✈️NTSB Holds Urgent Conference on Mid-Air Collision: Key Findings Revealed!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.พ. 2025
- 📢 NTSB Holds Critical Conference on Mid-Air Collision! ✈️⚠️
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has convened a crucial press conference to address the details of a devastating mid-air collision. Investigators are unveiling key findings, discussing potential causes, and outlining future safety measures to prevent similar tragedies.
🔎 What led to the collision?
⚠️ Were there any warning signs?
🛫 How will aviation safety change moving forward?
Stay tuned for expert insights and official statements from aviation authorities. Your safety in the skies matters!
#NTSB #AviationSafety #BreakingNews #PlaneCrash #MidAirCollision #FAA #AirTrafficControl #SafetyFirst #Investigation #LiveUpdate
He is well spoken.
The way I am starting to read into the height differences, is that it is confirmed that the CRJ was struck at 325 feet + or - 25 feet, whilst the last unrefreshed helicopter scope reading in the control tower showed the helicopter at 200 feet, which to me, suggest between the scope refreshing, the helicopter suddenly increased in height, which the pilots of the CRJ saw, and they tried to increase height themselves to try and avoid a collision, but time was not on their side, as it takes around 3-4 seconds for plane engines to spool up and increase engine power.
It will be interesting to see as to whether the pilots had tried to initiate a go-around.
I believe the helo didn’t know the CRJ was expected to turn towards them at an unknown angle - and even if they did, separating visually, estimating angle and distance, was extremely high risk. When the helo realised, they instinctively turned away (right) and elevated (descending at full speed at 200 ft would be the same as crashing in the river). Had they known the CRJ was making a left turn, the helo would have turned left and not right.
Unfortunately proper protocols were not in place.
So, this is an equipment issue. NOT DEI. HELO data showing 200. CRJ showing 325 +/- 25. ADS-b is off. Radar has difficulty picking up targets that low. In our training aircraft, our ADS-b is OFTEN showing incorrect data. Its aviation. We work with what we got
You can either focus on one party or the other failing to thread the needle, or we can all consider the existence of such a needle to thread to begin with.
last-minute changes to the runway (and ensuing flight path) of an approaching craft that another craft is responsible for tracking visually should be avoided. It's just inhernently dangerous.
@ circle to land approach’s are daily occurrence. The are requested all the time. Both the pilots and tower can ask for it. The other can accept of refuse: no questions asked. This happens multiples times a day at this airport. Pilots going into this airport has a specific required training session just for this airport. Anyone operating in this airspace is required to take this training. Right now, the helicopter altitude is the only unknown.
@bwro66 th-cam.com/users/liveDORCiujeNnU?si=dvJ-AZEqguRAGjXd Army helicopter pilots do not seem to have the same training. As I understand it, asking helos to wait at Hains Point was not uncommon. Assuming the helo realised runway 33 meant the trafic would turn towards them, at an unknown time and angle, is what I believe was part of the problem here.
Even if they did know, and had the right trafic in sight, would it be realisttic to visually estimate distance, speed and angle? Proper protocols were missing.
@ at night it’s SO hard to estimate distance and speed of another target. That helicopter route needs to be changed. We’ve been lucky for years. Luck ran out. Fed Aviation Regs usually take a fatal incident to change or update. With airlines trying to push more flights, something’s gotta give. Too bad the corporate airline industry has so much power.
This should not be considered "News Flash." This is OLD news.
This is an old video now, newly pisted.