Posted on 02/01/2025 6:13:37 AM PST by airdalechief
CNN obtained two new videos that show the collision from much closer than previously available clips. Both show that the Army helicopter did not attempt to swerve before colliding with the American Airlines flight out of Wichita.
(Excerpt) Read more at notthebee.com ...
Hopefully, the vast majority were dead before their brains were able to begin processing what had happened
It looks like someone driving onto a highway, not looking for oncoming traffic.
In the end, I think this is all on the pilot of the Blackhawk. They “merged without looking to their left.”
That is just past the 50 yard line on a football field. Scary close.
I don’t care to hear excuses about night vision goggles or the helicopter mistook a plane behind them. They were zig zagging back and forth just before and they were supposed to be on the far side of the river. No way they didn’t see the plane and never bothered to correct. If it had been hacked, they should/would have radioed it in. Nothing makes sense but intentional.
“...I have read the helicopter was supposed to be flying at 200 feet...”
It’s my understanding that that air space requires the choppers to stay around 100 feet as it is in the glide path of incoming traffic. So, yes they were too high.
“Is 175 feet of separation really acceptable for an approach?”
It is relatively too close for my taste as the clear air turb coming off the wing vortex would have an effect on the chopper in most cases. The chopper crew never saw the jet. I think the traffic they identified to the tower was not the one they collided with but the one that had just taken off. People think there is a lot of space up there but with speed, night, and a congested area, it can happen at lightening speed.
The Reagon main runway sees over 800 landings and takeoffs a day now. So on the average, there are over 30 aircraft in the immediate area scopes not counting the military at any given time and those enroute prior to entering the pattern. Mistakes are going to happen.
wy69
Snort, when was the last time the press did their job.
Good report; thanks.
Yeah the ATC could have been more specific when asking helo pilot if they had visual on CRJ - could have added “at 1:00” or “at 20 degrees”. Don’t think he ever mentioned “incoming” either. Not sure if runway was mentioned. There was another plane and people are saying the pilot and ATC might have been talking about two different planes.
ATC had no way of knowing the altitude of either craft since they were so low.
How the hell did the pilot(s) not know they were 150-175 feet above the allowed altitude for that area? Seems like an audible alarm set for 200 feet before takeoff would be a nice little piece of equipment to have. Have no idea if that exists or not.
And last but not least, they basically T-boned the plane and it should have been in their field of view for several seconds, even with night vision device. How did they not have visual? Was it night vision - bloom?
How is it to be fully staffed there are only 2 at crowded Reagan??? Can’t see how there is much difference between 1 and 2 ATCs.
The video also verifies that the planes strobe lights were working fine, too.
“Is 175 feet of separation really acceptable”
It can’t be. For a large aircraft going hundreds of miles per hour meeting a much smaller helicopter going half that speed, head on, that is a huge problem.
Were the altimeters of both aircraft accurate and did that altitude information get correctly sent to the black boxes in real time?
The real issue is the visual flying aspect, at least one of the pilots of both aircraft should have had their eyes forward on the flight path. One of the aircraft should have made some effort to veer off to avoid the crash.
Both aircraft were well lit. Being well lit against the contrast of a dark evening would make both aircraft much more visible, including visible from a great distance.
The video made it appear the helicopter gained altitude at the last minute to purposely hit the airplane.
I have read many of the 1000’s of FReeper posts regarding the DC crash.
I have not seen any FReeper say this:
Is it just a coincidence that military personnel have been involved in 3 recent incidents?
1. New Orleans Bourbon Street terror event on Jan 1.
2. Las Vegas Trump Hotel terror event on Jan 1.
3. Blackhawk t-boning passenger jet on Jan 27.
200 ft msl was required in the air corridor she was assigned, but not only did she ascend and accelerate speed, she was half a mile out of her assigned corridor…aimed right as well as any kamikaze might be, at that landing airliner, toward the heavily trafficked Virginia side of the Potomac
With no attempt to swerve drop climb or any reaction st the last seconds when any logic says she saw the airliner
and if sources released are reliable, her alt speed and course changes occurred after she was ordered to RTB and then to land immediately
I wanted to think it was an accident
Its never been revealed yet if the AA jet was even aware of the helo, not that he could have done anything at 400 msl focused on landing on challenging Runway 33
They almost made it. Minutes from the ground.
Heads need to roll. Courts martials. Brig time. DOD is not exempt. Some ass playing army in controlled airspace like a tw*t. Good men are dead. Steamfitters that I personally knew. Best of the best who worked hard their whole life to get to where they were. That’s all gone because of some careless nigh training in a flight path? Get real. I’ll be waiting for the court martial of the entire chain of command. They need to suffer.
“Name of third helicopter pilot please….”
***********
Yes, how about some of that promised transparency?
How do you account for the amount of lead time by the pilot to pull away? Would have been simple and easy. They were on the same plane. Looked like a torpedo run.
Basically:
The helo did not have an observer aboard who was focused upon being an observer; and THAT was the responsibility of the higher command.
ATC did not properly call out to, nor halt the helo (”PAT25, hover and hold at _______, wait for instructions.”).
ATC uttered “looky there” statements that were not adequate.
Speaking of which, if a Michigan lakeside watch tower or a ship, observing your boat offshore, calls out to you, in order to help you identify an object (about which, you need to be aware), the watch should / will:
- request your compass heading (orientation of your boat - even though the watch can see your boat)
- and then request that you look for the object of interest, “bearing 300 degrees” or “at 10 o’clock” relative to your position and heading.
Two ATC is clearly better than one. At a minimum, if one needs a bathroom break, there is another to cover. Also, if one looks at instruments another can look out the window.
I’m no expert but the advantages of more than one ATC look plain to me. (Of course, I could be wrong. Another set of eyes might perceive this better….)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.