Flight 5342 crash into Potomac River

[deirdre]

Flight# 5342

Article:
A commercial airplane collided in midair with a Blackhawk helicopter as the jet was approaching a runway at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport on Wednesday night, according to federal aviation officials.

The accident happened as the jet, operated by regional carrier PSA Airlines on behalf of American Airlines, was attempting to land just before 9 pm local time.

There was no immediate word on fatalities. But the incident could be the most significant disaster in U.S. airspace in at least 15 years.

A webcam at the nearby John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts showed a small aircraft, presumably the helicopter, colliding with the passenger jet at a low altitude, followed by a bright explosion. Radar tracking sites show the passenger jet appears to have fallen into the frigid Potomac River.
Source: https://www.npr.org/2025/01/29/g-s1-45449/plane-helicopter-crash-d-c-airport-potomac

 

[deirdre]

time stamp 0:34 video of crash?

Source: https://youtu.be/tbRabxgE4KE?t=34

 

[Alexandria Nick]

Bad bad bad. It was nearly a vertical drop. One of those flashes looks like a wing detaching and the rate of descent doesn't indicate any sort of glide.

 

[deirdre]

Bad bad bad. It was nearly a vertical drop. One of those flashes looks like a wing detaching and the rate of descent doesn't indicate any sort of glide.

almost 3 hours and listening to NBC live but no reports of anyone at all pulled out.

 

[deirdre]

news conference at 12:30 am

 

[Alexandria Nick]

Local chatter is aircraft in two pieces in seven feet of water and they're suspending recover operations until daylight. They've pulled 19 bodies from the water and the rest seem to still be inside the fuselage.

 

[Mick West]

It's not looking good. Very sad.

Attached is the ADSB from ADSBx. The helicopter (AE313D) only has partial information, so the recreation from this data isn't going to be very good.
https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a97753&lat=38.829&lon=-77.055&zoom=12.3&showTrace=2025-01-30

ATC has advised the helicopter to go behind the Jet. It seems possible that they were looking at the wrong plane.

 

[deirdre]

It seems possible that they were looking at the wrong plane.

a former navy helicopter pilot was on earlier and gave a pretty in depth idea of the corridors etc there. He said there are so many lights its hard to know what you are looking at.

 

[Mick West]

Here's a quick recreation and discussion of that possibility:


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IUJpRwzHZU

https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?cu.../1/Potomac as in the video/20250130_054309.js

 

[deirdre]

news conference: no information given on recovery efforts in regards to recovered people (numbers recovered).
60 passengers on small jet, plus 4 crew.
3 army personnel on Black Hawk helicopter.

Recovery efforts will work through night. Airport closed until 11 am.

First call came in 8:48pm
first crew on scene 8:58.

 

[deirdre]

No survivors.

Pete Hegseth: military crew on "annual proficiency training",
Wearing night vision goggles.
"annual night evaluation"
"a fairly experienced crew". <tone not indicating newish pilots
"Bravo company 12th aviation battalion"

 

[jarlrmai]

No TCAS on the Blackhawk?

 

[Trailblazer]

Here's a quick recreation and discussion of that possibility:


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IUJpRwzHZU

https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?custom=https://sitrec.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/1/Potomac as in the video/20250130_054309.js

It's hard to tell from the video because the altitudes are not accurate, so the CRJ appears above the helicopter and move significantly across the screen, but something that could be at play is the same phenomenon that can often lead to car accidents at junctions: when two objects are approaching at an angle at relative speeds such that the angle stays the same, there is very little visual movement to alert the driver/pilot to the danger – and because the angle stays constant, the other vehicle can remain in a blind spot.

I am thinking of this Tom Scott video:


Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYeeTvitvFU&t=62s


See from the 1:00 mark. In this case it is a car and a cyclist but could something similar be happening here?

 

[jarlrmai]

https://www.klapty.com/p/genesys-aerosystems/t/uh-60-blackhawk-cockpit-tour-100911

Two large posts here could have masked the aircraft from one of the pilots however they'd have to be looking for it, which they would not have been if they thought they had visual on it already (but it was the wrong aircraft.)

But it could have been contributing factor to the lack of SA.

 

[FastIndy]

No TCAS on the Blackhawk?

It probably would have already been inhibited either automatically or by the crew at that altitude and proximity to the airport. Blackhawks flying with the legacy avionics (UH-60M and older) would definitely take a hit on available screen space and SA, but the VH-60M serial 00-26860 should have had updated avionics. I've spent some time in the pilot/copilot's seat of a Blackhawk (no, I'm not a pilot), and the visibility I think is much better than the cockpit views above make it appear. The pillars look big and beefy because of the fisheye but it's more of a "I gotta make sure I don't break anything while I'm getting in" feeling in real life.

Not relating to that, but this is probably the first time I've experienced a larger disaster where I've been worried about people I know potentially being on the flight once I learned it happened. Luckily nobody I know of yet, but Wichita is a small community and I'm probably only 1 degree of separation away. It makes for a rather angering/disheartening feeling knowing there's already disinformation and conspiracy theories being spread.

 

[Dan Burt]

It probably would have already been inhibited either automatically or by the crew at that altitude and proximity to the airport. Blackhawks flying with the legacy avionics (UH-60M and older) would definitely take a hit on available screen space and SA, but the VH-60M serial 00-26860 should have had updated avionics. I've spent some time in the pilot/copilot's seat of a Blackhawk (no, I'm not a pilot), and the visibility I think is much better than the cockpit views above make it appear. The pillars look big and beefy because of the fisheye but it's more of a "I gotta make sure I don't break anything while I'm getting in" feeling in real life.

Not relating to that, but this is probably the first time I've experienced a larger disaster where I've been worried about people I know potentially being on the flight once I learned it happened. Luckily nobody I know of yet, but Wichita is a small community and I'm probably only 1 degree of separation away. It makes for a rather angering/disheartening feeling knowing there's already disinformation and conspiracy theories being spread.

Any idea how "Night Vision" affects peripheral vision while piloting a Blackhawk? I read that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is saying the crew were on an annual proficiency flight with night vision goggles.

"Hegseth said in a recorded video posted on X that the crew was "fairly experienced" and conducting an "annual proficiency training flight." They had night vision goggles."

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us...my-helicopter-dc-crash-grounded-16652750.html

 

[Ravi]

Any idea how "Night Vision" affects peripheral vision while piloting a Blackhawk? I read that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is saying the crew were on an annual proficiency flight with night vision goggles.

"Hegseth said in a recorded video posted on X that the crew was "fairly experienced" and conducting an "annual proficiency training flight." They had night vision goggles."

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us...my-helicopter-dc-crash-grounded-16652750.html

Would definitely be a contributing factor. The FOV of those goggles is (much) smaller than our own eye's FOV. The wearer must use more head movement to see what is going on.

 

[deirdre]

It makes for a rather angering/disheartening feeling knowing there's already disinformation and conspiracy theories being spread.

Brace yourself. Eventually "the good guys" will start including your tragedy in their books and documentaries to push their personal political agendas and/or cash in. Alleged good motivations dont make it any less painful.

I'm so sorry for your community's loss. Plane crashes are always heartbreaking, but this one i think really hits home for people. so close to landing, family and friends right there waiting to drive them home, the cold. It's just horrific in every way.

 

[Charlesinsandiego]

Its my impression that we have a lot of experts in the area of aviation on this site. My layman's understanding that there would be collision avoidance equipment onboard both aircraft, automated systems that would warn both pilots, Also that no aircraft are supposed to be within a certain distance at any time. I see references to FAA rules of a 3 mile minimum horizontal distance and 1000 foot minimum vertical distance.
I just can't understand how this crash could happen. Can anyone here take a stab in layman's terms at what could have gone wrong?

 

[Alexandria Nick]

Usually you have a pretty clearly defined line of aircraft strung out for miles and miles over the Potomac. They're all usually lined up for one or the other runway. But you've got one plane in the chain that's offset from all the others and National Harbor is behind the plane you're supposed to be seeing, when you think you're looking at the closest plane in the chain down the Potomac.

I'm 100 percent sure you're going to see a new directive about UHF versus VHF transmissions for military aircraft transiting Class B airspace.

 

[deirdre]

Its my impression that we have a lot of experts in the area of aviation on this site. My layman's understanding that there would be collision avoidance equipment onboard both aircraft, automated systems that would warn both pilots, Also that no aircraft are supposed to be within a certain distance at any time. I see references to FAA rules of a 3 mile minimum horizontal distance and 1000 foot minimum vertical distance.
I just can't understand how this crash could happen. Can anyone here take a stab in layman's terms at what could have gone wrong?

its a small and busy airport, planes are very close together on landing and take off as a regular occurrence. so those distances dont count near an airport.

The pilots on tv say 'avoidance alarms' are turned off near an airport because they'd be going off constantly.

The vast vast majority of planes land on Runway 1. but this plane was directed to land on Runway33 [..]
Besides Micks video explanation above in post #9 as a possibility and the possibility that night vision goggles played some role, i ..a total laymen..also wonder if the rarity of planes landing on 33 played a bit of a factor.

and of course there's always a chance of last second mechanical malfunction. The NTSB et al will investigate and tell us in due time.

 

[FastIndy]

Any idea how "Night Vision" affects peripheral vision while piloting a Blackhawk? I read that Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is saying the crew were on an annual proficiency flight with night vision goggles.

"Hegseth said in a recorded video posted on X that the crew was "fairly experienced" and conducting an "annual proficiency training flight." They had night vision goggles."

https://www.stripes.com/theaters/us...my-helicopter-dc-crash-grounded-16652750.html

For a flight like that I would hazard a guess that they're using fancy and extremely expensive panoramic quad-tube NVGs. I've never used the panoramic ones but instead of having the perception of looking out one tube, it looks like 3, side by side. See attached image, source. Your brain usually () combines the 2 center parallel tubes into one image. Under that, binocular NVGs are still a big improvement over the old monoculars but there is still a distinct feeling of looking through a toilet paper roll. I've never flown with NVGs (just IFR training glasses) but there's a reason they have to train for it. What would be surprising to me is that they would even be able to do that in an urban area with a huge amount of bright lights, but if their goggles are as expensive as my house they probably have good ways to filter bright spots and not burn the tubes out.

 

[deirdre]

this pilot agrees with @Mick West 's theory, only adding his vid here because he synced the ATC audio with the 'radar' map.


Source: https://youtu.be/hfgllf1L9_4?t=241

 

[Ann K]

goggles.

"Hegseth said in a recorded video posted on X that the crew was "fairly experienced" and conducting an "annual proficiency training flight." They had night vision goggles."

One of the contributing factors that has been suggested is the fact that there's an enormous amount of background lighting in that busy urban space, especially at the low altitude of the collision. Surely night vision goggles would make that even worse, wouldn't they?

 

[Ann K]

Brace yourself. Eventually "the good guys" will start including your tragedy in their books and documentaries to push their personal political agendas

Oh, that's already happened. Trump is busy blaming Biden, Buttigeig, and "DEI", in spite of the fact that the first two are not in power and the last is pure fact-free speculation.

 

[deirdre]

Oh, that's already happened. Trump is busy blaming Biden, Buttigeig, and "DEI", in spite of the fact that the first two are not in power and the last is pure fact-free speculation.

lol thats funny you thought i meant Trump as a "good guy". I was still pretty choked up about the above video so the "giggle" helped. (<not sarcasm) thanks.

 

[Charlesinsandiego]

The pilots on tv say 'avoidance alarms' are turned off near an airport because they'd be going off constantly.

I am appalled if that is true. They need to get some better f*cking avoidance systems then.

 

[deirdre]

I am appalled if that is true. They need to get some better f*cking avoidance systems then.

they have systems. watch the vid i just posted, he says we havent had a mid air collision in decades despite

Article:

Every day, FAA's Air Traffic Organization (ATO) provides service to more than 45,000 flights

Source: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/by_the_numbers

 

[john.phil]

but could something similar be happening here?

During training missions, the crew chief is supposed to call out for traffic from their vantage point. The crew chief has a very good view outside the helicopter from the gunner's seat.

source: https://www.defense.gov/Multimedia/Photos/igphoto/2001922200/

source: https://ok.ng.mil/Press-Kit-Thomas-Mancino/igphoto/2002513438/

MARK MCEATHRON: I'm a former Black Hawk helicopter pilot. This video shows all the red flags that led up to the deadly DC plane crash.

During my six years in the US Army, I trained helicopter crew chiefs. It is their responsibility to be the eyes of the pilot and co-pilot, who – ironically – spend much of their time with their attention trained inside the aircraft.

They must monitor multiple radio channels, and in cities like DC, the wireless traffic is constant. There are also instruments to check, fuel gauges to watch and checklists to evaluate. All of these factors are exacerbated when flying at low altitudes – as this reported training mission apparently was.

There, indeed, can be moments when all three crew members in the cockpit are not looking outside the aircraft.

That's not supposed to happen, of course. Pilot and crews are supposed to announce and coordinate when we are 'coming inside' or going 'back outside' the aircraft. But that doesn't always happen.

Plus, even with three-trained aviators in a cockpit, it's nearly impossible to navigate with the naked eye – especially at night.

This is important to keep in mind if you watch the video of this particular crash, which appears to show the Black Hawk flying directly in front of the well-lit passenger plane from a long distance.

All aviators face the challenge posed by optical illusions.

If you're in a car driving down the road and you look out the window at trees, they seem to be moving very fast in relation to the car, while the hills in the distance appear to be moving very slowly. In reality, neither are moving at all. This is an illusion. Pilots can experience a related phenomenon that is even more extreme.

If conditions are right, flying objects can look as if they're stationary.

In navigation, the phrase 'constant bearing, decreasing range' (CBDR) refers to two aircraft that are travelling at certain angles, speeds and directions and in the absence of any visible reference points.

It is possible for two pilots to fly toward each other without either of them be aware of it.

At night and in a city, this illusion is magnified, because a pilot may not realize that a seemingly stationary light is actually an aircraft.

I'm sure that American Airlines commuter airline was lit up like a Christmas tree. But it may not have mattered to Black Hawk pilots. In a brightly lit city, like Washington DC.

As for the airline pilots, they may have been completely oblivious to that Blackhawk traveling through their flight path.

These military helicopters are designed to be hard to see at night. The red and green lights on the side get lost in the lights of the city below. The only 'lights' on top of the aircraft are called 'slime lights' because they are a very dim green.

Moreover, on approach to landing, the commercial pilots are not looking outside of their aircraft.

At that point in the flight, they're relying on their instruments, being guided by radar, checking their speed, altitude and which runway they've been directed to land on.

The AA pilots would have been relying on air traffic control to clear the airspace – obviously, that didn't happen.

Finally, the role of air traffic controllers will be a major focus of any investigation.

One of the things that I did not like hearing on the recordings of the air traffic control conversation in this accident is that the Reagan National Tower asked the Black Hawk pilots if they simply saw the other aircraft, just moments before the collision.

That's not a helpful instruction from the perspective of a pilot, because they wouldn't know where to look. Perhaps, the Black Hawk pilots did identify what they thought was the aircraft in question – but it was another plane taking off at the same time.

As a pilot, I would want to hear, for instance: Do you see the aircraft three miles away off your 11 o'clock and flying at a hundred feet?

I would want a direction, altitude and a distance. It appears that these Black Hawk pilots did not get that information.

You can also hear air traffic control giving the Black Hawk permission to 'go behind' the approaching aircraft, but if the Black Hawk didn't see that aircraft, they wouldn't know where to go.

source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14343079/Washington-DC-plane-crash-helicopter-pilot.html

 

[deirdre]

I am appalled if that is true. They need to get some better f*cking avoidance systems then.

this is just some flight instructor and an article from canada but his overview of the avoidance system at low altitude sounds reasonable to me.

Basically, for the plane at least, the system going off at that altitude could be more dangerous then just crossing your fingers and hoping the other guy doesnt hit you.

Article:

"As opposed to somebody suddenly reacting and diving the airplane into the ground or pulling the airplane up ... and losing control of the airplane. You don't have any maneuvering margin at that point," he said.

"I don't know that TCAS wouldn't be helpful at all, but they inhibit the warning and alert, specifically because the risk of other problems is higher than the risk of a collision."

Source: https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/tcas-mid-air-collsiion-1.7445751

 

[Ann K]

lol thats funny you thought i meant Trump as a "good guy". I was still pretty choked up about the above video so the "giggle" helped. (<not sarcasm) thanks.

Well, you did put sarcasm quotes on it...

 

[John J.]

This is a dreadful tragedy, whatever its cause.
I know everyone here will be saddened by the lost lives, and will have thoughts for the bereaved.

But- and I'm not being facetious- has Americans for Safe Aerospace provided any useful insight?
Have they drawn attention to any factors which might have been involved in this terrible event?
If not, I have trouble understanding what their sphere of interest actually is.

 

[Charlesinsandiego]

this is just some flight instructor and an article from canada but his overview of the avoidance system at low altitude sounds reasonable to me.

Basically, for the plane at least, the system going off at that altitude could be more dangerous then just crossing your fingers and hoping the other guy doesnt hit you.

Article:

"As opposed to somebody suddenly reacting and diving the airplane into the ground or pulling the airplane up ... and losing control of the airplane. You don't have any maneuvering margin at that point," he said.

"I don't know that TCAS wouldn't be helpful at all, but they inhibit the warning and alert, specifically because the risk of other problems is higher than the risk of a collision."

Source: https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/tcas-mid-air-collsiion-1.7445751

Well, not being a pilot I have to take their word for it. It does not inspire confidence. I live pretty close to the flightpath for San Diego Lindbergh Field. My Dad witnessed the PSA 182 crash from our front window. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Southwest_Airlines_Flight_182

 

[deirdre]

I live pretty close to the flightpath for San Diego Lindbergh Field.

you can watch on flightradar24. so far i dont see any cross paths...but theres a ton of helicopters flying over coronado island..is that a military base?

edit: saw a plane fly over a helicopter..Sweetwater Summit lake. so click the plane or helicopter and you can see their altitudes..this plane was at 3000 feet so safe flying.)

 

[Dan Burt]

you can watch on flightradar24. so far i dont see any cross paths...but theres a ton of helicopters flying over coronado island..is that a military base?

edit: saw a plane fly over a helicopter..Sweetwater Summit lake. so click the plane or helicopter and you can see their altitudes..this plane was at 3000 feet so safe flying.)

Coronado is the West coast Navy SEAL training center amongst other military bases I believe.

 

[Charlesinsandiego]

you can watch on flightradar24. so far i dont see any cross paths...but theres a ton of helicopters flying over coronado island..is that a military base?

edit: saw a plane fly over a helicopter..Sweetwater Summit lake. so click the plane or helicopter and you can see their altitudes..this plane was at 3000 feet so safe flying.)

Coronado is "the largest aerospace-industrial complex in the United States Navy" according to the Wiki, and the Naval Hospital with a helipad is also close to the flightpath.

 

[Charlesinsandiego]

you can watch on flightradar24. so far i dont see any cross paths...but theres a ton of helicopters flying over coronado island..is that a military base?

edit: saw a plane fly over a helicopter..Sweetwater Summit lake. so click the plane or helicopter and you can see their altitudes..this plane was at 3000 feet so safe flying.)

I checked out KSAN on flightradar24, then I checked out LAX for comparison. Geeze is it busy!

 

[Landru]

Coronado is the West coast Navy SEAL training center amongst other military bases I believe.

The northern part of Coronado peninsula is home to North Island Naval Air Station.

 

[Matt33]

CNN:

Helicopter may have mistaken bright light for plane in fatal midair collision, experts say

Aviation experts are raising concerns the helicopter pilot may have misjudged the position of the doomed American Airlines plane, mistaking a brighter, moving light in the night sky for the aircraft he'd been instructed to track...

The experts might have read it on Metabunk.

 

[Trailblazer]

If conditions are right, flying objects can look as if they're stationary.

In navigation, the phrase 'constant bearing, decreasing range' (CBDR) refers to two aircraft that are travelling at certain angles, speeds and directions and in the absence of any visible reference points.

It is possible for two pilots to fly toward each other without either of them be aware of it.

source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14343079/Washington-DC-plane-crash-helicopter-pilot.html

"Constant bearing, decreasing range" is exactly the phenomenon I meant but didn't know it had a name. I'm sure most of us have noticed this when driving, if you are approaching a crossroads at the same speed as another vehicle at right angles to you, the other vehicle stays at a constant angle from you, simply getting slowly bigger, and is less visually obvious than something moving across your field of view.