All flights halted at Reagan National Airport due to plane crash

[DB]

This was not a training mission. That's why the ADS-B was turned off.

This was a regularly scheduled helicopter flight that ran this peculiar and very specific route several times each week.

My estimation of what happened here was that the helicopter was not deviating from its scheduled flight path and the flight crew of the helicopter bears no responsibility whatsoever for the disaster. 

The airliner was originally supposed to land at a different runway and ATC routed it to a different runway at the last minute.

The helicopter crew thought they were safe crossing the approach to the secondary runway because nothing was supposed to be landing there at that time.

ATC bears the responsibility for deviating the airliner within airspace in which deviations are not supposed to occur. Ever.

No. First there were no VIPs onboard. It was a periodic renewal of credentials which is "training". The helicopter was a half mile out of the flight corridor assigned to helicopter traffic and it was at least 100' higher than it was authorized to fly in that location, plane or no plane.

[MeganC]

No. First there were no VIPs onboard. It was a periodic renewal of credentials which is "training". The helicopter was a half mile out of the flight corridor assigned to helicopter traffic and it was at least 100' higher than it was authorized to fly in that location, plane or no plane.

"PAT" can refer to passengers or cargo. It can also be cover for whatever the heck mission profile was/is being flown on the route designated for PAT25.

https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/PAT25

I believe the flight crew of the helicopter is being smeared after the fact for flying the precise flight path they were supposed to fly.

Had ATC not had the airliner deviate from its course this would not have happened. Period.

[DB]

"PAT" can refer to passengers or cargo. It can also be cover for whatever the heck mission profile was/is being flown on the route designated for PAT25.

https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/PAT25

I believe the flight crew of the helicopter is being smeared after the fact for flying the precise flight path they were supposed to fly.

Had ATC not had the airliner deviate from its course this would not have happened. Period.

They were not on the flight path they were supposed to be on. They were flying under visual flight rules, and it was their duty to avoid other aircraft going in and out of the airport. Had they been where they were supposed to be including elevation, they would not hit the American Airlines flight as it landed.

In short, if they had followed their assigned flight path ATC wouldn't have needed to be involved with their flight.

[rangerrebew]

Why Wasn’t the Crashed Potomac Black Hawk’s “ADS-B” Tracker Turned On?
 
Nothing is confirmed yet, and the NTSB is still working to understand the specifics of the crash. Even the use of the ADS-B is still under investigation.

Investigators have revealed that the UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter that collided with American Airlines Flight 5342 over the Potomac River was flying with its automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) system turned off. The turned-off ADS-B is possibly another contributing factor to a crash that was the deadliest in U.S. aviation since 2001.
 
What Is an ADS-B?
The ADS-B is, essentially, a system that broadcasts an aircraft’s positions to others, allowing for easy and nuanced tracking of the aircraft. According to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the ADS-B “is an advanced surveillance technology that combines an aircraft’s positioning source, aircraft avionics, and a ground infrastructure to create an accurate surveillance interface between aircraft and ATC.” Pertinently, the ADS-B “is more precise than radar.”

ADS-B consists of two distinct functions. The first is ADS-B Out. The Second is ADS-B In. The Out function occasionally broadcasts information about the aircraft, including identification, position, altitude, and velocity, allowing ATC and other aircraft to see the transmitting aircraft in real-time. The In function, meanwhile, receives and processes the information that other aircraft transmit, giving the receiving pilots improved situational awareness.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/travel/news/why-wasn-t-the-crashed-potomac-black-hawk-s-ads-b-tracker-turned-on/ar-AA1yEcNO?ocid=widgetonlockscreen&cvid=a958356448d94724a1063e90b6fe2b79&ei=52

[rangerrebew]

Perhaps it was on and in the collision, explosion, debris flying, and crash it got flipped off.

[MeganC]

They were not on the flight path they were supposed to be on. They were flying under visual flight rules, and it was their duty to avoid other aircraft going in and out of the airport. Had they been where they were supposed to be including elevation, they would not hit the American Airlines flight as it landed.

In short, if they had followed their assigned flight path ATC wouldn't have needed to be involved with their flight.

One more time, ATC ordered the airliner to deviate and then failed to issue corresponding orders to traffic that was now in conflict.

[DB]

One more time, ATC ordered the airliner to deviate and then failed to issue corresponding orders to traffic that was now in conflict.

The runways are normal flight paths to the airport. The helicopter flight restrictions apply to both flight paths for the airport. There is nothing unusual about using or altering flights to different runways. The helicopter wasn't where it was supposed to be - period. ATC asked the helicopter to go behind the incoming flight and they acknowledged they would. ATC's radar indicated the helicopter was at 200' but isn't very accurate because the helicopter didn't have its transponder on that reports accurate information. So ATC had no way of knowing the helicopter was violating the airport's normal flight air space.

This is nearly entirely on the helicopter's flight crew. The only valid excuse is the altimeter in the helicopter wasn't operating properly beyond their control.

[MeganC]

The runways are normal flight paths to the airport. The helicopter flight restrictions apply to both flight paths for the airport. There is nothing unusual about using or altering flights to different runways. The helicopter wasn't where it was supposed to be - period. ATC asked the helicopter to go behind the incoming flight and they acknowledged they would. ATC's radar indicated the helicopter was at 200' but isn't very accurate because the helicopter didn't have its transponder on that reports accurate information. So ATC had no way of knowing the helicopter was violating the airport's normal flight air space.

This is nearly entirely on the helicopter's flight crew. The only valid excuse is the altimeter in the helicopter wasn't operating properly beyond their control.

The ATC order to have the airliner use a different runway is not a rumor. The ATC failing to have the helicopter hold for the airliner is a fact.

Wait for the official finding and it will say so.

[DB]

The ATC order to have the airliner use a different runway is not a rumor. The ATC failing to have the helicopter hold for the airliner is a fact.

Wait for the official finding and it will say so.

I didn't say it was a rumor. They were directed to runway 33. A normal runway used by the airport. That isn't the point.

The helicopter wasn't where it was supposed to be. Had it been at or below 200' like it was required to be it wouldn't have matter what runway was in use. There would have been no collision.

[Smokin Joe]

I didn't say it was a rumor. They were directed to runway 33. A normal runway used by the airport. That isn't the point.

The helicopter wasn't where it was supposed to be. Had it been at or below 200' like it was required to be it wouldn't have matter what runway was in use. There would have been no collision.

Had it been farther east, as the normal flight path calls for, it would have been below the incoming aircraft on final as well. It was out of position, period. The question is one of 'why'.  The time to transit between the approach paths for the two runways would be too short to matter (much), so the diversion to runway 33 for the incoming jet is a factor that really should be moot. 

At or below the 200 ft. operational ceiling for that airspace, and farther east, the Blackhawk would not have conflicted with traffic on either approach.

[DB]

Had it been farther east, as the normal flight path calls for, it would have been below the incoming aircraft on final as well. It was out of position, period. The question is one of 'why'.  The time to transit between the approach paths for the two runways would be too short to matter (much), so the diversion to runway 33 for the incoming jet is a factor that really should be moot. 

At or below the 200 ft. operational ceiling for that airspace, and farther east, the Blackhawk would not have conflicted with traffic on either approach.

Yep. And the question really is, as you say, why were they not where they were supposed to be.

[mystery-ak]

https://twitter.com/CameronABurnett/status/1888316970879357089

[mountaineer]

My Chinook pilot friend (Col., USA, retired) said when he was stationed near D.C. and flew routes in and around DCA, he maintained altitude  around 150' even where he was permitted to be at 200', just to keep it safe and out of the way of airplanes.

[MeganC]

Yep. And the question really is, as you say, why were they not where they were supposed to be.

You're assuming the helicopter wasn't where it was supposed to be at that precise time. Had the airliner not deviated there would have been no conflict in that location at that time.

A question that is being avoided because most people are caught up in blamestorming is to ask why regularly occuring Army flight PAT25 takes place at all.

Why is it necessary to do this?

[Cyber Liberty]

Why is it necessary to do this?

It's fun.....

[DB]

You're assuming the helicopter wasn't where it was supposed to be at that precise time. Had the airliner not deviated there would have been no conflict in that location at that time.

A question that is being avoided because most people are caught up in blamestorming is to ask why regularly occuring Army flight PAT25 takes place at all.

Why is it necessary to do this?

I'm not assuming anything. There is a documented corridor and altitude limit the helicopter was supposed to fly in when near that airport for this very reason. When in that corridor no fixed wing aircraft going in or out of that airport would ever cross the helicopter's path. That's the point. The commercial flight was where it was supposed to be and has the absolute right of way. The helicopter was not and does not. In addition, ATC had no way of accurately knowing the helicopter's altitude because the helicopter had the transponder that reports that accurate information turned off. And this is the result. Could have ATC done a better job of tracking all this, very likely yes but that doesn't excuse the helicopter pilot from flying where they were supposed to.

[MeganC]

It's fun.....

 

[MeganC]

The commercial flight was where it was supposed to be

No, it wasn't.

It was diverted to runway 33 and the ATC was then responsible for resolving conflicts.

The ATC told the helicopter to 'pass behind' the incoming airliner but what was missing from this order was the order to "Hold and then pass behind".

ATC created a conflict at that exact place and time and then did not resolve the conflict.

And I know you're not registering me here when I hammer on the exact place and time because you've never had to be in either front seat of an aircraft coming into an approach where you have an assigned time to land.

Reagan Airport is tightly controlled. I've never flown this ATCZ but I have flown right seat San Jose (Reid Hillview) north along the peninsula in a DHC-6 and we were assigned 4,000 feet and that allowed us +/- fifty feet left-right-up-down. Had we deviated we would have been ordered due west straight out to sea. This is very special airspace because of potential conflicts with airliners. But it's also a fabulous view and well worth doing.

Washington DC is even more tightly controlled. And if you're flying say LA to DC and you're assigned to land at 3:25pm than that means you will be there at precisely 3:25 or else you'll go around until there's a time slot for you to fit into or else you divert to another airport altogether. You have no idea the thought that goes into this when you're en route and you divert for weather or whatever and you have to adjust your speed, altitude, and heading to make that landing slot right on time. And then you have to make sure you have enough fuel to manage the adjustments to your flight plan because most commercial airliners cut it really close on fuel loads to save weight.

And if your precise flight path says you'll be somewhere at 3:25 then everyone else is supposed to rely on this and they expect you NOT to be anywhere else at that time.

And ATC has to do even more juggling when they mess with that carefully timed and carefully scheduled choreography of landings, departures, and conflicts.

A movie for you that depicts what ATC does. I had to watch this in class when I was getting my license.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120797/

[Smokin Joe]

Bottom line. If the Helicopter had been below the altitude limit, it never would have collided with the plane. It would not matter if they were coming in on a parallel runway. Lateral displacement is not the problem here, except for the helicopter being too far west (out over the middle of the Potomac), but vertical positioning is the factor that led to the collision.

[MeganC]

Bottom line. If the Helicopter had been below the altitude limit...

You're assuming the helicopter wasn't at the altitude it was supposed to be at for that particular assigned portion of its flight path.

Have you looked at the regularly scheduled PAT25 flight path? Note when I say "PAT25" I am referring to the assigned flight path and not the individual helicopter.

https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/PAT25

These flights happen 2-3 times per week. They take off from Fort Belvoir's airfield, fly this course of three different loops, and then they land. Kinda weird isn't it?

Here's the flight profile from January 18, 2025:

https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/PAT25/history/20250118/2245Z/KDAA/KDAA/tracklog

The lowest it flew during this normal flight was 250 feet. Not <200.

At 38°50'33.4"N 77°01'25.0"W this normal flight is at 275 feet where it crosses the approach to Runway 33. It descends to 250 feet where it crosses Runway 19.

[DB]

You're assuming the helicopter wasn't at the altitude it was supposed to be at for that particular assigned portion of its flight path.

Have you looked at the regularly scheduled PAT25 flight path? Note when I say "PAT25" I am referring to the assigned flight path and not the individual helicopter.

https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/PAT25

These flights happen 2-3 times per week. They take off from Fort Belvoir's airfield, fly this course of three different loops, and then they land. Kinda weird isn't it?

Here's the flight profile from January 18, 2025:

https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/PAT25/history/20250118/2245Z/KDAA/KDAA/tracklog

The lowest it flew during this normal flight was 250 feet. Not <200.

At 38°50'33.4"N 77°01'25.0"W this normal flight is at 275 feet where it crosses the approach to Runway 33. It descends to 250 feet where it crosses Runway 19.

The airplane as at 325' +/-25'. The helicopter hit it. So we know with certainty what elevation the helicopter was.

[Smokin Joe]

The airplane as at 325' +/-25'. The helicopter hit it. So we know with certainty what elevation the helicopter was.

And that was well above where the helicopter was supposed to be.

A caution about deviating from specifications, that applies most anywhere:

If the deviation does not cause immediate catastrophe (IOW, if you 'get away' with it), it will become part of an accepted practice, because it caused no harm. Future deviations will not be restrained by the limits of former deviations from spec, but will be added on to that new 'normal', because that 'new normal' did not produce catastrophic results. In practice, actions will eventually be well out of spec until there is a catastrophic result. That applies in ANY industry, from farming to the oil patch and beyond.

It's why safety hands and others of their ilk are often thought to be 'anal' for being such sticklers for meeting specifications first time, every time, but they understand that any culture that plays fast and loose, even a little bit, with the program will eventually have a disaster.
 
Little deviations can add up (sometimes they cancel each other out, other times they build on each other and all the holes line up in the Swiss cheese), and there will be a catastrophe.

Any other time, a few seconds either way, and there would have been no collision (just a close call or nothing), regardless of the helicopter being above its assigned altitude limits, because it would have passed through airspace not occupied by a plane on short final. IMHO, the ATC was not clear and specific in notifying both aircraft of the potential threat as well, but had the Helicopter been in its assigned flight corridor, there would have been no collision.

[MeganC]

"IMHO, the ATC was not clear and specific in notifying both aircraft of the potential threat as well, but had the Helicopter been in its assigned flight corridor, there would have been no collision."

Agreed on point one. As to the helicopter? What is with this bizarre flight path that was being flown two or three times a week? I suspect this is a surveillance flight. I also suspect that the helicopter was exactly where it was supposed to be. The flight crew was so busy doing whatever it is they were supposed to be doing that they did not fully grasp the purpose of the ATC orders to the airliner.

They did not understand the problem.

[Smokin Joe]

"IMHO, the ATC was not clear and specific in notifying both aircraft of the potential threat as well, but had the Helicopter been in its assigned flight corridor, there would have been no collision."

Agreed on point one. As to the helicopter? What is with this bizarre flight path that was being flown two or three times a week? I suspect this is a surveillance flight. I also suspect that the helicopter was exactly where it was supposed to be. The flight crew was so busy doing whatever it is they were supposed to be doing that they did not fully grasp the purpose of the ATC orders to the airliner.

They did not understand the problem.

You'd need flight data from previous flights to establish whether the helicopter was following a 'routine' flight path, but even then, recall my previous post about deviating from specifications. This might be a textbook situation.
That syndrome of small deviations from best practices adding up to an eventual trainwreck is something that has happened more than once in my industry, although people have gotten much better about it in the last 40 years.
Fewer drilling rigs have burned down and fewer hands have died as a result. Any potentially dangerous job has its 'swiss cheese' aspects, and only scrupulous compliance with well written specifications avoids eventual disaster.

[mountaineer]

Black Hawk pilots may have missed important air traffic control directive before DC plane crash
By Deirdre Bardolf   
Published Feb. 14, 2025, 3:34 p.m. ET

Black Hawk pilots may not have heard a critical directive from air traffic control to fly behind the American Airlines plane in the seconds before it collided with the jet, the National Transportation Safety Board said Friday.

Seventeen seconds before the deadly Jan. 29 crash, which killed all 67 people aboard both flights, the Black Hawk was directed to pass behind the passenger jet, NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy said at a news conference.

“They may have not received the ‘pass behind the’ because they were communicating with air traffic control,” Homendy explained.  ...

At one point before the collision, the helicopter’s pilot announced that it was at 300 feet, but the instructor pilot said the helicopter was at 400 feet, Homendy said.

https://nypost.com/2025/02/14/us-news/black-hawk-pilots-may-have-missed-important-air-traffic-control-directive-before-dc-plane-crash/