Breaking Plane Crash

[Nugget]

Here's an interesting vid of the flight path of the plane and helo...seems strange to me, but I'm no pilot.



It's reported that the Black Hawk climbed above permitted altitude 30-seconds before impact.

[Ksihkehe]

Here's an interesting vid of the flight path of the plane and helo...seems strange to me, but I'm no pilot.

Another video is available. It's a bit closer than others and it basically looks even more like it just flew directly into the jet. It's was on a forward trajectory that makes it seem incredibly unlikely that they didn't see it though I am aware that the distance, speed, trajectories, and use of night vision may have made visibility difficult to judge from any video.

There's also a Reuters article about the name of the third person on the Black Hawk not being released at this time.

[FCD]

I am (was) type-rated as a command pilot in about (7) different high performance and jet aircraft.  I've worn night vision goggles, but never when flying.  Repeat...never when flying.

Night vision goggles are important to helicopter pilots because vision with respect to the orientation from the ground is critically important.  Without night vision, it is nearly impossible to land a helicopter at night or in low visibility.  I am NOT an expert helicopter pilot, but I have flown a couple, and it's not easy.  Helo operations are much more difficult than aircraft operations, IMO.  Night operations make this even harder.

I don't know the protocol for NODS on helo flights, especially military.but I can say that it's difficult to take NODS off after you've been wearing them for a while.  Then, you're blind as hell.

NV is some great stuff, but it does have some limitations, AND, as I mentioned earlier, peripheral vision is one of these things.

That helo flew directly into the approach flight path of AA5432.   Directly into it.

I'm sorry, but that's what happened.

[Nugget]

That helo flew directly into the approach flight path of AA5432.   Directly into it.

Considering that it was flying at a higher altitude than it was authorized to do you think it was intentional? And if so, what might be the reason?

[FCD]

Considering that it was flying at a higher altitude than it was authorized to do you think it was intentional? And if so, what might be the reason?

Personally, what I don't understand is how the helo was ever allowed to enter that airspace at all, let alone counter to the approach path of inbound aircraft.  The altitude separation window is incredibly narrow right at the point where the collision took place, less than 100 feet.  A couple clicks on an altimeter barometric pressure setting could result in a deviation that large easily.  There's (300) other compass headings that helo could have taken, other than the one they were flying on; why they took that one (whether instructed to, or on their own decision) is completely a mystery to me.

Under any circumstances a flight direction, at that altitude, in the direction they were headed, under any circumstances, would be extremely dangerous bordering on suicidal.  To attempt something like that at night and at very low altitude where it's easy to confuse lights on the ground with other aircraft lights just doesn't make sense.

A lot of people are coming out blaming the helicopter and flight crew, but I think it's important to remember this is highly controlled airspace.  You don't just casually fly into this airspace without direction to do so.  Even during the day under perfect visual conditions this would have been a dangerous circumstance.  There's just way too many things happening on the flight deck of both aircraft.  In fact, it's the busiest, most stressful time onboard a high performance aircraft like a jet.  This is one of the main reasons why there is a thing called the "Sterile Cockpit" rules where all non-essential talk, activities or distractions below 10,000 feet are prohibited.  You have to be paying 100% attention to instruments, and you've got controllers firing instructions at you every few seconds, every one of which requires thought and actions, many of them critical operations.

The whole incident was preventable in my opinion.  The situation should have never been allowed to happen to begin with; it was a recipe for disaster.  What makes it even worse is, pilots require special training to even be allowed to operate out of DCA just because it's such a difficult airport and airspace to travel though.  For anyone to inject a dynamic complication such as helicopter operations into that equation is just criminal.  I honestly don't fault the AA5432 crew based what I understand at the moment; they were just flying their approach into DCA.

There's a reason many air to air collisions happen near airports, and what happened at DCA between AA 5432 and that military helo are almost a textbook example of why.

[Nugget]

Thank you for such an informative response! Thet leads me to wonder if the 'abnormal' staffing of the ATC played a part, and possibly 'less experienced' personnel were in charge that night.

Well, this is interesting!

In the week leading up to a tragic midair collision near Reagan National Airport, military helicopter operations were reported to have caused two separate planes to abort their landings. The incidents occurred on January 23 and January 29, prompting concerns about air traffic safety in the area.

https://www.pressrundown.com/top-news/tw...e99a451356

[Nugget]

I've got my C.T. detective hat on again....

Chinese Components in US Night Vision
The U.S. military has been concerned about relying on military components made in China, including those used in night vision technology. According to a report, the U.S. military has already addressed the issue of sourcing night vision goggles components from China. They have ordered the Pentagon to purchase more domestically-produced minerals for use in night vision goggles and have invested in a new domestic supplier to make propellant for the hellfire missile. This indicates that while there may have been some reliance on Chinese components in the past, efforts are being made to reduce this dependency.

I just couldn't let it go....something seemed too 'off' about this. Either a deliberate attack or an equipment malfunction, like a backdoor hack isn't completely off the table IMHO.

Shocking Number of Critical U.S. Military Equipment Components Made in China
A large number of Chinese semiconductors are used in critical military platforms, accounting for around 40% of all U.S. Department of Defense weapons systems and infrastructure, and are further linked to military supply chains such as Patriot air-defense missiles and B-2 bombers.

 

Chinese Semiconductors in US Military Aircraft
The United States military relies on semiconductors sourced from China for its aircraft and other defense systems. According to a Forbes article published on January 9, 2024, over 40 percent of the semiconductors that sustain DoD weapons systems and associated infrastructure are sourced from China. This dependence on Chinese semiconductors has raised concerns about national security and the potential vulnerabilities it introduces.

However, the U.S. government is actively working to mitigate this reliance. The Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) has implemented export controls to restrict China's ability to produce advanced semiconductors that can be used in military applications. These controls include restricting the export of software keys that allow access to the use of specific hardware or software, and renewing existing software and hardware use licenses.

Despite these efforts, the U.S. military still faces challenges in procuring sufficient semiconductors free from potential threats to national security. The Trusted Foundry Program, initiated by the Department of Defense in 2004, aims to establish a pool of trusted information technology vendors that provide hardware to the U.S. military. However, as the military's demand for more advanced semiconductors increases, existing facilities are struggling to meet the demand.

In summary, while the U.S. military currently depends on Chinese semiconductors for its aircraft and other defense systems, the government is taking steps to reduce this reliance and enhance security measures.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/erictegler/...tions-too/

https://foreigndesknews.com/asia/shockin...-in-china/

https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/chinese...ector-says

[Ksihkehe]

I just couldn't let it go....something seemed too 'off' about this. Either a deliberate attack or an equipment malfunction, like a backdoor hack isn't completely off the table IMHO.

My guess is that even if you were able to sabotage individual components, the best you could hope for would be to make it crash. The flight controls on these things seem way too sophisticated to be able to fly it into another aircraft's flight path using hijacked code or a remote hack.

If China can do this I would advise everyone to start learning some Chinese. 

I think people that pushed identity over merit for highly-skilled jobs that require specific aptitudes would like us to think it was China. Having had a front row seat for the decay of our basic standards of competency I wouldn't want to take the blame for it either. I don't know if the tower being short-staffed changed anything, but it seems the crew of the helicopter accepted responsibility for monitoring their space and acting accordingly in that timeframe. Maybe the tower should have done more, but I have damn near no knowledge of the protocols. Not sure if it was all normal operating procedure.

I've heard possible explanations about mistaking another craft on visual, but this would seem to require a pretty blasè attitude toward flying in high traffic areas on an airport approach. Seems like this involved lots of unnecessary risks. Even if they were being blasè, still seems like a freak accident to so perfectly t-bone another aircraft.

[Nugget]

My guess is that even if you were able to sabotage individual components, the best you could hope for would be to make it crash. The flight controls on these things seem way too sophisticated to be able to fly it into another aircraft's flight path using hijacked code or a remote hack.

Your thoughts combined with FCD's knowledge on the subject makes the most sense. I've been so conditioned through the years to believe that nothing is what it appears to be on the surface that I try to leave no stone unturned. 

Did I mention I love a good mystery?