Washington DC Plane/Helicopter Collision

[ThatEllie]

Is anyone awake and following this, or anyone in the States? It looks horrific. A US military Blackhawk helicopter collided with an American Airlines plane and both went down into the Potomac River.

You can see helicopters circling like mad on FlightRadar. I really hope they’re finding people.

www.nytimes.com/live/2025/01/29/us/plane-crash-washington-dc

Horrifying but not surprising.

Not just Vance, all of them...

Trump continued to turn what might have been a sombre briefing into a baseless rant against DEI (Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) despite no evidence of a link with the plane crash.

The president was backed to the hilt by transportation secretary Sean Duffy, who said “we can only accept the best and the brightest” in positions affecting passenger safety, and defence secretary Pete Hegseth, who echoed: “The era of DEI is gone at the defence department and we need the best and brightest.”

Then came vice-president JD Vance, who claimed “we want to hire the best people” who are “actually competent enough to do the job”.

Trump returned to the lectern to claim that “very powerful tests” for competence in air traffic control were “terminated” by Joe Biden.

CNN’s Kaitlin Collins asked: “Aren’t you getting ahead of the investigation?” Trump replied: “No, I don’t think so at all... I don’t think that’s a smart question. I’m surprised, coming from you.”

Another reporter asked why Trump believes DEI is responsible. He said: “Because I have common sense and unfortunately a lot of people don’t. We want brilliant people doing this. This is a major chess game at the highest level.”

Thing is how far back does blame game go -1981 or only as far as the start of the recent Democrat administrations…

TBH many reckon ATC in the States never really recovered from Reagan’s mass sacking of controllers way back in ancient history..

millercenter.org/reagan-vs-air-traffic-controllers

Planes heading west fly at even altitudes (e.g., 38,000 feet) and planes heading east use odd altitudes (e.g., 37,000 feet). So even if they are heading "straight for each other" there is 1,000 feet of separation. But even that can be insufficient if a tiny private jet flies 1,000 feet below an oncoming Airbus 380, so on busy corridors there is some lateral separation as well.

However, all of this breaks down at very low altitudes.

Also, most modern planes have collision avoidance detection systems, but it's not clear if the helicopter did. Hopefully its voice recorder will be found and the appropriate changes made. In the aviation industry, as opposed to politics, "Lessons have been learned" actually means something.

@samarrange

I’m guessing that’s aimed at @ChessorBuckaroo not me, but Yep, 1000 feet at high level (up to a limit at very ish high level when it reverts to 2000 feet), 500 feet lower down..that can cause lots of fun and games in the US where they seem to love putting you opposite way, minimum separation to other traffic.

Also, most modern planes have collision avoidance detection systems, but it's not clear if the helicopter did.

True, I think did that to death earlier and Juan Brown mentioned it in the YouTube piece ….whether fitted or not to the helicopter in the case of this specific accident the system (TCAS) logic will have almost certainly inhibited the aural resolution advisories.

We have helicopter training near us (RAF Shawbury). It's no where near a major airport.

Hated Trump et al. rhetoric. Stoking hatred wherever he goes.

I don’t think it was helpful for DJT to mention DEI at the press conference imho

BUT

this has been openly talked about for quite some time. FAA didn’t like the demographics of the ATC and did some rather sketchy things to change that. Here’s some of the background to that in this article from last year for those who are interested (see class action lawsuit Brigida vs Buttigieg): www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/the-faas-hiring-scandal-a-quick-overview

TBF at this stage It’s impossible to know if the training that has been mentioned has any relevance to the cause of the Washington accident but if there was any going on I suspect TBH it would be something a bit more advanced than most of that done at Shawbury and more akin to that done when people move on to their operational types.

If anyone is interested in comparisons in the UK there are the London helicopter corridors, the eastern end of one of those passes very close to London City.

https://www.caa.co.uk/media/wppncpam/london-heli-route-chart.pdf

Agreed (again).

As you say there has been quite open discussion/argument about FAA hiring, and hiring of controllers for quite some time.

Hmmm.

But if Trump really believed ATC was packed with people hired “for the wrong reasons” who couldn’t do the job, shouldn’t he ground all flights until this had been reviewed?

He can’t say “it’s fine to fly” and “ATC is full of woke incompetents”….

I was surprised at how blasé and non-technical air traffic seemed. Obviously helicopter pilot error needs to be investigated as does the possibility that something went wrong with the helicopter or inside it but the whole thing seemed so casual, non-specific, and lacking in urgency and authority. An expert interviewed on the BBC - he was very scathing about Trump - said that UK air traffic control is better staffed and never relies entirely on human visuals.

said that UK air traffic control is better staffed and never relies entirely on human visuals

The first might be true (though some airports struggle on a Sat AM).

As for the second point I can’t think of a situation with UK ATC these days where you’d get a clearance whilst airborne based simply on visual but there are (or were ) certainly circumstances where you’d get a conditional clearance on the ground based on visuals.

It may have changed since I stopped working but one typical example was being given clearance to enter the runway and line up after landing traffic, I.e. an aircraft on approach that was yet to touch down….the emphasis in the radio call was very much “line up behind”.

I look at message boards and forums as way of conversing with people. If you were having a conversation with someone and mentioned Doomsday planes, and someone asked what they were, would you say, “Google it”?

Also, the original post about Doomsday planes ended with “Make of that what you will.”, was just irritating.

Given the footage from the Kennedy Centre Cam shows the helicopter fly into the plane, I think it does have quite some relevance.

An expert on the radio talked about tech that all aircraft have to advise on re route if collision is likely

I can't recall acronym

The US defence secretary has made it clear that this was an experienced team. I posted his statement upthread.

I assume that this is the kind of job with mandatory training and assessment every year or two on a range of skills. Same as anti money laundering training for FCA regulated professionals, to pick a random one.

Well I guess if you are trying to make an a point, I agree there’s vague relevance in that the helicopter was airborne to do training at some point in the sortie.

Whether the actual specific training task had any relevance to the accident is another matter.

I'm not suggesting it wasn't. Still the helicopter flew into the plane.

@SheilaFentiman

I assume that this is the kind of job with mandatory training and assessment every year or two on a range of skills.

Yep, at least one or two check rides a year.

There are several PPs on here who have posted links and still others are asking what’s a doomsday plane rather than actually reading the thread 🤷‍♀️

I don't know what you're trying to say.

If the copter wasn't airborne it couldn't have flown into the plane. If the copter wasn't involved in a "routine training mission" as it has been declared, it wouldn't have been there in the first place.

I am not suggesting the pilot or crew were in any way inexperienced.

Probably talking about TCAS..

(Traffic Collision Avoidance System).

Been mentioned a few times here already.

Hopefully the expert pointed out that at low altitude TCAS commands that get triggered avoid collision (“climb”/descend” and others aural alerts ) are inhibited (to stop descent into terrain whilst trying to avoid other aircraft)…given the collision happened at maybe 300 feet that system logic could unfortunately have been a factor here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision_avoidance_system

Well, yes. But you seem fairly convinced that this is linked to the helicopter being on a training flight.

Ok, I’m clearer now as to what you meant. But what is the use of saying “if the helicopter wasn’t in the sky, it wouldn’t have hit the plane”? Which is what this amounts to,

I was responding to this statement:

TBF at this stage It’s impossible to know if the training that has been mentioned has any relevance to the cause of the Washington accident