabc5355 night vision googles. 40 degree field of view, monocular vision, no depth perception, no color detection, lights become brighter and large halos around lights make if difficult to see at all.
I'm not a pilot, heck I've never even flown before but, after seeing the video of that accident nobody could convince me that it was an accident.
Retired USAF with 2,000+ hours in fighters. This is absolutely not an ATC error. The helo crew was above the maximum allowable altitude (200’) for that airspace. No excuse.
@@LanceRomanceF4E YES excuse; the encoding altimeter was reading LOW, probably because some idiot pressure washed the static port!!!
The helo driver was seeing 200 ft all the way to impact.
100 percent
@@craigwall9536 There is more than one static port, plus isn't RADALT in use that low?
It’s the ATC’s primary job to avoid collision. That’s a complete fail. They put both aircrafts in a situation where they had 0 margin of error and on top of that only the helo was aware of the vis sep handshake.
100% ATC responsibility to compensate for that flaw. BH alt system is a real mess, pilots often makes mistakes when entering max min alt, very counterintuitive.
I'm no expert, but section 7-2-1 ("Visual Separation") of 7110 requires that when Pilot-applied visual separation is in effect, and the aircraft are on converging courses (like they were here) the OTHER aircraft be informed that visual separation is being applied. 7-2-1 a.2.(d): "If aircraft are on converging courses, inform the other aircraft of the traffic and that visual separation is being applied. PHRASEOLOGY− (ACID), TRAFFIC, (clock position and distance), (direction) BOUND, (type of aircraft), HAS YOU IN SIGHT AND WILL MAINTAIN VISUAL SEPARATION." It also requires the controller to "(e) Advise the pilots if the targets appear likely to merge."
I've heard no evidence that happened here. Would that have avoided the tragedy ? Who knows, but I sure as hell would have wanted to know if I were flying that CRJ. Regardless, I think this disaster shows that visual separation should never be used below 1000 AGL within 1 mile of the approach end of a runway.
you are correct you are no expert
@@ogc90 OK, feel free to correct me.
You have a good point, and it would keep things safer.
@@ogc90 stop trying to be a troll and go away if you are incapable of offering anything that’s not negative to the comments. Pathetic.
Visual Separation should REQUIRE that the approvee FIRST identify the approximate direction(heading) and altitude of the aircraft for which VISUAL is requested.
And under night/cloudy conditions should not be granted if the distance is over 1 mile (which the tower can KNOW without accepting any estimate).
Maybe 2 miles for day/clear conditions.
I'm retired Blackhawk instructor pilot (5000 hrs in blackhawks) who was stationed at Davis and I have flown that route thousands of times, both day and night. This accident was totally preventable. Normally when ATC would call me and advise me of an aircraft incoming they would let me know that there was more than one aircraft on final and that I need to avoid aircraft number 2. That way I know which aircraft to look for. If there was another aircraft inbound prior to the accident airliner, PAT could have misidentified the proper aircraft. With the crew under NVG's with limited field of view, and the crewchief in the right seat... all eyes would have been focused to the right. They should have maintained proper scanning, that we preach under NVG's. However, ATC never notified the airliner of the HELO, if they had the aircraft would have looked for it. ATC is the only one with the entire picture, they could easily have asked the HELO to stop, yes we can do that, or even slow down to ensure separation. I have even been asked to reverse route so I would not come close to landing traffic. ATC, I feel, failed this night...errors all around contributed to this unfortunate accident but the majority of it lies with ATC. We trust ATC to provide separation and enough information. I don't feel that ATC provided ALL aircraft with all the information that could have prrevented this.
Agree. And the fact this midair collision occurred in full view of the tower - practically on their doorstep is inexcusable!
Indeed there was another aircraft in line in this case, a 2nd aircraft on final for R1 - AAL3130. It then became 1st in line when JIA5345 accepted to land on R33. So there was a plane 180 degrees from the helo (3130) and another one at 90 to 120 degrees to the left of the helo (5345). We may never know which one (if actually any) were in sight by the helo. ATC was the only one of the three that had an overall view of the situation, and did not inform the CRJ of any other plane nearby.
Of course, 100-200 feet vertical separation is simply stupid that close to an active glide slope. Yes, the route did seem to work well for 999 times out of 1000. Pete Rose would have killed for that percentage.
You're supposedly a retired Black Hawk instructor pilot, yet you mentioned nothing about the helicopter being well above the maximum ceiling restriction, while blaming ATC.
@@synupps877I totally agree with you and it was the helicopter that requested to be left alone.
@@synupps877 ATC has altitude readout radar. Should have seen that. Busy with departures ?
Who in Gods name would design a helicopter route directly under the (short) final approach course of passenger airliners?
An over-confident child who believes that because he can get away fly foolishly for awhile he can get away with it forever. It is said that on a long-enough timeline that disaster will befall us all...but that's no excuse to shorten your timeline by doing stupid things.
Most of the blame for this accident goes directly to whoever approved these routes and altitude minimum for the airspace around this airport
I still disagree with this being 100% the fault of ATC. In my view military command training policies of the helo never should have had a very low time pilot doing a check ride into an extremely busy environment at night. This is a government system failure on both ends.
yes for sure
Dan’s way off base here.
It called Air Traffic CONTROL ! There was no control exercised here. ATC abrogated the responsibility for separation for what ever reason without first ensuring the helo had the right a/c in sight and also failed to tell that a/c about the helo’s position and intentions. Another thing… who approved this procedure for separating traffic in the first place ? Surely the safest procedure and routing would be to have the helicopter flying right over the centre of the field at 500 feet ? That’s the safest place to be and how I used to do it when I was an ATC.
@@ShaunHensleyNo he’s not. He nailed it.
@ The reason is because helicopters have the ability to hold short. Dan's entire premise hinges on the claim that the impact point was at 200' and not at 350' as is being widely reported.
ATC doesn't FLY the aircraft, it's ROUTINE to give pilots visual rules.
ATC informed the crew that the CRJ was coming in for a runway 33 approach and to 'pass behind' the CRJ
Those ARE instructions.
It means for the crew to locate the 33 path (the invisible line extending from the runway ) and to wait for the CRJ to clear before continuing past it.
The crew didn't do that
Why did they scrub the Blackhawks co-pilot Rebecca M. Lobach's entire social media footprint for days before they released her name while the other two pilots names were immediately released? 🤔
Plenty of legacy pics online to explain
@muddywater6856 Pictures do not explain why her entire social media footprint was scrubbed.
So MAGA won’t harass her family.
DEI. Overt Lesbian, which may be relevant. Biden hire. DC insider, appearances suggest that she was fast tracked into status positions. Two visuals came to mind when I saw the video of the chopper heading toward the CRJ at speed: one was 9/11, the other was the violent suicide of two lesbian "mothers" of adopted children, very badly treated...whom they ultimately murdered by driving over a cliff in California. Whatever the cause and effect, truly heartbreaking.
@peterthegreat996 Why would they do that unless it is proven she did something wrong? Why would they not harass the other two pilots families? Please explain yourself.
I understand that the helicopter busted the altitude restriction. He was to stay below 200ft. The collision occurred at 325ft.
She.
From physics formula, it takes 4.5 seconds to fall 325 feet under acceleration of gravity, with no initial vertical velocity. Looking at collision videos, I measured 4.5 seconds for the helicopter to hit the water, which proves the collision was close to 325 feet.
Thanks for providing some corroborating evidence.
It doesn't prove it, although it does support it. The physics formula doesn't take into account air resistance or lift, which are big factors with aircraft, and that makes it not very useful generally.
@@BryceShamwow Hence why I said "close to" 325 feet.. A rough guess at air resistance (I won't go into the maths here) would reduce the height drop in 4.5 seconds by about 5% (worst case 10%). I assume the rotors are providing no lift after the collision, having been too damaged. That still puts the collision at about 300 feet. This corroborates the plane's black box reading of 325 feet +/- 25 feet.
100% chopper pilot's error.
ten hour solo pilot knows what pass behind the airliner means when atc says it
Or purposely
WJHY DID HER CO PILOTS SIT THERE AND COMMITT SUICIDE?
@@regina8994Her social media was completely scrubbed and she was a known leftist Biden enthusiast (activist) with obvious incriminating posts. Parents requested her identity not be released initially giving time to erase her online accounts. She only had 500 hours of flight experience. Super sus.
It was on purpose! 3 attacks in one month,January by people in your own military. What's going on?
Not ATC error! Pilot error by the chopper. The chopper route which is regularly flown thru the city along the east side of the river has a maximum altitude requirement for the choppers to stay at or below 200 feet. Just prior to the collision, the chopper climbed to above 300 feet and flew right into the commercial jet. Chopper pilot was fault, NOT ATC!
yes it was pilots fault however I do not think that pilot taking responsibility means you can just watch 2 aircraft head straight for each other and not say anything! The plane deserves to have someone looking out for it!
@@michaelmayer-o3s nope. jet pilot has to be focused totally on landing. Besides, he doesn't have the visibility to see an aircraft approaching him from below and to the side. He relies on ATC to keep aircraft separated from each other by 1000 feet at least! This chopper route, which is frequently used, was an accident waiting to happen. ATC normally gives planes in the same airspace 1000 feet of separation. But this route gives only 200 feet or less between the chopper (flying at max 200 foot altitude) and jet (flying at 400 feet or slightly below that). Hopefully the NTSB will recommend shutting down that chopper route, and there will be follow thru by the military to do just that. Let the military fly a different route thru the city that does not take them within 200 feet (or less!) of commercial jets!
The one job an ATC does is to ensure separation. He failed to do so and it was not his fault, even partially? Ridiculous.
@@ConcernedPublic Military set up the route, Military had MAXIMUM elevation for choppers on that route to say below 200 feet. That route is flown regularly, several times a day. The chopper pilot knows the altitude limit, it's HER responsibility to stay within that limit. ATC knows the limit too. As long as the chopper stays within limits, there's no problem with commercial jet interference. ATC ensured separation due to the chopper altitude limitation and the commercial jet limitation. I admit 200 foot separation is not enough, but this has been going on for years, and it's time to stop it. But again, ATC is not at fault. Hopefully this will be a wakeup call that 200 feet of separation is cutting it too close. Military should shut down this route! When ATC stacks jets in a holding pattern, it gives them 1000 feet of separation. But hey, you want ATC to argue with the military? Good luck with that.
Chopper pilot screwed up and flew 150 feet above her max altitude and flew right into the jet. Chopper pilot had worked in the Biden admin for two years in a non-flyer capacity, so her flight skills might have been rusty. She was described as "fearless' and "cocky", traits you really don't want in a pilot flying a route like this. That combined with inexperience is not something you want in a chopper pilot who's flying a route with only 200 feet of separation between it and commercial jets.
@@pimacanyon6208 Of course the helicopter pilot was at fault for flying above the 200 ceiling. Anyone who defends her is, to me, evil. However, the ATC appeared to be the only person who was aware of the potential crash but he did nothing. The ATC could have helped to avoid the tragedy. If I were the ATC I'd regret not doing enough for the rest of my life.
My call on the collision -
Helicopter: 55% blame (incompetent or on purpose)
ATC tower: 45% blame (they are the sky god of control)
Airline pilot: 0% blame
The chopper flew into the plane not the other way round.
This is the most accurate description of events I have heard from any source since the tragedy. That a “Deal” can absolve anyone of fault and give them license to ignore the obvious is criminal.
Too high, too fast, 1/2 mile off course, only one observer in the back seat (so a blind spot). This is on the helo, IMHO.
Yes but ATC at least 50% to blame as they let and watched it happen.
@@lapoguslapogus7161 ridiculous
I know nothing about flying other than as a passenger. A retired aerospace engineer sent this to me. Interesting video and the comment section is breathtaking because there’s so much concentrated experience offering an incalculable wealth of perspective.
I hope we humans figure out how to crowd source so much knowledge and experience to set standards rather than leaving it to ass-kissing centralized bureaucracy. I dunno how it will happen but eventually this wealth will be used.
I bow to you experienced pilots who have safely commanded thousands of hours of flight.
Thank you.
very well said laurel🥰
The Blackhawk pilot trying to fly VFR at night in crowded airspace while wearing night vision goggles is stupid. The air traffic controller was stupid for letting the Blackhawk fly VFR under those same conditions. The only innocent party was the pilot of the passenger Jet who was unaware of the back and forth between the ATC and the helicopter because it was on a different frequency. Then there is the issue that there was no 2nd crew chief on the Blackhawk on the left side which created the fatal blind spot. My husband was a controller for 33 years and he would never do something this dumb.
I'm not aware of any proof that the Blackhawk was wearing NVG. NVGs are not useful when flying in well-lit areas. They are designed for very low light conditions.
Especially in a brightly lit city. NVG’s are meant for low light conditions.
@@awesomelana7227 NVG's are meant for night. Every U.S. military helicopter crew will be on goggles between EENT (End Evening Nautical Twilight) and BMNT (Begin Morning Nautical Twilight). And this is over urban, suburban, and rural areas.
And at that speed, Black Hawks have their nose down, plus plane was up, descending.
It was just insane to me.
I am willing to bet that routine procedure for military helicopters going down route 4 was to request visual separation and that it occurred nearly every day before the crash. Any busy controller is going to accept "the deal" as it reduces their workload and allows them to concentrate on everything else going on at the airport. If they are not happy about it, they probably get some pressure from the military as well.
Yes - this visual sep stuff had become sop.
Back in the 1980’s , I tried out for both ATC and Flight Services training.
( was a civilian doing both air and ground search & rescue at the time ) I failed Both because I could not keep all the tail #’s correct in my head as I moved them on and off the board.
My hat Is off to the good ATC’s still out there. We need you and more like you!
You're not making since 😢 shaking hands 😢 no time for this garbage 😢
@@JohnMoore-z1r I guess all you understand is, “Duh.” Good luck with that.
@@randommusings3304 Hi, did you go to the academy in OKC? I ran the same problems they did in the 80’s about 23 years ago. They were a mind fcuk.
@@sinebass808 negative; this was in Canada. YQT ( Thunder Bay Airport). They were trying to get people trained ( and cross-trained) to handle the more remote northern airfields.
Edit: those that made it , could expect to be covering multiple airfields at the same time. And doing both ATC tasks, and Flight Services
The circumstances of this collision are so improbable that it looks more and more an INTENTIONAL act. We can see from the various videos that the helicopter aimed at the jet for several hundred feet and there is no other way to understand how this helicopter pilot could fail to see the BLAZING navigation lights of the jet right in front of it unless the collision was intentional.
There are no latteral and horizontal separation rules after visual separation is approved. HOWEVER there were never authorizations to deviate from the VFR route restrictions. They were STILL mandated to fly on the east river bank at no more than 200-ft. Why the hell were they in the middle of the river at 350ft and nearly 1 mile off lateral course. This and this alone is the cause of the crash. Everything else is downstream factors of good or bad luck
Exactly
Yes, why was the helo in the middle of the river?
This is why I think it was intentional. That and the fact that she was at the wrong altitude. Wrong altitude + 1/2 mile off course + 2 last minute right turns = intentional.
@@snahg2356
So the question then IS
Who 'important' was on de plane?
Me wants to no
Was Lobach "suicidal"?
That Blackhawk flew into the CRJ like a moth attracted to a flame. I'm not saying it was deliberate, but something was going on in that heli that caused a serious mental lapse. The whole situation reeks of incompetence.
The chopper should not have been within a mile of that plane
Basically the helicopter flying at the wrong altitude ran into the back of the airplane. Many beautiful people's lives were lost. And the captain all we heard was a bang and it was over.
Dan , my friend has had a helicopter service in South Central , Alaska , for many years . He won't even look at hiring a pilot with less than 5000 hours to fly his many Hueys and " Black Hawk " . As far as the communication with both , military is on a whole different frequency than civilian . Thank you for informing the public . Cheers Mate !!
It sounds clear to me that the helicopter pilots are used to saying they have traffic in sight (even when they don't) and requesting visual separation so that ATC will leave them alone. I don't think they had the wrong plane in sight, at least initially, I think they had no plane at all in sight.
From 6 miles away, at low level, in the dark, with city lights as a backdrop.... yeah, exactly.
That thing was blasting its headlights right in their direction. The leaked video from employees show that the helicopter never reacted. It’s as if there was no one on board. (And rumor has it those employees were arrested for sharing the video.)
@@alwaysyouramanda Which video?
I'm sure it has worked great for them for several flights....but yea. I think he said he had him in sight so they could continue their check flight.
@@alwaysyouramanda Night vision would have added to the problem if they had it on.
The Helo was 1 mile of course, running a Government Continuity Program training drill with a pilot that had 500 hours of flight time. Nothing in this makes any sense at all albeit intentional.
I'm not 100% convinced there was even anyone actually in it. There was one person they claimed was either the pilot or copilot that has come forward and said they're alive & well. All aircraft can be controlled remotely.
it appears to me that the helicopter aimed to hit the airliner...👈
Blackhawk black op suicide mission on the 33.🤔🤔 That number is associated with sacrificial blood rites of secret societies
Tower and helo may have had a handshake deal on separation, but nobody asked the CRJ how they felt about it. Best practice would have been for ATC to tell the helo to hold at the intersection of Route 1 and Route 4 (north of the approach path of R33, where the Anacostia River joins the Potomac) until cleared to allow the CRJ to land.
Bingo. RJ didn’t know about the deal.
My point, exactly. Why, if in controlled airspace, commercial tower comm is VHF and military tower comm is UHF? If TCA is controlled by approach, why can't traffic hear what's going on in the airspace? Once you leave, then change freq's.
@@ProbableCause-DanGryder just as disturbing: once the magic words are used and the handshake is made, you’re out of words. What are the remaining magic words for: “Do you have your flipping eyes on the flipping plane?”
That makes to much sense.
Helicopter 100% at fault.
As a controller you DO NOT say "Do you see the other plane". You say, "Get your ass below 200 feet...NOW!" So, no, it's not 100% the helicopters' fault.
@@halholland1637 even so, I believe there are such things as altimeters on all aircraft, that show the altitude of the aircraft. Assuming the pilot is not blind and altimeter functioning properly, the pilot should be aware of the altitude restriction and able to comply with it.
@@halholland1637 Yea right. LOL
@@halholland1637So the controller knew the helicopter pilots were breaking protocols but did not tell them to correct the situation? That's incompetence on the controller's part as well.
Absolutely
Its been reported the impact was at 350 feet, not 200 feet. Now that we know the black hawk was given permission to fly anywhere, it makes sense why they were flying SO FAST at 350 feet. Not one person on either end of the call clarified WHICH jet they were talking about having this visual separation about. Just crazy.
The CRJ did in fact get a TCAS TA regarding the helicopter. But, short final is no time to searching for a traffic conflict visually, especially at night.
Wouldn't that be an Unstable approach necessitating a go around?
@@jdshemp No. Stabilized approach criteria does not include an absence of a TA (advisory) TCAS message, but…it is a potential source of distraction. No aircraft should have another aircraft crossing its final approach segment airspace in this regime though. It’s lunacy to think this situation was safe and/or acceptable.
From the Airman's Information Manual (The Pilot Bible)
Visual separation is a means employed by ATC to separate aircraft in terminal areas and en route airspace in the NAS. There are two methods employed to effect this separation: 1. The tower controller sees the aircraft involved and issues instructions, as necessary, to ensure that the aircraft avoid each other. *2. A pilot sees the other aircraft involved and upon instructions from the controller provides separation by maneuvering the aircraft to avoid it. When pilots accept responsibility to maintain visual separation, they must maintain constant visual surveillance and not pass the other aircraft until it is no longer a factor.*
Yes, the controller was *required* to separate. He did. #2 above.
ATC: AT25, traffic just south of the Wilson Bridge, a CRJ, 1200 ft, setting up for runway 33.
PAT: *PAT25 has the traffic in sight request visual separation.*
ATC: Visual Separation approved.
This was 55 seconds before the crash. Any yet, instead of changing course, the Helo flew into the CRJ.
He told the helo of the traffic, but he did not tell the CRJ. They had no idea the helo was there and it's very hard to see traffic behind the wing esp when in a turn!
I'm not a pilot, but I have watched some videos :), this seems pretty clear to me based on the facts presented. Busy airport, they probably have close calls all the time. The ATC probably have a standard with dealing with helicopters to ask for visual separation so they are covered. Should they behave this way, probably not, but that is how flights stay on time. At that point, it is on the helo. The helo also probably deal with issues like this frequently, so they quickly gave approval although it seems very likely they did not see the plane. Their belief was probably we are under 200 feet, so we are fine. Should they be doing this, again probably not. When you drive a car do you follow every rule to the letter. The big problem to me is the helicopter was too high. Is it typical for a helo to be at that altitude? They flew right into the plane because they probably thought we are low enough so there should not be an issue. The only question to me is why were they at that altitude. Was it pilot error, mechanical failure or something else. Let me know if my conclusions don't make sense.
It was a complete failure of the Blackhawk pilot to not fly into a passenger aircraft on final.
Yup. Dan is so wrong on this one.
A simple "HOLD SHORT" on the Helo route requirements for an active runway extended center line, built into the procedures, could have saved this tragedy.
Sad that common sense is ignored cause someone wrote a flawed policy. 😢😢😢
I have flown those helicopter routes. The helicopter was out of the lane. Should have been hugging the shoreline away form the airport. His max altitude at that point is 200 feet. The helicopter accepted responsibility for maintaining visual separation. The helicopter was out in the middle of the river and started climbing and most sources are saying the collision occurred at 400 feet.
If any of these things did not occur there would not have been a collision.
The idea of running helicopters down that route so close to the approach end of a runway that is not using ILS and they are doing circling approaches is just nuts.
Since they closed the routes to civilian traffic after 9/11 the only ones allowed in are military, police and medivac. They are all professionals and I am sure some complacency has set in with a lot more reliance of people following the routes correctly.
Links to those saying 400’ collision?
Deliberate act, assured collision
I have been saying the same thing since the accident happened. The pilot failed to follow the rules which in turn cost many lives. Incompetence. I saw the data and the copter got to about 400ft and the accident happened at 350ft. Whether that is accurate, will eventually be made public.
You are 100% correct. There were at least 5 mistakes made is the way I see it and like you said, take out any of these and everyone would be alive and well....
The helicopter screwed the pooch big time...
the controller nonchalantly approved vis separation and did NOT issue the traffic alert for the imminent head-on mid air! He failed at his only damn job!
the chopper pilot couldn't possibly have missed the the bright landing lights of the fixed wing, unless those in the chopper were just joy riding and havin' a good ol' time!!
Highly likely she had Aspergers Syndrome and all the lights and noise in the helo was sensory overload causing something of an Aspie meltdown or sent her into an Aspie blank stare state of incomprehension.
The very moment the helo's requests visual separation and it's given to them it becomes the helo's responsibility . If they were confused or weren't sure about "having the plane in sight", then they should immediately inform ATC of that .
This is all it took to not talk about the fires anymore
and forget about luigi
More red meat for both sides to argue about
@@alans5799 it's always that way
And the fires are all it took to stop conversation about the p3d0 S4+4N!S+S in Hollyweird, and the tunnels.
⅄┴┴Ǝפ ƎH┴ ⅄Ԁ∩ƆƆO
All?
Having flown for over 35 years and been an Instrument instructor and flown into many busy airspaces, I can say that as an airman (and we all are, pilot, controller, mechanic), we have to believe the system works. When we begin to second guess the other eyes, confusion, conflict, and anarchy happens. I am not saying the controller does not have some responsibility. I am saying that if a pilot says he has traffic, we taught to trust what they say. I do believe this particular airspace is unnecessarily congested. Would I have told to helicopter to hold at Hawks Point for an arrival on Runway 33? I don't know. I am not a controller (although, I have been married to one). I do believe that this crash was a "Perfect Storm". I believe that visual separation along Routes 1 and 4 in these areas need to be severely scrutinized, possibly eliminated. We also need to remember that when our military is flying, everything is a training flight. There are no joy rides. I am anxious to see the preliminary report.
From a former air Force mechanic, aviation enthusiast, and retired truck driver I'm wondering if the helicopter pilots got enough sleep prior to going on duty. Also if trucking and train locomotives have to have cameras watching operators why not aircraft and towers?
The pilot had about 1000 hrs fly time, in what was said, 6 months... I did the math. That is 8hrs a day for 25 weeks, is all. I've seen people in industry not understand their job more than a year, some never get it. Who rushed this girl through the process and why??? She used to be a Biden aid...
Land based systems can afford the weight of film data recording equipment, and/or are near wireless networks to upload the data continuously. Aircraft have neither the free useful load, nor the proximity to networks.
Besides, its ridiculous that that is required anywhere. Is a video really going to tell you if someone was fatigued? More like a Trojan horse for further invasion of privacy if you ask me.
@sithticklefingers7255 I guess you haven't seen all the videos, thousands of social media influencers videoing themselves flying around with numerous go pros all over the cockpit! Equipment only weighs ounces and uses memory cards. Easily done. Not ridiculous it's necessary.
@@TheeRocker Where did you hear 1000 hrs, 6 months? I keep reading 500 hours in the last 5 years
@@volvojohn9036 I watched the speaker on the crash report, that is what he claimed they did know. As with the 325 feet he also stated, seems to be in question as well now. WHy can't we just get the facts, it is something that keeps dividing us Americans. Huh, probably just answered it, lol...
NTSB has confirmed that the collision happened at 325' +/- 25' so not only did the helicopter violate visual separation but the helicopter route was ground to 200' so that was violated as well. Once a visual separation is approved, the responsibility is entirely on the helicopter pilots.
There are bigger problems with this route in heavily congested airspace where the military and civil pilots are on separate frequencies limiting situational awareness, where the military pilots have relatively low hours making them highly prone to overestimating their abilities, and with uncontrolled traffic crossing glideslopes. The best answer would be to close Reagan airport to civil traffic, and construct a shuttle tunnel from Reagan to Dulles. An alternative would be to require military aircraft to use the same tower frequencies, and require them to obtain clearance to cross glideslopes.
Really?
What you're saying is that IF YOU saw a RED CA warning that YOU would ignore it and say it is NOT YOUR responsibility? That you would let a dangerous situation continue.
Is that what I read you saying?
SMH 🙄🙄🙄😎
That was no accident, the people on the plane got murdered by the helicopter and ATC. Lawsuits are coming, stay tuned.
Just put the helos at normal altitudes and under positive ATC control flight following. The downside, the generals admirals dont get a river joyriders of the scenic sights.
ATC could have at the very least, advised AA5342 of request for Vis sep from PAT.ATC saw it coming 18 sec. out. SO, that let them off the hook, with yet a second vis sep confirmation. Omg!😡imo
@@hotrodray6802Do you understand what visual separation means?
Something to remember: Helicopters can hover!
Jets can not.
Helicopters can change direction.
Jets on approach have right away.
Sorry, as much as I dislike ATC, the Pilot-in-Command of the helicopter IS responsible for the crash. She was not up there because ATC was in the Tower, the ATC was there because she was up there.
It was a training flight, the CWO could have taken control at any time. How do 3 helicopter crew NOT see that jet?
Well...she was training...so what about the trainer pilot?
@@TheJHMAN1there is a really good video going around that shows the view of the approach by the helicopter and what the jet looked like with the multitude of lights behind it. At night the jet really does not stand out at all until way too late. This was an accident waiting to happen.
A training flight crossing commercial jet traffic? Seriously?
@ that to me is the root cause.
Visual separation can be applied not only when a pilot reports traffic in sight and requests it themselves, but a pilot can be instructed by ATC to maintain visual separation after they've reported traffic in sight. When visual separation is applied it's absolutely NOT a hand-shake deal that there are absolutely no rules regarding how close the two aircraft can get. Visual separation transfers the separation responsibility from ATC applying ATC standards of separation, to the pilot who is maintaining visual separation maintaining his own separation as required in the FARs. Here's another case where visual separation gets applied a lot: successive visual approaches. Would you also suggest that instructing the second aircraft in the arrival sequence, who has preceding traffic in sight, to follow the first aircraft and clearing them for the visual approach to be excessively dangerous?
As far as ignoring the CA on the radar screen, yup we have to do that all the time. That blinking red CA is a "Conflict Alert", and conflict should have been resolved by the pilot saying they saw the conflicting CRJ and telling the controller multiple times that they were going to ensure they didn't fly into them. The system isn't tracking control instructions issued, it's just plotting aircraft courses and determines that two are going to get kind of close and then sets off that conflict alert. Since the radar system doesn't know what kind of instructions have been issued and acknowledged, it doesn't know that the helicopter pilot promised that he could maneuver safely and avoid a collision with the other aircraft.
I don't think the individual controller deviated from the FAA regulations in any meaningful way. The system makes no allowances for stupid human tricks. Controllers believe the things pilots tell them and act upon that belief. If you tell a controller that you have traffic in sight and are going to ensure that you won't hit them, the controller will believe you. When the controller got the feeling like there was an issue he went to the pilot and asked the pilot to confirm he did have the traffic in sight and gave them an instruction to pass behind the CRJ. The pilot, for the second time, told the controller he had the CRJ in sight and wasn't going to hit them. At what point should the controller say to himself "This pilot is full of shit, and I'm now going to take over the separation from here because I have a better idea of how to keep these guys safe than the pilot"? I don't know. The FAA makes no allowances for a controller to determine that a pilots reports are intentionally unreliable.
Best response I have seen yet. Pilot In Command has to be trusted over someone in the tower until a better way is found to fly aircraft. Is Dan suggesting that all humans in the aircraft be removed from control and have all piloting be done from a lazy boy or some silicon based monstrosity? Never thought I would see him go that route...
Visual Separation should REQUIRE that the approvee FIRST identify the approximate direction(heading) and altitude of the aircraft for which VISUAL is requested.
WHY has that not been done well before now?
Trust but verify.
For any CA, at least once if not twice or more, DCA TOWER should have asked the PAT25 to provide heading and distance estimate of the OTHER aircraft that PAT25 said it had in sight.
@@2Truth4Liberty It is required and it was done in this case. The tower told PAT25 "Traffic just south of the Woodrow Bridge, a CRJ, it's 1200 feet setting up for runway 33" (about 7:07 into the video) PAT25 reported the traffic in sight and requested to maintain visual separation from the traffic, although you can't hear it on the video Dan played because that specific recording doesn't include the pilots response to the traffic call on the UHF frequency. In the second instance right before they hit, the controller omitted the position information for the sake of time since they were so close. If the pilot said anything other than he still had that traffic in sight the controller would almost certainly have assumed responsibility again and given further control instructions.
@@2Truth4Liberty I'm not sure I understand what you mean or what it would accomplish. Do you mean the controller should have had PAT estimate the CRJ's distance and direction from PAT so the controller could verify they actually did have the CRJ in sight, and the tower should have made PAT do that possibly multiple times just to prove they weren't being dishonest? I don't think that's practical for either the time constraints or the additional workload imposed.
THESE PLANES,CHOPPERS & SHIPS HAVE TECH "BACKDOORS"THAT CAN BE REMOTELY ACCESSED...THIS HASNT BEEN SUFFICIENTLY INVESTIGATED YET...
They hit at 325AGL. The helicopter was actively climbing well outside of its 2oo foot ceiling and turning right. It smells very fishy!
This was 💯 intentional and I don’t care how anyone wants to spin it
the chopper flew straight into the plane at an altitude that it was not permitted to be at. How can you blame the ATC for this?
Hi
It is ATCs JOB to keep aircraft separate!
AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL!😮❤
ATC had a conflict alert, they could have sent the CRJ around...
⚠️The collision happened at 325ft allegedly.
Therefore the helicopter was 125ft too high = not just ATC fault
the 325 feet mark was given to us by ATC Collision Commission,,, The math given in this video are the readings known. I trust the math more than ATC... And they already know what happened and why, they just need to tell it well, on their behalf.
The job of ATC is "aircraft separation". A near miss of 100' of separation is OK?
...and flying directly toward the jet. State of mind and health of jet pilots of great interest here.
@pittss2c601 Then you're referring to a procedural problem. Not an error from the controller.
@ ATC definitely made errors. Blood is on them.
My understanding that whatever "deal" was agreed between ATC and the helicopter, that DOES NOT ABSOLVE ATC from sharing responsibilty for separation failure. If you see on your screen two aircraft on a collision course, forget the "deal", you URGENTLY radio the aircraft and command an immediate turn (in this case) east in order to go round the CRJ. The CRJ pilot was turning left on to R33 approach so had a restricted view to his right, the direction from which the helicopter came. My view is that ATC is not absolved from anything. The prime purpose of ATC is to separate aircraft, PERIOD. That over-rides anything else.
As a 30yr airline pilot the primary cause was pilot error! Pure and simple. And the copter was high and violating the 200ft. Yes the controller is a very secondary cause. The helicopter airway construction had more to do with the crash than the controller.
You’re not a 30 year airline pilot.
@ I kinda think I am 17yrs with a regional and 13 years with a major. And I hear you but all responsibility was shifted off the controller as soon as the helicopter pilot accepted the visual.
@ and it’s been awhile but I do believe ATP standards are 100ft of altitude deviation. They were 125ft about their limit.
Thats way too close considering imperfect human beings are involved
@@chrisroberts3963 He has a good point Dan except for the CA the tower had. Why didn't the controller tell the CRJ about the CA? He knew the CRJ did not know about the helo.
According to a Blackhawk instructor who has flown as instructor/check-pilot on this particular route, who posted on another UA-cam video, the section of the route between the two bridges must explicitly be flown under Visual Separation rules to be a valid checkride. Thus, if ATC has NOT granted Visual Separation, the checkride would be over - no pass, no fail - and need to be rescheduled for another day.
Do the check ride at 3am.
So did she pass or fail her check ride? 😢
What a bloody ridiculous scenario- (I don’t fully blame the chopper pilot. I blame the system ie: FAA that ever allowed them to be so close to civil aircraft. The chopper pilot made a simple mistake- guess what? Humans do that. 100’ is almost nothing. You can’t run a system on such ludicrous tight margins without killing people sooner or later.)
Using civil airport traffic for “practice”. Pure insanity.
@ Actually, no. It is both sane and necessary. This was not an ordinary "Can you fly the helo?" checkride. This was the "Can you execute the mission under stress?" checkride. The particular mission of this air group, Continuity of Government, is to evacuate senior members of government, using this exact route, under threat of nuclear attack on Washington DC. The checkride is to assure that the pilot can do this particular route perfectly by memory at a moment's notice.
@ Based upon the information available yesterday, the ADSB data and the tower screen capture, she had clearly failed a few seconds before the collision (the point where most videos start), being 100 feet above the "hard ceiling" for the route. However, today there is some doubt as to whether the ADSB "300 feet" is one-digital bit off (computer engineering rule - "Never trust the lowest bit"), and both aircraft were at exactly 200 feet, the "hard ceiling" of the helo route. This "200 feet" altitude for both aircraft is based upon calculations of geometry. However, while the FAA-DoD agreement puts the ceiling of the route at 200 feet, the Army regs for pilots flying the route state the ceiling as 125 feet, which she had definitely exceeded.
The HH-60 was not at the prescribed altitude of 200 feet or below.
Absolutely.
Not only that, if you look at the track of the copter, you will see it made a 90 degree right turn over the water. Putting it closer to the ends of the runways. It made another smaller right turn right before the crash. Why? The copter was supposed to hug the bank of the river and stay at 200ft. If it did so the accident would not have happened. Was the controllers decisions part of the cause? Yes, by not giving the copter a heading or reminding them to stay on the designated route.
@@Sarconthewolf Signs of a deliberate act, No accident
Don't blame the air traffic controller. The whole helicopter crew was out of compliance. The pilot needed to practice out in the desert somewhere.
@@wayneanderson1641 The controller made a few mistake that contributed or possibly caused the error. The controller seems to have not met the requirements for visual separation to be used.
The pilots of the Blackhawk murdered them.
How is it that I could have watched (in horror) this pending collision LIVE on my effing cell phone, yet there was apparently no such instrumentation in use on the helo to help locate and identify a nearby yet hard to see aircraft, but rather depended on some poor shmuck squinting out of highly visually constricting windows through NVGs in response to a last second uninformative deadpan verbal prompt to SAVE HIS LIFE and that of dozens of other precious souls? Criminal.
Excellent and pertinent point! What a shock, man!
Could it be the pilot skated through her training and wasn’t really qualified?
Well, she cant hold altitude which will make you fail a private pilot checkride
Why are helicos simply not told to stop and wait while planes are landing?
Thank you, Dan, for your explanation, it makes sense.
I have never in my life seen a plane fly straight into an object like that helicopter flew directly into Flight 5324 straight on from a 12 o'clock view, with one exception: The attacks on the twin towers on 09/11/2001. The accident at Reagan International was a fiasco of irresponsibility on the parts of ATC and the helicopter pilots.
@@travellinglamp sadly, you couldn't be more wrong. This was a 100% preventable accident. Most of the fault that's not pilot error is military, some civilian. The UH60 did not have vertical OR lateral separation. He was slightly ahead of the CRJ at impact - his rotor sliced through the far side wing, and the CRJ barrel rolled down into the water. The UH60 should not have asked for, and should not have received, visual separation. But it is common and completely legal, as noted. In one of the busiest approaches in the world, in Class B airspace. Human failure on many levels. Not murder, but certainly lethal negligence.
ps - you can't tell anything about how these aircraft collided horizontally from this perspective. You can't even be truly accurate vertically. You are assuming the Blackhawk 'tboned' the CRJ, but that is not what happened. The CRJ crew almost certainly could not have seen the UH60 - they were responding to what they heard from the tower. And by the time the helo had a clear visual of the CRJ, it was too late.
@@SuzanneBlanchard yes, 100% preventable, which means there's only one reason it wasn't prevented. nobody involved with that flight had insufficient experience or knowledge of that flight path. you're glossing over two glaring, obvious discrepancies. How did the pilot not know she was 125 feet above the allowed altitude, placing her directly in the plane's path? and why did it happen to be the exact altitude the plane was flying, and even timed such that they'd collide? you're correct, it would have been incredibly hard to purposely t-bone the jet, but the chopper clearly flew straight into it while violating its flight path. so you want us to assume that a huge impossible combination of errors, bad decisions, and incompetence of a both the flight crew and ATC are to blame? That's not even numerically probable.
Edit: also, in a court of law, accidentally killing someone is still killing someone, because the court can never be certain that it was an accident, so the killer is charged as being a killer, regardless of motive and circumstances. Legally, this was a case of mass manslaughter, and we're supposed to assume it was purely accidental because the guilty party was a soldier(s)? That's the type of preferential treatment that violates due process, and is abused by police and military on a daily basis to cover for actual malice. It's more sensible to look at this case and say "let's not assume this was an accident because there's no evidence of it being an accident".
@@travellinglamp Are you a pilot?
@SuzanneBlanchardactually there is a way. Screenshot the explosion with your phone, then turn that screenshot into a negative. Darken it or lighten it until you see the helicopter's nose butting the belly of the plane. The plane had started lifting it's nose, and that kept the chopper from tboning it. The rotors look to cut into the wing where the fuel is. The engines on this plane are mounted on each side at the tail. That' s what I see, anyway. The plane flips and then does a belly roll, nose diving into the frigid water. You can tell me I dont know what Im talking about, and maybe I dont. Im just a country girl with a muscle dz that is killing me. I also have a sister named Suzanne. I always wanted to learn ice skate well, instead of some. Not a whole lotta rinks around here. Those kids looked like fantastic kids, unlike many today out destroying monuments and showing their ass. God, hold those people in your arms. Amen.
There have been 30 records of near-midair collisions since 1987 around DCA, with one-third of those incidents being military aircraft-related and seven including helicopters, according to the Federal Aviation Administration's Near Midair Collision (NMAC) Reporting Program (these are only the "reported" cases). Number 31 was NOT a near miss, but a direct hit, with the loss of 67 souls. This is unacceptable. ATC at Reagan International have willfully cultivated for years a callous disregard for human life. Much like people who dangerously engage in drunk or impaired unsafe driving on land, in an automobile: You may not kill someone every time that you drive impaired, but if you ever do, you can be charged with manslaughter. Trusting the fate of 67 souls to a helicopter pilot on a test check ride, possibly with night goggles on (with ATC callously granting visual separation in a careless manner), who ultimately flunked her exam by killing herself, her examiner, a copilot and an entire passenger airliner jet is certainly irresponsible controlling. It took 31 times, but on the 31st time, catastrophic disaster occurred.
What about the military ATC or tower asking the helicopter to return to base with no response? I heard this radio traffic once but now I can’t find it. I’m only hearing the airport’s ATC radio traffic. When I heard the military radio traffic it sounded like the helicopter was ignoring orders. Anybody else hear the Army ATC radio traffic?
Yes I did/ she didn't respond when he told her to land too..
H-60 pilot assumed responsibility for separation.
Yeah, lets ignore the 400 foot flight in a 200 ft restriction. Lets ignore the main thing few are talking about and that is that the military ATC was desperately trying to get that chopper on the ground with NO response. They were desperate and sounding very concern, Please land immediately, repeated 5 times or so with a desperate land at dulles if necessary but land immediately. They knew something, Whether it was said to them by someone in that chopper, someone in the family or something but something made them want that on the ground fast, a little bit too late. Scrubbing her entire SM history also proves they knew something.
Wow. Please elaborate.
Suicide mission?
Where did you hear that?
I read somewhere that a Military scientist was on board the aircraft that was struck by the Helo, can someone please confirm this?
@ Hear what? There have been numerous reports, With the black box info they have decided of 300 ft but either way too high. I heard the radio call out that night in some x videos, which seem to have been thinned out, hard to find now.
Why did they wait to disclose the female pilot's name until they completely scrubbed her anti-trump social media?
ATC and commercial pilots and passengers should have never been put in the situation to begin with! No Night Vision over populated cities and No Blackhawks flying within a 25 mile radius of a commercial airport!
NO! It was the helicopter pilot that failed! If all power failed on the tower and the landing strip lights were out they would still be required to see what and where they and everyone else was, is, are going. The helicopter has windows all around the front and sides, 3 military personnel should have seen a big fat plane with 2 million candle power landing lights that were on, right in front of them.
Blackhawk black op suicide mission on the 33.🤔 This number is associated with sacrificial blood rites of secret societies. This was no accident. The planes course was redirected altering it's original flight path to the 33. YGTBSM!!
I hate to even bring this up, but, what if the collision was deliberate?
You figure the girl was suicidal or may guy?
Thanks for pointing out and explaining this important clue.
My instinct says the helicopter was remotely controlled or locked in its trajectory and the pilots bailed, and someone the DarkSide wants dead was on that airplane.
All these other air mishaps "all of a sudden" are red-herring distractions to say there's something wrong with "the system" and no intentional crime was committed.
Best giveaway... Runway 33.
It looked like the helicopter deliberately ran into the back of the plane to me.
I did the same math that Dan did yesterday, and I came up with the same answer - the CRJ, on the glideslope, would have been right at about 200' AGL at the point of impact. That is, the FUSELAGE would have been there. If they were in a left turn, the left wing however, would have been LOWER than 200'. Both aircraft could have been exactly within their altitude limits and collided. Regardless of the fact that the Army needs to train for this mission, to allow helicopters to fly through the DCA glideslope, regardless of day or night, with traffic is insanity! In an actual mission for the Blackhawk - evacuating VIPs from DC - most likely incoming traffic to DCA would be the last thing you have to worry about. Adding the fact that the controller had a collision alert and did not take action, points the finger at the controller, the Blackhawk for not avoiding, and the FAA for allowing these flight rules in the first place.
It’s not a deal it’s the helicopter taking responsibility to use his eyes to avoid the collision this proves it was the helicopters fault
Pilots want to blame ATC. The tower asked twice if they saw the traffic and they said yes. And the PAT was off course and way too high. All this while an evaluator was onboard with nothing to do but watch all these things. And they are holding onto the helo tapes. Something is bad wrong here but it is not ATC.
In the Feb 2 NTSB update, Army Colonel OTT indicated there may be "reasons" why the helicopter would be higher than its assign altitude. He said for example to avoid flock of birds! This guy is an idiot and should be removed from this investigation. Also says a lot about the Army leadership at that base
exactly
The impact happened at over 300 feet. In incompetent helicopter crew called the wrong traffic, and climbed way above their 200 foot altitude restriction.
They also made a right hand 90 degree turn over the water bringing them closer to the ends of the runways.
deliberate act.
How much is way above their prescribed altitude?
Pilot shattered one too many ceilings.
Yes, flying a 200 foot ceiling at night over water is challenging. One does not learn in such an unforgiving environment.
@ Dan was guessing 1 foot high. They were 125 feet high.
I think you should reconsider your views before making another video. I'm applaud of what your saying after 4 minutes. 1) A pilot in command is just that. He has final say. 2|)A controller just advise. 3) Rules are implemented to avoid situations. 4) 200 ' max altitude rule was broken.
Hilo pilot made 2 mistakes. He didn't have visual on the jet, and confirmed he did and broke 200' rule. How dare you blame it on controller. Bad discussion on hilo P.I.C.
Agreed. Dan has this badly wrong.
There is another critical factor in this accident that's not often mentioned. *In aviation as in boating (which is where my experience is) when two craft on collision course the relative angle each has to the other does not change.* This means that the helicopter pilots were claiming to be able to pick the _unmoving lights_ of the plane out of a city background that was filled with _unmoving lights_ of all colors.
I've been told that the helicopter pilots flying Route 1 were able to do that because as they approached the airport N-S an aircraft flying S-N to land on Runway 33 is at a higher altitude and thus its lights are above the ground clutter. The fact that this helicopter was flying well above the required attitude negated that technique. That was even more true as the plane descended and the helicopter rose in the seconds before the collision. They were on a collision course vertically as well as horizontally.
A crazy effort underway to deflect blame from the dei pilot with a freshly scrubbed social media. Something is up.
The collision happened at 325 feet, +/- 25 feet. Didn't you see that initial report?
Makes no difference. ATC duty to guarantee that this didn’t happen. It happened.
ATC also instructed the chopper to go behind the CRJ and the chopper failed to do so. Go behind sounds like a pretty obvious way to avoid a collision, especially to a chopper that claimed they had visual on the incoming aircraft. From everything I have heard to this point, the chopper never changed course or speed even though they claimed to have the CRJ in sight. The use of VHF and UHF in that airspace is also an issue, If you want to admonish ATC, they could have told the chopper that you are above 200 feet and not hugging the coast line of the river, for that ATC could be at fault, then again this also sits on the pilot in command of the chopper and the evaluator sitting in the other seat as well for not following protocols for the area. Was there a proper pre flight done where this was all discussed ahead time on the route, knowing that you are supposed to be along the coast, you have to descend to 200 feet between certain bridges on this route.
To remove any blame from this preventable accident from the chopper is wrong. The only party out pf the three involved was the CRJ crew , they flew at normal altitude and on a normal approach following ATC instructions.
One more thing I’ve never seen reported anywhere…
PAT25 made a turn to the west at Haines point to cross the river, where helicopter route 6 is located… (1500 ft restriction) then turned back toward the south east down the river… helicopter route 6 requires the helicopter climb to 1500 ft on route 4. Before over flying National right where runway 33 is located.
Sounds like a terrorist attack, The Helicopter had picked up a Saudi diplomate before hand and now they arrested two control tower employees for videoing the crash, how did they have enough time to shoot a video? Something is not adding up....
Reports are that in recordings of the communication between the air traffic controller and the pilot, that they can hear collision avoidance WARNINGS/signals from inside the Blackhawk just before the crash. There seems to be this direct communication between tower and pilot up until seconds before impact. That controller was clearly warning that Blackhawk pilot about the regional jet, and with plenty of time for the Blackhawk pilot to acknowledge the warning and alter its flight path. You can clearly see in video clips that those bright lights are the landing headlights of the regional jet. And they look like floodlights, and impossible to miss on a crystal clear night. How do you miss that?!!! The pilot was clearly NOT at their required altitude, flying 400 feet above sea level, and 200 feet higher than their required altitude. BTW, there was a confirmation that they saw the regional jet TWO MINUTES before impact. This is not just pilot error, this has all the hallmarks of intentional, and if not, at best, is pilot negligence or incompetence. The fact is, with 500 hours of flying time, that she was competent enough to successfully target the regional jet before anybody had a chance to stop it from happening. The Blackhawk pilot was clearly warned of the the regional jet TWO MINUTES before impact, the night was so clear that cameras miles away were able to capture the aircraft course and collision, the Blackhawk was flying 200 feet above the maximum altitude it should have been flying, and we now know that the Blackhawk had veered off course and headed directly towards the jet. And finally, the pilot was a very experienced pilot with approximately 500 hours of flight time. It almost looks like this collision was intentional. Suicide? If not, this was extreme negligence!!! Instead of asking questions, the air traffic controller should have instructed and demanded that the Blackhawk pilot change its flight path; for example, BANK LEFT!!!, BANK RIGHT!!!, PULL UP!!!, or DIVE!!! Had he done so, there might have been a different outcome. Also, with the 500 hours of flight experience this pilot had, she absolutely should have known that they were entering a flightpath corridor dedicated to commercial aircraft landing at that airport. I also find it interesting that the pilot confirmed that she had a visual on an aircraft, but if she mistook which aircraft, the pilot missed the aircraft that was right in front of her. Given the crystal clear night that it was, it makes no sense to me that she could miss a GIANT well-lit aircraft right in front of her. If you look at photos of the aircraft just before the crash, you can clearly and obviously see that the aircraft landing headlights can be seen five miles away. How do you miss that?!!! Actually, she didn't miss that -- it was a direct hit! The landing lights simply helped to ensure that she would not miss the airliner. At this point, this is the most likely scenario and everything else is a red herring.
THANK YOU! You expressed so well everything I do not want to believe, but which was painfully obvious ab initio. Next question: motivation and did anyone try to stop her?
Another question: Any possibility this was a Zelinski - AI controlled, weaponised chopper (yes, I used to write sci fi) use in an attempt to precipitate warfare? For Putin to retaliate against the murder of his top skaters and their companion-protectors?
500 hours is extremely inexperienced. A lot of factors lined up just right for the two aircraft to be in the same place at the same time. Inexperience of the Blackhawk pilot is certainly one of them.
Yeah that's the thing, an inexperienced pilot isn't going to be able to intentionally down a passenger jet. It seems more like a tragic accident resulting from a seriously flawed system. But I'm open to other ideas, this is just one.
The problem is government stupidity and military complacency in a nutshell.
Airspace Violation!! Standard Procedure not followed!! WHY!??😳🤔🤔🤔🤔 WHERE WAS THE FOURTH CREWMAN!??😳🤔🤔🤔🤔, AND WHY WASN'T THE FOURTH CREWMEMBER ON THE BLACKHAWK WITH EYES OUTSIDE!??🙄🤔🤔🤔🤔 STRANGE!!!🤭🤭🤭🤭🤔🤔🤔🤔🤔???????????
Longhaul Boeing 787 Captain / Instructor / Examiner here…
Whilst the rules differ between different countries, I am sure the following will be evaluated during the investigation:
- Any policy that permits visual separation from traffic at NIGHT should be reviewed.
- Any policy that permits routes - especially with such minimal planned separation - that cross final approach tracks should be reviewed.
- Any policy that permits 'band-boxing' of UHF and VHF radio communication frequencies should be reviewed, especially as it does not enable the crew of the UHF and VHF aircraft to hear the transmissions of the other crew. This reduces flight crew situational awareness (SA).
Some other items not directly related to this incident, but that could lead to collisions are:
- Land and Hold Short (LAHSO) operations should be reviewed.
- Clearing aircraft to land with traffic ahead but yet to land, should be reviewed. (e.g. "XXXX123 number 4 cleared to land")
- Having Ramp areas uncontrolled by ATC.
- Encouraging crew to 'report visual' (and thus becoming completely responsible for their own separation from that moment) should be reviewed.
@@alexr5557 30 year ATC and Ops Officer here. All good points. Fully concur.
Exactly how in the hell is it standard operating procedure to have a helicopter flying under a jetline with only a planned separation of only 100 feet ? WTF!!!! You know that a deviation of 100 feet in height can happen in a number of seconds not minutes. Yes our man Dan told us how it became s.o.p. but why in the hell is this allowed- ever? People need to be in jail over this. At first I thought that maybe it happened because the pilot did it on purpose now I know it was a accident that was bound to happen. Who in the hell when buying a ticket on a airliner buys it with there lives being so tested in this way . This kind of **** has got to stop.
They were separated vertically by less than an 40 yard NFL field goal. Insanity
The CRJ was never aware of the deal.