By
Investigators are gathering evidence to determine the cause of the tragic midair collision between a U.S. Army helicopter and a passenger jet in Washington, D.C., early Wednesday night. Already a key focus is whether the helicopter was flying higher than permitted.
As the American Airlines jet made a final low turn across the Potomac River to land at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport, the U.S. military UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter on a routine night training flight slammed into it.
Engulfed in a fireball, the helicopter and the passenger plane — a small Canadian-built Bombardier CRJ-700 regional jet operated by American subsidiary PSA Airlines — fell into the river.
All 64 people on the commercial flight from Wichita, Kan., died, as did the three helicopter crew members, making it the first mass-casualty U.S. airline accident in 16 years and ending an unprecedented record of U.S. aviation safety.
In an interview, John Cox, a longtime pilot and aviation safety consultant, said, based on aircraft speed and position data transmitted from the aircraft and gathered by flight tracking company Flightradar24, the American jet was “being flown well” and was right on course.
“They’re doing everything exactly by the book,” Cox said. “The speed is correct. The track of the airplane is right where you would expect it to be.”
More about the crash
- Midair collision draws scrutiny to military helicopter training, previous accidents
- Passengers on downed flight included American and Russian figure skaters
- What to know about the collision between a passenger jet and Army helicopter near DC
- Here are some of the deadliest plane crashes in U.S. history
The helicopter should have passed underneath the jet. The set route it was following requires military helicopters to skim along the river no higher than 200 feet above the water.
However, the Flightradar24 data shows that moments before the crash, the helicopter was in level flight at an altitude of 400 feet, about the level of the impact.
“If the helicopter is at an altitude above 200 feet, that’s a very serious concern,” said Cox.
New Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth seemed to concede as much when he stated Thursday that “there was some sort of an elevation issue.”
National Transportation Safety Board and Department of Defense experts will also look at other possible factors, including the helicopter crew’s use of night vision goggles, which can restrict the field of vision.
Experts said the tragedy may also raise questions about the overall safety of the alternative landing track used by the passenger jet, which is routinely used in the tight airspace over D.C. Another potential factor in the crash could be the use of separate radio frequencies at the airport by military and commercial flights.
Cox urged patience as the facts are gathered.
“We’ll get the answers,” he said. “But it’s more important to get the right answers than to get a fast answer.”
Routine radio exchanges, and then disaster
Recordings of the conversations between the pilots of both aircraft and the air traffic control tower reveal how routine maneuvers suddenly turned into tragedy.
American Eagle Flight 5342 was set on a straight approach to land on the airport’s main runway, Runway 1, but just two minutes before the collision, the control tower requested it switch to land on the alternative Runway 33, which crosses the main runway.
This was to clear the way for a departure on the main runway. It required the American jet to slide its flight path to the left and then make a sharp circular turn toward Runway 33.
The pilot of the American jet acknowledged and accepted the request and adjusted the plane’s trajectory.
Just over a minute before the crash, the air traffic controller told the helicopter pilot of the approaching CRJ-700.
“It’s at 1,200 feet setting up for runway 33,” the controller told the helicopter pilot, then added “Visual separation approved.”
That meant the helicopter pilot should keep the CRJ-700 in sight and ensure separation.
Then as the two aircraft drew closer on the radar screen, 17 seconds before the impact, the tower asked the helicopter “Do you have the CRJ in sight?,” adding with 14 seconds left: “Pass behind the CRJ.”
The helicopter pilot replied immediately that he “has the aircraft in sight. Request visual separation.” The controller reiterated approval for visual separation.
Ten seconds later there was an audible exclamation from the control tower radio feed as the two aircraft collided.
Switching to the alternate runway is not unusual
At a news conference Thursday, Todd Inman, the lead NTSB board member at the accident scene, said that, “If you live in D.C., you see a lot of helicopters going down into this area, so there’s a very well defined system.”
Yet Juan Browne, a veteran pilot with a major U.S. airline and host of the respected aviation safety YouTube channel called blancolirio, said he believes the alternate Runway 33 approach, though used almost every day for decades, is unwise.
He agrees that the data indicates “the CRJ was in the correct place at the correct time, doing the correct approach,” and that the helicopter “should not have been at that altitude.”
Still, he said, “even if everything were perfect, they would only be missing each other by a couple hundred feet.”
“That just seems too close to me,” he continued.
With restricted flying over the Pentagon and White House and short runways at the airport, “that airspace is incredibly tight,” he added.
Browne notes that the standard traffic collision avoidance system installed on all commercial jets that warns pilots of approaching traffic is not as effective when a plane is coming in to land.
Below 1,000 feet, the TCAS system no longer issues aural advisories telling a pilot to climb or descend to avoid a collision; at such a low altitude, it might descend a plane right into the ground.
Below 500 feet, voice warnings of “Traffic! Traffic!” are muted because a pilot needs to concentrate on the landing.
“So now the only information you have about a potential TCAS conflict is the display on your screen,” Browne said.
Marty Coddington, a former air traffic controller and then an airline pilot and safety consultant for the major pilot union Air Line Pilots Association, now retired, said he has flown the Runway 33 approach enough times to dislike it.
“Anytime you hear the pilots assigned a circling approach there’s always a certain amount of grimacing, ‘Geez, we have to circle,’” he said. “Nobody likes to do it.”
It makes for a more complicated approach and a heavier workload.
Pilots don’t have to accept the request to shift to that runway and Coddington said, “It will not surprise me if American Airlines or maybe several airlines prohibit it in the future.”
Cox disagreed, based on flying that approach himself and a decadeslong safety record at the airport.
“I’ve flown that approach to runway 33 countless times. I’ve seen military helicopters pass underneath and behind me many times,” Cox said. “This was routine in every sense of the word, until suddenly it wasn’t.”
He said pilots keep on track through a series of four colored landing lights. If all four are white, the plane is far too high, if all four are red, it’s way too low. Three reds is a bit too low. Three whites is a bit high. Two and two is right on track.
Having to circle, “adds a level of complexity, but it happens so frequently, you almost know it’s coming, so you’re prepared for it,” Cox said. “Pilots flying in and out of Reagan National do this all the time, so I wouldn’t call it high stress. It increases workload, but nothing beyond what is normal.”
Night vision problems
So if passenger planes routinely fly this route with helicopters in the vicinity, how did the collision happen?
Browne thinks the night vision goggles worn by the Army pilots on their annual night flying proficiency run may have restricted their vision.
“Night vision goggles really hamper your ability to see and avoid visual flight rules traffic at night because of their limited peripheral vision and your limited ability to perceive depth perception,” he said.
And while the jet was flying along the Potomac, before the turn to the runway, it would have been facing the helicopter more or less head to head in opposite directions. The city lights behind could perhaps make it hard for the helicopter to see the plane.
Perhaps, said Browne, the helicopter pilot was looking at another jet that was approaching on the same trajectory but behind the CRJ.
“Was he looking at the wrong aircraft?” asked Browne. “Was he keying off of the aircraft that was right behind the CRJ that he hit? Was he thinking that that’s the traffic that he needed to avoid?”
Another potential factor contributing to the missed communication, he said, is the fact that the military and commercial aircraft use different frequencies to communicate with air traffic control. The controller can hear both, but they cannot hear each other.
“They’re missing half of the situational awareness,” Browne said.
Trump’s response dismissed
Even as aviation experts looked for facts, President Donald Trump jumped in immediately with accusations that recent Democratic administrations bore responsibility for the accident.
In particular, he blamed former Transport Secretary Pete Buttigieg and diversity, equity, and inclusion policies at the Federal Aviation Administration and other government agencies.
He claimed the FAA has been hiring people “with severe intellectual disabilities” and “psychiatric problems.”
“He doesn’t know what he’s talking about,” judged Coddington.
And Cox said the standards required to qualify for safety-sensitive positions at the aviation regulator have not changed.
“The pilots and the air traffic controllers have to meet very high standards. Those standards have not changed based on hiring practices or anything else,” Cox said. “There is no foundation at this point to say DEI had any effect at all on this accident.”
At the news conference Thursday, NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy said the accident investigation will be an “all hands on deck” and “a whole of government effort” to determine the truth and try to ensure this cannot happen again.
“We are going to leave no stone unturned,” she said.