Looks like a case of mistaken identity. ATC asked if the Blackhawk had visual on the CRJ...they reply yes. But was more than likely the United 737 landing on the next runway. You can see the landing lights of the 737 in the crash footage. Also, the Blackhawk window posts are quite big, which could have impeded vision of the CRJ approaching from the left.
I wonder if there could be some optical illusion to do with moving lights in darkness that could have made them think that they were avoiding AA5342 but were actually looking at the other plane and it made them move into the flightpath...
The Blackhawk was under a see-and-avoid but from reports there was no actual communication being received other than air traffic control. If you have fixed on the wrong aircraft to avoid, you're in trouble. The Blackhawk, you would have thought, should have been fixed on 2 sets of landing lights; one approaching RWY33 and the other 01, both aircraft were on their path.
I wonder if those 2 jets were a regular distance apart . They looked pretty close in the video. If they were closer than normal the Blackhawk may not have realized they were there and was only watching the lead aircraft.
In this CBS footage the A319 (AA3130) aircraft lights can be seen behind the aircraft taking off at between 2 an 3 o'clock on the screen at 52 secs in, in the following: most of the other networks have cropped the footage so you don't see the bright building:
Just wondering why the BH was in airliner space to begin with. Plus it airliner diverted to another runway, it would be possible the pilot of the BH was looking at the belly of the airliner and didn't see it in time. I don't think the BH should have been allowed in the airspace to begin with, but what do I know.
Lance Chapple is mostly correct. The helicopter is said to be on a training but most probably a rutine training they have done many times before. They have focus on the main stream of aircrafts landing on the main runway ahead going well below these flights. The unusual is that the CRJ is comming in to land on runway 33. They may have spotted it at long disctance kept outlook straight forward but suddenly it came in from left it was nothing to do.
In its first call ATC mentioned RWY 33. In the last call prior to the collision ATC did mention nothing which could have helped the Blackhawk Crew to recognize their error and the urgency of an imidiate action.
Problem managing started with Blue Streak 5307, when it was unable to accept RWY 33.
Interesting video. I don't know how relevant the wake turbulence of the preceding aircraft was, that would no longer have been an issue by the time AA5342 was on short final. Most interesting thing in the video, to me, was the idea that the second call from the tower to PAT25 might have been prompted by the tower's recognition that the two aircraft were converging, and he wanted to make sure PAT25 knew what it was doing.
The controller was in stress, he had to manage the arrival traffic alone. At the time of the second call he should have taken action, as he had alread a CA warning on his scope, which probably alerted him anyway. He should have given an instruction instead pose a question. But, the returns were quickly merging, so he probably was unsure which aircraft he could safely command an evasive maneuver.
The whole setup was a trap, all stops were removed except the chopper crew, and they had visual on the wrong target or lost visual when the regional jet turned to final. I go with the first one, they had the wrong one from beginning.
I've seen that footage the purports to be a recording of the controller's screen, showing the aircraft targets in green with "CA" alerts in (as I recall) orange. Do we know if that is real, though?
We don't know yet, though it's out since at least 48 hours and there is nothing published that it does not represent what happened or that it is not real. The numbers in todays FAA briefing update correspond to those numbers.
There had been many "holes lined up in the cheese" to make this tragic accident happen. One big question will be why the Black Hawk was not at its assigned altitude.
Thanks for this. I saw that VASAviation clip in Juan Browne's video. Two questions:
1) Where did he get this data from? FlightRadar24 has posted granular Mode S data from PAT25 but it doesn't have position information (I've just emailed VASAviation to ask directly)
2) Are they reall a lot of holes lined up in the cheese? It seems like the Blackhawk Pilot flew off course, and too high. So just a single-point failure.
I do not know the origin of the data and wether they are genuine or from a simulation, though they make a lot of sense. ADSB data are not the only ones available to ATC in the terminal area of airports with class B airspace, and Flight radar 24 data lack precision in data points and time delay.
Some points concerning the swiss cheese model from my pov:
The max altitude of the VFR routing at that sector is 200', the altitude of landing traffic at the crossing of that route is 400'. Only 200' vertical separation can't be the right number for safe operation between 2 aircraft. The intention imho is to work with vertical "and" lateral separation, the call of ATC to cross behind the regional jet supports that.
Obviously the crew of the chopper had aquired and tracked the A319 following the regional jet. I've flown at night, the 3-dimensional vision is degraded, distances are harder to judge and bright lights look to be closer than dimmer lights. From the geometry the landing lights of the A319 might have been brighter and look closer than the landing lights of the regional jet, which were not pointing direct to the chopper.
Flying with NGV goggles (that what I heard the chopper crew was doing) is a challenge on its own close over an area with multiple light sources in different intensities.
The main question arrising, is it possible to identify a specific aircraft ahead of you in this environment and situation (night, urban area with multiple light sources, arriving an departing traffic) with the necessary certainity? In my humble opinion it is only possible if there is only one aircraft in the area ahead, you see it or you don't.
The regional jet was cleared for the approach to RWY 01, it would had been on the ground before the chopper would have passed the area. The decision to circle the regional jet to RWY 33 was the reason that both aircraft closed at each other, creating the situation of conflicting traffic on opposite vectors. It will be interesting wether this was a late ATC decision or planned from beginning.
The chopper and the regional jet were under ATC control on different frequencies, the controller could hear and talk to all three aircraft (Chopper, regional and following A319) while the chopper could only hear the controller and both jets couldn't hear the chopper. In a situation where visual references are limited it is important to know about traffic in the vicinity, their altitude, their heading, their intention either by monitoring the communication or by information provided by ATC. Ideally that projects a map with the dots of other traffic into the brain of the pilot with which he can project the further development of a situation. Was the chopper aware of the following A319 and the possible risk to identify the wrong target?
The deconfliction of the traffic in class B airspace from arrival traffic and an aircraft departing another airport within this airspace will or should (I don't know how that is handled at Reagan Int.) start as early as possible, f.e. with take off clearence of the chopper. As I mentioned before, that looked good until the regional jet was circled from RWY 01 to RWY 33. I ask myself what the plan would have been when the chopper pilot had denied the responsibility for "visual separation and passing behind", which he should have done anyway.
The investigation will check on a lot more swiss cheese holes, instrumental and structural ones procedures and habits. The failure which led to the final moment of crash was only the last one.
Disclaimer: The investigation will be the one to shed the lights on the cause of the accident. This is just my 2cents, It is not my intention to blame someone or something.
Really good point. The female pilot might have been at the controls -- the "pilot flying" -- but that doesn't mean she was the "pilot in command" who bore responsibility for the conduct of the flight.
Looks like a case of mistaken identity. ATC asked if the Blackhawk had visual on the CRJ...they reply yes. But was more than likely the United 737 landing on the next runway. You can see the landing lights of the 737 in the crash footage. Also, the Blackhawk window posts are quite big, which could have impeded vision of the CRJ approaching from the left.
That's an interesting idea, thanks. Not sure how we could verify it...
no TCAS on Blackhawks
PPRUNE forum suggesting the other aircraft was A319 operated by AA
I wonder if there could be some optical illusion to do with moving lights in darkness that could have made them think that they were avoiding AA5342 but were actually looking at the other plane and it made them move into the flightpath...
The Blackhawk was under a see-and-avoid but from reports there was no actual communication being received other than air traffic control. If you have fixed on the wrong aircraft to avoid, you're in trouble. The Blackhawk, you would have thought, should have been fixed on 2 sets of landing lights; one approaching RWY33 and the other 01, both aircraft were on their path.
one pilot reviewer said they might have had Night vision Goggles on ?
I wonder if those 2 jets were a regular distance apart . They looked pretty close in the video. If they were closer than normal the Blackhawk may not have realized they were there and was only watching the lead aircraft.
I got the impression that they were at the same distance as all the jets coming in...
You may be looking at the wrong aircraft; refer to videos below:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/bHBKptJWXtU?feature=share
In this CBS footage the A319 (AA3130) aircraft lights can be seen behind the aircraft taking off at between 2 an 3 o'clock on the screen at 52 secs in, in the following: most of the other networks have cropped the footage so you don't see the bright building:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IzOUiHf3TJ4
Just wondering why the BH was in airliner space to begin with. Plus it airliner diverted to another runway, it would be possible the pilot of the BH was looking at the belly of the airliner and didn't see it in time. I don't think the BH should have been allowed in the airspace to begin with, but what do I know.
Well the FAA agrees with you because it's banned them! For now, at least...
Former Army Pilot provides insights.
A long video, but worth to look at.
https://youtu.be/lJmvyEEIkEM
Really interesting, thanks.
Lance Chapple is mostly correct. The helicopter is said to be on a training but most probably a rutine training they have done many times before. They have focus on the main stream of aircrafts landing on the main runway ahead going well below these flights. The unusual is that the CRJ is comming in to land on runway 33. They may have spotted it at long disctance kept outlook straight forward but suddenly it came in from left it was nothing to do.
Question is: did ATC mention runway 33?
BRGDS Thom Olsen
In its first call ATC mentioned RWY 33. In the last call prior to the collision ATC did mention nothing which could have helped the Blackhawk Crew to recognize their error and the urgency of an imidiate action.
Problem managing started with Blue Streak 5307, when it was unable to accept RWY 33.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RzQe6W7vcu4
That is exactly what I ment but the first communicaton was more than 5 mins before and at that time not so actual for the helicopter pilot.
I am not blaming anyone but it should have been pointed out that the aircraft they talked about was approaching runway 33.
Interesting video. I don't know how relevant the wake turbulence of the preceding aircraft was, that would no longer have been an issue by the time AA5342 was on short final. Most interesting thing in the video, to me, was the idea that the second call from the tower to PAT25 might have been prompted by the tower's recognition that the two aircraft were converging, and he wanted to make sure PAT25 knew what it was doing.
The controller was in stress, he had to manage the arrival traffic alone. At the time of the second call he should have taken action, as he had alread a CA warning on his scope, which probably alerted him anyway. He should have given an instruction instead pose a question. But, the returns were quickly merging, so he probably was unsure which aircraft he could safely command an evasive maneuver.
The whole setup was a trap, all stops were removed except the chopper crew, and they had visual on the wrong target or lost visual when the regional jet turned to final. I go with the first one, they had the wrong one from beginning.
I've seen that footage the purports to be a recording of the controller's screen, showing the aircraft targets in green with "CA" alerts in (as I recall) orange. Do we know if that is real, though?
I guessed before that the controller was under stress, as he was working alone.
By chance I found a link to the ATC tape. It covers 31 Minuten , the crash takes place at 17:40
See the link, after the first paragraph.
https://www.npr.org/2025/01/30/nx-s1-5281166/dca-crash-helicopter-air-traffic-controller-radio
Seems like the article comes down on the side of the controller doing a good job, no?
We don't know yet, though it's out since at least 48 hours and there is nothing published that it does not represent what happened or that it is not real. The numbers in todays FAA briefing update correspond to those numbers.
https://youtu.be/RzQe6W7vcu4?feature=shared
pilot debrief is pretty reliable in these types of accidents
Link to a youtube video with live ATC and secondary radar plot.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CiOybe-NJHk
There had been many "holes lined up in the cheese" to make this tragic accident happen. One big question will be why the Black Hawk was not at its assigned altitude.
Thanks for this. I saw that VASAviation clip in Juan Browne's video. Two questions:
1) Where did he get this data from? FlightRadar24 has posted granular Mode S data from PAT25 but it doesn't have position information (I've just emailed VASAviation to ask directly)
2) Are they reall a lot of holes lined up in the cheese? It seems like the Blackhawk Pilot flew off course, and too high. So just a single-point failure.
Hi Jeff,
I do not know the origin of the data and wether they are genuine or from a simulation, though they make a lot of sense. ADSB data are not the only ones available to ATC in the terminal area of airports with class B airspace, and Flight radar 24 data lack precision in data points and time delay.
Some points concerning the swiss cheese model from my pov:
The max altitude of the VFR routing at that sector is 200', the altitude of landing traffic at the crossing of that route is 400'. Only 200' vertical separation can't be the right number for safe operation between 2 aircraft. The intention imho is to work with vertical "and" lateral separation, the call of ATC to cross behind the regional jet supports that.
Obviously the crew of the chopper had aquired and tracked the A319 following the regional jet. I've flown at night, the 3-dimensional vision is degraded, distances are harder to judge and bright lights look to be closer than dimmer lights. From the geometry the landing lights of the A319 might have been brighter and look closer than the landing lights of the regional jet, which were not pointing direct to the chopper.
Flying with NGV goggles (that what I heard the chopper crew was doing) is a challenge on its own close over an area with multiple light sources in different intensities.
The main question arrising, is it possible to identify a specific aircraft ahead of you in this environment and situation (night, urban area with multiple light sources, arriving an departing traffic) with the necessary certainity? In my humble opinion it is only possible if there is only one aircraft in the area ahead, you see it or you don't.
The regional jet was cleared for the approach to RWY 01, it would had been on the ground before the chopper would have passed the area. The decision to circle the regional jet to RWY 33 was the reason that both aircraft closed at each other, creating the situation of conflicting traffic on opposite vectors. It will be interesting wether this was a late ATC decision or planned from beginning.
The chopper and the regional jet were under ATC control on different frequencies, the controller could hear and talk to all three aircraft (Chopper, regional and following A319) while the chopper could only hear the controller and both jets couldn't hear the chopper. In a situation where visual references are limited it is important to know about traffic in the vicinity, their altitude, their heading, their intention either by monitoring the communication or by information provided by ATC. Ideally that projects a map with the dots of other traffic into the brain of the pilot with which he can project the further development of a situation. Was the chopper aware of the following A319 and the possible risk to identify the wrong target?
The deconfliction of the traffic in class B airspace from arrival traffic and an aircraft departing another airport within this airspace will or should (I don't know how that is handled at Reagan Int.) start as early as possible, f.e. with take off clearence of the chopper. As I mentioned before, that looked good until the regional jet was circled from RWY 01 to RWY 33. I ask myself what the plan would have been when the chopper pilot had denied the responsibility for "visual separation and passing behind", which he should have done anyway.
The investigation will check on a lot more swiss cheese holes, instrumental and structural ones procedures and habits. The failure which led to the final moment of crash was only the last one.
Disclaimer: The investigation will be the one to shed the lights on the cause of the accident. This is just my 2cents, It is not my intention to blame someone or something.
https://youtu.be/RzQe6W7vcu4?feature=shared
Great points, thanks.
they were on a training flight, so yeah what was the senior instructor on the copter doing ?
Really good point. The female pilot might have been at the controls -- the "pilot flying" -- but that doesn't mean she was the "pilot in command" who bore responsibility for the conduct of the flight.