UPDATE 3: Former Blackhawk | CRJ Pilot & Former ATC Controllers Help Find "Smoking Gun" at DCA
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 лют 2025
- Michael 'Rocket' Blackstone speaks to former Black Hawk H-60 IP with thousands of hours in the helicopter for the Army and who also was a Captain of the CRJ-700. His thoughts help to uncover the shocking truth about the hidden hazards of flying into and around DCA along the Potomac River at night in both aircraft, using ANVIS-6 Gen 3 NVGs and flying the RJ into runway 33 as a Captain. Also included are new insights that former ATC Controllers shared about their experiences and what they would have done differently in the same situation that developed on January 29, 2025. They both stated that they would have issued a Collision Alert to PAT 25 and/or sent Bluestreak 5342 around. Please help us to find the TRUTH in this complex and ongoing investigation. If it is helpful we welcome your thoughts. If you are here to spread hate and misinformation, please go elsewhere. Be kind to each other, love one another, even if they have a different opinion than yours. Be respectful in your comments. Stay safe out there. Keep on flying.
Retired Army Aviator and rated H60 pilot here. Really appreciate what you did with this video and all the work involved. Quite in depth. Looking at the comments I see a lot of confirmation bias in what people think they know or have already made up their minds about. Having been a member of several Army accident investigation panels I can say what needs to be remembered here is that the purpose of all this is to figure out what went wrong, create awareness, and look for ways to mitigate future risk. It is not to assign blame as I see a lot of, safety is not about liability. In an accident board you look for two things, factors that are present relating to the mishap and those that actually contributed to the accident . So for example, even though ATC not telling the crew to look left did not contribute, it was present and it should be a lesson learned for the future. I think you covered much of what is there and I have seen and also discussed elsewhere. Great job and thanks. Fly safe brother.
It’s really about both though. There will be lawsuits, hence the need to figure out who messed up.
Try telling the families of the innocent people killed that this isn’t about blame. The minute that helicopter hit that plane, thats all it’s about. If the helicopter crashed into a mountain, then maybe it’s only about safety
@ Do you think it was deliberate? Do you think everyone on that helo sacrificed themselves to kill others? If so I feel sorry for you. It has all the hallmarks of being an accident as was well explained here. Hope you never have to risk your life for a mission that you believe in.
Hello. Do you know how many BH training exercises take place along path 4? Once per day, 10 per day?
@@TomHaywood-w2j I think that asking the control tower operator to give advice such as, "look left," is asking too much. The Control tower operators job is to give advice and instructions regarding landing, runways and traffic in the area that's known weather, barometric pressure and so forth. I think the FAA needs to establish rules regarding this situation, if the rules don't already exist. The basic problem in my mind is that the airliner is on an IFR clearance all the way to the point of landing and he's got his head and eyes on the instruments, accepting that moment when he visually divert from runway one to runway 33. The helicopter pilot is operating VFR and is required to keep separation visually. It seems to me that fundamentally, the crew of the helicopter strapped itself down by using the goggles. How can you see through the goggles accurately enough to separate yourself from conflicting traffic when you've restricted your eyesight to infrared signals? I think the army needs to reconsider operations like that training mission along the river. They need to consider the probability that they are the only ones who are going to separate the traffic visually it may be a fundamental problem that people are expecting safety to come from the tower. That is not going to happen, especially when they're supposed to be two or more controllers, and one of them has left.
A couple of small details that I have noticed; 1. Capt Lobech was an RLO Aviator, being as such, she is going to be a low hour operator simply because her primary duty is leadership/management, a desk jockey is you will, and is probably a Company Commander within the Battalion which is normal for her career path. Being a fully qualified Pilot, she has to maintain a minimum number of monthly hours to stay qualified but also maintain her flight status/pay, the Warrant Officers are (Army's words) the expert flyers as they fly 80-90% (or more) of the missions; 2. On the speeds, the imagery released of the ATC Radar scope shows the H-60 doing ±80-90kts and wavering between 200 and 300 feet, while the CRJ is doing its expected approach speed of ±120kts; 3. When the original Visual Separation was called the H-60 was near the Basin/Haines Point area and if you watch the flight path they juked to the west almost like they expected a holding call from ATC and then returned to Route 4.; 4. The NTSB has previously stated that the H-60 was within the boundaries of Route 4 at the time of the accident, do not know if this has been modified after the recovery of the H-60's black box.
The Swiss Chesse is a mean mistress.
Watching the targets merge and the tower not controlling that situation took a huge chunk out of my heart as a retired ATC. I've seen a lot of close ones in 33 years working traffic. You're right, they have to use positive control. You can't just watch the targets hit. There's phraseology for that and it wasn't used. After the PATCO strike, supervisors and military controllers were sent to the towers and it all worked out. Supervisors in the tower need to do a better job. I retired in 07 and still have nightmares.
Thank you for your excellent service and I hope those bad dreams will go away…
@@tweaterdea2 The phraseology being? Don't leave us hanging; What was ATC supposed to do?
@@mvpfocus Announce "Collision Alert" and give instructions to avert, to both pilots. It is mandatory, when the red Collision Alert lights flash on the screen, that the ATC announce that, in those words, to the pilots. It doesn't matter about visual separation. The ATC failed in his duty of care. Along with failures by others.
@ To pilots on IFR _and_ VFR? I'm waiting to hear from the OP, because the OP listed his credentials and then left it there without stating the policy.
@@jesabeltwin5051Exactly! But I believe this is a policy change to free up ATC responsibility. They now can notify pilots of traffic and the pilot can request authority to use his own visual judgement.
Once the pilot is authorized by ATC he's got full responsibility and strangely the ATC is free of any further responsibility.
This needs to be immediately changed back to full ATC control. They have a the ability to see the full traffic while the pilots are trained to look in their direction of travel and target.
Let’s get back to basics. The pilot doing the flying whether it’s a 150 or 747 has as primary flying functions heading, speed, altitude. The helio was restricted to max altitude of 200 feet. The pilot failed that primary altitude function and 67 people are dead because the helio was 100 or more feet too high. It doesn’t matter if she had 50 hours or 5000, the mistake is the same. It doesn’t matter if one more pair of eyes would have been helpful. If the helio had been flown within the positioning envelope it was authorized to be in the crash would not have happened. All the rest is looking for ways to offload the blame. This isn’t even close… it’s not like it was a 25 foot elevation mistake.
True. Hours of experience are for the recommendations after the enquiry.
100% spot on from a pilot and ATC for 35 years!
This youtuber has been told to shut up or paid off or threatened to have his retirement "Lost " he and may others a sugar coating the woman pilots flying...she was a Biden Party DEI show pony and had just bought a 500 thou buck home had been advanced past many men 10 years more service than her ...she was pissed off maybe the men on board had teased her...lesbians don't like men...100 ...200 feet to high flying at 120 MPH....wrong side of the river...lied about seeing the jet so she would not have to follow ATC instructions...
Not a pilot but I ran night small boat OPS on NODS as an instructor and had similar experiences of near misses in the Puget sound. I will say that the controller is a fail safe. Someone who has the overall picture and can relay potential issues. Assume the worst when you see something unfolding that has a potential for a MISHAP
No
If you think 100’ separation is the difference between safe and unsafe, you’re already dangerous
I’m curious if her duties as a voluntary military social aid in the White House caused a rush to complete required training.
Sympathy and excuses do not bring back the 67 lives that have been snuffed out due to pilot error.
I doubt it, but I'm sure how training is conducted at that unit will be looked at as a part of the investigation.
This a very important element of the situation. The military is littered with people like that.
They FastTrack her
As a retired controller, we used to have a program where we could fly jumpseat on civil flights. 9-11 changed all that. And we don't give traffic to aircraft via clock positions that are always changing headings...we can use reference points also.
Flight deck training did come back for a bit. Went away during covid. The excuse now is it puts “undue strain” on the system.
Thank you for your service in ATC. It’s a very challenging job.
Agreed. These armchair experts appear to believe that everything controlled from 'local' is under a radar service.
@@daveotterblad1896 I fly helos out of FLL. I get (thankfully) traffic advisories in clock positions and distance ALL THE TIME. 100%
Thank you for your pursuit of the truth and your attempt to explain it to the rest of us. I have no background in flying. Your explanations help make some sense out of a senseless tragedy. It’s really tough as a typical civilian to accept that unsafe deviations at DCA had become routine. In many ways, this accident isn’t just a tragedy, but a scandal. People are rightfully shocked at the risks that have been allowed to accumulate both in ACT and military flying.
The Captain was stated to be PIC qualified. However she had gotten a highly prestigious white house assignment that had apparently just ended. Was she allowed to maintain qualification and currency while doing this job or was it one of those all-consuming jobs that leaves no time for anything? If so, was this mission running before walking? But the entire route was a disaster just looking for an opportunity.
Sadly, the Helo Pilot and radio man didn't Aviate properly with altitude, didn't Navigate properly with following the Eastern Potomac shoreline with proper lateral separation, they cut the corner to the almost the center of the river and didn't Communicate effectively with ATC, with Request Visual Separation, to gain clearance, never contacting ATC asking for assistance in picking up the jet, never acknowledged that they DIDN'T have visual, and never ASKED for more help from ATC.
They made errors on all 3, Aviate, Navigate, and Communicate.
The jet, being diverted to a different runway, 33 did everything by the books.
Maybe she wanted to die, because she had no pleasure in guiding republic leaders in the White House? Possible since Trump is cleaning up the place with dishonest actors?
Right. And this with an evaluator on board to watch all these things. I have a bad feeling about this. They still have not said what is in the helo tapes.
@@andymachala999
Maybe it's like a move: Top gun in a bad way 😱😩😰😰😰
3 Personen can't listen ,can't seeing and can't follow the advises
I'm happy somebody else analyzed this accident referencing A N C .
Full stop. If I were the CRJ pilot though, knowing a BH is heading towards me 5 miles away, I decline the request by the ATC to take 33, like the Republic pilot did the day before.
The swiss cheese model lined up. 1. Change in runway 2. Vague ATC 3. Helo attitude error. 3. Helo off course. 4. ATC spread too thin. 5. Night time. 6. Possible goggles 7. Trajectories hid the aircraft. 8. Slim probability of two speeding craft meeting at same time at same altitude. 9. Different radio frequencies. 10. 5342 was early
All of things aligned perfectly to yield a crash. It's extreme improbability, which is crashes are rare, but can slip through the cracks.
Absolutely correct
The CRJ having no information of PAT 25’s existence is another factor that should’ve never happened.
Reality Check ✅
This whole incident boils down to an accident waiting to happen.
*All three runways intercept with each other at various points.
*The amount of traffic has only increased throughout the years.
*Helicopter traffic routes so close to take off and landing of fixed wing aircraft.
* This has been going on for so long now that the exception became the norm.
* Most airline pilots know Ragan National is one of the more difficult airports to operate in.
Unless something is done to eliminate, resolve, or correct these issues, it is bound to happen again.
Given all that, my contention is ATC is the last line of defense. It is unbelievable a controller can give up responsibility using the "visual separation" excuse. The controller should have directed the helo around the traffic. Period.
The perfect storm
When the PAT-25 Black Hawk crew was alerted about landing traffic on runway 33, they were abeam the Jefferson Memorial and the CRJ was over the Wilson Bridge, 5.94 miles away. I don't think PAT-25 ever had the CRJ in sight, even though they said they did.
Agreed. They knew the magic words to say and immediately said those words, even though they likely didn’t have the traffic insight, or best case scenario thought they had it, but really had a different airplane in sight.
Completely on the Blackhawk crew as much as this channel wants to blame the controller.
I say that too...
exactly, helicopter was just robotically calling they had visual
I would assume if PAT said looking or we don't have them they'd be holding. So to continue the training they said they had visual.
I suspected this, maybe it meant visual on screen? Turning into the mid-river didn't make sense based on what actions were agreed upon
"They climbed a little bit". Yeah, minimum of 50% over their well-known ceiling. You're soft-peddling it on behalf of the helo pilots and dumping it straight on to ATC.
ATC did exactly everything it was legally permitted to do.
People believe the tower can tell VFR traffic to turn… nope.
Not without taking on the responsibility if they crash… then off to prison
@@TestPilotN911RG mistakes can be found in all further procedures also higher command, all are professional & have a responsibility within part. Including your comments. Thankyou.. kdagPlymouthUK 2025Feb6th1008hrGMT
@@TestPilotN911RG clearly the legalities need to change, ATC had the opportunity to save these lives, of course ATC can advise a pilot to turn if there is a risk of crash but they did not so stating they did everything they needed to legally doesnt cut it
Not true. It seems like everyone is forgetting just how small of a vertical space 200 ft is.. All it takes is a gust of wind or a sneeze to pop up 50 ft in a helo. Completely overlook things just to make a simple, naive judgment... Such as wind gusts, air currents and even vortex left by Jets flying around.. You can't just set it at 200 and it just stay right level. Not to overlook the fact that that was the ceiling, and that was the ceiling... However it also seems silly to chastise someone for going 21 in a 20. As far as dumping it on ATC... I don't care who has visual this or separation that, when one human is sitting there watching two aircraft flying straight towards each other, and can prevent it with a simple sentence... And does nothing, yeah they deserve a little bit of responsibility. That is why they are there... Because humans are human, because instruments fail!... You could be doing everything right and have a faulty instrument and not know it, so then ACT should just let you fly straight into another aircraft in their airspace just because you said you would look for a plane lol come on now. He was watching it on his radar screen, he had a collision alert going off... A helicopter can stop, all he had to do was say hold your position.
..
@@wayne9638 ATC advised the helicopter pilots twice of the CRJ traffic. Both times the PIC/IP stated he had the traffic in sight and requested visual separation. In both the mid air and the near miss the day before, the helicopter pilots seemed very nonchalant with regard to requesting visual separation. Short of being a mind reader, the controller had little recourse IMHO. But I’m sure that all sides will be looked at and changes made to help ensure everyone safety going forward.
It just absolutely shatters me that the helo confirmed sighting of the CRJ not once but TWICE. You'd think they'd edge closer to the eastern river coastline and slow down as R33 started coming into view.
They thought atc was saying get behind the cjr that was taking off and that’s exactly what they did. Atc should have specifically said “ incoming” cjr
@@AngelofHogwarts the NTSB confirmed that wasnt PAT25 answering! The NTSB said PAT25 was using UHF. The voice on the LIVEATC tapes was another confused medevac pilot. Listen to the full tapes.
There were two CRJs, one either side of the Black Hawk.
The general professional opinion now is that BH never saw the CRJ it hit.
And they shouldn't have changed route as you suggest, they didn't have permission to leave the designated H route.
Black Hawk should have corrected altitude - problem solved.
@@warrenranstrom4462 listen to the audio again. He gave complete details including plane type, location and destination runway, when the CRJ was south of Woodrow Wilson.
You completely skipped over the most important element, the fact that the helicopter was over its ceiling by more than 100ft, if they had stayed below 200ft this collision would not have happened. So, the question is, why were they at that altitude?
From my understanding it rounds up to the nearest 100. So if the helo was flying at 251ft it would read that they were flying above 300ft. Who knows, it was windy that evening, possible gust of wind? 50ft isn’t very much.
@@fatpandasquad6719 Wrong.
Nice try...but NO. @fatpandasquad6719
@@Pasovineyard Thank you for that amazing insight.
That's going to happen often enough that helicopters shouldn't be flying that route
Just FYI, no one is playing baseball outside at night in January in DC. Honestly, the river was a literal sheet of ice just two days prior
Yeah, when he went there, I pictured females eyes rolling at “mansplaining”. A lot of what ifs. Next we’ll be asking what if there was a falling star. If the goggles don’t work for the environment, by all means, take them off.
Actually I pulled it up and there is games going on still as well as other stuff is being done lights stay on till 10 or 11
Life continues in winter - those of us who live in cold places continue with our lives, even when the local river freezes 👍🏻
@@Daysofyoutubeliers Are there even lights on the smaller field Rocket pointed to? Do you live on or near Bolling? Are lights on every night? Were the on the night of the incident?
Yes, that was really weak speculation by Rocket.
I had to acquire two thousand five hundred (2,500) hours within 18 months to learn cosmetology (hair coloring/cutting/chemical processing, and other skills) just to be allowed to take a state board exam to be allowed to earn a license to practice as a hair stylist. I don't have tens to hundreds of people's lives to worry about, I only worry about my client's desire for the outcome of their specific requirements and requests.
I'm shocked at the one thousand hours, or less, for pilot training. Eye opening. 😮🤯
You are correct Ma’am
It costs a "LOT" of money to fly a blackhawk and airplane in both fuel and maintenance so it is not so easy to get hours as a pilot. when you fly a plane for "so many" hours, you have to do maintenance on the plane. Hours in a plane are very expensive.
. It's over $100,000 for 10 min of jet fuel in a fighter -- should we cut their hours back, too? No more Top Gun training? It's not like the military uses them as much as helicopters.
@myronww Such a stupid comment. So because it costs "a lot" of money we should just give pilots less time flying and turn them loose sooner?
It's going to cost "a lot" of money for families to bury 67 loved ones.
I see your point but you are offering a false equivalence.
You get credit for an 8 hour work day. If you're working full time under the supervision of a fully qualified stylist you should get your 2,500 hours in around 14 months.
Flying is a different thing. Junior pilots fly with an instructor until they pass a series of evaluations. Going forward every US military pilot must fly and pass an evaluated "check ride" for every flight profile within that unit's mission set.
Then there's the reality that for most flights in fighter jets and helicopters the average sortie is less than 2 hours.
There's a lot to unpack with this mishap. Let's be patient and let the investigators do their work.
You can find so many reasons for the helo not seeing the jet, lights, NVG, looking in the wrong direction etc, but the PRIMARY problem you completely ignore is the altitude. In that area the helo was restricted to a max of 200'. Period. The ATC controller could see at the last few moments that the "02" changed to "03" but it was the PRIMARY DUTY of the helo air crew to maintain their restricted altitude. No matter what else you throw into the equation, if they had been at 200' this would have been avoided.
You are using lame "reasoning" to shift the blame onto others when the Helo crew violated their altitude restriction by 125' and they are responsible for this collision.
That is the point Robert is making.
No, any less than 1000 ft of separation would still have been unacceptable, and the pilots would have aborted the landing had they known. The helo ascended and turned away from trafic (right) seconds before the crash as that was the most intuitive thing to do trying to separate - had the CRJ not ascended simultaniously, the crash would have been avoided. I believe the helo didn’t expect the CRJ to turn left towards them, if they did, they would have diverted left. Proper protocols to avoid this situation were not in place.
Obviously. But why was it at that altitude? Was the crew negligent, or was the altimeter inaccurate?
Something as ordinary as 5G could be part of the problem. Blackhawks use RA-4500 altimeters, but 'should' be upgraded to RA-4500 MKII, "elegantly designed as a simple drop-in replacement for RA-4000 and RA-4500 radar altimeters installed earlier, prior to the emergence of spurious 5G C-band interference caused by 5G network transmissions."
And, if this crew was negligent, how do we explain the near miss 24 hrs earlier, which also resulted from a higher altitude. What are the odds that 2 helo crews in a row chose to exceed altitude? Two military flight crews in a row who didn't watch their altimeter, or ignored it and flew too high--in THIS traffic corridor? Really?
@@robertverbois9232 Somebody needs to say it, in the night it is very difficult for heli to adjust/configure the instruments in the cockpit, and to fly in the night with or withouth gogles. And a passenger plane in night needs to configure for the ILS and for the flight path downards and the are focused on the landing lights. And the serveral configurations are done so often.
100% the most thoughtful, levelheaded, humble and humane analysis of this tragedy I’ve seen. Hopefully, this all leads to urgently needed changes at DCA.
1) out of practice PIC , 2) Plane diverted to rwy33 , 3) Plane flies overland to the East of the river bank closer to HELO rt 4 4) PIC avoids plane by going West of the bank (tries to pass to West of plane), 5) ATC lowers (its own) workload by granting vis sep, 5) Plane gets closer and PIC drifts higher(because PIC not a good pilot) 6) HELO sticks to route (West of plane) having lost situational awareness , even though it is in landing corridor of plane (and should know it) 7) Plane banks left towards West to land 8) Because vis sep, there is not enough time for HELO to react and the two aircraft collide.
Appreciate you and other Pilots input on this to help us understand what might happened. Prayers to all families affected by this terrible tragedy.
Having been a USAF ATC TWR controller, I cringed upon seeing the obvious path to the mid air collision on radar: I would have been far more animated and proactive giving "come to Jesus" traffic advisories (warnings) to the helicopter- to get his 💩 together and I would have given him a suggestion or request or advisory (for all you perfect ATC phraseology scrutinizers) immediate break left heading 090 for collision avoidance and spacing, & request maintain holding pattern East of the river bank- Traffic is a head on collision with CJR! No fooling around with namby pamby "Visual separation requests"! Situational awareness for ATC controllers is to be an extra pair of eyes aided by radar to give pilots the info they need to avert such an obvious death threatening convergence! Too many controllers are stuck in just repeating by rote the acceptable terminology to sequence the traffic through and are stymied in a real emergency. I personally believe the atc controllers could have assisted the military helo (who couldn't hear VHF comms ) with frequent necessary CRJ on final to rwy33 location description traffic updates/ advisories so he could have chosen to divert himself and save all their lives.
💯%
They're atheists now. Nuff said.
ATC could have also told the CRJ to go around. Regardless of the helo mindset.
@surf-n-turf It is not easy for A CJR to go around on final with wheels down. They are in stable flight. They can't turn as quickly as a helo
@ No one said anything about an immediate turn. I said Traffic, landing clearance cancelled. Go around.
Lookup the actions of PAT11 around DCA the DAY BEFORE the AA5432 crash. Sickening. PAT11 came within 200-300ft of THREE different Commercial Flights that were on short final onto RWY01.
This is a mix of a lackadaisical, complacent and passive ATC controller combined with bad airmanship and complacency on the part of PAT25. I’m a Current First Officer with a mainline US Carrier, proud former US Army Soldier, (2009-2013) two combat deployments to Afghanistan with 10th Mountain Division.
I hate that I have to say this, but sometimes “It is what it is”. I love our Army Aviators. I truly do, but the seemingly consistent PAT Flights in and around Washington DC that have a record of flying and communicating recklessly. And doing so regularly. This is unacceptable.
As for NVG’s; PAT25 had its Spot/Searchlight turned on as it clearly illuminated a large part of the River as it approached AA5342. I doubt they would have NVG’s on while using a light that is designed to illuminate the terrain. It would be blinding, even more so over a reflective surface.
Sad story. I hate that this happened.
Things usually get fixed quickly when something completely avoidable like this happens. Beyond all the political nonsense, the aviation community will fix all of this procedurally so it will not occur again.
@@xvsmokeLife is nothing but a set of mistakes that leads to improvements. Like toddlers have to fall down to learn how to walk, it's just part of humanity. It's crazy though, how quick everyone is today to absolutely tear apart another human for making a simple mistake... As if every person sitting behind their little phone or their little keyboard is absolutely perfect and goes through their daily lives without ever doing any little thing "wrong". I can guarantee you none of them speed, none of them cross lanes of traffic without a blinker, Certainly none of them text and drive! If it were they or one of their loved ones, they would certainly be expecting grace and understanding... Goes out the window that even the most repaired, the most trained, the most educated on the planet still make little mistakes on a daily basis.
Solid comment. The helo routes and protocols depend on responsible airmanship on the part of the PAT aviators.
@@Mandy-nt2cs Correct, we ALL make mistakes. But when that mistake kills 64 innocent human beings, many of them children, then folks are well within their rights to criticize & condemn!
I appreciate how much research and learning that you are doing about Army Aviation and rotary wing. I am a retired Chinook helicopter aviator and aviation safety officer. Keep asking that 60 IP questions and keep presenting the facts. Thank you for not armchair flying tragedy, but for bringing facts with consideration for the families grieving their loved ones.
On the contrary, there are only two salient facts supported by the data (1) the UH60 changed course and (2) the UH60 gained altitude. If it stayed on course and at correct altitude (200ft) the collision wouldn't have occurred. This is very straight forward.
I do not think the ATC is at fault. The Blackhawk crew seemed to be rushing through this flight at some speed and not processing the ATC information being provided to them as to the location of the jet. They were flying at an altitude not permitted and did not appear to be hugging the shoreline but flying in an unauthorized area over the river. Plus they took responsibility for visual 41:04 separation. No doubt this is a highly stressful night flight and I have great empathy for this crew. But Flight safety must be a priority and I hope the military takes these training missions to another location.
ATC procedures are also to blame here no question, this visual authorisation request is ridiculous especially in airspace this close to final approach
@@wayne9638 Visual separation policies should probably be reviewed. Aircraft on different frequencies and with different purposes probably can't maintain separation reliably, and this situation should have an avoidance rule.
They didn’t get information on the location of the jet. ATC let them collide
Madam you are clearly not a pilot or an air traffic controller. If you were you would understand what is required flying in controlled airspace. We all know what caused this accident, the question is why was it allowed to happen. Mike answered that perfectly.
@@wayne9638 maybe the procedures should be changed, but ATC did nothing wrong. The procedure did not cause this accident. Bad navigation on the part of the Blackhawk crew caused it.
Someone made an analysis why the copter was still intack after the collision. The finding was that the copter hit the airplane's wing when the plane was banking to avoid the collision. The ball of flame we saw was the fuel on the plane's wing igniting when the heli propeller hit it.
@@edmund2j what channel?
@@alireid5874 ua-cam.com/video/xdlDboE1zfI/v-deo.htmlsi=SS4P23pH36JyKlR1
Pilots always want to blame the tower. The point is that there was no reason to be above 200', much less above 300'. It would have been a near miss, but that's all. The tower asked twice if they saw the traffic and they said yes. There was not time to do anything else. There was a crew chief that was supposed to be checking all this stuff. It was pilot error, pure a simple.
Or perhaps the pilot wasn’t in the helo? Welcome to the Swiss Cheese Matrix System.
Or the pilot was on a suicide mission.
Terminology, Near Miss, would indicate a collision, Near Hit, would mean a miss.
Got to love the language.
When there are multiple FAA reported incidents, including the day prior, it is not simply pilot error.
@@dkeota That’s insulting to the pilots and their families. The blackhawk had an autonomous AI Matrix system that could be controlled by a tablet.
So this is the helicopter that is supposed to safely whisk away top leadership in a event of attack by a foreign enemy
I believe so. The actual route this Blackhawk followed was weird, criss-crossing the Potomac several times at sharp angles.
@@lynnlynn2661 Yes, erratic flight and above the not on centerline of the VFR corridor.
@@lynnlynn2661 Was it part of this particular training objective -- maneuvers at the Potomac?
Feels like someone’s had a word in his ear.
@@Pasovineyard Any chance people with time can check on the flight path of previous training exercises?
I know people think that this was a dangerous training mission but the military has to prepare for everything. A VIP transport could happen in the middle of an attack while planes are still landing.
Safety changes are going to be made and everyone will be safer, that's just how these things work.
You’re bending over backwards to make excuses for the helicopter, give it up
This is a very different take than his last video, very different.
Maybe you are bending over backward to blame the helicopter 🥴 if it was a private owner people would be more divided, everyone just wants to blame the military for everything they can.
Johny Correct.
@@itsallmyfault264 viewers are taking the known facts and deciding for themselves.
OP seems to have a lot of agreement in 👍
kinda obvious, isn't it? making every "rational" excuse conceivable to minimize helo responsibility. the pilot bears responsibility for the AC... until something really bad happens. then, it's all about the Swiss cheese... & it stinks.
A 100-foot vertical separation at night is insanity.
Here's the main issue: the helicopter crew wasn't paying attention when the controller advised them that jet traffic was landing runway 33. So, when the controller realized this, and not-so-subtly hinted that the helicopter was now actively creating a hazard, the helicopter crew was not honest enough to admit they weren't listening and had forgotten where the jet was landing; and worse still, decided to pull a stunt and dart out in front of an active airfield, by flying nearly half-a-kilometer West of where the helicopter corridor was meant to be flown.
The only error that the controller made was not advising the jet of the traffic, in the first place. But you have to believe as a controller that pilots are going to be professional and stay within the safety parameters of their flight plan. The helicopter crew, for whatever reason, deviated mightily, directly in front of an active runway glideslope, to tragic effect.
Perfectly said! Thank you for that…was starting to feel like I’m living in the twilight zone! Baseball being played in January?? What about flying fast, tactical “missions” in close proximity to runways, during peak hour arr/dep traffic, at night, wearing(vision & depth hindering) NVG’s, directly affecting a pilot’s ability to see, due to ambient lighting from the airport & metropolitan area. And, all under the GUISE OF FLYING VFR? VFR, my -$$!
Then, throw in a H60 crew(or maybe just one over-confident instructor pilot) that cared more about not receiving any undue delay from ATC to start their mission, that he couldn’t wait to get on tape, “traffic in sight. REQUEST VISUAL SEPARATION”. I really believe this is the point where it all could’ve been saved. Had that H60 instructor exercised some critical listening skills in that moment, he may have picked up on the fact that the CRJ, LANDING RY33, was going to be a bigger obstacle, than what routinely takes place, the majority of the time(i.e. landing RY1). I’m 99% certain that had the H60 pilot said, “looking for traffic”, the next words out of the controller’s mouth would’ve been, “Hold north of the field” or maybe, “Proceed to HAINS waypoint and hold”. Unfortunately, we’ll never know. Yet, nobody seems to want to focus on all that.
Respectfully,
Opinion of a retired DOD ATC with 33+ years experience.
p.s. Thank you, again, for pointing out the obvious in your post. God bless the fallen and their families.
Assuming is never a good idea when peoples lives are in your hands. There was assumptions from both the helo and ATC.
ATC did not give clear directive to assist the pilot in seeing the aircraft, yes the pilots were at fault but so are the ATC procedures
@@wayne9638but everyone is trying to cover up for the helicopter pilots . This is why chump blamed ATC initially. It’s a deflection.
@@beez991 you mean ATC assuming that a pilot who stated he had a traffic in sight actually had the traffic in sight? Are controllers to assume now that when a pilot states something that he is mistaken or lying? There has to be some level of trust.
All aviation accidents (probably non aviation as well) can be seen as a chain of events that lead to something bad. If you break one of the links in that chain, the accident doesn't happen, but that doesn't mean the other links are ok. All the links in the chain contribute. As a former Blackhawk crewchief with over 5000 hours crewing black hawks I have some thoughts on just one of the possible links. When crewing with three crew members, the crew chief normally sits on the right side. One of the duties of the crewchief is to scan the airspace and call out any aircraft or obstructions they see. Obviously the crewchief in this case would have had no chance to see the airliner from where he was sitting. But if PAT-25 was flying with 4 crew members, they would have had a crewchief in the left hand crew seat who's only duty at that point is to scan the left side's airspace for anything that could affect the safe flight of the helo. Again, just one link in a chain that possible has hundreds of links, but something to think about. Maybe if you are flying in airspace as crazy as Washington DC, use 4 crew members.
That's every accident or bad event in life. But i always say, there are also THE CHAIN OF EVENTS that bring about GOOD OUTCOMES in peoples lives.
Or maybe stop these dangerous flights, move the routes, and stick to the route and altitude limits.
I must say that I really appreciate your composure, your desire to help us understand.. and the compassion with which you speak.
I disagree with your statement that the Blackhawk is flown from the right seat. I deployed twice in the UH60 as a PIC/UT. It was very common to always switch seats from day to day or mission to mission. Sometimes the PIC would be in the right, sometimes the left. Basically you would ask SIC (co-pilot) which seat they wanted, or literally do Rock-Paper-Scissors. AND, throughout the entire flight, which may be 2.2+ hours (without extended range tanks) you would alternate who was actually flying at any particular moment…because there was no autopilot, and sometimes you needed a break.
Now, in the civilian world, yes, the captain flys typically in the right seat. But in my 22 years in the Army, there was never an “assigned” seat for flying pilot.
I dont think it matters what seat the DEI hire was in
I hope the FAA doesn't stop at DCA but asks questions from pilots of other security issues they have experienced at other airports. For example there is a helicopter company who does tours here in Las Vegas located to the left of runway 1L/19R. They need to do checks at every major airport.
The helicopter was too high.
Rocket, I have watched both episodes and I had not seen your broadcasts before. Mostly a Juan Browne follower. I want to commend you for both episodes but especially the second. I can see the emotional toll these segments have had on you and I am so impressed by both your clarity and your efforts to learn more and adjust you opinions accordingly. This is an immense tragedy because it is a mid-air and they are fortunately so rare. But those of us who are old enough can remember the Grand Canyon and NYC mid-airs from the 1950s which transformed controlled airspace forever and created the foundation for truly safe flying that now makes this type of accident so rare. But as long as human beings fly airplanes and the ultimate control functions are made by human beings in an ATC, there will be lessons to learn. The fact that one of these birds was a helicopter that literally could have hovered out of harms way by a simple instruction or that a communication could have guided the copter crew to the right quadrant to confirm the visual is a very painful conclusion. But if we step back further, how could our government create a VIP transport unit and not make sure they had the very latest technology available knowing they had to traverse such a difficult corridor. Reminiscent of Ron Brown's death and that of 34 others in Croatia in 1996 on a VIP 737 that was flying without state of the art TFR and TAR systems. Ultimately, the real blame belongs to nameless bureaucrats and not these souls who struggled to do their best but had a bad night at the office-and I am referring to ATC and HH60-the CRJ crew and passengers clearly have the distinction of being blameless. (but of course that does not bring back their loved ones)
With immense gratitude and respect for your efforts,
Jim
My same thoughts. The true responsible persons are high-up in society to find.
Jamesroberts9253, Very well said. This is my first time watching Rockets' videos. I am very impressed.
If you have any doubt about what traffic ATC wants you on the look out for, THEN DON'T ACKNOWLEDGE ask for a vector, ask for clarification
I agree, but also ATC should not watch a head on collision on radar and not take control. Both are at fault
@@beez991 ATC did take control, he told him to fly behind the CRJ. If the IP hadn't lied, the controller would have given him digits.
Absolutely! I don't call traffic insight for this reason. Let ATC handle the separation.
ROCKET.... Hey, my call sign was GRUNT... I was a Doc of an FA18 squadron after transitioning to the 3d MAW from Force R at Lejune. I also worked Aviation Medicine and Physiology... Below is my take on the crash.
Listen, I love your Take on this. You are spot on about the new goggles.... tremendous but... Huge ambient light fuzzs them...
Remember it was WINDY and helos don't like wind so much as she was off course on Rt.1 several times. We have to wait and see about the altimeter setting ...
If you watch the video from the airport you see the lights of the helo across the front of the plane. In the last instant, you see head on... Green light in the left and red light on the right with landing lights on the center .... Slow it down and watch frame by frame. The1st officer evidently saw the copter and in the last instant they pulled up. You can see the green light move up... Red light drops...and this is the problem... The wing dropped and that is where they hit.. the plane flipped... Follow the green light and did and aileron roll... Into the water. You can see it if you watch closely. They pulled up and left ..raising the right side ..lowering the left.
Just my take. The helo went right under and clipped the lowered wing area because that is shown on the video also ..the wing is separate from the body of the plane as it aileron rolls
.
I am confused about this extreme opposite opinion on ATC’s responsibility today?? I really listened to your explanation of what visual separation request meant in your last video. It was very clear from you that placed responsibility on BH.
He is rooting for his frienda
In the FAA order 7110.65 the ATC guide/manual/bible. Section 7-2-2 covers the controller's responsibilities when separating traffic. The controller admirably did steps a,b,c. Look up the rest for yourself and ask did the controller perform steps (d) and (e) ? Google 7110.65 and look at section 7-2.
@@stevegiron8825 I focus on the failure to issue a traffic alert that would have instructed the pilot their situational awareness was broken:
7110.65W (page 2-1-4):
b. Aircraft Conflict/Mode C Intruder Alert.
Immediately issue/initiate an alert to an aircraft if you
are aware of another aircraft at an altitude that you
believe places them in unsafe proximity. If feasible,
offer the pilot an alternate course of action. When an
alternate course of action is given, end the
transmission with the word “immediately.”
PHRASEOLOGY−
TRAFFIC ALERT (call sign) (position of aircraft)ADVISE
YOU TURN LEFT/RIGHT (heading),
and/or
CLIMB/DESCEND (specific altitude if appropriate)
IMMEDIATELY.
EXAMPLE−
“Traffic Alert, Cessna Three Four Juliet, 12’o clock, 1 mile
advise you turn left immediately.”
or
“Traffic Alert, Cessna Three-Four Juliet, 12’o clock, 1
mile advise you turn left and climb immediately.”
I think everyone has been reading my comments over the last few days, that's why.
YES, the Blackhawk screwed up, but couldn't see it coming. That was obvious when they spent nearly a minute after claiming to have the CRJ in sight _homing in on it like a heat-seeking missile_ . ATC, on the other hand, COULD see it coming.
The more conversation I listen to the worse this gets.
Now we are concluding the pilots couldn't see.
Ok. So let's conclude they couldn't see.
Does that mean a pilot continues on?
I thought pilots own the craft.
I was always told that my pilot of my commercial craft is the boss. If weather seems off, he/she decides to keep that plane on the ground. I've even heard of a pilot refusing to take off just because he felt something was not right.
Now I'm hearing that pilots are flying forward at 100 knots even though they are blind.
This is very very concerning as a frequent flier.
A final thought for Rocket and his audience here... Question: NTSB reported that the jet crew did in fact receive three audible RA warnings from their TCAS systems, one at 1000ft closure with the helicopter, a second at 500ft closure, and a 3rd alarming traffic traffic. The night before at around 8pm, a different jet pilot responded to the RA from TCAS and aborted his landing avoiding a potential collision with helicopter traffic. Why didn't these pilots respond to their audible RA TCAS warnings? I know the reason most have said is they were focused on the runway bc it was a tough change, short runway, etc. I agree that may be likely, but I'm also wondering if it was because they were NEVER TOLD by ATC there was going to be a helicopter potentially crossing their path. The BIG difference between the near miss 24hr prior to the crash incident is the ATC the day before Gabe way more information to both the jet and heli that gave them knowledge of one another, and the locations/whereabouts of said aircraft to the other party. The ATC involved in the crash gave, in my humble opinion, absolutely MINIMAL information to both parties
My thoughts.
@lbhays5477 It seems like you misunderstood the 1000ft and 500ft callouts. They came from the radar altimeter automaticly telling the height above ground. They are not TCAS warnings! Also to mention TCAS would not give resolution advisory (RA) below 500ft as no one can be adviced to decend so close to ground.
"Traffic Traffic" is an TA.
@@Merilix2 RA's can also command a climb.
@@Merilix2@Merilix2 I did misunderstand that. Yes, I thought the "automated call-out" was synonymous with traffic warning. Thanks for the clarification. Now I wonder what the RA was that brickhouse jet aborted a landing in response to the previous day. Would it have been the "traffic traffic" audible, or some earlier traffic warning? If you know please comment. Again thank you! That makes more sense why the pilots on bluestreak would not have had time to react, and they wouldn't have been looking for a heli because they weren't told of a potential. I wonder if any traffic warnings were there but they weren't concerned as they wouldn't have been informed of anything to link it to and would assume it was due to normal traffic around them
@@kentpaynter1350 Yes, but there are always two RA's. *Both* involved TCAS systems must agree on which one should climb and which one should decend.
The night before the exact thing happened in a near miss at this airport.
I hope none of the family members see this video. Never heard so many excuses in one sitting. This is one of those cases where we should let the NTSB complete investigation.
“Intentional non-compliance” and “Normalization of deviants of procedure”. Huge contributing factors!
Yes. Over and over again.
Retired FAA ILS tech with 29 years of experience here. One thing that I haven't heard mentioned, or mentioned often is the fact that you had non landing or departing aircraft in the runway corridors, in the immediate area of the airport. That is something that HAS to change, or this will happen again.
“I’m not blaming anyone” (Immediately blames ATC while tripping over himself to excuse the helo pilots)
Helicopter was supposed to be flying between 100 and 200 ft. When the helicopter hit the CRJ it was at 300+ft where it was not supposed to be. I have not heard any explanation put forward as to why it was at a height where it was not supposed to be. This video of yours is very interesting. However all your maths calculations and your lines in Google Maps from each aircraft's position/route towards the impact point does not explain why the helicopter was at the wrong height. One of your previous videos showed the radar screen which had the CRJ at 500 ft and the HU6 at 200 ft prior to and at the point of impact the radar showed the CRJ was at 300 ft and the HU6 had climbed to 300 ft. It amazes me that an accident has not occurred prior to this one. Having helicopters whizzing past the end of runway 33 is a recipe for disaster. As a side note it would have been nice to have seen your Google Map while you were making your time vs speed calculations.
Correct.
The woman pilot was assigned to the White House and probably wasn’t up to par with her training but had to do an annual check ride to stay certified. If you’re a helicopter pilot, be a helicopter pilot and not be assigned unrelated duties.
That’s my opinion. She had a gap in her flight time how much we probably won’t get to see.
Would it have been her choice? Would the Army have given her orders to do one assignment at the WH and then do the heli training? I understand we may not know that. Just curious about whether she was caught in a difficult situation not of her own making.
Just incredibly sad.
She probably should not have been on this route at night
Just wondering, why did the training officer say he had the rj in sight when he didn’t.
It's a man's voice on the heli saying they could see the CRJ.
Dude - at 39:30 - who is playing ball at 8:20P in February?! Nobody…
I am not a pilot at all but as someone who is also in a high risk occupation that means life and death for others, I find your analysis a learning experience.
Tbh, I search your updates rather than the news because I learn so much more from your problem solving.
Thanks for your hardwork putting these points together
🙏👨✈️🛩️
I search for his updates too.. but I don’t think anyone ever reads these comments but don’t helicopters have like recordings of inside the aircraft like planes do.. seems like that would be pretty telling.. hope it doesn’t get lost.
@@ericafrenk6747haha I read it! And yes you are right. They are called Black Box and they extracted both Black Boxes from the plane and the helicopter. NTSB (team running aviation safety/investigation) is investigating them right now.
@@ericafrenk6747 haha I read it! And you’re right - they have recording systems for both the helicopter and the plane. These have been extracted (they call them Black Box) and the NTSB (the aviation safety governing body) is investigating both recordings.
@@ericafrenk6747 I don't know if the copter has voice recordings of discussions in the cockpit like a jet has. They would have speed and altitude ect.
It's true that the ATC didn't give a clock position for the CRJ but he did say it was at 1200 ft setting up for runway 33 which should give the helo pilot the direction to look for the CRJ.
She was more than 50% ABOVE the MAXIMUM altitude. You dont use the maximum as your guideline. Case closed. No matter what ATC said, if she was flying properly, we wouldn't be discussing this.
If the helicopter receives instructions to pass behind, and they don’t have an airplane in sight to pass behind, they need to stop and make sure they’re not in line with runway 33. They didn’t even slow down as If they just wanted to get out of there asap.
💯 there was no plane they were conceivably going behind, robotically flying and confirming nonexistent visuals
If a controller asked a second time if I had the traffic in sight my head would be on a swivel looking out both sides of the copter if I never really saw the jet in the first place. But you'd think the first place you'd look would be to the left inland.
Correct. I don't understand why people aren't discussing this point. They took no movements that could be construed as "passing behind" a flight from either behind them or coming from the 33 flight path. Do you think they were looking around for the flight and inadvertently went up in altitude?
The instruction to pass behind was given less than 20 seconds before crash
@@KB-xd5wq if the heli had the other plane insight, a simple "do you have RJ in sight?" does nothing. ATC should have given distance and direction!
Love your channel. Although ATC didn't say "left", "11:00", etc., as a civilian, when I listened to the first conversation with ATC and PAT-25:" PAT-25, there's traffic just south of the Wilson Bridge, CRJ is at 1,200ft setting up for Runway 33", my interpretation from having stayed near Reagan and flow into Regan many times is that the CRJ will be flying towards Runway 33 on the left. The reason is because given the layout we know that Runway 33 is perpendicular to the Potomac and there'd likely be no other way for a CRJ to line up and land on this runway unless they were able to cross the river from the left side. The second point you make is that ATC didn't specifically state how far away the CRJ was and again as a civilian I think to myself, I've driven from the bridge to about that location and it's approximately five miles. But then I think about everything you just said and I understand where the majority of PAT-25's focus likely would have been given their probable frequency of flying and the circumstances they were flying in. This is in no way to disrespect anyone involved in the crash, it's rather just me appreciating the opportunity to learn about the hard work and ins and outs of being a pilot and an ATC from someone who admires their jobs and loves to fly.
@@Wvu4776 agree…. Anyone flying that route should know exactly where the airport is and the runway orientations…And even though I’m no pilot, I would think that a helo pilot should also know exactly where the bridges are! Otherwise you’re unprepared to fly that route!
One of the best series I’ve ever seen on UA-cam. Bravo!
You had the most valuable insight and concentrated analysis of the doomed airliner and helo I have heard. Your goodness and humanity is evident in this analysis with an obvious sensitivity for all the souls involved. The detail you have worked out will probably be backed up by the data recorders in total. As a lay person who is not a good flyer, I found your video most enlightening. This entire calamity will certainly not make me a better flyer, or even a more willing one, but knowledge and information and common sense has always been my motivation and I thank you for the sharing of this valuable insight. In my mind, it comes down to the humans and that is the case in whatever activities we engage in whether it be driving a car or riding on a bus. The best at this point anyone can do is to find solutions so that this exact scenario will not be repeated again. Thank you for this excellent video.
No one plays baseball in Washington in January. Stop trying to make excuses for two very bad pilots.
I did think the same thing about the ballfields being lit at night in January at 845pm.
I'M A USAF VET. 🇺🇸 I know DC well & the airport! I worked 14 years downtown DC.
The military has no business there at the airport!!!
There is only one solution: Move military helicopter training to another place in the country. Period. The pathway is too narrow to accommodate both civilian and military; the DC airport and civilian flights cannot be be moved. Highway traffic cannot be accommodated in side streets. The only military flights near that airport should be active missions and prearranged individually with ATC.
It is not just a military helo corridor. Medical, weather, news etc. FAA changed airspace control after a similar collision in 1978 at SEATAC. The rules were not enforced in DC.
I thought they training there because of White House, so they can react on some events related to government. You always want to train in the similar to events environment.
I hear what you’re saying but there are soooo many bases in that area: Boling, Andrews, Belvoir, Ft. Myer, Quantico, to name a few. It definitely complicates things, but you make a good point.
I was thinking the opposite. Close it to commercial aircraft and restrict access to only the military and possibly transport of VIPs and/or people with high security risks. It’s a ridiculously high risk location as it is. Decades ago, when the air traffic had grown to greatly exceed the design capacity, shutting it down, or shutting it down to commercial traffic was the plan. Dulles and BWI could handle the extra load, and they both also had (still have?) room to expand in the future. But CONGRESS didn’t want to have to add the extra travel time when they’re in session, flying into DC on Mondays, and flying out on Fridays.
Thank for all the work you’r putting into these videos. I’m a nuclear engineer, and air travel is one of the few industries outside my own that must work as diligently, always, to combat complacency, avoid normalizing deviations, and keep the holes in the Swiss cheese from lining up. To find our problems before our problems find us.
Well done. You’re almost making it too easy on whatever engineer, operator, or training instructor that is eventually tapped to draw up the lesson plan and training module to make this tragedy in DC a case study in the nuclear industry through which we are reminded that it CAN happen here, it CAN happen to us.
Mike this is a brilliant analysis of this accident, and best yet in this series. Your closing statement was 100% on point.
Totally disagreeing with you attempting to cover for the diversity hire pilot. Controller had nothing to do with this. It’s the chopper pilot.
Why helicopter was flying so fast??? Crossing active runway extension in such low visibility
39:00 Do they play baseball on those fields in the middle of the winter? The facts that we know are that the IP misidentified the CRJ twice and the BH was ascending above its ceiling limit when it flew into the plane. When he received the collision alert, the ATC who was managing all the incoming and departing flights, had about 15 seconds to process what he was looking at and contact the BH, which again assured him they had the CRJ in sight. It’s easy to Monday morning quarterback the ATC with “could haves and should haves”, but in the end the BH crew bear the responsibility for flying into the CRJ.
I appreciate your expertise and empathy, Mike. As an aside, I met your Dad during a visit to Air Combat way back in 1990 or so. It was quite an experience. Take care and fly safe.
On a 3 degree flight path you descend 300’ per mile. The accident happened at approximately 2,400’ from touchdown RWY 33. That is 4/10 of a mile. That would put you at 120’. At 1/2 a mile you would be at 150’. The H1 ceiling was 200’. This means that if both aircraft were exactly on profile, the approach designed separation would be 70’ …. This is madness. The approach should never have been approved by the FAA. When landing on RWY 33 H1 & H4 should have been closed. Why were the helicopters forced low, rather than not below “x” .. which would could have improved separation? “No accident yet” = Complacency.
It's not necessarily that the procedure should not have been approved. The ultimate fault lies with whoever in the FAA approved the airspace (ie, vis chopper routes so close with potentially 100' vertical clearances under landing aircraft - absolutely no tolerance for error or even mild windshear) and the ATM operational policies (choppers should be held or tracks widened to provide a safety envelope for landing & departing aircraft, especially at night and in marginal visibility).
Thankyou for expressing the clear evidence there were several critical failures by the H60 crew. It was not DEI it was not the Tower. The IP took full responsibility twice and was given info on jet. If the IP said truthfully "no I do not have jet" then the Tower would have called Hold immediate at 200 feet 20 secobds before impact.
In my opinion the basis of the failures on the H60 was the military culture of not admitting "fault" ie I cannot see jet
Too many are afraid to call the military out and seek to blame others
The Helo pilot may have been looking at the wrong aircraft and believed he had the correct aircraft in sight. Him not “admitting” fault is the dumbest thing I have heard yet. Just because you fly in the military doesn’t mean you have an ego or want to hide fault. I guarantee you he did not want to slam into another aircraft. He thought he saw the aircraft he was supposed to avoid. It is super easy to look at the wrong target during the day in a target dense environment, not to mention at night at low altitude. What is your beef with the military?
Yet with all of the FAA reported incidents, including 2 the day prior, you place all blame on the BH? This was a systemic problem with the FAA, procedural problem with ATC and flight errors with BH.
In essence she was a part time pat pilot devoting more time as presidential aide and LGBTQ spokesperson than military. Ridiculous, gross negligence and incompetence that got 67 people killed and like you said family members destroyed forever
She did it to herself....you want to be a pilot - then fly, maintain your skills. Asse kissing duties will always be a hindrance to professional excellence.
Wasn't it more her PIC's fault?
Thank you for such a clear explanation of the facts leading up to this accident. There always is a collection of circumstances that cause accidents, its rarely one thing or person to blame. The actual position of the crj could have been given to the helo sooner. Helicopters fly this route all the time,they know where the runway is and a plane landing will be a common occurrence and during the day visibility is easier but at night more information is required as every light looks more or less the same and to try and distinguish a plane light as at distance from others is very difficult.
Maybe Helicopters know where the runways.are, but do the heli pilots? It may be the PAT25 helicopter, but that doesn't mean the same crew is aboard. Evidently this crew didn't know all it needed to or cared to.
6:08 traffic alert is a good thing, but …
There are examples of accidents that happen despite the alert system being activated.
One reason can be that the crew is fully focused on a specific task, so they don’t “hear” the alert.
I recall one accident report from the U.S. that I read years ago where an aircraft hit the ground with the ground proximity warning being audible in the cockpit (recording from cockpit )
They had a problem with some equipment, non life threatening problem, and everyone were occupied with that problem.
And the steam gauges are absolutely perfect.
I have been flying VFR during night. It’s a challenge but if you stay within the limits of VFR night and the limitations of your ability, it is absolutely fine.
I even turned off ALL lights on the airplane, in cockpit and navigation. The airport turned off all approach lights and turned the whole airport black.
I successfully landed the aircraft.
I would not dream of flying in against the flow of the traffic, head to head with an airliner…
I would rather do a racetrack
Thank you for this analysis. I can tell the sincerity in your voice. It gives me a better understanding of the pressures and stress involved in flying. God bless you 🙏
She was a certified PIC, yes, but Eaves was automatically the PIC as the instructor evaluating her. In fact, a military representative confirmed Eaves was the PIC for this mission before they released her name.
I wish more people would realize this fact. RIP to them all 🙏🏾
"Eggzactly" and Eaves was in the left seat thus additionally giving him the greatest burden to spot the CRJ out the front windscreen approaching them (with bright AF landing lights) from their 10 o'clock.
But that might have been an early attempt to deflect criticism of performing such risky training flights at night, especially in the light of Lombach's inexperience. It smells really bad.
@ I don't assume which seat either was in, but it is clear the field of vision was restricted. Given the vision issues and the threat to civilians, they should have had a fourth crew member sighting the other side of the helo, from what some BH pilots have said.
@ Not sure what you are arguing here, but the status of the pilots is encoded in law.
"lack of navigation capability" in an aircraft training exercise within an extremely congested corridor at night seems totally insane and a situation that should have been voided by an 'experienced pilot' or crew of instructors...over confidence, not appreciating dangerous consequences lurking is not 'an experienced pilot' effort - I'm not a pilot but as a physician w/ 50 yrs experience, used to making rapid at risk, life vs death decisions, this tragedy was avoidable, should have never happened.
Everyone is forgetting the instructor pilot in the helo. He is probably the most to blame for this tragedy. He was calling the shots in the helo, and apparently not paying attention to anything. Don't try to hang this on ATC.
Thank you for your comment. So many people bash the female like she is this terrible pilot and those same people make no judgement on the Male Instructor. I compare it to all the pharisees wanting to stone the woman for adultery but don't ask where is her male lover?? The Instructor was the one that made the request for ''see and avoid" the male instructor said 'he saw the aircraft twice"
Its my opinion that she got high because EVERYONE eyes were looking out the windows for the inbound jet they didn't see and were not focused on the Altimeter.
But even with 500 hrs SHE DID KNOW HOW TO FLY a BLACKHAWK. And she may have gotten to the front of the line with her connections but she still wasn't a dummy as so many make her out to be.
I do UNLIKE YOU blame ATC also because they saw the whole picture and even got a CONFLICT ALERT and did not make a request to the Helo to Turn left, Decend . And he should have been more specific into where to look.
ATC should have also recognized when he got the CA alert that the HELO was in no way flying a course that would put him behind the inbound CRJ and Called for Helo to Turn left and fly 90 or 180 degrees, Cancel the See and Avoid
I also think ATC may have been a bit intimidated to hold up A MILITARY FLIGHT. A more experienced or a different controller may have declined the 'see and avoid' at night with a 33 inbound and just had them hold till they can be sequenced.
Wrong I think. The ATC identified the location, flight path (RW33) and altitude at the Bridge. After that, ATC assumed they knew what to do, and where not to be. If helo never identified CRJ--at that stage its six NMs away, they needed to take special care. But be clear , confusing a CRJ landing on RW01 is inexcusable.
You mean CRJ taking off from RW01.
Thank you Rocket for sharing your experience with us on this mid air collision
Experience is key in everything.
Number of hours are important.
Prayers for those souls and people working in the towers....you are right Sir, those people in the control tower must feel terrible.
Excelent explanation.
All the best.
Rocket, what happened?, yesterday you said it “absolute was not ATC responsibility. “What did you learn, remember, what exactly informed your shift? What did people say? What is the norm , the protocols with communications. And, why the heck are people wearing vision impairment NVGin this area?
So glad u said that - i also felt from the first moment they played the audio of the traffic controller: HE SHOULD HAVE EMPHASIZED EMPHATICALLY- SCREAMED TURN OR DESCEND NOWW!!!!
They were supposed to hug the shore
You want me to hug you I’ll hug you
Possible theory. The H60 may not have picked up on the change on runway and thought the CRJ was going to continue straight on. The TCAS triggers when they are all but head on, told to go behind, which is all but impossible, evokes the second request for visual as the H60 turns right not realizing the H60 is headed for 33 and is turning in the same direction ( CRJ's Left ), seconds they collide like two people walking into each other on the same footpath.
Once you’ve graduated army flight school, there is really no designated left seat or right seat based on mission or training flights. If she was truly on an annual proficiency flight, the instructor would be logging IP time, and she would have logged PI (she would not have been PC on a training flight).
Point blank, period. The IP or Check Airman has responsibility over the whole mission.
One thing is definitely clear. The CRJ pilots approach was pure text book. So enough of what they could see or not see.
You mentioned lighting at the ball fields, why would they be lit up on a cold winter's night? I have worn NVGs before. I don't understand why they would be wearing them in an area with so much ground lighting? If you want to fly training missions using NVGs, do it somewhere with a lot less ground light!
I put some blame on the people setting up these practice missions. I put some blame on the helicopter pilot and co-pilot. Why were they 100 or more feet above their flight ceiling? I put some blame on the ATC tower, more specific instructions could have been given to help locate the CRJ.
Who made the decision to have flight plans that have so little room for error?
I was wondering the same. The park is closed.
I want to sincerely commend Captain Michael for his sharp and thorough analysis-one of the most perceptive I've seen on this topic. His insights highlight critical concerns that cannot be overlooked.
IF, the controller is the only one who could hear, and see, both aircarft on the most advanced conmunications, then they have one heck of a responsibility and dury.
Steam or Star Trek gauges have no bearing on looking out the window or asking for clarification on where the jet was. Steam gauges are the worst reason for pilot error. Having steam gauges might be a reason to be more hands and eyes on instead of asking Sulu, Scotty, and Spock for help. There is no reason to have sympathy for the helicopter pilot if she killed 67 people. This is not a DEI, lets play nice situation. People expect to stay alive. Don't care about her feelings or aspirations. I assume most people who join a service to fly are already flying before or studying flight before service entry. They have a burning desire to fly. It sounds like she was a service member working at the white house and said 'Hey why don't I be a pilot." Don't know for sure as her social media was scrubbed. Did she have more social media posts on flying or more posts on DEI and hate of Trump? The answer is an indicator of focus. If she had the former, her media would not have been scrubbed.
Interesting perspective. I wonder why her social media was scrubbed
One commenter has said that requesting visual separation is routine, and a check ride cannot continue if visual separation is not granted.
Your giving great insight to all sides of this situation. No need to apologize. Please don’t let these negative comments stop you from continuing your great analysis! There is a reason we all came to watch your channel.
If the helicopter pilot would have answered the tower when given traffic with "looking" ATC would have given him/her "ahead and to your left or traffic at 11 o'clock.
I have to say your Channel is the best in offering what could have happened in this horrible tragedy. The math and applying logic and reasoning brings a multitude of layers. I heard one synopsis say there was a 'perfect storm' as the elements lined up in such a way to produce failure in all directions so a catastrophic event ensued. Something that comes to mind is how you listed biases that aviators may come across in their line of work.
I just want to provide another example of this as I watched a You Tube video of an extremely skilled parachute jumper who would video jumps of he and students jumping out of an aircraft.
I will simplify it. The instructor had a backpack on he and students went up and made their jump. From an observer the expert instructor had on a black backpack. To those observing it was assumed it was a parachute. Yet when the jump was made the instructor with tons of experience & hours went to pull his chute yet there was none. The black backpack the instructor had on was his camera equipment & gear. No one checked & the instructor who did this countless times before actually believed his parachute was already on his back. No one crossed checked him & he discovered that he forgot his chute after jumping from the plane. Something seemingly so pointless he lost his life because of this. Something he did so routinely he actually forgot as he was focused on filming his students on the way down. So he had some time on the way down realizing that he had no chute. I think this serves as a powerful reminder of no matter how many times you've done something before you still have to stop be in the moment & consider all possible details as if it was one of your first times doing it. I think in Zen this is referred to as beginner's mind. So when people become good at what they do or have done something successfully in the past it's also important to just stay focused in the moment for what it is & if a pilot has visual contact it could be on a plane in the distance so language & specificity is also important. If visual was not there one can't rely on a previous time with a positive outcome to float them to a current moment thinking visual will eventually come into contact. Humans are kind of hard wired this way so having checklists as a protocol is extremely important & perhaps offering more ways of communicating the same thing as people communicate on different levels & if a radar screen shows a collision course instead of asking if there's a visual on someone & go behind them perhaps stating more specific directions can be the new norm with specific coordinates.. training missions so close to commercial airlines seems like an unnecessary risk to take. If it's so important then create an obstacle course to fly through on a base and simulate the real thing...
I like your videos - you speak well and your demeanor is calm. Thanks for taking the time to provide the info for us.
💯
Thank you for what you are doing and being human. Information about this awful accident has helped me better understand!
That helo pointed directly to the cockpit of the crj, thats why the crew had a “verbal response” before impact! We need to know the condition of the bodies of the helo crew.
Ill bet the passengers on the right side of the CRJ looking out the windows saw the helo approaching and had a sinking feeling. I guessing the Co Pilot heard the thumping of the Helo too when it was about 200 ft away
@@proudbirther1998 the question of why that helo pointed directly at three other aircraft needs to be answered as well. What was the purpose of the training mission that departed Langley VA?
As someone unfamiliar with flying i appreciate the video and
your insight. Thank you.
Is definitely the military helicopter fault. Flying in the wrong zone n height. They're not supposed to fly above 300feet.
Hope lesson learned and make sure no military aircraft around civilian airspace and esp for night visual flight.
Thank you Mike for this excellent report. It certainly makes more sense now after hearing the calculations. Bless you🙏🏻
But she wasn’t at 200ft. She was at 300+ feet. Why? Should trainer not said your to high?
Love your humble attitude , the way you explain things and even talk about corrections. Found your talks so imformative and sensatively spoken ❤
You're making excuses for the pat and pilot please stop they caused that horrible accident
Thank you Mike, for your transparency and professionalism , you clarified so much.
We live in a world where, we need to find blame, but what we need is to identify the (PROBLEMS), And fix them, and their is obviously more then one.
I was tracking with you until you thought they were playing baseball in the freezing winter at 9pm