Plane Crash In DC

Resume said:
It is inevitable that Trump will massage the facts (what are those?) to allign with his preferred narrative.
Click to expand...
That always occurs. As neutrally as we try to represent the facts and to draw conclusions, there will always be political elements that use those findings to support their agenda. Investigators can't let that discourage them. We have a job to do regardless of how others misbehave.

Resume said:
He will make sure his sycophants in the appropriate agencies validate that narrative and the maga weirdos will nod and say "told you so."
Click to expand...
That's what I fear most. Nobody can control what unscrupulous people do with the things you produce. But if unscrupulous people are meddling in the process to get you to produce something that's dishonest, that's an entirely different animal. There are enough people who understand the concept of political spin that you can confidently speak the truth and trust people to recognize the subsequent spin and be able to distinguish between them. But if the NTSB is simply directed to find that DEI is the cause, and if it is populated with new people who will happily obey that direction, then the distinction is harder. If the finding in print contains the spin, you can't see it as easily.

Resume said:
It would ne nice if the legacy media would exert a little pushback but they're too busy sucking . . . up.
Click to expand...
They're afraid of reprisals. It's not that they like Trump; they fear him. The Trump has already announced investigations targeted at NPR and PBS. This is straight up strongman dictator stuff.
 
newyorkguy said:
NPR is reporting the male pilot had 1,000 flying hours. The co-pilot -- assistant aircraft commander in Army lingo -- was a woman and had 500 flight hours. Apparently they were on a proficiency training mission, not flying an 'air taxi' mission. It doesn't seem clear whether the aircraft commander or the assistant aircraft commander was at the controls. NPR article link
Click to expand...
One would think that proficiency training would be completed long before a pilot went across the Potomac in a helicopter.
 
JayUtah said:
That always occurs. As neutrally as we try to represent the facts and to draw conclusions, there will always be political elements that use those findings to support their agenda. Investigators can't let that discourage them. We have a job to do regardless of how others misbehave.


That's what I fear most. Nobody can control what unscrupulous people do with the things you produce. But if unscrupulous people are meddling in the process to get you to produce something that's dishonest, that's an entirely different animal. There are enough people who understand the concept of political spin that you can confidently speak the truth and trust people to recognize the subsequent spin and be able to distinguish between them. But if the NTSB is simply directed to find that DEI is the cause, and if it is populated with new people who will happily obey that direction, then the distinction is harder. If the finding in print contains the spin, you can't see it as easily.


They're afraid of reprisals. It's not that they like Trump; they fear him. The Trump has already announced investigations targeted at NPR and PBS. This is straight up strongman dictator stuff.
Click to expand...
The other main factor for Trump has been to get his bull-crap story out ahead of any official investigation story. Then he can harp on about it being "the truth", and the MAGAs will all nod along, and the facts that come to light later will get lost in the mists of time.

Flooding the zone with feces.
 
In the unlikely even that anyone would like to discuss the accident, instead of pretending they have no volition and must respond to every dumb comment Trump makes, it is starting to look like the helicopter pilots were at fault for not maintaining visual separation.

 
jt512 said:
In the unlikely even that anyone would like to discuss the accident, instead of pretending they have no volition and must respond to every dumb comment Trump makes, it is starting to look like the helicopter pilots were at fault for not maintaining visual separation.

Click to expand...
I'd be more inclined to this conclusion if ATC had been on top of the situation, and the helo had ignored their timely instructions. Obviously the helo pilots still carry some of the blame either way.
 
newyorkguy said:
Apparently they were on a proficiency training mission, not flying an 'air taxi' mission.
Click to expand...

The proficiency training mission is an annual requirement.
The helicopter flight along the Potomac was a routine nighttime qualification flight in which an instructor pilot tests a pilot's skills at navigating the various routes through the Washington area that are key parts of his or her mission. "It was a very experienced group," said Jonathan Koziol, a retired Army chief warrant officer with more than 30 years experience in flying Army helicopters...As part of their annual qualifications, all Army aviators are tested on their skills during daylight and nighttime, as well as instrument flying. AOL News article link
Click to expand...
 
jt512 said:
...it is starting to look like the helicopter pilots were at fault for not maintaining visual separation.
Click to expand...
Given what we know so far, that is a likely conclusion.

theprestige said:
I'd be more inclined to this conclusion if ATC had been on top of the situation, and the helo had ignored their timely instructions. Obviously the helo pilots still carry some of the blame either way.
Click to expand...
ATC is only marginally at fault here unless new information comes to light. The controller verified that the helo pilot had the traffic in sight. With that confirmed he cleared the helo for visual flight and instructed the pilot how specifically to avoid the traffic. It's the pilot's responsibility to follow those instructions. While ATC radar in many cases gives a bird's-eye view that pilots may not have, it's not clear in this case that ATC could have seen the conflict develop any better or faster than the pilots.

ETA: ATC did in fact notice a possible collision scenario and asked the helo pilot a second time whether he saw the CRJ. The helo pilot confirmed that he did and confirmed his request for visual separation and was told to go behind the CRJ. A pilot's request for visual separation is a cognizable acknowledgment of his primary responsibility to avoid collision. This goes a long way toward absolving ATC of fault here.
 
Last edited:
Most blame will go to the ATC, because the Trumpers won't to privatize air traffic control, and this is exactly what they were hoping for would happen when they started making life even harder for them.
It follows the pattern of the Post Office and the bonehead effort to get Government employees to quit en masse.
 
Another update from Juan Browne


He introduces the possibility that the UH60 pilot identified the wrong aircraft for deconfliction (an American Airlines 3130 that was behind JIA 5342) and he probably never saw the aircraft he collided with which would have been hidden among the glare of the city lights.
 
Last edited:
jt512 said:
In the unlikely even that anyone would like to discuss the accident, instead of pretending they have no volition and must respond to every dumb comment Trump makes...
Click to expand...
In this case the dumb comment is that DEI in part caused the crash. What's your opinion on that?
 
smartcooky said:
Another update from Juan Browne


He introduces the possibility that the UH60 pilot identified the wrong aircraft for deconfliction (an American Airlines 3130 that was behind JIA 5342) and he probably never saw the aircraft he collided with which would have been hidden among the glare of the city lights.
Click to expand...
The helicopter was at 400 feet, 200 feet over the maximum permitted altitude for the route he was following. Had he been at or below 200 feet, as required, he would not have hit the other aircraft even if he never saw it.
 
JayUtah said:
Given what we know so far, that is a likely conclusion.


ATC is only marginally at fault here unless new information comes to light. The controller verified that the helo pilot had the traffic in sight. With that confirmed he cleared the helo for visual flight and instructed the pilot how specifically to avoid the traffic. It's the pilot's responsibility to follow those instructions. While ATC radar in many cases gives a bird's-eye view that pilots may not have, it's not clear in this case that ATC could have seen the conflict develop any better or faster than the pilots.

ETA: ATC did in fact notice a possible collision scenario and asked the helo pilot a second time whether he saw the CRJ. The helo pilot confirmed that he did and confirmed his request for visual separation and was told to go behind the CRJ. A pilot's request for visual separation is a cognizable acknowledgment of his primary responsibility to avoid collision. This goes a long way toward absolving ATC of fault here.
Click to expand...
It's an absurd way to organise air traffic around a very busy airport. VFR at night with military flights directly across the flight path landing jets. When ATC says what to look for, they can't actually see what the pilot can see. This was always going to happen. It was just a matter of time. Apparently there was a go around the previous night due to similar circumstances.
 
jt512 said:
The helicopter was at 400 feet, 200 feet over the maximum permitted altitude for the route he was following. Had he been at or below 200 feet, as required, he would not have hit the other aircraft even if he never saw it.
Click to expand...

I have been often been criticised here for posting a video without giving any summary of what it contains.

So what happens when I do give a short summary of the new information? Someone like you comes along and mistakes my summary for an opinion.

Sometimes, I wonder why I even bother! :mad:
 
smartcooky said:
I have been often been criticised here for posting a video without giving any summary of what it contains.

So what happens when I do give a short summary of the new information? Someone like you comes along and mistakes my summary for an opinion.

Sometimes, I wonder why I even bother! :mad:
Click to expand...
I have no idea why my comment offended you. Perhaps you could suggest wording I could have used to have avoided having done so.
 
jt512 said:
The helicopter was at 400 feet, 200 feet over the maximum permitted altitude for the route he was following. Had he been at or below 200 feet, as required, he would not have hit the other aircraft even if he never saw it.
Click to expand...
What sort of fight path in a busy central city location is 200 ft right across a landing path for jets. That's about 30 metres.
 
Keep in mind that this airport is the favorite of politicians wanting to get quickly to and from Congress. They voted to increase the number of flights going in and out without upgrading the airport - there is a history of near-misses. In addition, anyone going to and from the Pentagon loves taking a chopper from there. This accident was going to happen with or without Trump. Maybe Politicians should use more public transport.
As the expression goes: there are three ways to do things: the Right Way, the Wrong Way and the Trump way: The Trump way is the Wrong Way, but it's faster.
 
It's OK, the Magat talking heads have found the cause, the pilot was a woman with 500 hours of flying experience, barely enough to be trusted with a Cessna.
Even worse, she may have been transgender.

This is being posted as evidence that she was the cause

20250131_111130.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom