YouTube Videos Page: 1 of 4

MitrePeak
January 30, 2025, 04:14:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11816850

Video of collision

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anti Skid On

News coming in of an incident with an American Eagle CRJ operating AA5342 colliding with a military Sikorsky over Washington
Plane crashes near Washington DC after mid-air collision with military helicopter \x96 follow live
Flightradar24 snot showing anything of note.

Update - everything grounded at Reagan International and Helicopters searching over the Potomac

Video of collision..

Subjects AA5342 CRJ FAA

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

mobov98423
January 30, 2025, 08:41:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817000

Quote:

Originally Posted by WideScreen

With the CRJ crew probably having their attention focused to aim for runway 33, while performing the circle to approach. With a "clear to land" obtained, they even might be less aware, there might be something out there on a collision course with them.

Not to say, the helicopter declared a "CRJ in sight", which also implies from that moment on, the separation became their responsibility.

When flying myself, I am very hesitating to "accommodate" to ATC's information about other aircraft around me, since I then take over the separation responsibility, even when losing sight of the other aircraft(s).

yeah,atc had nothing to do with this ;(

Subjects CRJ Separation (ALL)

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

2 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

bean
January 30, 2025, 11:42:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817150

vasaviation

Subjects: None

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

MPN11
January 30, 2025, 12:09:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817176

Quote:

Originally Posted by bean

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiOybe-NJHk
vasaviation

OK, that overlay at least shows PAT25 is no the Route 4 track. Just the height now remains a question. Seems to climb from 200' to 300' at the last minute.

Subjects PAT25 Route 4

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

dragon6172
January 30, 2025, 14:10:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817272

Quote:

Originally Posted by visibility3miles

The helicopter\x92s right turn was directly over a golf course, not a residential neighborhood. It was probably done for noise abatement reasons, because it then turned left and proceeded down more directly over the river.

The golf course is on a peninsula in the river, so the helicopter was flying over water before and after it made the two turns.

The track in your image is not an accurate representation of PAT25s actual flight path. The leaked ATC radar track here and the VASAviation recreation here are more representative. There was no sharp RH turn to cross over the Potomac Park golf courses, it was a gentle RH turn to follow the published Route 1 to Route 4 helicopter transition around DCA.

Subjects ATC DCA Radar Route 4

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

1 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

visibility3miles
January 30, 2025, 14:32:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817282

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragon6172

My bad. The image was published online by the Washington Post, which is obviously covering the story, and elsewhere.

You could contact them if you want and tell them it\x92s wrong. No offense intended.

Even if it wasn\x92t a sharp turn, it was done over a golf course and their flight path was probably dictated by noise abatement reasons, as are those flown by jets flying into DCA.

Subjects ATC DCA Radar Route 4

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

rigpiggy
January 30, 2025, 14:44:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817291

Quote:

Originally Posted by mobov98423

yeah,atc had nothing to do with this ;( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHBKptJWXtU

based on this he was already on the sidestep and leaving mda. Concentrating on his runway picture. Who is at fault here, unsure but the helo definitely flew into the approach path

Subjects Circle to Land (Deviate to RWY 33)

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

canyonblue737
January 30, 2025, 14:44:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817292

Quote:

Originally Posted by SINGAPURCANAC

Shouldnt it be:
Pat 25 traffic at 11 o clock 3 miles, crj following ils for rwy 33, report in sight
??

yes. if you look at the longer transcripts his initial call of the traffic was exactly that format and the helicopter acknowledges the traffic in sight and is approved visual separation. they some time later 30-60 seconds at least (maybe more) there are the more common published transcripts where the controller uses non standard phraseology in quick succession to attempt to point out and ask he helicopter to pass behind the traffic. the non-standard phraseology and voice is clearly stressed because its the moment in time the ATC controller becomes first concerned by the proximity of the helicopter and airplane and clearly he is making a quick call to try to see if the helicopter still "has him in sight" or if he needs to take action (like sending the CRJ around). unfortunately after the second quick non standard call the helicopter again responds they have the traffic in sight and will maintain visual separation. perhaps 10-15 seconds later the midair occurs. detailed audio long before and after the incident is here:

Subjects ATC CRJ Pass Behind Pass Behind (All) Phraseology (ATC) Separation (ALL) Traffic in Sight Visual Separation

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

2 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

bean
January 30, 2025, 15:51:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817349

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magplug

Just listened to the audio. The tower controller seems to have issued some sort of a 'semi-conditional' clearance to the helicopter for which there was no response from the pilot..... So what clearance were they following? The controller did not even establish that the helo pilot had the traffic visual before allowing him to cross the 33 approach. R/T discipline in the USA is normally poor but this was pitiful and I suspect will prove to be a primary factor.

BTW.... I have used NVGs. How the hell can you operate in downtown Washington, with so much that is either lit... or floodlit? The NVG image will be flared out every time you turn your head towards a light.

Helo was on UHF.Comms included on this

Subjects ATC Night Vision Goggles (NVG)

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

TEEEJ
January 30, 2025, 21:37:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817674

Quote:

Originally Posted by jumpseater

A possibility I can see here is that the PAT25 crew misidentified AAL3130 (on extended final for 01) as the CRJ. If so, they didn't see the CRJ to their left and possibly above them descending. If the CRJ descended into the helicopter from above the CRJ crew would likely not have seen PAT25 as it would have been in the blind spot underneath the nose.

Yes, that is very much a possibility. Confirmed via US Defence Secretary that the crew were on night vision goggle flight. Did the helo pilot call visual on AAL3130 Airbus A319 that was on approach?

See following video.

Subjects CRJ PAT25

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

CayleysCoachman
January 30, 2025, 22:26:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11817707

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Biggles 101

We need the industry to wake up and realise, see and avoid is unreliable, and air law does not protect IFR traffic from VFR traffic enough.

the industry, and in Washington the military and the State, knows this, but chooses movement rates and freedom over delays and failure to deliver. Aviation is not zero-harm. This is a risk which is well established as tolerable, the rate of occurrence seems acceptably low overall, and I suspect nothing will change. Those affected should, in my opinion, be enormously compensated, which will not bring loved ones back but will make going on more tolerable, and will enable the status quo to continue, satisfying the commercial, capitalist, military, and executive imperatives. I’m often reminded of the scene in Airplane, which cuts to the made-up TV talk show, ‘Counterpoint’, whose host says (and I may be a word or two off here), ‘I say, they bought their tickets, they knew what they were getting into…. Let them die’. Macabre I know, but feel free to challenge me if you don’t believe that this is a true reflection of our reality.

Subjects IFR See and Avoid VFR

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

2 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

xetroV
January 31, 2025, 11:08:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818111

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prob30Tempo TSRA

Is there any audio suggesting the heli acknowledged the instruction to pass behind ?

This version of the Vasaviation video includes the heli R/T.

At 00:26 ATC informs them about the CRJ, and PAT25 requests visual separation. At 01:08 the conflict alert sounds and ATC instructs them to pass behind. This is not read back; instead PAT25 affirms they have the traffic in sight and asks again for visual separation. ATC seems to approve this request for the second time, but this transmission is not very clear.

Subjects ATC CRJ PAT25 Pass Behind Pass Behind (All) Separation (ALL) Traffic in Sight Visual Separation

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

treadigraph
January 31, 2025, 12:33:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818165

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelKPIT

CNN are broadcasting a new video of the accident from a different viewpoint. Apologies for linking to the whole (constantly updating) page - it\x92s not like YouTube where you can grab just the video: https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/pla...003b6mql4oglfn

YouTube version: the CRJ crew appear to start banking left a moment before the collision...

Subjects CNN CRJ

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

1 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

bean
January 31, 2025, 15:54:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818312

The day before

Subjects: None

1 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

fireflybob
January 31, 2025, 16:01:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818318

Video starts 0:35 in

Subjects: None

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

fdr
January 31, 2025, 17:42:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818402

Quote:

Originally Posted by Widger

I have been watching this thread for a while now and felt compelled to respond, mainly due to some of the comments on here, a proportion of which, come from professionals within our industry which in itself is troubling.

Lets break it down based on what we know so far:

See and Avoid We have years...
Procedures - There is nothing inherently wrong...
The Controller - Reports suggest that controller numbers...
Phraseology - Others on here have mentioned about phraseology used..
Duty of Care - Some of here have spoken about the transfer of responsibility onto the helicopter operator. This is a pet hate of mine, of people hiding behind the rules to abrogate responsibility. Everyone in the system has a duty of care and Air Traffic Controllers, regardless of type of service, have an accountability to do what they can to prevent collisions. That is written into the highest levels of ICAO Annex 11

My condolences to all involved and my thoughts are also with those under investigation, who I feel may have been let down by the system.

Well said and reasoned.

The losses so far in this case are almost defined, except that the unfortunate ATC officer is a victim of nothing more than being human and working within the constraints of a system that he did not design or have responsibility of. He has the most powerful pumpkin in the world defaming him from the normalised position of gross ignorance to such an extent that even Fox news and CNN push back. I would suggest that a suicide watch be placed on this poor individual to protect him from the hurtful comments that exude from the incumbent of the WH. This guy is going through hell, as much or more so than any other person suffering the loss in this mishap.

Spoiler

PS:

Humans may be the frail part of the system but they are also the most resilient parts. We will have moments in the following months to doubt that, history highlights failures not successes.

Last edited by fdr; 31st January 2025 at 17:56 .

Subjects ATC Accountability/Liability CNN ICAO Phraseology (ATC) See and Avoid

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

14 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

my_call
January 31, 2025, 20:45:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818520

I concur with this analysis

While the LC did not do anything unacceptable per se, the second affirmation of the CRJ being in sight would have been due to his concern about the proximity of the approaching aircraft. On this basis and with some benefit of hindsight, if he had been a bit more informative about the location and distance of the heli, this could have been a point of avoidance. Maybe there were some human factor priors were the heli pilots do not like what they deem as overly verbose comms or reassurance/verification calls, who knows.

Secondly, there appears to be an instrumentation issue, pilot error or both in one or both aircraft i.e. 1. no warning or awareness of warnings on a clearly impending incident - I only used TIS when I was flight training in the US some years ago, so again, some speculation. For CRJ, could be they had become accustomed to flying a few feet above helicopters there that they ignored such warnings 2. altitude deviation - could be mechanical, airmanship, wrong QNH etc.

Thirdly, the margins for error in the operating environment as many have commented appear too low, though in general there are low margins anyway when you are close to the ground.

If they [heli crew] were supposed to be following behind the CRJ, why were they getting that close to rwy 33 extended centreline or were they planning to turn once crossed? Was the CRJ centred laterally or did it perhaps slightly overshoot to the right?

I think it's more likely that the heli crew mistook the landing plane for #1 for rwy 01 rather than one taking off in my opinion, which leads me to think they may also have misidentified rwy 33 or the alignment to it at least. The latter may be an easy mistake at night. I would expect that part of the heli crew would have been very familiar with the territory, which makes it even more puzzling. The circling to land also adds a degree of ambiguity as to their understanding of the initial position notification or their expectation of where the landing a/c should be.

Anyway, we'll see when the prelim report comes out. I certainly hope there was a functioning CVR in the chopper.

Last edited by my_call; 31st January 2025 at 22:37 .

Subjects CRJ QNH

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

1 recorded likes for this post.

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

RAFEngO74to09
January 31, 2025, 19:30:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818522

Ward Carroll video on the mid-air - with input from USCG helo pilot familiar with the area. Again, helo too high (300ft shown on ATC plot) + probably sighted wrong aircraft)

Subjects ATC

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

AirScotia
January 31, 2025, 23:42:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818626

Quote:

Originally Posted by GoWest

Rubbish

Listen to the audio at 1.10 to 1.13

Controller asks PAT25 if CRJ in sight NO ANSWER

Controller asks PAT25 to pass behind. NO ANSWER

Dealt with.

There are several recordings - not all of them capture the helicopter frequency.

This shows exactly the communications. The heli was told about the CRJ at 1200ft, going for 33. The heli said explicitly they had the plane in sight.

7:20 onwards.

Subjects ATC CRJ PAT25 Pass Behind Pass Behind (All) Pass Behind (PAT25)

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

joe_bloggs
February 01, 2025, 00:55:00 GMT
permalink Post: 11818670

Quote:

I believe the controller was working two frequencies (duplexed?), probably 119.1 and 134.35, so raw LiveATC recordings would only pick up one side of the conversation.
The two traffic items probably didn't hear each other.

My understanding is the controller communicated on multiple frequencies. One for PAT25 on UHF which was not able to be heard by the CRJ. The second of the “VAS videos” edited the multiple frequency streams together in which you hear the PAT25 responses. This was not as heard by the CRJ crew. They were deprived of that awareness.

Edit: here’s vid.

Last edited by joe_bloggs; 1st February 2025 at 04:33 . Reason: Added vid link

Subjects ATC CRJ Frequency 119.1 Frequency 134.35 PAT25

Links are to this post in the relevant subject page so that this post can be seen in context.

No recorded likes for this post (could be before pprune supported 'likes').

Reply to this quoting this original post. You need to be logged in. Not available on closed threads.

Posts about: "YouTube Videos" [Posts: 64 Page: 1 of 4]¶