Plane crash DCA?

[Anonymous]

I have been involved in Blackhawk accident investigations. Blackhawks are frequently equiped with non standard "special ops" gear and do special ops training. I have no idea if this is the case here, but it could explain why certain things aren't making sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s zero reason for so many helicopters in DC, let alone “training flights.” They fly too low over residential areas and seem to just be doing it as a lark. They should train elsewhere.

Not so sure about the so called training.
I thought they delivered VIPs to CIA, no?

Yes, they dropped the VIP(s?) off at Langley and then a less experienced pilot took the controls for "training hours" for the flight back. They are very much trying to hide that the reason the helicopter was there at all was because some faux-VIP wanted to skip traffic.

Or they were summoned?

We don’t know who was at the controls. But shouldn’t there be two at the controls, or not?

Two at controls and one watcher

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it real bizarre that musk forced the head of the FAA to resign. Apparently he didn’t like the regulations and fines being suggested for Space-X misbehavior. It’s just so weird to me how we are subject to this fool’s desires.

I also read that several air traffic controllers had their job offers rescinded by the new administration. They have been reinstated now of course.

I don't think the word to describe this is "bizarre." I think the word is criminal.

Didn't he also cut the aviation safety committee?

You are correct. I don’t know why they would want to mess with something as important as aviation safety when it has nothing to do with politics.

https://newrepublic.com/post/190934/trump-aviation-safety-committee-dc-plane-crash

Anything that involves government spending or regulation has something "to do with politics." Especially now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it real bizarre that musk forced the head of the FAA to resign. Apparently he didn’t like the regulations and fines being suggested for Space-X misbehavior. It’s just so weird to me how we are subject to this fool’s desires.

I also read that several air traffic controllers had their job offers rescinded by the new administration. They have been reinstated now of course.

I don't think the word to describe this is "bizarre." I think the word is criminal.

Didn't he also cut the aviation safety committee?

You are correct. I don’t know why they would want to mess with something as important as aviation safety when it has nothing to do with politics.

https://newrepublic.com/post/190934/trump-aviation-safety-committee-dc-plane-crash

I am sure the advisory committee would have had valuable insight of consulted before this ill-fated flight was made.

Why would they have been consulted about this flight? These training flights happen on these exact routes all the time, day and night. That fact that this flight took place is nothing out of the ordinary- at least it hasn’t been for the past few yrs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump mentioned DEI so that people would be talking about that instead of the Jan 20 removal of the FAA head, and his proposed fed cuts, it’s embarrassing that people think there’s anything to it beyond him wanting a scapegoat and to change the conversation. The fact that he immediately appointed a new head speaks to how he didn’t want that to be the focus.

Yep.

The narrative seemed to be that DEI has caused the ATC shortage because they were turning away qualified white men. Not that any of the pilots or ATC were a DEI hire.

If that's their narrative they are going to have to prove it -- I dont' believe it.

ATC has been understaffed for years and according to Congressional testimony the issues are lack of funding and trouble getting ANYONE to do these jobs given the stress and hours involved (indicating they need to raise pay, increase benefits, and improve mental health support).

There is zero evidence that there were a bunch of white men applying for these jobs and getting turned down in order to keep the positions open for "DEI hires." There is evidence that Congress was not allocating enough money for them to hire and staff sufficient numbers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great pilot analysis. He seems fairly confident the Helo simply had the wrong airplane in sight. Literally did not see the other plane.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfgllf1L9_4

If true it's really hard to understand how they don't see the airplane right in front of them, both on radar and visually. Like I understand what this guy is saying and I assume he knows more than I do about what it's like in the air, but when you look at the radar and see the video footage, it's hard to make sense of because the plane is *right there.*

What is the reason they might not be looking at radar to see the closer plane? There are two pilots and a crew chief on the helicopter. Surely one of them would be in charge of checking radar especially while flying through that particular corridor knowing there will be planes taking off and landing from National. I don't get it.

It also raises the question of whether the night vision goggles they were wearing for training purposes obscured their vision to the degree that it made it more likely they would not see the closer jet and would think the area closer to them was clear. If that's the case, I'm sorry, but this is 100% on the DoD for permitting that kind of training flight near a very busy urban airport. Like completely unacceptable. I understand why an Army pilot would need training with night vision goggles but there is no reason why that should be done in an area where it could jeopardize civilian lives in that way.

So if this is the explanation, it honestly raises more questions than it answers. IMO.

I see what you are saying. But the Helo pilot acknowledges at least twice (maybe 3 times?) that he sses the aircraft and assumes responsibility for visual separation. So he's either a terrible judge of distance and incorrectly thought he would clear the plane, OR was focuses on creating visual deparation from a completely different plane.

It’s confirmation bias. When your brain thinks you’ve seen “the thing” it stops looking for other things, even if your eyes are on the sky/screen/whathaveyou.

We teach our residents “what do you look for after you see a fracture?” (on X-ray or CT, whatever). The answer is “the second fracture”.

I’ve seen people miss some crazy sh!t bc their eyes and brain are looking at what they think the pathology is, and they’re completely blind to the other issue that’s literally right there.

We take a lot of our error reduction education from the aviation industry, or at least try to. Pilots are better than we are at acknowledging the propensity for human error (probably bc a lot of us doctors are @ssholes).

We cleared our incoming space last night for a mass casualty event in prep for what we hoped were survivors. Awful when no one came.

This might make sense if there was one pilot on the helicopter. There were two plus a crew chief. You're telling me that three people collectively assumed the CRJ they were told was there by air traffic control was the one *behind* the jet they were about to run into, and not one of them at any point looked at the radar or just out the front of the helicopter and said 'whoa actually there's a plane right in front of us'?

It strains credulity.

MD from upthread. I’m not telling you anything about why this particular tragedy happened. I’m saying I also work in a high stress profession with lives on the line and have two decades of experience. And in that time I’ve seen the wrong side operated on, the wrong family informed their loved one was dead, the wrong med given (to fatal effect).

People really want to believe in the infallibility of both systems, and themselves. And truthfully, it’s a wonder things go as right as they do, as often as they do. Because when they go wrong, they go really wrong, as evidenced here.

You have too much sense to be in this thread.

I don't think anyone believes medicine or aviation are infallible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Great pilot analysis. He seems fairly confident the Helo simply had the wrong airplane in sight. Literally did not see the other plane.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfgllf1L9_4

If true it's really hard to understand how they don't see the airplane right in front of them, both on radar and visually. Like I understand what this guy is saying and I assume he knows more than I do about what it's like in the air, but when you look at the radar and see the video footage, it's hard to make sense of because the plane is *right there.*

What is the reason they might not be looking at radar to see the closer plane? There are two pilots and a crew chief on the helicopter. Surely one of them would be in charge of checking radar especially while flying through that particular corridor knowing there will be planes taking off and landing from National. I don't get it.

It also raises the question of whether the night vision goggles they were wearing for training purposes obscured their vision to the degree that it made it more likely they would not see the closer jet and would think the area closer to them was clear. If that's the case, I'm sorry, but this is 100% on the DoD for permitting that kind of training flight near a very busy urban airport. Like completely unacceptable. I understand why an Army pilot would need training with night vision goggles but there is no reason why that should be done in an area where it could jeopardize civilian lives in that way.

So if this is the explanation, it honestly raises more questions than it answers. IMO.

I see what you are saying. But the Helo pilot acknowledges at least twice (maybe 3 times?) that he sses the aircraft and assumes responsibility for visual separation. So he's either a terrible judge of distance and incorrectly thought he would clear the plane, OR was focuses on creating visual deparation from a completely different plane.

It’s confirmation bias. When your brain thinks you’ve seen “the thing” it stops looking for other things, even if your eyes are on the sky/screen/whathaveyou.

We teach our residents “what do you look for after you see a fracture?” (on X-ray or CT, whatever). The answer is “the second fracture”.

I’ve seen people miss some crazy sh!t bc their eyes and brain are looking at what they think the pathology is, and they’re completely blind to the other issue that’s literally right there.

We take a lot of our error reduction education from the aviation industry, or at least try to. Pilots are better than we are at acknowledging the propensity for human error (probably bc a lot of us doctors are @ssholes).

We cleared our incoming space last night for a mass casualty event in prep for what we hoped were survivors. Awful when no one came.

This might make sense if there was one pilot on the helicopter. There were two plus a crew chief. You're telling me that three people collectively assumed the CRJ they were told was there by air traffic control was the one *behind* the jet they were about to run into, and not one of them at any point looked at the radar or just out the front of the helicopter and said 'whoa actually there's a plane right in front of us'?

It strains credulity.

Please share your alternate theory that does not "strain credulity."

This is the most likely scenario. They were wearing the goggles and the ambient lights from the surrounding city camouflaged the closer plane.

I'm having more trouble believing as you do that one or all of them saw the plane and hit it anyway.

PP here and you misunderstand me. My point is that is that it strains credulity that it would *just* be confirmation bias, if there were three people in the helicopter. Because with each additional person you increase the likelihood someone looks at the radar and says "no there's another plane" or similar.

I agree that there must be an additional factor, like all three of them wearing night vision goggles, that would explain how three people could have somehow missed the closer plane on both the radar AND visually out the window of the helicopter.

I think the explanation that it was only confirmation bias is highly unlikely because of the number of people involved. There must be a reason none of the three of them saw the other plane which (if you look at flight paths) was bearing directly towards them for close to a full minute prior to collisions (both the plane and the helicopter veer west right before collision, the plane because it's the path to get to the runway, the helicopter for unknown reasons -- they had been told to go behind the plane which would have sent them east).

They were very close to a plane with very bright landing lights on. Wouldn't that make it difficult to use night vision goggles?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it real bizarre that musk forced the head of the FAA to resign. Apparently he didn’t like the regulations and fines being suggested for Space-X misbehavior. It’s just so weird to me how we are subject to this fool’s desires.

I also read that several air traffic controllers had their job offers rescinded by the new administration. They have been reinstated now of course.

I don't think the word to describe this is "bizarre." I think the word is criminal.

Didn't he also cut the aviation safety committee?

yes. yes he did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it real bizarre that musk forced the head of the FAA to resign. Apparently he didn’t like the regulations and fines being suggested for Space-X misbehavior. It’s just so weird to me how we are subject to this fool’s desires.

I also read that several air traffic controllers had their job offers rescinded by the new administration. They have been reinstated now of course.

I don't think the word to describe this is "bizarre." I think the word is criminal.

Didn't he also cut the aviation safety committee?

You are correct. I don’t know why they would want to mess with something as important as aviation safety when it has nothing to do with politics.

https://newrepublic.com/post/190934/trump-aviation-safety-committee-dc-plane-crash

because dictators try to make everything political, get their supporters angry all the time about anything and ensure getting their cronies and loyalists into every imaganible position.

[Anonymous]

It's disgusting that he tried to say this was somehow related to DEI, when the air traffic control tower handled everything extremely well and professionally, despite what seems like a grave error by the military helicopter pilot. Just reprehensible behavior by Trump. How are we only one week into this nonsense?

[Anonymous]

You would think even Republican lawmakers loyal to Trump want confidence in the safety of commercial aviation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump mentioned DEI so that people would be talking about that instead of the Jan 20 removal of the FAA head, and his proposed fed cuts, it’s embarrassing that people think there’s anything to it beyond him wanting a scapegoat and to change the conversation. The fact that he immediately appointed a new head speaks to how he didn’t want that to be the focus.

Yep.

The narrative seemed to be that DEI has caused the ATC shortage because they were turning away qualified white men. Not that any of the pilots or ATC were a DEI hire.

Biden hired hundreds of new ATCs during his presidency. There are more needed but it requires funding, which the GOP cuts and limits at every turn.

[Anonymous]

Brave new world of no vaccines, dangerous air travel, no medicaid/medicare, and a huge loss of jobs.


Sounds great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's disgusting that he tried to say this was somehow related to DEI, when the air traffic control tower handled everything extremely well and professionally, despite what seems like a grave error by the military helicopter pilot. Just reprehensible behavior by Trump. How are we only one week into this nonsense?

They want to privatize the Air Traffic Control so they have to make it look bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read multiple comments on Fox News and 80% say that Trump should not have said anything other than offering condolences, this is not even sitting right with his base.

I think he can’t hold back at all due to dementia. My personal opinion.