A couple of nights ago, there was a mid-air collision between a military helicopter and a commercial flight on approach to Reagan National Airport. Sixty-seven people were killed, including the crew of the helicopter, and the crew and passengers on the jet.
Although we saw what happened, we will have to rely on the skill and experience of air crash investigators to sort it out. [In the meantime, apparently the FAA has restricted the helicopter route along the Potomac to police and medical helicopters.]
In my personal search for helpful information, my husband alerted me to this video, made by a former F-15 pilot. In my limited experience with pilots, this is how the really good ones talk about flying — as analytical, careful practitioners. This creator has a YouTube channel, and is at https://pilotdebrief.com/. (One of my first questions was about why TCAS didn’t seem to be in play in the jet, and he answered that question — because of the low altitude of both aircraft.)
I’m sure there are many other smart, experienced people, with relevant experience as pilots or controllers, who can help us make sense of the publicly available information we have so far. I watched another video where the creator (a pilot) talks about the tower and ground response being quick and professional, and another where the creator broke down (in more technical terms) the routes each aircraft were taking and the challenges presented by busy airspace in nighttime, urban, conditions. Although “visual separation” is a recurring theme in these videos, one of the most important features of them is that each of the creators says that they are working with publicly available data, and that there’s still a lot that we don’t know…
… which is an excellent reminder that air crashes tend to be complex, often cascading, events. A lot of the time, they can’t be explained easily, and sometimes, investigations raise more questions.
The NTSB investigated the air accident that killed my dad, many years ago. The report was comprehensive, and fair, and included not just information about the weather (nighttime, poor visibility due to fog, near-freezing conditions), and the equipment involved (which I can’t remember off the top of my head), but information about the pilot’s (my dad’s) qualifications, his decision making on the ground before the flight, and in the air. They also sought information about the conditions and operation of the airfield, and the quality of information from the tower just before the crash. In their final report, the NTSB pointed out decisions that probably should have been made differently (including by my dad), but stopped short of assigning blame for the accident. (This may be wrong, but I get the sense that they avoid assigning blame when they can, particularly if no one is behaving recklessly, or purposely acting against their training.)
Of course, in my dad’s accident, the investigator knew what had happened immediately (the pilot was dead, the plane was destroyed, the tower was damaged), but they took the time to examine multiple factors that may have contributed to the accident, to get a better sense of how it happened, why it happened, and how to prevent it from happening again. None of it could bring my dad back (closure is not a word I would reach for, here). There have been other small-craft air accidents in similar situations with similar outcomes, because when weather issues, human perception issues, and navigation issues converge, bad things can happen. But I hope that, with more information and understanding, these kinds of accidents are rarer than they might have been otherwise.
Point is, I think the NTSB does excellent, important, work. I expect they will do the same here. The rest of us should avoid coming to conclusions based on easy explanations and/or speculation, and let the NTSB and the FAA investigate the accident without pressure or interference.
But it’s also important to understand that even if the NTSB’s report is helpful, and this kind of accident never happens again, there is no making sense of this event for the families of those killed in it; it is a terrible tragedy.
–*–*–
Confession: I’m a fan of the TV show Air Disasters (Smithsonian Channel, and now Paramount+), not because of the flashy recreations, but because they highlight the work of air crash investigators (often the NTSB, but they have featured agencies from around the world). The work these folks do is creative, evidence-based, interesting, and important, and has improved safety for both aviators and passengers.
Carmen Yount 