Conclusion
The NTSB has issued preliminary information releases from January 30–February 5, 2025, detailing black box recovery, initial FDR/CVR data (CRJ at ~325 feet, Black Hawk at 278 feet, evasive action, missed ATC instructions), and wreckage recovery. The March 11, 2025, preliminary report outlined the collision sequence, Black Hawk altitude violation, ATC miscommunications, and DCA’s near-miss history, with urgent FAA recommendations to restrict Helicopter Route 4 and review ADS-B systems. No final conclusions or probable cause have been determined, with a final report expected in January 2026–January 2027. The investigation continues to focus on pilot actions, ATC workload, airspace design, and equipment issues, with transparency promised but limited by ongoing analysis.
-------------
my synopsis:
Near Misses at said airport were common. No corrective action to address this issue had been taken.
THERE WERE AND ARE SYSTEMIC PROBLEMS AT THAT AIRPORT THAT THE FAA DID NOT AND HAD NOT CORRECTED.
A near miss condition was already well underway between the two aircraft that the ATC Controller refused to take responsibility for correcting, instead attempting to hand off his responsibility to both the airliner and the chopper with 'be on the lookout for' and 'pass behind ....' to the pilots on BOTH aircraft.
Inexcusable and criminal, imo. Bureaucrats, greedy corps (get there on time or else ...), stupidity of 'missions', lack of real command and control - take your choice.
Ultimate Responsibility is THE FAA - and the ATC is part and parcel of the FAA.
Any way you cut it - the ATC put those two aircraft into a near miss certainty (violating FAA regs on safe plane separations) and did NOT pull them out of the problem - which was HIS responsibility. I do not think it is beyond the pale to say the man 'cut and ran', at the very least he attempted to pass a buck which was not his to give away.
Also - just for the record - take notice of what has and has NOT been released thru verifiable sources. The NYT's at best is using 'unofficial sources (eg anonymous leaks/sources)' at worst is using X as sources. Neither is acceptable.
Are we going to see a whitewash of the systemic errors, and who is really responsible for such a provably unsafe system for that airport - or will we see it buried through time 'exceeding reasonable attention spans' being used ?
Probably both and more. A lot of tits in the fire on this one.
Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good ...
| 