for posting

I heard on the news that they crashed at 300' and that helicopters are forbidden to go above 200' in that area.
''

The helicopter was probably higher than they realize. The difference is about the same as the distance from home plate to first base on a high school baseball field. Probably not hard to get off that much. Maybe there was a problem with the altimeter on the Blackhawk.

Local reports here in DC say the Blackhawk was on a training flight; maybe not the best place to br doing that at night.

It looked in the video like they flew right into it and there would have been time maybe to do something.

Between the other billion lights in the field and probably having eyes on the wrong plane.... I think it would have been easy to not see it.

I think it would have been much harder to hit a moving plane with a blackhawk on purpose

It just seems very odd to me. Because the natural reaction would be at the last minute to try to do something in any accident. Which suggests like you said that they didn’t see it. I’m not saying it was done intentionally.

Probably the video is not going to show us everything also because the depth of field and everything else that may have been going on can be a bit distorted.

Is a high chance the UH60 pilots were wearing night vision. Maybe getting in hours for night flight quals.

In that case their field of vision would have been even more deteriorated and probably mostly looking down to navigate with the river. Didn't realize the plane was approaching 33 instead of 1 and didn't think they were in an danger of contacting it.

Such a tragedy…

They were both flying VFR (not using instruments). It was very sunny. One of the planes had been delayed by 13 minutes and didn't anticipate it. They were both cleared to land at two different airports. There is no indication that the plane that was headed to Oshkosh spoke with ATC in Appleton. The plane headed to Appleton was delayed by 13 minutes and was only five miles or so from their destination.

1972 Lake Winnebago mid-air collision

The National Transportation Safety Board noted that the North Central crew would have had to look toward the sun to see the approaching Air Wisconsin plane[2][6] and concluded that they took no evasive action.[

The report also noted that the decision by both flight crews to fly under VFR rather than IFR and the fact that neither captain requested in-flight advisories deprived both aircraft of air traffic control support, and that such support to even one of the aircraft would have ensured sufficient separation to avoid a collision.[7]

The NTSB recommended that the Federal Aviation Administration create a standardized method for training and grading flight crews in visual search techniques and time-sharing between instrument checks and visual searches, and that the FAA expedite the development of anticollision systems.[11]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1972_Lake_Winnebago_mid-air_collision

I have vision problems and use a special screen. Those screen grabs are a big wall of black. Blowing it up just makes a bigger wall of black.

I understand that Twitter = bad = we don't like Musk, but if people are going to post screen shots, could they please be considerate enough to summarize or type out the text, remembering that when you do that and don't provide a link, now anyone who needs a screen reader, or who can't see your screen shot can't see what you've posted?

I cannot easily read white type on black background

to me, those screenshots appear like a big black nothing. Zooming in and out does no good because on my screen, it's just a black screen of nothing.

I get that we no longer want to link to Twitter, but for people with vision issues who use special screens, at least on Twitter, you can zoom in and out and it's text so you can use a screen reader.

A lot of people asking what the helo was doing there. USCG helo pilot here who's flown that route
a thousand times: DC has a whole network of helo routes and zones designed to organize helo traffic and route it under and around commercial traffic. Route 4 goes right down the east side of the Potomac, max altitude of 200 ft. It is not uncommon for helos to be flying under landing traffic once visual
separation is established and with correct altitudes maintained. From the ADSB data, it looks like the helo was southbound on Route 4, and the airliner was on final to rwy 33. Here's one plausible scenario... just one that fits the facts we know right now, could be totally wrong: Landing on 33 is not as common as landing on wy 1. Airliners are often not cleared/switched for RWY 33 until just a few miles south of the Wilson Bridge. Let's say the H60 is southbound and is told to maintain visual separation with the landing CRJ. The 60 crew may not have caught that the CRJ in question was landing 33, which is less common. They look south and see lights of the next aircraft lined up for RWY 01, and they report "traffic in sight, will maintain visual separation." Then they cruise south, looking south. Maybe the CRJ is a little low on their approach or the H60 is accidentally a little high on their route and fails to see the CRJ approaching from their 10 o'clock. The CRJ is focused on DCA which is surrounded by a sea of lights in the metro area. They don't notice one small set of lights out of place at their 1-2 o'clock as they focus on the runway. The controller believes the helo will maintain visual separation so

LAST EDIT: Another FAQ, then I have to sleep.... What about TCAS? - TCAS is great but speaking for the systems I'm familiar with, they're not primarily designed for a dense airport environment like that... its accuracy at short range is not great, and with so many aircraft so close to you, including those that are sitting on the ground at DCA, you generally have to mute or inhibit the alerts because it would go off constantly and drown out your communications with your crew and ATC. Think about a ring doorbell camera: it's great for alerting you when a suspicious person shows up unexpected at 1 AM, but it's not much good while you're having a house party at 7pm... you probably muted it because you KNOW there are dozens of people there and you're okay with it. I have no idea what kind of system the CRJ or H60 have or what their procedures are, but it's possible that TCAS could have been saturated/muted while flying that close to DCA, and even if it wasn't, they may not have been
able to distinguish the alert for the CRJ from another aircraft until too late.

The jet plane requested a different runway right before landing, on approach to DCA.

Most of the time runway 1 is used. The busiest runway in the US.

The plane saw that runway 1 was in use so asked to use runway 33 which is not used as commonly and which seems to be an area mostly used for helicopter traffic etc.

Plane had to bank and circle to use newly requested runway, which means when the helo looked, he may have assumed plane was going to runway one as usual or helo pilot may have visually identified another landing plan since it is so congested. Pilot may have had his eye in the wrong plane, looked the wrong way, never saw the plane going to runway 33.

ATC had reassurance from the helo that the pilot had the plane in sight so ATC thought everything was okay until BAM.


Night goggles may have been used but because of all the lights, may have done more harm than good, if used.

The anti collision systems are normally turned off or muted on approach to the airport, because it would go ping ping ping constantly due to other planes and planes on the ground, making it impossible to hear ATC, etc. So when they get down below 400 feet and seconds from landing, which was the case in this tragedy, collision alerting would have been disabled, providing no help.

All of this is conjecture and the pilot says could be totally wrong but it seemed as plausible an explanation as any I have seen.

I hope someone else will provide a better summary in case I got it wrong or left something out.

Have a wonderful day.

to land on a runway with a difficult descent in pretty short order, and the Blackhawk may have made a visual with another aircraft they thought was the American flight. Lots of air traffic, lots of lights to discern. Poster was a USCG pilot and says this is his best guess as to what happened.

People outside of the DC area don't understand how complex the airspace is around National Airport.

The main runway is the most frequently used runway in the US, I have read.

Other airports get more traffic overall, but no other runways get more traffic.

He was also on the Commercial Aviation Safety Team and always said he hated flying in and out of National Airport (I refuse to call it by the "R" word). If I need to go to DC I usually fly into Dulles and take the Metro into town.

and for posting your screenshots

Just my opinion, mind you. I would have preferred a link to Twitter so I could read it on my account, which is in positive rather than negative script. I still want to thank you for taking the time to post and summarize this. It's very helpful.

...is when under 1000 ft, TCAS will alert the pilot, but won't advise them to ascend or descend.

They provide direct image links that render in-line on DU so we don't have to click through and enlarge the photos one by one:

DCA has planes taking off and landing, seems like, every 30 seconds. Army reported this was a standard training practice for the Black Hawk? Seriously?
https://wtop.com/arlington/2025/01/small-aircraft-crashes-into-potomac-river-near-reagan-national-airport/

crossing a flight path of a runway at a very busy airport is not a smart idea. Rule of thumb in safety is you don't "create" obvious situations which can go wrong if you don't have to. Based on the info that this helicopter was a "training" flight they could have scheduled a route away from a busy airport and certainly not have it cross the runway flight path.

Thought of another way you don't take a student driver and run them down the Kennedy Expressway when traffic is full tilt around early evening. You're setting up for an eventual tragedy. It may not be with the first student but it will happen. Needlessly.

I deliver to airports and have to cross runways and your access is tightly controlled with ground escorts and flashing lights. Crossing a runway on the ground is one thing because the crossing vehicle can stop and not proceed into the flight path of an aircraft. When you're in the air there is no "hitting the brakes" in the same fashion as on the ground. I think crossing that approach of that plane was insanity.

I was based in San Diego. Flew around SoCal. Most congested metro areas have 'helo routes' for air traffic separation. One along the beach near LAX goes under the flight path. Works fine. Dangerous? Perhaps. Professional pilots train all the time, in all conditions, day and night. I would guess there are thousands of helo flights around DC every year. This one ended tragically, due to a combination or errors. Rather than suppose, we should let the National Transportation Safety Board professionals do their job. (If the Trumpie goons will let them.)

it is not necessary for the crossing of the flight path near an airport then it should not be done. It may work out 1000 times but there is that one time it doesn't and as I said if it is not necessary then it shouldn't be done. But too many times safety personnel doing planning get overridden by higher ups who pooh-pooh that anything will happen or who do a risk/benefit analysis and decide, quietly, to accept a certain number of dead as the "cost" of doing it their way.

Now in the case of going "under" the flight path by a safe margin that is a different matter than what we see here at DC. I agree that the NTSB should do their job and like you I am concerned whether they will be completely free to do so or whether they will be interfered with or whether the report will undergo an "evaluation/editing" process before it is released.

this guy sounds like he knows a hellava lot about this and clarified it in layman's terms.

It's so heart-breaking. My heart goes out to these families. 🥺

2. I have hundreds of flights, as pilot, into and out of DCA.

3. I was an ALPA-trained (Air Line Pilots Association .. AFL-CIO) airline accident investigator.

4. I participated in the beta testing of the original TCAS (Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System) .. made by Bendix.

I would not touch the quoted pilot-on-twitter's irresponsible "most likely explanation" with a ten foot pole. In the long run, he might be right .. but it is just his guess at this point. His, or anyone's, theories are no more helpful than the conspiracy nuts that come crawling out of their roach-holes, as predictably as day following night, at times like this.

I also saw on twitter that Rep. Andy Ogles (MAGA-Tennessee) is questioning whether DEI could have contributed to the DCA crash last night. I think that most all DUers would dismiss this as total BS. Maybe we should wait for the professional air accident investigators to do their jobs.

For the record, I have my theories .. but I am keeping them close. What I have far too few of are facts.

In the aviation sub.

I learned something today (several actually)

Thank you for bringing this over.

Helicopter flying VFR was asked by tower do you have aircraft in sight. Helicopter said yes but had the wrong aircraft noted. Helicopter knew about 200 foot restriction but went from 200 to 350 in 18 seconds to avoid the incorrect aircraft. This put helicopter on a collision course with accident jet aircraft. Main blame on helicopter and tower both could have done things better. JMHO
-Airplane