DCA - American Airlines passenger plane collides with Blackhawk over the Potomac River, all 67 on both dead, 29 Jan 2025

Status
Not open for further replies.
I also am curious about the last minute switch to runway 33. I know it's done, but what are the protocols for switching like was done here?
As @acutename mentioned, its done to increase landing efficiency.

A commercial pilot on a Youtube channel mentioned that it is a routine option asked by ATC when they need to land planes quickly. He then related that he had flown the switched route and that it demands total concentration from the flight crew.

The pilot also implied that accepting the switch is voluntary as the ATC asks crews if they "can accept" the new assignment. This implies that if the flight crew is not comfortable with a rapid new assignment to a tricky approach, they can decline and still land at the originally assigned run way.
 
It's paywalled for me, but from the headline and the tiny bit I can read, I think it's about Olivia Ter and her mum.

This article is about the Livingston family.
 
Last edited:
ADMIN NOTE:

1738568923079.png


Sheesh ... for a few minutes I thought I was in the wrong universe here.

Posts have been removed.

This case is not about plastic, autism/ADHD, low testosterone levels, low sperm counts, Nomadic tribesman, warrior genes, men being the expendable sex, etc. None of this has any place in this discussion.

Please get back to discussing this tragedy, this plane crash, and stay on topic. Members who continue to post off topic will be removed from this discussion.

Thanks !!
 
"Col. Francis Pera of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District, said crews are scheduled to begin lifting large pieces of the wreckage of both aircraft from the water at dawn on Monday after spending two days surveying the debris field and rehearsing how the recovery of the wreckage will go.

Pera said wreckage will be placed on flatbed trailers and taken to a nearby hanger for investigators to analyze.

Pera said that if crews come upon more human remains, the salvage teams are prepared to pause the operation to facilitate a "dignified recovery" of the victims."

 
"The families of victims of the deadliest US air disaster in nearly 25 years have visited the crash site

Dozens of people walked along the banks of the Potomac River near Reagan National Airport

They arrived in buses with a police escort, remembering loved ones" . ❤️

 
"The families of victims of the deadliest US air disaster in nearly 25 years have visited the crash site

Dozens of people walked along the banks of the Potomac River near Reagan National Airport

They arrived in buses with a police escort, remembering loved ones" . ❤️

I can’t begin to imagine the pain they must have felt visiting the site where they lost their loved ones in such a horrible way. It’s heartbreaking.
 
I can’t begin to imagine the pain they must have felt visiting the site where they lost their loved ones in such a horrible way. It’s heartbreaking.
I'm sure it's been studied but just a sad observation -- each with personal grief over their individual loss but overwhelmed by the corporate loss. Like 9/11. Mass trauma over individual trauma. Like war.

And some victims still not recovered, perhaps those who were seated where the fuselage imploded.

And then the contrast now, as the sky and water look placid as if no terrible thing occurred there... except for the plane's carcass...

I can only try to fathom the grief...

Well-intentioned folks often say to those facing the tragedy of loss words about getting through it... and perhaps they mean getting through the passage of time because that comes but I don't know that there's ever a "getting through" grief. It sounds too close to "getting over" it and that hurts worse. I think what it really is, we hope they find a way to carry it.

Unfathomable loss. Multiplied.

I hope it helps to know a whole world of people care.

JMO
 
I'm sure it's been studied but just a sad observation -- each with personal grief over their individual loss but overwhelmed by the corporate loss. Like 9/11. Mass trauma over individual trauma. Like war.

And some victims still not recovered, perhaps those who were seated where the fuselage imploded.

And then the contrast now, as the sky and water look placid as if no terrible thing occurred there... except for the plane's carcass...

I can only try to fathom the grief...

Well-intentioned folks often say to those facing the tragedy of loss words about getting through it... and perhaps they mean getting through the passage of time because that comes but I don't know that there's ever a "getting through" grief. It sounds too close to "getting over" it and that hurts worse. I think what it really is, we hope they find a way to carry it.

Unfathomable loss. Multiplied.

I hope it helps to know a whole world of people care.

JMO

They are all part of a club that they never wanted to belong to. And they each understand how they all feel.

May their lives be filled with kindness to help them along the difficult path they walk.
 

Attachments

  • 78156126007-20250202-t-145214-z-1374289207-rc-2-emcai-0-u-2-s-rtrmadp-3-usacrashwashingtondc.jpeg
    78156126007-20250202-t-145214-z-1374289207-rc-2-emcai-0-u-2-s-rtrmadp-3-usacrashwashingtondc.jpeg
    93.8 KB · Views: 40
Salvage crews began lifting the wreckage of American Airlines Flight 5342 from the Potomac River in Washington on Monday morning, the start of an operation that was expected to take three days.

 
"Our goal is to really lift as much as we can, given the fact that we are also accounting for the human remains component," Col. Francis Pera with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers told reporters.

 
As @acutename mentioned, its done to increase landing efficiency.

A commercial pilot on a Youtube channel mentioned that it is a routine option asked by ATC when they need to land planes quickly. He then related that he had flown the switched route and that it demands total concentration from the flight crew.

The pilot also implied that accepting the switch is voluntary as the ATC asks crews if they "can accept" the new assignment. This implies that if the flight crew is not comfortable with a rapid new assignment to a tricky approach, they can decline and still land at the originally assigned run way.
As I mentioned (far) upthread, I was on a flight where the pilot refused a new runway assignment, and pulled up out of the landing pattern. He got on the PA to inform the passengers why he had pulled up from the landing pattern and that he didn’t think it was safe to change to the last minute ru way change. He went in to state that it is always up to the pilot whether to accept a new runway assignment and if they don’t feel comfortable with it they can refuse or circle around and come back to it.
 
probably not because all the incoming traffic for landing and take off was to the south. No crossover commercial flights.
But here's where I'm stuck. Those two aircraft, even with the call out from the ATC at 12 seconds before contact, were uncomfortably close. Like mayday close. Seems like the AA pilots should have been advised (assuming they weren't) that switching to the sorry runway would bring them VERY CLOSE to the Blackhawk's crosswind course, giving the pilots enough information to reject the runway change or reject the landing altogether, in favor of a fly around.

100 feet of supposed clearance? Who could be satisfied with that?????? Comfortable near hit? Hot miss?

There's got to be a better way to prioritize incoming commercial flights with souls aboard and feathering in military transport, especially when it transects short approaches.

The aircraft was mere feet really from a successful landing. T-boned. By a projectile which could only happen IMO if both crews were blind to one another. And that just shouldn't be.

That's a gap we should be able to close. One crash too late.

JMO
 
But here's where I'm stuck. Those two aircraft, even with the call out from the ATC at 12 seconds before contact, were uncomfortably close. Like mayday close. Seems like the AA pilots should have been advised (assuming they weren't) that switching to the sorry runway would bring them VERY CLOSE to the Blackhawk's crosswind course, giving the pilots enough information to reject the runway change or reject the landing altogether, in favor of a fly around.

100 feet of supposed clearance? Who could be satisfied with that?????? Comfortable near hit? Hot miss?

There's got to be a better way to prioritize incoming commercial flights with souls aboard and feathering in military transport, especially when it transects short approaches.

The aircraft was mere feet really from a successful landing. T-boned. By a projectile which could only happen IMO if both crews were blind to one another. And that just shouldn't be.

That's a gap we should be able to close. One crash too late.

JMO

Yes, I also think all should be informed of each other's close presence ... military aircraft or not.

It sounds as if the plane pilot(s) saw the helicopter at the last minute, as the preliminary flight data indicates they may have tried to pull up in the last seconds.

Pilots tried to pull passenger jet’s nose up within seconds of deadly DC helicopter collision, preliminary NTSB data shows
.
 
Last edited:
But here's where I'm stuck. Those two aircraft, even with the call out from the ATC at 12 seconds before contact, were uncomfortably close. Like mayday close. Seems like the AA pilots should have been advised (assuming they weren't) that switching to the sorry runway would bring them VERY CLOSE to the Blackhawk's crosswind course, giving the pilots enough information to reject the runway change or reject the landing altogether, in favor of a fly around.

100 feet of supposed clearance? Who could be satisfied with that?????? Comfortable near hit? Hot miss?

There's got to be a better way to prioritize incoming commercial flights with souls aboard and feathering in military transport, especially when it transects short approaches.

The aircraft was mere feet really from a successful landing. T-boned. By a projectile which could only happen IMO if both crews were blind to one another. And that just shouldn't be.

That's a gap we should be able to close. One crash too late.

JMO
I think very poor reporting by the media is making this situation worse.
The airport is there, and it is busy. But, this is the nation's capital and the Army has to operate its own flight missions in the area. So, the flight corridors exist. This helicopter got out of the corridor and failed to observe visual avoidance as was required. We don't know why. The 100 ft issue is meaningless. It wasn't supposed to be anywhere near that close to the plane, the helicopter operating under visual separation authorization, meaning it is supposed to just fly around scheduled traffic. Normally that isn't a problem. But some reason, that night they failed to see the plane they were supposed to avoid.
The request to change runways had nothing to do with the helicopter and the AA pilots seemed to have no problem with the change.
I am an Army veteran and still think that the blame for this mostly falls on the Army pilots. Yes, the flight corridors are rough, but there is just a LOT of traffic that has to fly in that area. Should that all be reconsidered? Perhaps, but that is beyond my paygrade. But it seems maybe Reagan International needs to go away.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
152
Guests online
1,585
Total visitors
1,737

Forum statistics

Threads
623,362
Messages
18,466,749
Members
240,367
Latest member
ys13
Back
Top