Black Hawk military helicopter collides into American Airlines flight landing at Reagan Airport in Washington, DC

[Beau]

A bit more explanation about the last few minutes before collision from the jet pilots' POV and breaking down some comments from the NTSB presser:

 

[A Jay]

And a letter complaining about ADSB being turned off as a matter of policy from a congresswoman to the heads of DoD, DHS, FAA and the NPS:

http://docs.copterspotter.com/NortonLettertoDeptsHelicoptertransponders.pdf

Ah, perfect. This explains why Ted came out of the briefing talking about the ADS-B and the NTSB responded by saying "we don't know for sure yet", because it's common practice and an open secret for the military to abuse their privilege in this air space.

 

[thorbiorn]

Here's a detail from a week ago that I haven't seen mentioned yet unless I missed it that I've seen reported in a few places:

Where there was:

Data from the passenger jet’s flight recorder showed its altitude as 325 feet, plus or minus 25 feet, when the crash happened Wednesday night. Data in the control tower, though, showed the Black Hawk helicopter at 200 feet at the time.

The 100-foot discrepancy is yet to be explained, but if the impact did occur at 325ft, the crash would have occurred well-above the maximum allowed altitude of 200ft for helicopters in the area.

Learning about this I tried to find out if the problem of flying at the same altitude could be explained by the perceived experience of how high they were flying which might be based on the altimeter readings. If the altimeter setting was somehow compromised, just a bit, on the helicopter would it be possible that there was an illusion that it was flying at 200 ft, while it was in reality flying a bit higher? I am somewhat doubtful, but as you can see below, here is how I went about trying to find out, maybe it will be useful another day.

The weather on January 30 from https://www.weatherforyou.com/archives/washington-dc/01-30-2025/nws gives the weather on the day and time of the crash.

Assuming the times below are local and assuming the collision took place around 9 PM, the air pressure at the time would be 30.19-30.18 inches of Hg which translates to around 1022 mbar.

If the pressure at sea level is 1022, then the pressure at 200 ft and 320 ft, given a temperature of 44 Fahrenheit would be respectively:

An adjustment, even temporary, of less than 5 mb would be all that is needed for the helicopter to fly at the same altitude as the plane.

About Altimeter Settings

By Aviation Hunt Team Updated on October 9, 2024
Altimeter setting procedures define how the altimeter barometric sub-scale must be set during the different phases of the flight.

Types of Altimeter Settings
There are three primary altimeter settings used in aviation:

1. QNH:This setting adjusts the altimeter to read the altitude above mean sea level (MSL). It is the most commonly used setting and is essential for ensuring that all aircraft in a given area are using the same reference point for altitude.
   • QNH: Q-Normal-Height
   • Altitude Correction: This is calculated based on the altitude above sea level and the standard lapse rate of atmospheric pressure (approximately 1 inch of mercury per 1000 feet).
   • Formula: QNH = Barometer Reading + Altitude Correction
2. QFE:This setting adjusts the altimeter to read zero when the aircraft is on the ground at a specific airfield. It indicates the height above the airfield elevation and is particularly useful for landing operations.
   • QFE: Q-Field-Elevation
   • No correction: Since QFE is already at the airfield’s elevation, no altitude correction is needed.
   • Formula: QFE = Barometer Reading
3. QNE:This is the standard pressure setting of 1013.25 hPa (29.92 inHg) used above the transition altitude. It is used to ensure uniformity in altitude readings when aircraft are flying at higher altitudes, typically above 18,000 feet in many regions.
   • QNE: Q-Normal-Elevation
   • Altitude Correction: This is calculated based on the difference between the actual altitude and 5000 feet, using the standard lapse rate.
   • Formula: QNE = Barometer Reading + (5000 feet – Actual Altitude) * Lapse Rate

Note: The specific values for the standard lapse rate and altitude correction factors may vary slightly depending on the region and aviation authority.
[...]

The altitude of the airport is like 5 meters about mean sea level, see Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. There would not be much that difference for the large plane between using Q-Normal Height and Q-Field-Elevation.

 

[Ca.]

Something still bothers me about this collision. Yes, the plane's pilots couldn't see the helicopter because the plane was turning to the left, and the helicopter was coming from the right. Yes the pilots of the helicopter, if they were on collision course with the plane, they would see a stationary flashing light in their field of view (it's like when someone pass you a ball, you run so that it appears to be stationary in the sky to intercept it). However, a military helicopter should have sensors, including radars, for approaching objects like missiles and birds. It doesn't look like an exotic technology and I'd imagine it's a prerequisite for a vehicle supposed to protect government VIPs in case of an emergency/attack. Disabled?

 BREAKING: The NTSB just dropped the Blackhawk helicopter’s black box recordings from the deadly Washington, DC crash with a commercial jet—and it’s a jaw-dropper. Here’s what it tells us:
 Altitude Chaos: The chopper’s altimeter was off—way off. Pilot read 300 feet,… pic.twitter.com/bmWjHx9Utx

— Project Constitution (@ProjectConstitu) February 18, 2025

 

[JEEP]

The NTSBs black box data just confirmed what we all feared this crash wasnt just bad luck
Altitude chaos. The Blackhawk pilots were flying blind—literally. One thought they were at 300 feet, the other called out 400, but the brutal truth? They were at 278 feet, soaring dangerously above their supposed 200-foot ceiling. The altimeter was feeding them bad data, and they had no idea.

Two dead after small planes collide mid-air near Marana airport in Arizona.
On Wednesday, February 19, 2025, a tragic mid-air collision took place at Marana Regional Airport in Pima County, Arizona. Two small planes, a Cessna 172S and a Lancair 360 MK II, collided, leading to the unfortunate deaths of two individuals. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) are now investigating to find out what went wrong.

This incident is part of a worrying trend in aviation safety, with several recent accidents raising concerns. For example, there was a crash between a regional American Airlines plane and a U.S. Army Black Hawk helicopter near Washington, D.C., and another involving a medical transport plane in Philadelphia. The NTSB is investigating potential factors such as radio communication issues and altitude discrepancies.

JUST IN:

Reports of plane crash at Marana Regional Airport in Pima County, Arizona.

What is going on?? pic.twitter.com/JrTI2hYXSM

— AmericanPapaBear (@AmericaPapaBear) February 19, 2025

Have to wonder if the spate of plane collisions is like the Cs said about ships, incompetence was to blame. Or, is it more like the case of the collision that resulted in the Francis Scott Key bridge collapse, 4D bleedthrough - would such a phenomenon cause the multiple inaccurate readings of the altimeter?

 

[Approaching Infinity]

JUST IN:

Reports of plane crash at Marana Regional Airport in Pima County, Arizona.

What is going on?? pic.twitter.com/JrTI2hYXSM

— AmericanPapaBear (@AmericaPapaBear) February 19, 2025

Have to wonder if the spate of plane collisions is like the Cs said about ships, incompetence was to blame. Or, is it more like the case of the collision that resulted in the Francis Scott Key bridge collapse, 4D bleedthrough - would such a phenomenon cause the multiple inaccurate readings of the altimeter?

Altimeter isn't GPS, but this reminds me of Skinwalker Ranch and other window areas were GPS goes wonky. Actually, not just GPS, other technology too, like LIDAR. The machine will give a reading that is way off from reality. When attached to a drone, for instance, the drone might think it is 100 meters higher than it actually is, and in order to get to its "proper" altitude, dive bomb into the ground.

 

[JEEP]

Altimeter isn't GPS, but this reminds me of Skinwalker Ranch and other window areas were GPS goes wonky. Actually, not just GPS, other technology too, like LIDAR. The machine will give a reading that is way off from reality.

It happens that the Marana Regional Airport, located about 21 miles northwest of Tucson, is an uncontrolled airfield. This means it doesn’t have an operating control tower, so pilots are responsible for maintaining safe distances from other aircraft using a Common Traffic Advisory Frequency (CTAF). Judging by the posted X, it appeared to be a clear blue sky day and presumably, unobstructed visuals. Were the planes' instruments giving inaccurate readings or was there interference of their radio communications? This is part of the area the Cs indicated was going 4D first, so ???

I believe it's been recently reported of on the ground collisions of jets taxiing at airports - are things starting to get wonky all over or just DEI incompetence proliferating? Will the Delta crash shed any more light on these incidents - pilot error, weather impact, or bad instrument readings? Time will tell.

 

[Ruth]

Latest on the collision from the NTSB. I know this has been posted before, but here it is again It has some interesting info:

 

[Beau]

One interesting piece of info I just discovered after watching the below interview with an ex Army pilot: Blackhawks will rise in altitude when you slow down. The crashed BH went from 100 to 80 knots right before the crash. He mentions how that can happen really quickly if the pilot doesn't immediately respond. Overall, this was a really good discussion around what it's like to be flying a helicopter at night on that exact route

 

[Beau]

YouTuber blancolirio with a short update after the NTSB released its preliminary report, in which they recommend to the FAA that they shut down all helicopter training missions around DCA.

 

[A Jay]

That's so much stupid it defies belief.

At least until the C's tell me it was a Darwin Award moment.

Well, not a Darwin Award moment but close!

(Joe) Walking in the back garden - that's travel, no? On that plane thing, that was a general question, but I just want to know: The Black Hawk helicopter that crashed into the jet over the DC area, what was the cause of that?

(L) Didn't we already ask about it?

(Niall) We haven't had a session since then. Was that one an accident as reported?

A: Mostly.

Q: (Niall) Mostly? Ah. It could have been one of the bleedthrough ones where the pilot was unsure or something...

(L) What was the root of it?

A: DEI.

(Niall) Oh, really?!

(Joe) Oh wow.

(L) Were there any otherworldly elements to it?

A: Some.

Q: (L) So in other words, a DEI-selected person was involved, who was susceptible to manipulation. Is that what we're getting at?

A: Yes exactly.

Q: (Joe) And what about two days after that crash, when there was the jet that crashed in Philadelphia?

(Niall) The Medivac Learjet?

(Joe) Yeah. Was that an accident as described?

A: Not exactly.

Q: (L) Okay. What was the root of that one?

A: Bleedthrough.

Q: (Niall) That makes sense. The pilot was going so fast he thought he was at a different altitude, I guess.

(L) So we could ask that about every single one and probably every single one would have a different combination of factors. Is that it?

A: Yes

Q: (Niall) Well, one more then. These are the three big ones. There are lots of little things. The Toronto one: so a Delta Airlines plane crashed into a snowy runway in Toronto and flipped upside down. What was at the root of that one?

A: DEI hubris

Q: (Joe) The way they were flying it, they just slammed it down and broke the landing gear.

(L) They just thought they knew what they were doing and they didn't.

(Joe) The Black Hawk one over DC was weird.

(Niall) Joe had a whole conspiracy theory.

(Joe) I mean, that helicopter was training for carrying out an emergency continuity of a government situation where they would have picked up Trump in the current administration...

(L) Well, what did they just say? It was DEI and... susceptible to manipulation.

(Joe) It looked a lot like… kind of like a message they were training for a situation...

(L) Well, DEI susceptible to manipulation IS a message.

(Niall) But from the next level up.

(Joe) Was it considered as a possible message by the Trump administration or as a warning?

A: No

Q: (Joe) Oh well.