Flight simulator shows what flying into Reagan National at night looks like
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 фев 2025
- CNN's Jason Carroll went inside a flight simulator and spoke with a flight instructor to get a sense of what conditions may have been like for the pilots of American Airlines Flight 5342. #CNN #News
This is silly, there’s nothing the pilot of the aircraft could have done. Show us the cockpit of the Black Hawk
American Airlines bot?
I t is important to rule out any wrongdoing by the plane pilots, this is why it is adressed- deductive process.
@@elizafaulhammer2203whatever
For sure. But, it helps to prove that the accident was caused by a miscalculation by the helicopter pilots.
Plane was literally flying straight at the runway, at a proper descent rate.
Hello everyone Aaron Murphy here. I need to correct some misinformation in this video: The Potomac river is NOT black and featureless as it appears in this simulation. Water features like rivers, lakes, oceans etc in populated areas reflect the surrounding lights adding to the difficulty to see other aircraft in the area over the land or water. The weather conditions and state of the surface of the water will determine the amount of reflection: wind speed/direction, frozen or ice free. The flight simulation depicts the river as a "black hole" which is what bodies of water look like only when there are no lights in the area to reflect off the water. My deepest condolences to friends and families and thank-you CNN for including me in this devastating report.
This is a military error. Show what the helicopter was seeing.
Short crew, vision limited in incoming landing path.
I blame cellphones
@@gibbonsgomez4434 The military crew know well enough to put cell phones on airplane mode.
The NTSB is working on that more scientifically. It’s going to take time to gather all that data.
🧍♀️🩸
we already know the chopper pilot didn't follow height limits protocol.
well, it is still important to clear other facts.
That has no relevance to why those two acft crashed. No controller in their right mind would allow a helo to pass below a descending jet at 200’ in the face of wake turbulence.
@@Puncherschance24 at that particular airport it is common place for helicopters to fly below approaching jet liners. If the Blackhawk in this situation was flying at their assigned altitude, the collision wouldn't have happened.
@ what altitude are they normally passing below the jet liners though? And how far out from runway? If they’re passing below the jet liners when the jets are 5 mile final then there may be 1000’ vertically. I would be shocked if helos were passing 150 ft below descending air carriers with the possibility of wake turbulence planting them into the ground
@ the rule was helicopters had to be below 200 feet when flying in their assigned corridor near the airport. Any approaching aircraft would be above 400 feet when passing over the helicopter corridor.
So sad, CNN is picking on the commercial pilots. These guys have flown so many many time. CNN should have the balls to investigate the pilots of the black hawk
How were they “picking on the commercial pilots”? Please don’t lie. If there’s bias against CNN, that’s fine but please don’t lie (or project blame for that matter) and say that they’re finger-pointing towards the commercial pilots. That’s clearly not what occurred in this video. Please stop any gaslighting or spreading disinformation.
Exactly they trying so hard to keep us from the real reason 🧍♀️
defense secretary probably told them to pound sand.
They cannot, they're dead.
I'm sure they have tried. But they were not given access. It just happened and it's obviously tied up with security situation or what not.
The UH-60 pilot said he saw a plane and requested visual clearance, which gave him full responsibility for separation. He was obviously looking at the plane that was behind the CRJ.
no, it's not obvious.
That’s the part I’m not getting, because if the pilot saw two planes on his instrument screen why didn’t he check back with the tower on the actual sight and altitude of his so he could know how to adjust. That helicopter was told to land and land immediately. It was descending by ATC Tower directions. What was or is more accurate to the pilot? The instrument screen or the human ATC guidance?
I also heard that there was 3 crew on the military aircraft and the two in the back usually are looking out in the back at 90 degrees and there was only one in the back instead of two. Maybe another of Trump's budget cuts.
@ it is a logical explanation.
The Question everyone is asking, How did the Helicopter crew Not see the Airliner with all of its lights on for landing ?
They might have mistaken the other inbound plane behind it, as the one the tower was talking about. There's a great RUclips channel called blancolirio with a video about it.
They left their white cane at the Army base accidently.
The question should be: Why did the helicopter *not ask ATC* about the go-behind command - it didn't make sense if the helicopter had visual on the wrong aircraft. It looks like the helicopter adjusted course then directly into the flightpath of the plane.
Because the helicopter was increasing in altitude and the commercial plane was decreasing in altitude. It was also night time and the landing lights you see were in the front of the plane… they wouldn’t see those from the side/rear.
You can experiment with this using a standard flashlight. Go outside at night and turn on the flashlight, pointing it into the sky - with the beam away from you. Are you able to see the beam of light when pointing it away from your direction? The answer is likely no, especially without fog or smoke in the air.
That's easy they probably was looking at the wrong aircraft there was a Airbus behind the RJ they just got cufussed which happens more than you think
Thanks, CNN, that big graphic at the bottom of the screen covering up the view out the simulator window is really helping. WTF, we don't need constant captioning to know what to be thinking.
You should do a simulator in a UH-60 flying around Reagan with a pilot using night vision googles. That's the news you should be delivering.
don't know for certain if the UH-60 pilots were wearing NVG's. They had them but nobody knows at the moment if they were actually being worn.
Yup!!! That’s what everyone wants to review!
Explain why you are so anxious to blame.
Military training flights are notorious for their inattention, as I was an ATC at a military airfield and those student pilots were constantly causing separation issues, both on the ground and in the air. With standard lateral separation set at 2000' and vertical separation of 1000', a mere 200' separation seems like mighty close quarters. You can deviate a 100' or more very quickly while flying 200+MPH.
Most of them are row 4 students. Not intellectually capable.
wasn't a "Student"
My uncle is a pilot and he said that flying into major Cities at night makes him super vigiliant because the anti colliosion lights on aircraft depending on your point of few can some times blur into the backround street lights and beacons on buildings so you dont notice the flying aircraft more so when both pilots are concentrating on landing the aircraft.Elevation distortion He called it.
That chopper didn't seem trying to avoid the plane, went straight into it at full speed
the "no fly zone" alarm would have been going nonstop.
Because aircraft don’t operate like cars and they also don’t respond as quickly as cars either. Clearly it’s likely they also didn’t see the airplane before colliding with it. Can we stop this “it looks intentional” garbage? Let’s reason with what an accident is and what it looks like.
Let’s consider a driver that runs a red light and t-bones a car turning left at full speed. Is that an accident? Yes. While the red light runner’s actions were reckless… they didn’t intend on colliding with that vehicle, meaning it was an accident.
🧍♀️🩸
Makes zero sense. Why are we simulating whether the plane could see the helicopter or not? Shouldn’t we be asking if the helicopter saw the plane?
Because there have been a bunch of bizarre armchair aviation expert comments about that… so they decided to take that question on. The helicopter did not see the plane or rather, they did not see it with enough time to maneuver around it, hence how they managed to crash into it. Did they mistake another plane for the one they were warned about? Possibly.
This is educated speculation but the ADSB data shows the helicopter was ascending and the CRJ was descending, so for every second the gap between the two aircraft lessened - it became less and less possible for the helicopter to spot the CRJ until it was too late. Especially if the helicopter pilots thought they identified the correct air traffic and became distracted by something in the cockpit.
Very sad loss. Preventable to be sure. Thank you for the explanation of TCAS and control hierarchy etc.
you are talking to the wrong people----you need to talk to helicopter pilots here. not the airliners. they just truck ahead
From someone that served in US Army air cavalry squadrons, you do not know what you are talking about
Don’t boast about your supposed service, no one outside America cares about that. How can a plane that has been cleared to land and that is flying vfr be at fault of colliding with a military helicopter that is flying on visual and was at the wrong altitude.
@@aliounendayziga8669 It wasn't a boast it is a fact and I think your dismissive attitude only confirms your myopic view. Whether Operator or technical error was involved absolutely needs to be investigated.
But it is to foolishly miss a major contributing factor to ignore or discount the sudden overburdening of already overburdened system. WHY were they allowed to add that much more traffic to already overcrowded skies when there were already near misses?!
And you’re mostly right but in this specific scenario the two aircrafts collided with eachother, that means at least one of them shouldn’t be that location at that specific time and from what i gather it is the helicopter. Wether or not the system is overloaded might be a contributing factor but is not a primary cause of the crash.
Pretty effing crazy how MSM keeps blabbing on about airline pilots and ATC. It is like the government, DoD, or Army are holding them hostage, trying to gaslight us all.
I just don’t understand how it’s allowed to be standard procedure that aircraft would be flying below an aircraft on FINAL!! Especially when we’re talking under 1000 feet that just sounds like a terrible idea. I get the factors are different, but I believe minimum separation for aircraft vertically would be 1000 feet at cruise (such that if two aircraft are flying directly at each other, one would be 1000 feet higher/lower than the other). The fact that that same rule doesn’t apply here is a problem in itself and whoever okayed such regulations shouldn’t walk away without consequence.
Because there a published routes like highways for aircraft.
You are war mongering nation. Your military sees you as a civilian expandable. This is why they ok such training, so they can evacuate important cargo. Next.
It isnt, except for DCA, right next to FAA, NTSB etc...
Exactly. The FAA has allowed this to go on and should’ve never been in this scenario ever.
Because this particular flight for the helicopter is a “Mission” flight. So apparently, there were specific and special rules about the flight routine they could do based upon their Practice Classified Mission.
Letting the helicopters fly beneath an aircraft so closely in such a busy airport IS ABSOLUTELY INSANE AND UNACCEPTABLE!!!! An airplane can lose altitude due to a micro-burst, technical reasons, faulty equipment, distracted pilots or numerous other reasons!!!! This accident was no surprise!!!
You have good points. Apparently there was a "near miss" the day before the accident. How many "near misses" happened in the last few years ? I think I experienced one about ten years ago. We were descending towards the main runway at Reagan, coming from the north-west. We had passed the Washington Monument so we were very low, but suddenly the plane changed course and went up, up, up ; we made a huge 360 around the airport and came back , then landed safely. Looks awfully like an aborted landing at the last minute. HOW OFTEN does that happen ?
The pilot talks about a "hot spot", about "special training". So indeed, authorities have been playing with fire here. It was just a question of time before something happened. The fact that there hasn't been any accident in decades is a testament to the high skills of pilots and controllers.
The big elephant in the room is that a stable approach to one runway is NEVER changed to an unstable approach anywhere in the US or on earth. Everyone knows this. Je Ju did it in South Korea and look what happened. Ironically, this was allowed right under the nose of FAA hq for decades so this was destined to happen. In fact it happened the day before but was classified as a near miss, and countless other times. This was no accident but an error in procedure. The accident report will prove this very quickly. This airport can remain in operation but with only runway 1, close 33 and all will be fine. Your welcome.
@@Brpwndood what are you talking about? The CRJ easily met stabilized approach criteria. The runway change was agreed to before reaching the WW bridge.
Totally agree!
Yea, Sherlock. Something happened. The helicopter flew higher that is was supposed to and run into an airliner.
This is truly heartbreaking. My deepest condolences and prayers go out to the victims and their families during this difficult time. May those affected find strength and comfort, and may this serve as a call to action for improved aviation safety and military training in high-risk areas. Rest in peace.
The Airline Pilots did nothing wrong. I’ve flown this procedure many times. They flew it flawlessly. No error here. Please move on and pay your respects
Why are they not interviewing the pilots of the plane that was behind the CRJ? I would think they would have had a good view and have insight on what happened
It was a helicopter not a plane
...Also as I read the comments I would ask that everyone please focus on fixing the problem not the blame. The crews of PAT25, Bluestreak 5342 and the Air Traffic Controller are/were all highly trained professionals who take their jobs very seriously. There was no malicious intent in this accident only classic Human Factors limitations compounded by flawed Procedures and Training. Aviation is a high risk activity and we mitigate those risks through understanding Human Factors and creating Procedures and Training that are never perfect and require constant revision, improvement and frequent recurrent training.
If not for Congress wanting easy access to travel - I’m not sure Reagan should be an airport where it is.
DCA is by far the most convenient airport for people in Northern VA, DC and parts of Maryland. This is not just a congress thing.
U sound goofy 🤣 u know how many people live in that area that aren't in congress......
@ I’m referring to the area of land it’s built on. I understand its purpose. I’m referencing its air traffic, shrinking land, its inability to expand further, and its air traffic in an already crowded space.
Dulles airport is far better tbh
Well, D.C. is the capital of the most powerful nation of the world. So, yeah, maybe other people besides Congress would be traveling there.
2 things
The plane didn’t do anything wrong !
This pilot saying that it being dark area with no lights on ground means it’s water down there.🥴 Sorry sir, but no lights in areas could mean it’s a wooded area too😉
The lights that were on the plane before it hit were BRIGHT AS HELL.
Landing lights are that way on purpose! They help light up the landing area from 1000 feet up and also help you be seen, well hopefully be seen. You'd think that even a blind pilot could see them. Evidently not.
@@DNHarris maybe it WAS a blind pilot haha
Not from the side
The helicopter did not strike the passenger plane from the front, it struck it from the side/rear. Commenters, please use rationale and logic before pointing towards things like this. Landing lights mean nothing to an aircraft approaching from a different angle.
@@TitaniumTurbine my point entirely
Have flown into DCA many times at night, its usually uneventful, a nice view if coming in from the north and an occasional hard landing. And BTW, we locals don't call it Reagan, just call it National or DCA.
Why are they focusing on the commercial flight. Clearly it the chopper.. 😅😅😅
Mid air collision is a passengers worst nightmare. Id there was a problem with a plane it can still land but mid air collision you have no chance
Zero fault from the airplane, whether there’s a lot of lights or not. They had no recourse but to land on a given flight path even if they closed their eyes the plane would’ve landed. Why the helicopter was at that altitude is the only concern and perhaps any and ALL helicopter flights need to be restricted in a new zone no matter what. I don’t think this is unreasonable for the airport in particular.
Congress needs to cut back on the number of flights into DCA, and also increase the number of air traffic controllers.
I have heard that Reagan was supposed to be shut down in the past - like twice or more. It was Politicians that wants it open because of its' proximity to their offices.
there was talk after 9/11 but it's not happening. After 9/11 the terminal has been refurbished and the airport is not going anywhere.
I really wish this situation didn't have to happen so many people lost their loved ones that day😮
I don’t think people are aware of how many airplanes are actually in the air at the same time. There’s a lot! The helicopter shouldn’t have been flying above 200ft and if they were wearing night goggles then they had an obstructed view.
When your flight procedure allows a helicopter to cross the approach path of an active runway, it's already a disaster waiting to happen😊
Airplane had nothing to do with this tragedy.
✈️To add to what the Captain said. For clarity - TCAS inhibit facts:
INCREASE DESCENT RAs are inhibited below approximately 1,500 feet radio altitude.
DESCEND RAs are inhibited below approximately 1,100 feet radio altitude.
RAs are inhibited below approximately 1,000 feet radio altitude.
Below 1,000 feet when the TA/RA mode is selected on the transponder panel, TA only mode is enabled automatically and the TCAS message TA ONLY displays on the ND.
All TCAS voice annunciations are inhibited below approximately 500 feet radio altitude.
They say the tcas wouldnt work so near the airport as there is too many alarms would be going off.
100% american agree the mistake that make AA-blackhawk tragedy is cause by the military incompetence.blackhawk should more easily manuever than commercial jet.
This is a military helicopter error that had hitted the civilian aircraft!
"Near misses" is a misnomer. We should be referring to "near hits."
Narrowly missed?
“Near disastrous tragedies” more like it. The helos being that close to commercial jets should have never been standard. It was just a matter of time until this happened.
NOW MILITARY HELICOPTERS ARE ON THE SPOT LIGHT, THEY SHOULD KEEP ALL HELICOPTERS AWAY FROM COMERCIAL AIRPORTS , NO HELICOPTERS ON COMERCIAL AIRPORT RUNWAYS !!!
Last time I flew was when my best friend and I were leaving DC out of Ronald Reagan at night. Chills
His setup is nearly as good as mine!
The CRJ windscreen is much different then that sim 737 he is flying. Not a good comparison.
I'd have to push some of those pretty bright lit up buttons. Bro doing the interview has tons of self restraint 😅🙏🏾PRAYERS FOR THE BELOVED 67🙏🏾
Helicopters should NOT be that close to landing aircraft.
Visibility looks difficult. The screens on the fight deck are distracting.
CNN - get your damn banner out of the way...
the chopper either thought he would miss the plane or he didn't see it...
Hope both sets of pilots dialed in the correct altimeter settings from the ATIS loop.
The show must go on GOT IT
this is not the only city airport that is on the water. I've been to several airports landing from the water into the city/airport. The traffic maybe the issue, but not the location or city lights.
Facts it's the same way in San Diego and Hawaii
DC is different because of the no-fly zone over a part of the city for national security reasons. So a restricted airspace near the Airport.
The problem with DC is that the landing/takeoff paths follow the Potomac River. If you make that a no-fly zone for helos, then it would be impossible to get from DC to VA by helo, you'd be cutting a major metropolitan area in half. It would be better to close DCA, which isn' t going to happen.
and they are not sending the helicopters over residential areas as the noise complaints would explode.
This is great and all, but show us the view from inside the Blackhawk or equivalent too. It’s still crazy to me how they couldn’t see the incoming plane in time to move out the way.
ya show what it looks like in the black hawk
lol lessons to be learnt. Maybe see sense and don’t build an airbase and and airport so close together they have to cross each others flight paths. Not that hard to comprehend
Flight simulator is located in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada. After February first it may not be available to Americans when tariffs are introduced. Please let there be some sane Americans left to stop this nonsense.
Yep. It's likely at or near Pearson Airport, which is just a few miles from my home.
@ Yes, I think that it’s at Pearson or in one of the buildings off Dixie Rd.
lol, what are you talking about? I have flown the CRJ9 sim at CAE Montreal.
@@skyboy1956 the simulator shown was for a 737 and it said Mississauga above the speaker
@@skyboy1956 That was a 737 simulator, IIRC and the video link also said Mississauga.
What’s the proximity to each other that an alarm would go off in the control tower?
TCAS warning « traffic - traffic » works down to 500ft above ground level I believe (below that it would be triggered by several aircraft on the ground at airports).
But TCAS resolution mode when getting too close (instructing the crew to either pull up or descend, in an opposite fashion between the two converging aircraft) is inhibited below 1000ft above ground because of insufficient height margin and risk of ground collision in an emergency descent maneuver.
Feel so sorry for those lives lost
TCAS RA doesn't give resolutions below 1000ft, so it doesn't to give a advisory to descend into the ground.
What if there was a laser system on the passenger jet nose that would point at the end of the runway it is approaching to land on? Would that have made it easier for the helicopter pilot to have seen the approaching passenger jet?
That’s a good question
You could keep attempting to add several new measures to make air travel safer. But in the end, it's still air travel. 1000 things could go wrong up there.
@@KnifeGuy_ Right. I get it. But the best analysis of this incident I've heard/seen so far, mostly draws the conclusion that the helicopter pilot - for whatever reason - just didn't see the plane. So I was trying to think of something that isn't beyond current technical capabilities, and might have made the jet more visible in that particular airspace. But I'm not a pilot, so I don't really know how well that would work.
If they didn't see the floodlight landing light and all the flashing beacons, there's no way they're seeing a laser that would only be visible from directly in front of said laser. Any laser system that would be visible from the side would have to be powerful enough to burn everyone's retinas out or like a disco ball and be an insane distraction for those who have retinas leftover. The logistics of having a deadmaus concert on the nose of every plane also will not work, even if daft punk helps.
If they didn't see the landing lights, beacon lights, nav lights, stobe lights, recog lights, wing inspection/ice lights or logo lights, wtf makes you think adding another light would help?
Nobody ever tells us that it is riskier to fly at night. I think passengers should know this.
Hello who will money 🤑
Good point, also how do we know they weren’t looking at their phones when it happened
…. This is common knowledge. At smaller airports, ATC isn’t even open at night.
Accidents can happen during the day as well, many have. How is this “riskier”? Actually, most mid-air collisions have occurred during the day as opposed to night. “Passengers should know this”… okay, how do you want to tell them and what statistics are you referencing for this conclusion? You need solid statistics to determine risk, not just a personal opinion.
The ATC needs to be arrested. He knew there was a helicopter on runway 33 but he still told the airplane to use runway 33 instead of the larger easier option of runway one which was what the airplane was originally going to do until the ATC told them to go to runway 33 and put them in the direct path of the helicopter
Can they please make the plane cockpit window bigger starting lower from the ground?… I don’t think it’s humanly possible to see below. They need to make the window bigger. Is this that difficult?…
'The éastest way to get away from an objject is to go the opposite dirrection.' It's very possible that's what the helicopter was trying to do by climbing at the last moments before impact with the plane.
@1:35 at 2 o'clock is that the milky way galaxy's center / central mass (of stars)?! great aviation piece btw
I thought the TCAS didn’t work below 400ft. This guy sounds like he’s blaming ATC.
I think it was a combo of ATC not giving the direction of the CRJ to the chopper (there were 2 CRJs in the area that could’ve confused the pilots), & the chopper confirmed visual separation on the wrong plane. The CRJ pilots did nothing wrong.
First, the guy was just stating facts - not pointing the finger at anyone. We need to get out of this blame game mindset and rather absorb information without assigning fault with such information. Second, TCAS doesn’t work below 1,000 feet. Third, the air traffic controller was not in the helicopter’s cockpit and therefore could not see what the helicopter pilots were seeing. As they always do, the controller saw the conflict on their radar and (correctly) alerted the helicopter pilots about the conflict - to which the helicopter pilots stated that they had the CRJ in sight. How was the controller supposed to do anything differently than that? They followed standard procedure and stated where the CRJ was in relation to the helicopter. Fourth, we completely agree on that last point - the CRJ pilots did nothing wrong.
@ I agree that we shouldn’t jump to conclusions & assign blame. Other Blackhawk pilots & ATCs have said that if ATC provided the CRJ’s location, this crash could’ve been avoided - something like, “Do you have the CRJ at 12 o’clock in sight?” This airspace is incredibly congested & there were 2 CRJs in the area, plus another inbound plane (AA3130) coming in behind our CRJ (AA5342). Our CRJ was initially supposed to land on runway 1, but several minutes before the crash, ATC rerouted them to runway 33, requiring a 90° turn. Before that, they were on the other side of the river heading in a different direction.
As a result, AA3130, the plane behind our CRJ, was directly in the chopper’s line of sight, so it’s possible they mistook it for the CRJ.
What stands out to me is that when the chopper confirms having a visual, he doesn’t specify “CRJ” - he just says, “PAT25 has the… (pause) aircraft in sight.” Why didn’t he identify it as the CRJ, & why did he pause? 🤔
I’m not blaming - I just think it’s worth noting.
Aircrafts should not be flying infront of planes on final approach(lined up with the runway)
Why was the helo allowed to go in that direction with all the inbound flights; that's what setup this disaster.
The pilots of the commercial airline perhaps were on a tunnel vision mindset during the approach phase. The pilot flying was laser focused on the immediate runaway. The pilot monitoring was multitasking between checking the instrument and scanning the sky visually for traffic. Considering it was a circular not straight-in approach, the peripheral view of the pilots were limited. The co-pilot has only a split second to react if indeed he had a visual on the helicopter on his right handside. The big factor here is the level of situational awareness of both pilots. Strictly speaking, they have only milliseconds to avoid a midair collision considering the 130-140 kts speed the pilot are maintaining for the final landing. They were almost on the threshold of the runway, seconds to landing. I figure, both pilots regardless of the instrument warnings and atc caution were afflicted with the “ get-home/-itis “ or “ hurry up syndrome “which is one of the hazardous attitude any pilot can ever have that can compromise a pilot’s decision making. It would seem counterintuitive for them to throw caution to the wind but most pilots do dread go arounds let alone initiate evasive actions on final approach. But overall it is absolutely not the fault of the commercial airliner. They have the procedural right of way. Not to mention they were cleared by the approach control to land on the active runway.
The helicopter WAS AT FAULT!!!
They love putting fear into the minds of people, but fail to mention the amounts of aircraft in the air at one time. What happened is a tragedy but flying is absolutely the safest form of travel
Wasn't the Black hawk pilot looking out of his or her front window? Or do those pilots of the helicopters rely only on navigation equipment? It seems to me that if they were looking out the window they would have possibly seen that aircraft.
Why conduct military exercises alongside a highly congested area with civilian aircraft? I might be ignorant but I just dont understand this. Why increase any risk period for commercial airlines containing civilians
I recall this is the 3rd military officers tragedy incidents this month!
Even cars have sensor detectors to warn you of other cars nearby. Why dont planes have that?
Seems like the helicopter procedure needs a major overhaul, used the word visual separation without understanding and seems like the route was not flown correctly, laterally and vertically something wrong there. The controller should have known going into 33 was risky with the helicopter on that route, controller also didn’t paint a picture to the landing aircraft of what was happening. Just a bunch of high risk stuff going on at night treating it was daytime just to get a departure off the runway. Horrific and tragic.
But was the transponder turned off in the military helicopter? That’s the most important question! 📡 🚁
no
Great explanation by you Mr. Pilot. Jesus Christ loves you.
Moses loves you even more.
Some things can only be truly understood by living them. I was born and raised in Chicago, and I know every nook and cranny of the city. Im a pilot when land ar MDW or ORD the flight path is almost like Im driving home because of my understanding of the terraine.
I have been told that LiDar scanners on phones and tablets are used to calculate distance from surrounding objects......why don't they have this same technology (or something like it) on airplanes??
I just don't get it. Why does this deadly line crossing occur, and what training can ensure that they will not fly to the same altitude and location due to mistakes? This is inevitable.
1. You have commercial flight paths at a higher altitude but are descending over the river to land.
2. You have helicopter flight paths over the river at a lower altitude.
3. A precarious but highly coordinated and controlled situation, but at an airport with such a high traffic volume that already stretches the capacity of it's resources with a history of near misses over the river.
4. Now add in a bunch more commercial flights...which they just did.
5. Technological or human error needs to be investigated of course, BUT
Why were they allowed to add the extra air traffic to an already precarious situation?!?
the traffic levels have not suddenly changed. Go away.
@@skyboy1956 That main runway is now the busiest in the nation.
I was hoping they would complete the landing on the simulator.
Who told these three inexperienced trainees that they could take that nighthawk and go for a ride?
15k hrs is opposite of inexperienced
@@arcgaming6201 As the flight instructor explained, 2:50 you need SPECIAL training just to fly into that airport.
No matter how much is your flight hours, if you don't have enough training FOR THAT airport, then you are inexperience.
@@arcgaming6201
1000 + 500 = 1500
500 was flying the plane. 1000 was the instructor.
Nw car LED LIGHTS ARE BLINDING DRIVERS
God forbid if anyone blamed anyone. If you can't lay blame and rectify, incidents will continue. Human error needs to be called out. Any true professional knows that but many go into damage control and cover up.
There has been speculation that the pilot and copilot of the Army Blackhawk may have been looking at or towards another aircraft that was on the ascent at the time that 5342 was inbound to RWY 33. Given the chaotic nature of DC airspace especially of DCA it is possible the helicopter crew became disoriented and confused, I speak from 25 years of experience in actual aircraft and 35 years studying aviation.
Honestly can we just move flights out of Regan and more into Dulles? The restricted airspace combine with choppers etc adds a lot of risk .
It would easier to lift some of the restrictions so that helicopters can avoid the final approach
@@emartinez2740 I mean DC to NYC you have Amtrak. Upgrades along route can absorb demand from Hartford and Boston into Regan. That can at least eliminate some of the flights and make the airspace a little less crowded
CNN finally broadcasting something informative and interesting.
they almost always do
Commercial airlines have a voice system telling pilot how high they are landing
CNN needs to stop these simulation videos 🤦🏻♂️
The helicopter mistook with another jet passenger.
Should not be so congested area.
So whats the point of this similation?
Procedural problem, communication problem, and situational awareness problem. My opinion. Aspiring pilot here.
What happend to the TCAS system
I have no experience as a pilot or a ATC operator as I'm a from Namibia in Africa. According to the videos Ive seen there were at least 2 commercial flights on approach to land and one aeroplane departing. Im just wondering if the ATC informed the Black Hawk crew about the 3 commercial aircrafts in their immediate vicinity and if they had all 3 aircrafts in sight. According to the conversations with the Black Hawk ATC only mentioned one aircraft. Can someone explain why all 3 aircrafts were not mentioned? Tx
They were not doing a circling approach to Rwy 33. They were flying a visual approach.
pilots of the CRJ likely didnt see the helicopter, they were blindsided