Commercial jet collides with Black Hawk helicopter near Reagan airport
489 comments
·January 30, 2025bryant
sib301
I just listened to the ATC recording from immediately before the collision. ATC instructs the helicopter to pass behind the CRJ. I’m fairly certain a few minutes before that, ATC instructed the helicopter to maintain visual separation, which is common. They typically ask, “do you have the aircraft in sight” and if you respond in the affirmative they rely on you to maintain safe distance.
I should mention that in the recording you can only hear one side of the conversation, so I don’t know whether or not the helicopter said whether or not they had visual contact with the plane they collided with.
Either way it doesn’t seem to be the fault of ATC. Of course we’ll know more as additional information becomes available.
blantonl
Here is the ATC audio between the Tower and PAT-25. Helos that transition DCA's airspace use a separate VHF frequency from traffic landing and departing, but talk to the same tower controller.
https://archives.broadcastify.com/44114/20250129/20250129200...
* At 5:41 - 5342 is given instructions for circling to 33.
* At 6:45 - PAT-25 reports Memorial
* At 7:06 - tower gives PAT-25 traffic advisory about 5342 and PAT-25 reports traffic in sight and requests visual separation
* At 8:12 - tower asks PAT-25 if they have the CRJ in sight and tells him to pass behind the CRJ. PAT-25 again reports traffic in sight and again requests visual separation.
* At 8:28 - crash occurs, exclamations, go arounds issued
fblp
This is wild to listen to. A) this is a busy atc channel and it's amazing how much complexity is coordinated over noisy radio. B) within minutes of the accident happening (at 11:48) the ATC controller is calmly asking helicopters in the air if they can assist in search rescue operations asking, if they have search lights and direction them. This is whilst diverting and grounding flights.
wyldfire
In the video from the webcam there's another plane which is much easier to see. Could they have asked about "the aircraft" and the helicopter pilot mistook which one they referred to? "yes I can see the plane flying much higher"
unsnap_biceps
It's possible but generally there's implied context to ATC. ATC would only instruct you to watch out for possible vector interceptions. flying over an approach path, the context would be that you would look for aircraft on approach, not ones in holding or other patterns above.
That said, it's possible they mistook which aircraft to look for, but it's unlikely imho and we will likely never know for sure, as I would presume the pilots are deceased.
mlyle
It's pretty dang easy to misjudge distances and closing rates in a plane or helicopter, especially at night.
throwaheyy
No, that aircraft (having taken off from Reagan, visible in the full not-cropped videos) is close to the Kennedy Center camera but is nowhere near where the CRJ and helicopter were.
hammock
I was a controller at DCA for 8 years and this is a normal operation with Helicopters using the Helicopter routes.
The problem I see is the controller asked the Helicopter if they had the CRJ in sight, but he never said WHERE HE WAS OR WHAT HE WAS DOING! The controller should have told the Helicopter that the CRJ was circling to RWY 33. The helicopter said he had him in sight, but he really had the Jet in sight that was landing on RWY 1.
Had the controller told him: Traffic ahead and to your left landing runway 33 is a CRJ report him in sight, then the helicopter crew would have LOOKED to their left and saw him. They unfortunately were looking straight ahead at a different plane.
The controller is going to take a major blame for this one unfortunately for not being more detailed. Those Helicopters literally fly directly in the path of those RWY 33 arrivals so as a controller you have to be EXACT!!!!
Another problem I see is the expectation bias. As controllers in that scenario, we want to hear the Helicopter say "traffic in sight and we will maintain Visual Separation. These Helicopter Pilots know we need to hear them say that (it's required), so they will say this just because even though they might not really have the aircraft in sight. They are just saying what we want to hear. If they don't, then we stop their forward progress or make them turn out. Comment from instagram
abecedarius
If you're quoting someone else, please say so at the top of the comment instead leading with "I was a controller" and burying the attribution at the end of a paragraph.
deadbabe
The controller will not take blame. It is a blameless culture where mistakes are expected and analyzed and learned from.
null
rsanek
Do you want to post a link the recording?
unsnap_biceps
it's linked in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42874330
TacticalCoder
[dead]
stall84
In any event, unless the weather was IMC, where neither aircraft can see because of weather/cloud, which I'm deducing is not the case if they were allowed to maintain visual separation, the ultimate responsibility for maintaining separation is with the pilot(s) .. But as I posted, we should not have this happen anywhere in the United States in 2025 & much less the nation's capital. Hopefully DOT and FAA get to work, but I have a feeling that will be the end of DCA's usefull life as a major passenger airport.
jfengel
Just so ya know, "get to work" is the opposite of what the federal agencies are being told just at the moment.
I'm sure the accident investigators are very compassionate and dedicated to their jobs, and will do everything they can to resolve this and prevent future accidents. But overall the mood in DC isn't great just at the moment, as everyone is expecting to be fired regardless of their experience and skill.
insane_dreamer
> Hopefully DOT and FAA get to work
they were just told to resign en masse as a loyalty test (the memo literally uses the word "loyal"), so yeah, no
datadrivenangel
Weather was fine tonight.
Also DCA is the most popular airport and congress would stage their own revolution if they had to go further.
JohnBooty
but I have a feeling that will be the end of
DCA's usefull life as a major passenger airport.
Wait, what?I was with you until this last sentence. You think DCA will be spun down because an accident occurred there?
This seems wild - what am I missing here?
unsnap_biceps
Regulations are written in blood, which is why it's such a disservice to indiscriminately tear it all down. We will re-learn the same lessons and people will pay for those lessons with their lives.
derektank
Some regulations are written and blood but some regulations are written to cover someone's ass and the two should not be treated equally. We shouldn't give equal respect to the Federal Aviation Regulations and to OPM's Qualification Standards for Federal Jobs; doing so deligitamizes the importance of the former.
addicted
Why don’t you identify all these easily found regulations then?
There’s a whole YIMBY movement, for example, that has identified specific regulations that are no longer valid and have made tremendous strides in proving and changing these regulations for almost universally better outcomes.
So where are all these specific regulations that are so terrible and the evidence that they are indeed net negatives.
I absolutely believe such regulations exist. But that’s not what these people care about. They simply care about trashing the govt to make it easier to drown, otherwise they would actually act like the YIMBY movement and identify specific regulations and work on changing those.
massysett
The latter is how you get a workforce qualified to write the former, rather than a bunch of hacks who know nothing about aviation safety.
randerson
FAA is however an agency that regularly tangles with SpaceX and could be seen as slowing them down. Seems like a conflict of interest for the guy tasked with government efficiency.
unsnap_biceps
That's entirely true. Thank you for the correction. I spoke overly broadly.
rayiner
If everyone writing regulations were as rigorous as the FAA people wouldn’t be clamoring to reduce regulations.
freen
Ooh… which ones?
Classic Edgerton’s Fence: If you don’t know why someone put up a fence, don’t take it down.
xienze
> Regulations are written in blood, which is why it's such a disservice to indiscriminately tear it all down. We will re-learn the same lessons and people will pay for those lessons with their lives.
And which regulation was eliminated that caused this?
UniverseHacker
I have a feeling from your comment that you know more about aviation than you are letting on, and the part about being in DC not giving you a right to an opinion seems pretty silly in that context.
boringg
This seems to be a resolved problem and one that we shouldn't have in this era. An unnecessary tragedy.
bsder
Reagan should have been shut down for commercial use many moons ago.
It will never be shut down because it's got all the exceptions so that Congresscritters don't have to be treated the same as us plebians.
LeafItAlone
>It will never be shut down because it's got all the exceptions so that Congresscritters don't have to be treated the same as us plebians.
DCA is open to the public.
bsder
DCA is open to the public. But it has lots of ways for Congressmen to avoid the inconveniences that you and I have to endure.
The other airports in the area do not have those.
rayiner
Not disagreeing, but is there something particularly wrong with DCA?
tssva
DCA is just across the Potomac River from DC and thus large amounts of restricted air space. This makes take offs and landings at DCA challenging since all this restricted air space has to be avoided. DCA also has not space to expand to try to mitigate the risks. Congress has interfered over the years by attaching riders to legislation requiring the number of flights allowed in and out of DCA to be increased over the objection of the Metropolitan Washington Airport Authority (MWAA) who runs both DCA and IAD (Dulles). This despite decades of warnings that the number of flights posses a significant safety risk.
Regional airport authorities which run multiple airports such as MWAA generally spread the cost of improvements out across the multiple airports by increasing gate fees at all the airports they control to cover the cost of improvements at any one airport. Congress has forbidden MWAA to do so which has limited their ability to expand and improve IAD to lure airlines to shift domestic flights from DCA to IAD. IAD remains primarily an international airport with domestic flights in and out supporting that role. This is largely due to the higher gate fees at IAD.
jonstewart
DCA is great to fly in and out of (I live in DC proper), as it's close, isn't hard to get to, and has a Metro (our subway) station right in front of the terminal, and the airport is fairly easy to navigate once you're in. Dulles now has a Metro station, but it's still far away from the terminal and it's hard to navigate, with gates very far away from the terminal; other than the Saarinen architecture, everything else about Dulles is awful. BWI is even further from most parts of DC; there's an AmTrak station where you can catch a bus, but pretty much you're driving an hour+ and it's in the middle of exurban hell.
DCA is challenging for flights, though, as the approach from upriver over the Potomac requires a sudden bank to the right just before landing and the runway's a bit short (tonight's flight was coming in from the southern approach). The Potomac also has a lot of helicopter traffic, between the military (including POTUS/VPOTUS), US Park Police, DC Police, and civilian flights. DCA's natural advantages have put the screws to Dulles the last 20 years, and Dulles's inability to not suck hasn't helped. As a result, people (including Members of Congress) want more flights out of DCA, so flight traffic has steadily increased. There were two near-misses last spring: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/faa-investigating-colli....
Tonight's crash seems like a colossal screwup by the helicopter. DCA is too popular for flight traffic to cease, but I wouldn't be surprised by further restricting the flight corridors and helicopter traffic, more funding/staffing for ATC, and maybe a small reduction in flights.
cyberax
It's in the middle of a city, with lots of restricted airspace just _seconds_ of flight time from it.
jcranmer
From what I've heard, it's a challenging airport to land at, particularly because one of the approaches has two sharp turns in it, and I think the main winds tend to be annoying crosswinds for the main runway. Also, the airport is surrounded by lots of restricted airspace because, you know, seat of federal government and all that.
idlewords
[flagged]
numba888
[flagged]
affinepplan
what a revolting comment.
numba888
> what a revolting comment.
Sure it is, truth hurts. But president is on my side:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14342925/Trump-says...
teractiveodular
To put this in perspective, this is the first fatal crash of a US commercial airliner in 16 years (Colgan Air Flight 3407 on February 12, 2009) and the first fatal commercial airliner crash in the United States in 12 years (since Asiana Airlines Flight 214 on July 6, 2013).
We like to throw shade at Boeing, the FAA etc, but this is still an incredible accomplishment, especially given the explosive growth of traffic over those years. Back in the 1970s and 1980s, there were far fewer flights but multiple crashes every year was the norm.
windowshopping
The real question, I feel, is whether the current U.S. government as it exists in 2025 is still capable of continuing to improve things, and whether it's still putting all the lessons of the past into practice - or whether we were just coasting on a combination of luck and the vestigial safety left to us by the diligence of the past.
venusenvy47
Considering that the head of the FAA and TSA were forced to resign, and a hiring freeze on air traffic controllers is suddenly in effect, I don't think the current government wants to improve flight safety.
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2025-0...
neuronexmachina
> Considering that the head of the FAA and TSA were forced to resign
For context, the heads of the FAA and TSA are supposed to serve 5-year terms. The FAA Admin (Michael Whitaker) who was forced out started serving in Oct 2023. The TSA Admin (David Pekoske) was first appointed in 2017, and then nominated for another 5-year term in 2022.
As far as I'm aware, this is the first time those positions have ever been told to resign by a new administration.
AdamN
Reagan fired the ATCs when they tried to assert their rights - can't be good if they think they may be the next in line for DOGEing.
contravariant
Honestly I'm expecting an executive order banning left wings at this rate.
LeoPanthera
Our presidents social media commentary on this issue reads, and this is the only way I can phrase this, like a child wrote it. It's embarrassing.
tmountain
[flagged]
happytoexplain
There is simply no reason to use the statistical safety of air travel to excuse incidents. We can appreciate the incredible feats of engineering and logistics that make air travel so safe without letting the bar dip down or throwing up our hands and saying "well it can't be perfect, don't throw shade" when a specific organization has a specific incident.
Edit: To be clear, I'm referring to what you said, not to the current incident.
wat10000
We can simultaneously acknowledge this amazing safety record and still want to fix issues that are found.
paulddraper
Well it is objectively true that it can't be perfect.
OtherShrezzing
I think Boeing specifically attracts criticism due to all the fatalities outside of the US in that time period.
gota
And the perceived sentiment that those fatalities are directly linked to changes in the corporate culture that emphasized 'greed' and 'middle management power structures' over 'engineering focus'
Not saying these are true - or false - just that the prevalent media coverage and social media commentary (including here on HN) has been touching on these points frequently. The 'good guys' at Boeing were pushed out or silenced, the 'sleazy guys' won and didn't care about the consequences as long as they got their payday
cameldrv
That was my thought exactly when I heard of this. I trust that like other major accidents, that we will learn from this and make the skies safer. Sixteen years without a major airline crash was an incredible accomplishment. It's a tragedy it couldn't have gone on longer.
sofixa
> We like to throw shade at Boeing, the FAA etc, but this is still an incredible accomplishment, especially given the explosive growth of traffic over those years
To be fair to them, the Boeing-related incidents could have well happened in the US and killed Americans too. And the FAA absolutely refused to do their job until their hand was forced by everyone else - they refused to ground the Maxes until all other major air authorities did. That's also why EASA is involved in the Max recertification, and the 777X certification. Nobody trusts the FAA anymore.
And the fact that the door blowout didn't damage any part of the plane is miraculous - if it had hit the vertical stabiliser, the plane would have been a total loss.
So you're giving credit where very little is due.
junaru
Why is this being framed as airliners fault to begin with.
When a fishingboat gets rammed by an cruise ship it's not "cruise ship collides with fishingboat", its the reverse.
One is a big civilian aircraft thats being tracked and has no way of making sharp course adjustments the other is a 'VIP' with potentially ADS-B off.
Heads should fly at whatever military branch the hellicopter was operated at... but they wont.
twoparachute45
It wasn't a police chopper, it was a military VH-60, also known as a "White Hawk" [1]. It's a VIP transport helicopter, the same type that is used to transport the president.
~The flight track of the helicopter [2] starts at a property in McLean, VA (edited to remove likely inaccurate info)~
The chopper was based out of Fort Belvoir, and based on similar past flight tracks, looks like it probably took off from there too. CNN is reporting that there were 3 soldiers onboard, and no VIPs.
1: https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikorsky_VH-60N_White_Hawk
2: https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=ae313d&lat=38.952&lon=-...
evil-olive
> The flight track of the helicopter starts at a property in McLean, VA
that's almost certainly not where the flight started, due to intricacies of how this sort of flight tracking works.
if you look at [0] it has tracks of both flights. toggle the right-hand sidebar, if it's not open already, and you'll see a table containing both planes. the helicopter (PAT25) is yellow, the plane (JIA5342) is blue. the legend right below that explains the color-coding - the plane's data came from ADS-B, while the helicopter's data came from multilateration (MLAT).
MLAT [1, 2] works by having multiple ADS-B feeder stations cooperate in real-time and deduce an aircraft's position based on timestamps of when the signal is received. it allows tracking aircraft that only broadcast the more limited Mode S data, instead of the newer and more detailed ADS-B.
because it requires multiple cooperating receivers, the start of the track in suburban McLean does not mean it took off from there. it just means that was the point in its flight where it became visible to enough receivers that MLAT was able to pin down a position.
you can also see this difference just by looking at the tracks - the plane is broadcasting its own position continuously, so its track is nice and smooth. meanwhile the helicopter's flight looks "jagged" in a way that does not match what its actual flight path would have been. this is an artifact of the small errors introduced by MLAT.
0: https://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=ae313d,a97753
1: https://www.flightaware.com/adsb/mlat/
2: https://adsbx.discourse.group/t/multilateration-mlat-how-it-...
alistairSH
And just to be clear, the POTUS/super-special VIP transport is run by the USMC out of Quantico[1], a bit further to the south along the Potomac. Belvoir is US Army, and does have VIP heelicopters (obviously), but it's not the same group that lands at the White House.
1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMX-1 They have some Ospreys and other things as well, but HMX-1 is the most famous and recognizable.
amelius
That's a nice website, but from a layman's perspective it seems odd that everybody with an internet connection could have seen the imminent crash except the pilots ...
nemomarx
once you know to look at those two specific flights it probably gets easier, yeah. if you were looking at everything in the air at the time I think less so?
reaperman
[2] shows the helicopter taking off 2 miles away from the old saudi embassy in McLean marked “permanently closed” on google maps. (The current embassy is in DC proper, directly across the river from DCA airport)
I don’t think thats strong evidence that it took off from the old Saudi Embassy - thats pretty far away even given your caveat about accuracy.
Edit: it looks to me like the black hawk was coming from somewhere else with its ADS-B turned off entirely, and then turned on ADS-B once it reached the potomac to approach DCA. The first two datapoints of that flight already show it going 110mph, which its unlikely to be able to accelerate to in just 0.2miles after take off.
Edit 2: The route also looks very similar to this flight from 11 days earlier (but reversed in direction): https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/PAT25 This shows the Blackhawk at 300 feet passing by DCA on what seems like a routine or training flight? I don't know how to look up historical flights to see if this is a commonly-flown route. On that flight, the Black Hawk flew past DCA at 300 feet of altitude, and the last FlightAware data for the American Eagle passenger flight showed 400 feet of altitude.
lovecg
Note that that track is not ADS-B at all. It’s triangulated from mode S pings (“MLAT”, https://www.flightaware.com/adsb/mlat/). I don’t know how accurate these are.
twoparachute45
I didn't say it took off from the old embassy. The flight track starts at the backyard of a house that is currently owned by the embassy. You can see the owner of that property by searching that address here (the site doesn't support a direct link): https://icare.fairfaxcounty.gov/ffxcare/search/commonsearch....
dboreham
That house doesn't seem to have enough clearance vs the trees to land a helo. Note that Langley (CIA) is nearby.
reaperman
Thank you!
jijji
811 Lawton St, Mc Lean, VA 22101 Name: SAUDIA ARABIA ROYAL EMBASSY OF, Mailing Address: 8500 HILLTOP RD STE 301 C/O FINANCIAL DIRECTOR FAIRFAX VA 22031 4310
jetpackjoe
CNN is reporting the helicopter came from Fort Belvoir.
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/plane-crash-dca-potomac-was...
reaperman
The helicopter seems like it is typically stationed at Fort Belvoir. Does "out of Fort Belvoir, Virginia" strictly mean that the helicopter's flight started at Fort Belvoir, or that the helicopter itself is considered to be "out of Fort Belvoir" in a similar manner that LeBron James could be said to be "out of Akron, OH"?
null
highcountess
Military flights do not fly ADB hot outside of the DC FRZ. It was also clearly exactly following flight route 4.
There are a few locations in that area it could have been coming from. Anything else would have made no sense flying through the FRZ from/to Belvoir.
reaperman
What is "flight route 4"?
i_am_proteus
The current embassy is indeed in DC proper, but it isn't directly across the river from DCA.
It's about a mile upriver, near the Watergate.
highcountess
That was clearly a training flight
alistairSH
But does that provide any context? Military pilots perform training flights regularly - it's not necessarily indicative of an inexperienced pilot.
TacticalCoder
[dead]
Kon-Peki
[flagged]
jballer
It's a "Gold Top", callsign PAT25
https://helicoptersofdc.com/helicopters/5-us-army-12th-aviat...
Rantenki
BBC is reporting that the Army has confirmed that it was a UH-60, not a VH-60, ie: not a VIP transport: https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cy7kxx74yxlt?post=asset%3A62b9...
Although it's early on and these communications are often chaotic/inaccurate.
twoparachute45
I thought it was a VH-60 given that it was callsign PAT25 (PAT is Priority Air Transport and they use the VH-60 for those flights), but if this was a training flight, they may have still used the PAT callsign while flying a UH-60.
alistairSH
Both are "Black Hawk" airframes, right? The VH-60 variant is just a UH-60 that was build/configured for VIP transport vs the normal UH-60 utility variant.
IE, other than paint, they look the same to a casual observer.
null
GlenTheMachine
I work at a Navy installation on the Potomac just south of DCA. As of 10 am EST today there was a moderate police and rescue presence on the water. There is a significant amount of debris visible floating in the river, and the boats are fishing it out piece by piece. The only things in the air are a handful of helicopters, presumably related to the search operation.
vman81
If anyone needs a palate cleanser after listening to a depressing ATC recording, I can recommend this heartwarming first time solo flying teenager dealing with her landing gear coming off after takeoff. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZ5q7Iv5wTM
Reubachi
The amount of times i've wtched this video needing an excuse to feel hype is greater than 10.
Her personal instructor finally arriving ("Maggie it's john") and Maggie starting to normalize the situation/making professonal raido calls really show the power of humanity working through struggle.
null
kirtakat
Gods, her "OK" at 30seconds is fucking heart wrenching.
dibujaron
This was great, thanks!
toomuchtodo
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Potomac_River_mid-air_col...
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-01-30/washingto... | https://archive.today/n1ark
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/plane-crash-dca-potomac-was... (CNN live updates)
https://old.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/1idbkyd/crash_at_dc...
https://old.reddit.com/r/aviation/comments/1idba8i/plane_cra...
https://x.com/aletweetsnews/status/1884789306645983319
https://archive.liveatc.net/kdca/KDCA1-Twr-Jan-30-2025-0130Z... | https://web.archive.org/web/20250130025411/https://archive.l... (event starts at 17:25)
unsnap_biceps
https://archives.broadcastify.com/44114/20250129/20250129200... contains the ATC feed in addition to the PAT-25 (helo) radio.
~5:41 mark 5342 is given instructions for circling to 33. ~6:45 mark PAT-25 reports Memorial ~7:06 mark tower gives PAT-25 traffic advisory about 5342 and PAT-25 reports traffic in sight and requests visual separation ~8:12 mark tower asks PAT-25 if they have the CRJ in sight. PAT-25 again reports traffic in sight and again requests visual separation. ~8:21 mark, crash occurs, exclamations, go arounds issued
htgb
I'm impressed by your, and their, hearing comprehension here! Granted, English isn't my native language but even with concentration I struggle to hear what they say.
vharuck
It's easy to forget how many skills and "heuristics" go into listening. I once read a scale of language proficiency that placed "Can converse over a poor phone connection" at a very high level. When a word is garbled or lost, you have to quickly think of all the possible words that could've fit the grammar and whatever sound you heard, consider them in the context, and choose one or two. Then the next part of the conversation should let you pick one. Then add the complication of not seeing body language.
I forget where I read this. I think it was from the US Department of State, but I can't find it now.
83457
Any takeaways from this? ATC not responding with separation but Blackhawk continuing anyway?
LeoPanthera
BBC live updates: https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cy7kxx74yxlt
snowwrestler
DCA has two runways. The longer runway is aligned with the river’s north/south direction at that point, so planes flying the approach to this runway from the south track along the western shore of the river, leaving the eastern shore clear for other aircraft like helicopters. The vast majority of flights on approach from the south [1] use this longer runway.
The secondary runway is set at a diagonal NW/SE. Planes flying an approach from the south follow the river at first, but then loop out over the eastern shore of the river to line up on that runway. To my eye the radar track of the downed flight follows this path. It’s possible since it was a small plane and only small planes can use the diagonal runway—it’s shorter.
I mention this because this track takes planes into airspace that is a) usually clear of commercial airplane traffic, and b) directly over military facilities like Naval Research Lab and Joint Base Bolling, which have significant military helicopter travel.
Basically, I wonder to what extent the helicopter pilot was surprised to find an airplane descending in that location.
[1] When flights are approaching from the north, the main runway requires a pretty sharp right turn seconds before touching down. Approaches to the diagonal runway from the north take planes almost directly over the Pentagon.
GlenTheMachine
I work at NRL, east of DCA and about 500 yards south of the crash. Can confirm that it is not unusual for flights to pass directly overhead of us, however I don’t understand the statement that this was a new flight path.
Molitor5901
The press conference this morning mentioned that this was a new flight path. I wonder if the helicopter crew were not fully briefed on the new path, if that is the case.
francisofascii
In looking at the radar recording, the plane appears to be approaching from the south going north (very slightly east), than diverts northwest to land on the runway, as you describe.
nradov
Obviously it will take some time for the full accident analysis but there have been quite a few near misses lately due to air traffic controller errors. Flight volume has been growing, airspace near airports is more congested, and controllers are overworked. Eventually all of the "Swiss cheese" holes line up. We're going to need to hire more controllers.
Also, it appears that one of the aircraft was a military (not police) H-60 Blackhawk helicopter.
NaOH
Hiring controllers is not easy. A friend's daughter just went through the hiring process. She graduated from college with an appropriate degree right as COVID hit. Her FAA application wasn't accepted for four years.
This past summer she did the four-week interactive online courses. Applicants must pass this and may not re-enter the program if they do not. After that she did the six-week courses in Oklahoma City. Again, applicants must pass this and may not re-enter the program if they do not. She passed. Only half her class of 20 passed. In the prior class, only 4 of 15 passed.
She declined the position when they could not offer a position within reasonable proximity of her family. She, too, may not re-enter the program. On top of all that, the program has strict age requirements because there's a mandatory retirement age (55, I believe).
There isn't a large pool of applicants and the percentage of successful ones is not high. Considering the amount of lives on the line, it's understandable the hiring criteria is strict. All told, it's not an easy position to fill and even explicit efforts to increase the number of applicants will take years. Just like many other skilled fields.
throwaway36482
Their candidate success rate would probably be higher if they weren’t rejecting the vast majority of their most-qualified applicants for reasons that are clearly pretextual: https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/the-faas-hiring-scandal-...
neuronexmachina
It's kind of odd that blog post doesn't mention that the biographical assessment it's talking about was only used between 2014 and 2018.
tristor
That's shocking and disturbing, and is pretty much a textbook example of exactly the type of thing opponents to DEI have been referring to for how DEI and Affirmative Action result in a lowering of the bar. They explicitly structured things so that ATC hiring was pre-restricted for non-cognitive (e.g. merit) reasons, and failed out candidates that scored a perfect score on the cognitive test on the basis of their demographics (they weren't minorities).
kbaker
Another problem is the maximum entry age for the ATC school - if you are over the age of 31 you can't apply.
UltraSane
Not being allowed to re-enter the program is just insane.
kemayo
Particularly not for the last reason mentioned -- declining an offered position because it's not in a place you want to live.
perihelions
Isn't it a reasonable filter? I'd (naively) assume that all things being equal, a person who passes a test on the first attempt, is more likely to have a higher innate ability than one who doesn't.
Is this wrong?
pirate787
The program needs to have high standards and I imagine some of the reasons for failing are related to ability under pressure.
fernandopj
Indeed. Imagine if prospect lawyers were prevented from retaking the bar exam.
datadrivenangel
And current controllers are often working 60-70+ weeks because of the understaffing...
bradfox2
This is, justifiably, very similar to nuclear reactor operators. Pay needs to reflect the working conditions to attract more people (it does for reactor operators).
mplanchard
In addition, ATC is not allowed to go on strike, limiting the degree to which they can bargain for better working conditions, pay, etc.
xienze
Then why is there an ATC union if, apparently, it can't affect any change?
insane_dreamer
> appropriate degree
what's considered an appropriate degree for ATC?
nradov
No college degree is officially required. Candidates with aviation related degrees probably have a better chance of making it through. But there are plenty of working controllers who have only a high school diploma or learned the job as enlisted military personnel.
"Have either one year of general work experience or four years of education leading to a bachelor’s degree, or a combination of both"
NaOH
In her case it was a Bachelors in Aviation and Aerospace Science with an Air Traffic Control Concentration. There may be other programs or concentrations which are acceptable.
mvdtnz
[flagged]
peblos
Requirements are strict in other countries as well. It comes with the nature of the job.
Dalewyn
Practically all laws, rules, and regulations in aviation were written with the blood of those who, well, sadly had to embrace the Earth so to speak.
On the face of it they may look discriminatory, especially the age restrictions, but the FAA will be more than happy to cite objective and scientific evidence supporting them which were, again, written in blood.
ghc
> In addition, the White House has put a hiring freeze in place, prohibiting the replacement of open government positions or the creation of new ones while the administration evaluates reductions in the workforce. The White House plans to release a memorandum with further guidance within 90 days. This has drawn criticism from lawmakers as the FAA has been ramping up controller hiring.
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2025-0...
joezydeco
Meanwhile, San Carlos Airport (KSQL, near San Francisco) is going ATC-zero on February 1st. The tower will be unstaffed.
https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/CASMATEO/bulletins/...
"The FAA has awarded a new contract for air traffic services at SQL to Robinson Aviation (RVA). However, the contract does not include locality pay to account for the high cost of living in the San Francisco Bay Area. As a result, RVA’s employment offers to current SQL controllers were significantly lower than their current compensation under SERCO. Understandably, all current controllers have declined RVA’s offers."
"Given that the FAA is ultimately responsible for ensuring air traffic services at SQL, we requested temporary FAA staffing for the tower—a solution currently being implemented at Eagle Airport in Colorado during its transition from SERCO to RVA. However, the FAA informed us this morning that they will not provide temporary personnel for SQL"
dylan604
> The tower will be unstaffed.
Doesn't that just mean there will be no taxi control? My understanding is that ATC isn't in the tower. The tower staff just give clearances for take-off and directions on which runway to land/take-off. In radio clips, you can hear ATC hand-off a plane to tower.
cco
Surely the FAA would just shut the airport down in that eventuality, no?
Seems tenable for a GA airport in rural Wyoming but that is far too close to a major hub.
jonathanlb
Honest question: are air traffic controllers at risk for being replaced with AI systems? My initial thought is no, there is too much complexity, but AI could help ease the load. I'm not really informed about air traffic systems, just curious.
null
Jtsummers
In fairness to the current administration, while the hiring freeze may have impacted ATC hiring, that is not causal here. No one hired last week would have been running things today (if they were hit with the freeze).
sigmar
Someone that was hired weeks or months ago, but scheduled to start last week, could* have been included in the hiring freeze. There's examples here of rescinded offers after doing irs on-boarding: https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/news/2025/jan/executive... (Not that there's information that suggests this caused the incident)
insane_dreamer
> not causal here
but it does illustrate the type of future incident that it _could_ be causal of
elicash
They were replying to a comment that said "We're going to need to hire more controllers."
So I took their comment to be forward-looking.
It's worth adding that Elon Musk's email that had the supposed "buyout" went to ATC folks -- however management was telling them they'd need to work through their resignation date, regardless, removing the point of it. Then again, Musk denied the buyout will work this way, that agencies can just do whatever they want on this and OPM seems to agree, so who knows.
ekianjo
Is there an actual reason why the control tower work can't be fully automated? For train control lights we almost don't rely on human operators anywhere.
LeafItAlone
> For train control lights we almost don't rely on human operators anywhere.
Trains are on tracks. They basically move in one dimension. And the tracks can have (near) contact-based sensors along the way where the exact distance is known. (And in the US, there still is human conducting in a lot of the US)
That’s a very different problem space than the three dimension, unattached, space that air traffic moves in.
SeptiumMMX
Because things can go from routine to multiple simultaneous life-threatening failures very quickly. Something like one flight declaring a mayday while another one just lost communication, all while the radar just started glitching in a weird way. Human intuition and common sense can sort it out. Deterministic algorithms would not.
randerson
The problem space is too broad.
E.g. On 9/11 ATC had to land almost 3000 planes in 1 hour. I'm not sure if that sort of national coordinated grounding is part of ATC training, but it's certainly not something I'd want to leave to some code that has never needed to run in production before.
stouset
Trains run on fixed tracks with fixed intersections, and one track might see a handful of them per day.
Planes around airports come in from all directions in three dimensions, and there can be hundreds of arrivals per hour.
These are vastly different scales of problem domain.
namirez
How would you deal with all sorts of emergencies involving human pilots? For unmanned aircraft(aka drones) it’s a lot easier to implement unmanned traffic management (UTM).
thowawatp302
Weather. How often do weather events change the entire traffic flow into a train station?
I’ve heard ATC swap landing and takeoff directions in the space of 10 minutes because of weather
foobarchu
Not an expert but I can't imagine that would go very well. Trains have a single axis of movement that sometimes cross or combines with others. Aircraft have three axes of movement all under human control.
justinspace
I mean this sincerely. What is more likely: that we've spent several decades ignoring very real automation solutions to this problem, or that it's a really, really hard problem that could get people killed?
rayiner
https://www.govexec.com/workforce/2025/01/broad-exemptions-t...
> President Trump signed an executive order instituting the freeze on Monday shortly after his inauguration, but allowed for exceptions for positions related to immigration enforcement, national security or public safety.
Important to read the details! There will be lots of misinformation as people invoke the minority of critical jobs as cover to defend the less critical ones.
justinspace
[flagged]
smitty1110
To quote the order itself:
> This order does not apply to military personnel of the armed forces or to positions related to immigration enforcement, national security, or public safety.
ATC surely falls under public safety. Additionally, the ATC issues stretch well back into the Biden term, and you can find plenty of articles discussing the controversy elsewhere.
int0x29
I get a strong sense that they don't actually know what they cut as they stopped paying to guard ISIL prisoners. I could very easily see ATC getting hit by accident. Generally this administration neither thinks nor plans before acting
https://www.politico.com/newsletters/national-security-daily...
allemagne
"Surely"? This is only a few days after a change of administration along with sweeping government changes. Don't you think it's worth asking questions a little more deeply than this?
null
rsanek
Wow, a controller can be hired and on the job in less than a week?
SmellTheGlove
Sure can if they make the right offer to the people that were working there just before they quit due to being lowballed!
paulddraper
I believe this happened in DC SFRA, which is a 30-mile radius specially controlled airspace due to the level of traffic and national security interests.
AngryData
And we also did make it basically impossible for ATC workers to strike, so its not like the ATC workers could have said "fix this shit so people don't die or we will strike" because they can't really and anyone who says it anyways alone is going to be given the boot and blacklisted from the job. Not to mention the amount of training and effort needed to become one in the first place with basically zero job security or recourse if you make the wrong person angry.
readthenotes1
[flagged]
unsnap_biceps
If you listen to the ATC recording, around 15:50, they instruct the helicopter to watch for traffic, specifically this flight, and clears them for virtual separation.
It's the helo's fault. They likely misjudged the plane due to assuming it was a large jet but it was a regional jet, so it was way closer than they thought it was.
It's a tragedy, but I don't see how it would be ATC's fault. But that's just my 2 cents.
jonlong
> They likely misjudged the plane due to assuming it was a large jet but it was a regional jet
Maybe this is possible, but it seems implausible given that ATC explicitly refers to the jet as a "CRJ".
JADev62096
It could be that the right call was for ATC to deny the request for visual separation and for them to do the deconflicting themselves. Not saying that's the case, I don't know, but that's one way it could be (partially) ATC's fault.
anigbrowl
That's the best theory I've seen so far, but it's still really really bad.
thallada
Do you have a link to the recording?
YZF
It's way to early to say but one of the threads seemed to indicate the helicopter pilot was told about the airplane and instructed to maintain visual separation. I used to be a military air traffic controller and that was fairly common practice but I wasn't aware this is something that happens in civil aviation where usually the margins should be much higher.
Crazy and sad. I guess we'll learn more over the next few days. Going into the water is maybe better than crashing on land. Hopefully some people make it.
EDIT: Found this: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/atc_html...
nradov
It's very common for civilian ATC to instruct pilots to maintain visual separation, especially when they're both in the approach pattern. For airliners, TCAS gives an extra level of safety to guard against pilot errors. But I think many military aircraft lack TCAS.
dralley
It is so incredibly tiring that you dweebs try to blame every single bad outcome in the world on cough minorities cough "DEI", with zero evidence.
In fact, literally when you posted this comment there were already ATC recordings floating around of the controller telling the helicopter pilot to maintain separation from the exact airliner they crashed into.
Take a look in the mirror.
userbinator
At least DEI can't be blamed for much longer.
duxup
I sometimes wonder about the value of these news stories on forums and social media.
It's all pretty much wild speculation with several potential causes already mentioned on this forum.
News important yes, every rando with a few shreds of factoids speculating, not so much.
francisofascii
Here we get air traffic controller recordings, and people who are ammeter pilots. It is more informed speculation than my "normal" friends or co-workers.
whateveracct
It just sounds more informed. Just like all the "amateur" physicists who speculate on theoretical physics posts on HN.
duxup
I suspect moderately informed, but not completely informed, is the worst kind of speculation. It has a sense of authority and knowledge that is hard to pinpoint its accuracy.
Almost all the amateur theories in here, just by the variety, are going to be dead wrong.
wat10000
Here, I get ATC transcripts and learn about the helicopter flight paths. Traditional news describes an airliner with 60 people on board as a “small plane.”
throwaway2037
Anything about civilian air safety is like catnip for nerds. It is the ultimate armchair nerd sport -- speculating about reasons for a civilian air crash. I guess this discussion will be more than 1,000 comments before its heat-death.
g-nair
I’ve been saying something similar to friends recently. We have access to a bit Too much news for our own good.
fullshark
In this case there is no or negative value. Wait for the facts, avoid the noise and wild speculation.
avs733
But my dopamine…
neilv
Yes, tons of speculation, and very little clear basic facts.
When I clicked, I expected to find the comments interesting (since I worked in a small corner of flight safety), but, skimming through, I kept feeling aversion to threads.
Most modern news organizations aren't much better.
readyplayernull
Let's go back to AI non-stop 24/7, hallucinations are saner.
Ylpertnodi
I come to hn for the speculations.
7thpower
Oh man. I’m in Wichita and am getting a bunch of texts.
Texted my friends that fly that route regularly and most have texted back.
It can all be gone in an instant, tell those you love what they mean to you.
edit: everyone is accounted for
jeffhuys
> everyone is accounted for
Happy to hear that.
throw0101c
"FAA Got Rid of Its Leader Before D.C. Plane Crash—Thanks to Elon Musk":
* https://newrepublic.com/post/190942/faa-no-leader-dc-plane-c...
"FAA Administrator Quit on Jan. 20 After Elon Musk Told Him to Resign":
* https://www.thedailybeast.com/faa-chief-michael-whitaker-qui...
"The FAA is facing a major crisis without a leader because Elon Musk pushed him out*
* https://www.theverge.com/news/603113/faa-chief-musk-dc-plane...
dehrmann
If we see more accidents a year from now, you have a point. The most you can really blame on leadership changes right now is stress from worrying about your next paycheck. Even then, this looks like a military pilot screwed up doing a routine training exercise.
r00fus
I wonder if this administration's firing of many FAA civil positions and the federal worker "buyouts" are responsible.
davidw
The intelligent response would be "probably not, but we'll see what the investigation says".
But imagine if the tables were turned politically. Fox News would be going off 24/7 about "DEI" or some such for weeks on end. That strategy seems to be successful, so I would expect the other side to start employing it more as well.
Having a bunch of harried, overworked people stressed about their jobs and the future certainly doesn't help anything, in any case.
null
rapnie
Just learned about it here: https://fallows.substack.com/p/it-had-been-16-years-since-a-...
Likely more affected are learning about the aftermath via investigation, but I am not sure.
Edit: No wait, that article mentioned the disbanding of Aviation Security Advisory Committee a week ago.
JadoJodo
I'll bite. How are you thinking that might've contributed to the crash?
snailmailstare
As long as it also affects the investigation to find out its all the same to a psychopath.
Not that being near DC affords me any kind of right to an opinion, but:
Given the uptick in near miss incidents across the US the last few years, this is the kind of incident that should've been entirely avoidable through changes in policy from these past events but is also apparently the only kind that can spur along policy changes. I can see a world where the fault is on the VH-60, but absent more information, it would surprise me less to hear that it's the fault of the tower.
Knowing where AA5342 was in its approach, I see no possibility of the jet being at fault.
https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/AAL5342
I'm drawing a lot of early conclusions but it's mostly because I'm just not surprised. Angry as someone who flies a bunch, but not surprised.