regional jet crash? (American Airlines) at Reagan (DCA)

189,870 Views | 1557 Replies | Last: 17 hrs ago by titan
flown-the-coop
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BluHorseShu • 4:45p, 1/30/25
AG
BluHorseShu said:
flown-the-coop said:
Per Fox, Reagan ATC was understaffed with only 19 certified ATC controllers out of a need for 30.

Indicated that helicopters and plane take offs and arrivals were handled by two folks not one.

I suspect Trump was aware of this before today's presser.
Just continues to make it harder to support this guy after begrudgingly voting for him again. Immediately going to point fingers at the same time they're pulling bodies out of the water. You're the president now....everything is your responsibility now...have the cojones to either own it or just skip the blame and offer prayers and commit to making it better. Good grief.
Its like he does good with the ICE raids one minute and the minute tragedy strikes its all 'not my fault'


Meh, this again goes back to what one personally wants to see and feel post-tragedy and what gets things done.

Trump can console in one second and bust arses in the next. You are right he is POTUS now and having your VP, SecDef and DoT head all there to not just stand around but speak. Heck, the two cabinet secretaries out there within a couple of hours.

Heck did great today, cause people start with "my god he blamed DEI" and the day ends with the Reagan ATC being chronically understaffed and presentations by the Biden admin and before saying it is okay to sacrifice incompetence in the name of DEI.

We have had airplanes crash because pilots think flying is a video game and plowed two 737s into the dirt due to lax standards in training and very little real world flying experiences.

He is POTUS now, he is taking responsibility, and he is showing you whether you want to see it or not that the DEI push, affirmative action and the like reduce competency and increase accidents.

Edited to clarify: Though political in nature, the lack of properly staffed ATC is absolutely relevant to the discussion on the accident. But if others think not, I apologize.
Reply Quote
9
1 edit
torrid
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jt2hunt • 4:48p, 1/30/25
AG
jt2hunt said:
Is the consensus right now that the air traffic controllers were at fault?
My armchair impression is the plane was exactly where it was supposed to be doing exactly what it was supposed to be doing. The helicopter was cutting through the normal airplane approach area, and was looking at the wrong plane either due to pilot confusion or miscommunication with ATC.
Reply Quote
20
JFABNRGR
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ETFan • 4:49p, 1/30/25
AG
ETFan said:
100% Pure Aggie said:
So are you saying that one ATC controller doing the job of two played no role in this collision?
That's correct.

Responsibility went to the helicopter pilot after they asked for visual separation. It's in the video above and has been discussed extensively in this thread with charts, graphs, approach plates, etc,


I still think ATC is going to bear some secondary responsibility for failing to act appropriately when separation was being violated.
Reply Quote
6
FireAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 4:51p, 1/30/25
AG
flown-the-coop said:
BluHorseShu said:
flown-the-coop said:
Per Fox, Reagan ATC was understaffed with only 19 certified ATC controllers out of a need for 30.

Indicated that helicopters and plane take offs and arrivals were handled by two folks not one.

I suspect Trump was aware of this before today's presser.
Just continues to make it harder to support this guy after begrudgingly voting for him again. Immediately going to point fingers at the same time they're pulling bodies out of the water. You're the president now....everything is your responsibility now...have the cojones to either own it or just skip the blame and offer prayers and commit to making it better. Good grief.
Its like he does good with the ICE raids one minute and the minute tragedy strikes its all 'not my fault'


Meh, this again goes back to what one personally wants to see and feel post-tragedy and what gets things done.

Trump can console in one second and bust arses in the next. You are right he is POTUS now and having your VP, SecDef and DoT head all there to not just stand around but speak. Heck, the two cabinet secretaries out there within a couple of hours.

Heck did great today, cause people start with "my god he blamed DEI" and the day ends with the Reagan ATC being chronically understaffed and presentations by the Biden admin and before saying it is okay to sacrifice incompetence in the name of DEI.

We have had airplanes crash because pilots think flying is a video game and plowed two 737s into the dirt due to lax standards in training and very little real world flying experiences.

He is POTUS now, he is taking responsibility, and he is showing you whether you want to see it or not that the DEI push, affirmative action and the like reduce competency and increase accidents.

Edited to clarify: Though political in nature, the lack of properly staffed ATC is absolutely relevant to the discussion on the accident. But if others think not, I apologize.

I agree…

I don't need POTUS to be focused solely on consoling families…part of his duties, yes, but we hired him to fix a bunch of broken ****, and it's starting appear that one of the contributing factors to this accident may very well be incompetence that had its origins in bad policies…

An understaffed tower is bad policy…and whatever decisions lead to that being allowed to happen is also bad policy…
Reply Quote
5
ETFan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to JFABNRGR • 4:54p, 1/30/25
JFABNRGR said:
ETFan said:
100% Pure Aggie said:
So are you saying that one ATC controller doing the job of two played no role in this collision?
That's correct.

Responsibility went to the helicopter pilot after they asked for visual separation. It's in the video above and has been discussed extensively in this thread with charts, graphs, approach plates, etc,


I still think ATC is going to bear some secondary responsibility for failing to act appropriately when separation was being violated.
I won't argue that, there will be blame to spread, but the people I'm responding to want to place this all or even majority on ATC because of [politics redacted] are my main issue.


Trying to stay more on topic. Everyone should watch the latest from Blanco posted above in this thread.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
TheWoodlandsTxAg
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:55p, 1/30/25
Reply Quote
7
txags92
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:55p, 1/30/25
AG
Seems like there was a cascade of small errors by ATC and the pilots both that had to happen in order to cause the wreck. Hard to pick just 1 of them as the "root cause", because if any of them were erased, the accident becomes a near miss instead.

1) ATC calls out approaching traffic for PAT25, without telling them where to look for it (ie at your 11 o'clock), instead telling them a location relative to a specific ground feature (South of Woodrow Bridge), which leaves the possibility of seeing a more distant plane as the approaching traffic ATC is talking about.

2) ATC second callout about the traffic also does not specify where the traffic is relative to PAT25. ATC misses chance to say "If you have visual on traffic, why are you still flying right at the traffic?"

3) If the collision occurred at 395 ft, PAT25 is flying at nearly twice the max altitude for their cleared route. Neither the pilot nor ATC note the discrepancy in where they are supposed to be vertically.

You had 3 shots at missing the collision. If ATC calls out where the traffic was relative to PAT25 either time, the pilot presumably turns their head and sees the much closer plane. If PAT25 flies at <200' or ATC calls them out for flying above 200', the accident never happens...it is a near miss as PAT25 flies very close, but under the CRJ.

To me, if that turns out to be the scenario, the root cause is ultimately PAT25 flying too high. But ATC would have missed multiple chances to prevent the collision.
Reply Quote
15
Jbob04
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TheWoodlandsTxAg • 4:56p, 1/30/25
AG
TheWoodlandsTxAg said:
Reply Quote
3
Catag94
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Kenneth_2003 • 4:58p, 1/30/25
AG
Kenneth_2003 said:
Update...
Watching now

This is a far better analysis than the one he pushed out this morning IMO.
Reply Quote
2
Catag94
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Jbob04 • 4:59p, 1/30/25
AG
Jbob04 said:
TheWoodlandsTxAg said:
The ATC audio is definitely that of a man talking with the tower.
Reply Quote
3
BBRex
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:00p, 1/30/25
AG
I think people are starting to grasp at straws to try to prove Trump right. There can definitely be problems with ATC, but those problems appear to have had little bearing on this particular incident.

My personal opinion is that they're going to blame the pilot of the helicopter for this crash, but there will be enough of a reference to staffing problems at ATC for everyone to jump on board and say Trump was right.
Reply Quote
4
1 edit
AggieFlyboy
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TheWoodlandsTxAg • 5:01p, 1/30/25
AG
TheWoodlandsTxAg said:


500 hours of "military flying experience", which is worth more than the equivalent non-military experience. This seems like a lame attempt to make it about her being female
Reply Quote
22
FireAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ETFan • 5:01p, 1/30/25
AG
I don't think anyone is trying to place it all on ATC…

But you have to at least admit that having a mid-air collision that killed 67 in the air space controlled by a tower that was staffed at 50% is…at BEST…really bad optics…
Reply Quote
7
javajaws
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:02p, 1/30/25
AG
If there were 2 planes approaching the ATC should have warned the heli pilot that there were two possible planes within visibility range and to verify proximity to both. ATC should have also verified altitude it seems. I think primary blame will end up with the heli pilot but ATC should have done more IMO. You see 2 paths about to cross you better be damn sure of who is who and where.
Reply Quote
1
BadMoonRisin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 100% Pure Aggie • 5:03p, 1/30/25
AG
Usually when ABIA is understaffed you get a lot of delays and sometimes end up waiting for a runway on the tarmac for 15 to 30 minutes as they slow down the volume of planes coming and going to one that is safe for the staffing level.

Assuming that happened here too, no?
Reply Quote
Stat Monitor Repairman
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:04p, 1/30/25
Reminiscent of the low-hour lady that flew directly into a radio tower east of downtown Houston a couple months ago.

File this under

"'Doing stuff; it's a lot harder than it looks."
Reply Quote
2
Catag94
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to JFABNRGR • 5:05p, 1/30/25
AG
JFABNRGR said:

Agree.

Where is the slight right turn by PAT25 in timing with ATC 2nd instruction where they said to go behind the CRJ?

If going behind this should have been a left turn and a huge red flag should the timing of the turn come after the instruction from ATC.
I wonder that too, but on the scope capture playback, that right turn isn't seen really. I'm not sure about the source of the screenshot that showed that last minute right turn and altitudes in 50' increments. If that data source is accurate, it may raise more questions.

ETA: Actually a closer watch of the radar scope playback does show a right turn. This right turn and the climb along this route is VERY problematic. As you or another poster said yesterday, there is NO scenario where that right turn makes any sense after being told to go behind the RJ, even if your looking at the wrong plane.
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
BBRex
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AggieFlyboy • 5:05p, 1/30/25
AG
Didn't they say that the pilot in command was an instructor pilot with 1000 hours?
Reply Quote
1
FireAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BBRex • 5:06p, 1/30/25
AG
Can you be honest and admit that AT THE VERY LEAST, a 50% capacity tower in this situation is bad optics?
Reply Quote
8
deddog
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
5:06p, 1/30/25
AG
The most likely reason, my guess, is pilot error. they spotted the wrong plane, were a little higher than they should have been in very crowded airspace, at night, in a very populated area with a lot of lights, and a lot of air traffic.

What would have been a near miss in most situations, ended up, tragically being a crash. We look for people to blame, but it might be a minor mistake by an experienced and good pilot, that resulted in the tragic consequences. At some point, you have to depend on a human to do the correct thing ad it really sucks that a mistake took this many lives.

Also Very Bad Trump. Extremely irresponsible to blame anyone with no investigation. It might have been his opinion, but his opinion matters.
Reply Quote
15
3 edits
FireAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to deddog • 5:09p, 1/30/25
AG
deddog said:
The most likely reason, my guess, is pilot error. they spotted the wrong plane, were a little higher than they should have been in very crowded airspace, at night, in a very populated area with a lot of lights, and a lot of air traffic.

What would have been a near miss in most situations, ended up, tragically being a crash. We look for people to blame, but it might be a minor mistake by an experienced and good pilot, that resulted in the tragedy.

I think it's going to be a combo of helo pilot error (being at the wrong altitude) and ATC not verifying helo altitude error and having the helo correct it…
Reply Quote
1
Tom Fox
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AggieFlyboy • 5:11p, 1/30/25
AggieFlyboy said:
TheWoodlandsTxAg said:


500 hours of "military flying experience", which is worth more than the equivalent non-military experience. This seems like a lame attempt to make it about her being female
Female or not, she is the idiot that was most responsible for this accident.
Reply Quote
3
CanyonAg77
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AggieFlyboy • 5:11p, 1/30/25
AG
AggieFlyboy said:

500 hours of "military flying experience", which is worth more than the equivalent non-military experience. This seems like a lame attempt to make it about her being female

Yeah, my first thought was "So?".

We're talking an aircraft likely with hydraulically boosted controls, that don't require Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime to yank around.
Reply Quote
2
ETFan
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AggieFlyboy • 5:11p, 1/30/25
AggieFlyboy said:
TheWoodlandsTxAg said:


500 hours of "military flying experience", which is worth more than the equivalent non-military experience. This seems like a lame attempt to make it about her being female
Seems like? It clearly is. Also, the PAT25 pilot who responded to ATC that they had the CJ in sight was male.


Seems pretty clear they saw 3130 and not 5342.

Reply Quote
1
deddog
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FireAg • 5:11p, 1/30/25
AG
FireAg said:
deddog said:
The most likely reason, my guess, is pilot error. they spotted the wrong plane, were a little higher than they should have been in very crowded airspace, at night, in a very populated area with a lot of lights, and a lot of air traffic.

What would have been a near miss in most situations, ended up, tragically being a crash. We look for people to blame, but it might be a minor mistake by an experienced and good pilot, that resulted in the tragedy.

I think it's going to be a combo of helo pilot error (being at the wrong altitude) and ATC not verifying helo altitude error and having the helo correct it…
Agreed. Reaction time would have been really short though. Some accidents are caused by negligence (the Aeroflot with the kid in the cockpit comes to mind), and sometimes you just get freaking ridiculously unlucky.
Reply Quote
1
Rockdoc
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Catag94 • 5:12p, 1/30/25
AG
Catag94 said:
Kenneth_2003 said:
Update...
Watching now

This is a far better analysis than the one he pushed out this morning IMO.

Yep after watching this, there seems to be a lot that COULD have gone wrong. Right now the only party I'm gonna give a pass to is the regional jet. They seemed to be spot on with their approach.
Reply Quote
1
FireAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to deddog • 5:13p, 1/30/25
AG
deddog said:
FireAg said:
deddog said:
The most likely reason, my guess, is pilot error. they spotted the wrong plane, were a little higher than they should have been in very crowded airspace, at night, in a very populated area with a lot of lights, and a lot of air traffic.

What would have been a near miss in most situations, ended up, tragically being a crash. We look for people to blame, but it might be a minor mistake by an experienced and good pilot, that resulted in the tragedy.

I think it's going to be a combo of helo pilot error (being at the wrong altitude) and ATC not verifying helo altitude error and having the helo correct it…
Agreed. Reaction time would have been really short though. Some accidents are caused by negligence (the Aeroflot with the kid in the cockpit comes to mind), and sometimes you just get freaking ridiculously unlucky.

We will have to see what the helo altitude was for the entire video clip…but if they were at the wrong altitude that entire time (length of the full video clip showing the collision), then there was more than enough time for both the pilot and ATC to correct it…
Reply Quote
Catag94
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to txags92 • 5:13p, 1/30/25
AG
Quote:
1) ATC calls out approaching traffic for PAT25, without telling them where to look for it (ie at your 11 o'clock), instead telling them a location relative to a specific ground feature (South of Woodrow Bridge), which leaves the possibility of seeing a more distant plane as the approaching traffic ATC is talking about.
I agree, but Heli pilots who commonly fly this route are well aware of the location of the bridge mentioned and where a CRJ inbound from that bridge setting up for a landing on 33 should be I think. When ATC first contact PAT25 and tells them the location, He knows that at that moment the CRJ is at roughly 3 O'clock to the PAT25, but when its gonna count, it will be at their 11' O'clock. This is due to PAT25 being on route 1 at first and ATC knowing they are going to transition to route 4 (change headings).

I pretty well see it ultimately the way you do though on other pints especially.
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
BBRex
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FireAg • 5:14p, 1/30/25
AG

[Give your opinion without the obscenity and it will stay on the thread. -Staff]
Reply Quote
8
Edited by Staff
FireAg
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to BBRex • 5:16p, 1/30/25
AG
Well except that a lack of personnel may very well have contributed to ATC being distracted by too many things to notice the helo at the wrong altitude…
Reply Quote
7
flown-the-coop
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Catag94 • 5:23p, 1/30/25
AG
I was unaware of the other approaching plane (3130) which is still S of the Woodrow bridge when accident occurs per above graphic, no?

Listening to the coverage today it would seem runway 1 is the more common approach, for some reason, likely traffic, they want to get the RJ in on 33 between the take off or the plane in the original video and this 3rd plane 3130.

As mentioned, that pilot was told to find the approaching plane south of Woodrow may not have made the connection that he was also told the approaching traffic was 33 and instead saw the usual position of a plane approaching 1 and figured he/she was good.

Seems to be some discrepancy as to who was piloting the helo, but that does not matter and I don't think Fox or anyone else was trying to indicate that is the DEI issue.

The DEI issue is about a severe dip in the competency in US govt employees due to affirmative action followed by DEI and always promoting skin color over competency for the last 40 years.
Reply Quote
3
ApachePilot
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to AggieFlyboy • 5:27p, 1/30/25
AG
AggieFlyboy said:
TheWoodlandsTxAg said:


500 hours of "military flying experience", which is worth more than the equivalent non-military experience. This seems like a lame attempt to make it about her being female



In my experience in Army aviation you are correct with regards to the value of hours leading to control of the aircraft and skills doing things that put you at limits. However I'd want to see how much goggle time she and her fellow pilot had and were they current/recent. It's a perishable skill and flying through a busy airspace can overwhelm in VFR. It's not hard to get behind the aircraft when the radios are going and you are distracted. I also think where those hours occurred is crucial. Flying around Rucker or Hood doesn't prepare you for a busy city at night.

Personally I think this Class B airspace approach is stupid. Way to close even if clear. It's set up for failure.
Reply Quote
6
flown-the-coop
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to ApachePilot • 5:31p, 1/30/25
AG
Hegeseth mentioned it was a continuity of government exercise training that they conduct regularly and at varying times of day.

In order to be effective, I would think you would want there to be the varying conditions such as last night.

Just a thought as I am not sure how much the type of exercise they were doing has been discussed much.
Reply Quote
Catag94
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 5:36p, 1/30/25
AG
Agree.
It does seem as though the it is somewhat common for the DCA tower to move RJs off the runway 1 approach and dogleg them to 33.
There could be NO tower controller if the UH60 is properly established on route 4 (on the east bank of the Potomac and at or below 200' and this crash doesn't happen.

That said, there was ATC and unfortunately he could have done more to ensure this didn't happen. I'm sure today he is feeling that more than anyone. I pray for this guy along with those poor souls who lost loved ones.
Reply Quote
6
ApachePilot
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to flown-the-coop • 5:38p, 1/30/25
AG
flown-the-coop said:
Hegeseth mentioned it was a continuity of government exercise training that they conduct regularly and at varying times of day.

In order to be effective, I would think you would want there to be the varying conditions such as last night.

Just a thought as I am not sure how much the type of exercise they were doing has been discussed much.


Was this her first time on this exercise? First night flight on this route? Had the flight crew worked together before? Many things I'd want know. Spent hours last night talking to my hawk buddy in the 160th. Trying ti better understand. This is depressing.
Reply Quote
4
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.