Air traffic control can be heard warning the helo about the incoming (to airport) aircraft but no reply from the helicopter. A video shows the helicopter approaching the jet from the airplane's starboard side., (left in the video) and then the collision.......... and the jet drops straight down.
Have been watching all the news sources I can about this incident.
It appears to me that the Black Hawk pilots were seeing the other traffic that was taking off and didn't see the landing aircraft until it was too late. That's an extremely busy airport. Way too much traffic to be safe. Was reported this morning that Congress (they report didn't say who) lobbied the FAA to increase the amount of traffic allowed by an additional 800 flights last year. Very congested airspace. Normal for areas like this the helicopters operate at different altitudes and restricted routes, commercial flights are normally at higher altitudes. I do have suspicions on what occurred but, will wait on the FAA and Army Flight Board investigations
Have never flown a helicopter into that airport but have had several sorties into Chicago, Kansas City, DFW, OKC, New Orleans and a few other large airports on many occasions during my military flying career. It was never a fun experience. Everyone's eyes needed to be looking for other traffic. Have experienced two close calls while still on the tarmac while following ground control instructions. Sometime remind me to tell you about the time in S. Korea a U2 and the UH-1 I was preparing to take off had a near miss. Yeah, we were still planted firmly on the ground.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-30-2025).]
(PAT 2-5 is the Blackhawk and CRJ is the passenger jet)
An air traffic controller said, “PAT 2-5 do you have the CRJ in sight?”
The controller then said, “PAT 2-5 pass behind the CRJ.”
Additional air traffic control audio shortly before the collision captures the helicopter pilot saying, “PAT 2-5 has aircraft in sight, request visual separation.”
Less than 13 seconds later, the audio then captured audible gasps, including a loud “oooh” in the background apparently from the tower, at the moment of the crash.
The tower then alerted another pilot of what has taken place.
“I don’t know if you caught earlier what happened, but there was a collision on the approach end of 3-3. We are going to be shutting down operations for the indefinite future if you want to go back to the gate. Highly suggest you guys coordinate with the company. Let me know what you want to do,” the controller says, referencing runway 33.
The audio also revealed that another pilot had seen the incident and confirmed with an air traffic controller.
Another pilot could be heard saying, “Yeah, we were on short final, and we saw flares from the opposite side of the Potomac.”
An approach controller later said, “Apparently both aircraft involved are in the river, a search and rescue will be ongoing.”
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-30-2025).]
Lots of reporters offering up opinions, most don't seem to know squat about aviation. I do have a couple of ideas about what may have happened but, I'll hold back on advertising them. I just watched President Trump's press conference, a lot of things said that in my opinion showed a lack of what being in the cockpit requires. Many of the reporters asked some really unqualified/stupid questions.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-30-2025).]
That's an extremely busy airport. Way too much traffic to be safe.
It was reported that the Blackhawk helicopter involved was undergoing a "annual proficiency training flight". This may be another "unqualified/stupid question", but why is there a need for the military be running a training mission in the vicinity of such a busy commercial airport?
It was reported that the Blackhawk helicopter involved was undergoing a "annual proficiency training flight". This may be another "unqualified/stupid question", but why is there a need for the military be running a training mission in the vicinity of such a busy commercial airport?
My understanding is the unit this Blackhawk was from was routinely tasked with transporting VIPs through, to or from this area to other destinations. Those missions go in both day and night and under IFR conditions if, they have at least 1/8 mile visibility with very strict altitude and route restrictions. This is after all, the Capitol City with a lot of No Fly Zones. Hope that answers your question.
At one point in my military career, I was assigned to such a unit for III Corps. Flew all kinds of VIPs. Pilots had to have very good reasons to cancel a mission so, practice or training in this particular area was not only required but mandated if the pilots were to ever fly the mission.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-30-2025).]
My understanding it the unit this Blackhawk was from was routinely tasked with transporting VIPs through, to or from this area to other destinations.
I can certainly understand the need to be transporting VIPs in this area, but my question is more about the need to be running training missions as well out of this very busy commercial airport. There very well may be valid reasons for doing so... but if not, this tragedy may initiate a re-evaluation of this practice.
I can certainly understand the need to be transporting VIPs in this area, but my question is more about the need to be running training missions as well out of this very busy commercial airport. There very well may be valid reasons for doing so... but if not, this tragedy may initiate a re-evaluation of this practice.
The unit must be able to transport those VIPs at any time, the commercial and private traffic at this airport rarely slows down. This is one of the busiest airports on this side of the planet, those VIPs don't want to hear they have to wait for better traffic conditions. If, the pilots had a choice, they might choose to fly under different rules but, they don't get to make the rules.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-30-2025).]
This is copied and pasted from another forum I frequent. This is several hours old but my post reflects what was being questioned at the time. Things/information may have changed since then.
The question: I know its just a partial audio but, unless that Blackhawk was flying in some mode that prevented it from having a "radar signature" this is just appalling and really shows a major degradation in our air traffic control personnel and processes.
Absolutely no way an aircraft is going to be allowed to fly in that Controlled Airspace without properly squawking the correct code and yes, a Blackhawk does present a decent radar image. If, in that airspace and unidentified aircraft was observed on radar, that aircraft would have activated the on-call alert squadron protecting DC and the Capitol.
The next question: It was just reported on Newsmax that the helicopter was on a night vision training/qualification flight. Night vision flying was what we did when I was stationed in Sacramento. It seems like a terrible idea to me to attempt night vision training in the most congested and complex airspace in the entire country. If in fact that was taking place it cannot be overruled as a possible cause of this tragedy.
Personally, I think Newmax of full of crap. NVGs magnify ambient light, the darker the better. There's no way I believe this training mission was done under NVGs. This entire area has so much light pollution the pilot's vision would be shut down. I would be absolutely amazed if NVG was in use with so much light pollution in that area.
This airport is one of the busiest in the nation, very congested traffic with a huge amount of NO FLY restricted areas (The White House being just one of them.). All traffic unless specially approved must approach along the river or other designated routes. Absolutely no way I'm buying the NVG story. I was qualified for NVG as a mission pilot and if asked to do so in such an area would have refused to fly the mission, that's just stupid. But I'm quite certain no one would have asked.
I do have a few other thoughts about how this accident could have occurred but will withhold them for now. Just not enough information and facts available right now.
Reference this Blackhawk flight being on a training mission, it's hard to know what that was intended to be but let me offer one possibility, a new pilot comes the the unit, it would be normal for that pilot to undergo familiarization with flying into and out of the locations and routes normally associated with their mission before they are actually turned loose flying those missions. Or, it could be this training mission is an annual requalification requirement. When I flew the Z in S. Korea, to do so single pilot had similar requirements.
The training mission could have also been a IFR training mission where the "trainee" goes under the hood so he can only see his instrument panel and his navigation instruments. In that case, the "trainee" can't see squat outside the aircraft and would depend on the other sets of eyes to watch for traffic. Have flown IFR many times in real IFR conditions as a mission pilot. Not saying that's what was going on but, it's one possibility.
Another option. When flying in controlled airspace, (it was normal) to receive instructions about other aricraft within the airspace I was flying. That information was provided in this manner. Army 12345, you have traffic at your ten o'clock at 3000 ft. This way you knew where to look. I did not hear such a warning from ATC about where the commercial airliner was at. The commercial airliner would also receive similar information about the Blackhawk. The only thing I've heard up to this point was instructions for the Blackhawk to pass behind the airliner.
Well, if the Blackhawk pilots didn't know where to look, they may have mistaken the commercial airliner that was taking off as the one the ATC controller was telling them about. This is all supposition but, there's just not enough facts known at this time.
The Blackhawk WAS asked by ATC if he saw the airliner. (I agree about Newsmax..clickbait morons most of the time)
It appears a combination of things contributed to the accident. The airliner would have a sharp course change to switch runways from 1 to 33.
I do not, understand the helo's question/statement "Request visual separation" in reference to ATC's ? about whether he saw the jet.
Yep, I understand that ATC did ask but, my question is, which aircraft the one landing or the one taking off. Based on what is known at this point, I'm not so sure the Blackhawk crew was looking at the right aircraft.
Most of which is still questionable. I honestly have no idea if the Blackhawk "black box" also records cockpit conversations. I didn't fly Blackhawks. None of the A/C I flew had that option. Maybe but I doubt it.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 01-30-2025).]
I can certainly understand the need to be transporting VIPs in this area, but my question is more about the need to be running training missions as well out of this very busy commercial airport. There very well may be valid reasons for doing so... but if not, this tragedy may initiate a re-evaluation of this practice.
There ARE, very valid reasons for running training missions in a congested airspace. The crews HAVE to be able to do it in real life combat conditions in similarly congested airspaces. You train in and for as close to real conditions as possible and nowadays, that includes urban surroundings.
Originally posted by Patrick: I can certainly understand the need to be transporting VIPs in this area, but my question is more about the need to be running training missions as well out of this very busy commercial airport. There very well may be valid reasons for doing so... but if not, this tragedy may initiate a re-evaluation of this practice.
Patrick, I also wondered that. Then I thought about repeated fire drills in school.
I have been in situations, in the air, where there were many dozens of fixed and rotary wing aircraft at the same time in a relatively small air space, but in real life combat conditions.
The largest combat helicopter operation the US was ever involved in.. Plenty of downed birds and dead friends but Only because of the trained pilots and aircrews were there no mid air collisions.
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-31-2025).]
One of the Blackhawk pilots was former USN aviation enlisted, but switched over to US Army warrant officer program and became Army pilot. The other Blackhawk pilot is reported to be famale and in training.
Some images of ATC radar I'veseen this morning, showed the helo's altitude at 200', then just before collision, increase to 300' just as jet was descending from 400' to 300'. Posted on X by Thomas Massie, US Congessman
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 01-31-2025).]
There ARE, very valid reasons for running training missions in a congested airspace. The crews HAVE to be able to do it in real life combat conditions in similarly congested airspaces. You train in and for as close to real conditions as possible and nowadays, that includes urban surroundings.
This video has some good information in it. The Blackhawk was flying along the river and possibly the pilots saw one aircraft nearby but might not have seen the approaching one that it ultimately collided into.
One thing not said is what I thought was the 1 mile rule. Aircraft should never come closer than 1 mile of each other. Any time that happens it is considered a near miss. ATC should have keep them farther apart.
I agree with his conclusion that the airport should be turned over to the military and a new civilian airport built farther away from D.C.
The crews HAVE to be able to do it in real life combat conditions in similarly congested airspaces.
I understand completely what you're saying. But is it justified to be putting civilians at risk in commercial airliners while this military training is taking place? I'm pretty sure no one on that plane signed a waiver form agreeing to be involved in a military exercise.
Depends, whether one views that the price of liberty is always to be borne only by those in uniform or not.
The circumstances that were present that night take place all over America every single day an night. I see it every day here at Killeen/Ft Hood multi use airport, with Chinook, cobra, and Ah-60 helos flyin in the same flight profiles and flight paths as all the civilian passenger jets. c-17s and C-130s, as well as a LOT of fighter jets coming and going.
I used to go up and watch the USAF aircraft at Dyess USAF take off and land, and, the military aircraft practice T&Gs at the civilian airports both at Abilene and San Angelo. This is the wiki descrioption of Abilene airport.
"Abilene Regional Airport is a public airport located approximately 3 miles southeast of downtown Abilene, in Taylor County, Texas. The airport is located within the Abilene city limits, and is and owned and operated by the city. Most operations at the airport are general aviation and military training."
Military C-130s, F-18s and military helos land and take off from the12,000' runways at Austin's Bergstrom airport all the time .
All up and down the East coast too, unless things have changed since I rode piedmont airline planes back in the 70s.
The smaller 'international' airport in Houston..same way.
In this day and age didnt both aircraft have some type of TCAS system onboard that would alert the pilots? and probably an audible warning?
Im sure Washington must be airspace that requires aircraft to have ADS B signals and transponders. all civil aircraft should be able to see eachother? maybe military is different?
[This message has been edited by gregr75 (edited 01-31-2025).]
Depends, whether one views that the price of liberty is always to be borne only by those in uniform or not.
It's debatable if "the price of liberty" should include sacrificing school age children while running a training exercise.
I suspect there'll at least be a review of the necessity for military training exercises to be run in the vicinity of busy civilian airports. The powers that be may indeed decide that it's acceptable to put the occasional civilian airliner in the river.
In this day and age didnt both aircraft have some type of TCAS system onboard that would alert the pilots? and probably an audible warning?
Im sure Washington must be airspace that requires aircraft to have ADS B signals and transponders. all civil aircraft should be able to see eachother? maybe military is different?
In regards to the passenger jet, the cockpit warnings don't work the same way once it begins final. I have no idea what modern helos have in regards to surrounding aircraft but I doubt it's changed terribly since I was crew on CH-53s. Pilots relied solely on the left and right gunners for clearance warnings from about 9 o'clock to 6 o'clock and 3 o'clock to 6 o'clock both while taxiing and in flight. On the port (left) side, From 12 o'clock back to around 9 or 10 0'clock and on starboard (right) side 12 o'clock to around 2 or 3 o'clock the pilots could see better than the crew. Where the pilots' view ends and the crews' begins depends on the helo type and how it may be configured. Most military helos the crew can lean out and even see behind the helo to provide voice clearance to pilots if reward movement of the helo is needed.
Reuters News reports that the Blackhawk was undergoing it's annual retraining for night ops and is part of the nation's 'continuance of government' thing, otherwise known as doomsday, where top govt officials are evacuated from Wash DC. The article also very strongly suggested that the flight was conducted using night vision.
WASHINGTON, Feb 1 (Reuters) - The Black Hawk helicopter that collided with a passenger jet in Washington on Wednesday was on a training flight along a route core to a seldom-discussed military mission to evacuate senior officials to safety in the event of an attack on the U.S., officials say. The military mission, known as "continuity of government" and "continuity of operations," is meant to preserve the ability of the U.S. government to operate.
Most days, crews like the one killed on Wednesday transport VIPs around Washington, which is buzzing with helicopter traffic. But U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth disclosed the Black Hawk crew's ties to the mission during a White House press conference on Thursday, saying they "were on a routine, annual re-training of night flights on a standard corridor for a continuity of government mission." Still, little of such missions is publicly discussed.
The three soldiers killed in the collision were part of the 12th Aviation Battalion at Fort Belvoir in Virginia, whose responsibilities in a national crisis include evacuating Pentagon officials. Another 64 people were killed in the passenger plane.
The Black Hawk crew, using night vision goggles, flew the training mission along the Potomac River on a path known as Route 4. As the Army comes under scrutiny for operating at night near a busy airport, officials have pointed to the battalion's sensitive operations. "Some of their mission is to support the Department of Defense if something really bad happens in this area, and we need to move our senior leaders," said Jonathan Koziol, the chief of staff of the Army's Aviation Directorate.
SEPT. 11 EMERGENCY FLIGHTS The most recent time the U.S. government is known to have activated a continuity of operations mission in an emergency was on Sept. 11, 2001, when al Qaeda hijackers slammed airplanes into the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon, killing almost 3,000 people. Reuters was able to establish some of the activities of the 12th Aviation Battalion that day.
"The battalion helped transport some senior leaders out of Washington, D.C. to 'hide sites,'" Bradley Bowman, a former Army aviation officer who flew on Sept. 11 as part of the 12th Aviation Battalion. That evening, Bowman flew a Black Hawk to pick up then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz at one of those sites and fly him back to the Pentagon. There was just one problem -- the Pentagon's helicopter landing pad used to pick up and drop off VIPs was destroyed. "We just repositioned and landed in the traffic circle of 395, which had been closed by that point," Bowman said, referring to I-395 highway that loops around the U.S. military's headquarters.
Wolfowitz was quoted in a 2017 book describing going to a "bizarre location that was prepared to survive nuclear war." The book's author, Garrett Graff, said the site was called Raven Rock Mountain Complex, or "Site R," located just miles from Camp David. It remains one of three main backup facilities for the U.S. government, and the main one for the Pentagon leadership. "It's 100 percent operational today. There's a team of maybe 100 personnel inside Raven Rock right now, ready to pick up the pieces of the U.S. government," Graff said.
Originally posted by maryjane: Some images of ATC radar I'veseen this morning, showed the helo's altitude at 200', then just before collision, increase to 300' just as jet was descending from 400' to 300'.
I heard the helo was supposed to maintain a 200' altitude. Neither aircraft knew the altitude of the other. The helo might have got wrong the trajectory of the plane and tried to avoid what eventually happened.
Originally posted by Patrick: I'm pretty sure no one on that plane signed a waiver form agreeing to be involved in a military exercise.
I have never signed a form agreeing not to be involved in any crash. Involving military or not. The people in the attack to us on 9/1/01 signed an agreement to be involved in a terrorist attack.
Had a friend who's "motto" was: "I've never made a mistake.....I've just paid a lot for some bad information.".....and....."I thought I was wrong once...but I was mistaken!"
HAGO!
Somebody was wrong that night....and everybody involved paid...the ultimate price.
The Black Hawk crew, using night vision goggles, flew the training mission along the Potomac River on a path known as Route 4. As the Army comes under scrutiny for operating at night near a busy airport, officials have pointed to the battalion's sensitive operations. "Some of their mission is to support the Department of Defense if something really bad happens in this area, and we need to move our senior leaders," said Jonathan Koziol, the chief of staff of the Army's Aviation Directorate.
Army Officials Say Helicopter Pilots Were Likely Wearing Night-Vision Goggles
Army officials said Thursday the pilots of the UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter that collided with the American Airlines jet had night-vision goggles and likely were wearing them at the time of the crash. Officials said using NVGs, as they are often called, would likely be useful in an urban environment as they help the pilots navigate at night. The NVGs would help them see the other aircraft, especially over the Potomac River, which is only lit along the shorelines.
From Business Insider:
quote
The US Army Black Hawk that collided with an American Airlines flight was training on a familiar flight path.
The 12th Aviation Battalion frequently navigates Washington DC airspace for VIP transport.
Pilots were flying with night vision goggles and are trained to deal with those challenges.
The US Army crew of a UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter that fatally collided with an American Airlines passenger jet on Wednesday was on a routine training flight on a well-known flight path at the time of the incident, an Army official said Thursday.
Jonathan Koziol, a retired Army chief warrant officer aviator with nearly three decades of military flight experience, said during a media roundtable this flight would have likely been deemed "low risk," not medium or high risk.
Such designations are required elements of pre-flight risk assessments and briefings to military mission approval authorities and take into account variables like weather, mission type, and potential hazards. Koziol, the Headquarters Department of the Army Aviation Directorate Chief of Staff, was not involved in flight operation or oversight.
There are several discussions ongoing within current pilot organizations that explain the current NVGs filter out light in urban areas instead of blinding the pilots like the older ones do. I wouldn't know from experience as NVG came out after i had left the military but using NVG in urban settings seem to be pretty commonplace in parts of the modern battlefield and in training.
There are several discussions ongoing within current pilot organizations that explain the current NVGs filter out light in urban areas instead of blinding the pilots like the older ones do. I wouldn't know from experience as NVG came out after i had left the military but using NVG in urban settings seem to be pretty commonplace in parts of the modern battlefield and in training.
Well, I'm prepared to eat crow for dinner, I do understand most equipment has been improved. I didn't know they had reached that level of advancement. Please pass the salt and pepper.
Being worn is one thing, being in operation in that much light pollution is still shocking to me.
Rebecca Lobach ID’d as female soldier inside doomed Black Hawk during DC crash
Well, I'm prepared to eat crow for dinner, I do understand most equipment has been improved. I didn't know they had reached that level of advancement. Please pass the salt and pepper.
Being worn is one thing, being in operation in that much light pollution is still shocking to me.
Rbecca Lobache ID’d as female soldier inside doomed Black Hawk during DC crash
I saw that a little bit ago. She was the pilot at controls when the impact took place if everything I've read is correct. She had done a stint not too long ago as an aide or attache with the previous white house staff.
Pentagon has continued the practice flights in the crowded airspace around Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, even as flights into and out of the airport have grown in number in recent years.
The Government Accountability Office said in 2021 that there had been some 88,000 helicopter flights in the area between 2017-2019, 37% of which were military flights. The report was commissioned by local lawmakers because of noise complaints stemming from all the flights.
"WASHINGTON (TNND) — The Army Black Hawk helicopter that collided with an American Airlines passenger plane was flying too high, according to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
The flight traffic data that NTSB has obtained confirms that the helicopter was flying at 300 feet according to the air traffic control display, which is 100 feet more than it should be flying the nation's capital.
The maximum altitude for a helicopter to fly in the area is 200 feet.
Since radar data is rounded to the nearest 100 feet, NTSB knew that the helicopter was flying anywhere between 251 feet and 349 feet. With the data from air traffic control, they were able to confirm the high altitude of the helicopter.
The passenger plane was at an elevation of 325 feet and was cleared to land into Ronald Reagan National Airport."
"WASHINGTON (TNND) — The Army Black Hawk helicopter that collided with an American Airlines passenger plane was flying too high, according to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
The flight traffic data that NTSB has obtained confirms that the helicopter was flying at 300 feet according to the air traffic control display, which is 100 feet more than it should be flying the nation's capital.
The maximum altitude for a helicopter to fly in the area is 200 feet.
Since radar data is rounded to the nearest 100 feet, NTSB knew that the helicopter was flying anywhere between 251 feet and 349 feet. With the data from air traffic control, they were able to confirm the high altitude of the helicopter.
The passenger plane was at an elevation of 325 feet and was cleared to land into Ronald Reagan National Airport."
Yep, I read that also. But, with an error potential of 100 ft? How they can determine that precisely is somewhat of a guess. I have no doubt it's a close estimate but, an estimate it is. Both aircraft should have set their altimeter to the reported Density Altitudes so, the altimeters should have been showing accurate readings. I have little doubt the airliner was at the reported altitude and so it makes sense the Blackhawk was within feet of the airliner's altitude but, I'm thinking the helicopter data estimated altitude (supposedly from the tower is more based on the airliner's black box and not on data from the tower. My understanding is that the Blackhawks data has not been retrieved and won't be until the fuselage has been recovered and inspected. I don't understand that decision but, I don't get paid for crash analysis.
Edited: BTW, while I may be wrong, I still don't believe the Blackhawk crew was under NVGs prior to the collision. Just an opinion but, it's all mine and I'm sticking to it.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 02-05-2025).]