Plane in DC crash tried to pull up just before impact, investigators say The National Transportation Safety Board said Saturday that data shows the plane tried to pitch up one second before impact.. Federal accident investigators on Saturday said the commercial plane involved in Wednesday’s deadly crash in Washington appears to have tried to pull up a second before it collided with a U.S. Army helicopter. “Sounds of impact were audible about one second later,” National Transportation Safety Board investigator Brice Banning told reporters at a news conference. Banning said the aircraft’s flight data recorder showed that the plane had started to increase its pitch. The independent agency also said it had been able to verify based on initial data that the impact occurred as the airplane was flying at roughly 325 feet when a Black Hawk helicopter slammed into it. The agency wouldn’t say what altitude the helicopter was flying at but the air route it was using should have limited it to no higher than 200 feet. Other preliminary data appear to indicate that air traffic controllers at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport were operating with radar scope data showing that the helicopter was flying at an altitude of 200 feet at the time of impact, Banning said. That radar data has “less fidelity,” he said. “Our team is looking into that,” he said. When asked what would explain the apparent discrepancy between the two reported altitudes, NTSB board member Todd Inman said: “That’s what our job is — is to figure that out.” The data recorder from the Army helicopter has been retrieved, but investigators are in the process of removing some water that seeped into it, said Inman, who added the agency is “confident” they’ll be able to get data from it. Inman said the helicopter flight was approved to use night vision goggles but could not yet confirm whether the pilots were wearing them. The goggles could have limited their field of view.
空管的雷达显示屏数据应该是同时显示探测高度和飞机自己发的数据。 Air Traffic Control Radar Beacon System (ATCRBS)The ATCRBS, sometimes referred to as secondary surveillance radar, consists of three main components: Interrogator. Primary radar relies on a signal being transmitted from the radar antenna site and for this signal to be reflected or “bounced back” from an object (such as an aircraft). This reflected signal is then displayed as a “target” on the controller''''''''s radarscope. In the ATCRBS, the Interrogator, a ground based radar beacon transmitter-receiver, scans in synchronism with the primary radar and transmits discrete radio signals which repetitiously request all transponders, on the mode being used, to reply. The replies received are then mixed with the primary returns and both are displayed on the same radarscope. https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim_html/chap4_section_5.html#:~:text=The%20equipment%20is%20also%20designed,the%20effectiveness%20of%20radar%20systems.
we are missing the big picture. even if the chopper is at 200 feet the difference is only 100 feet btw the two. Thats a bad design to start with, an accident waiting to happen and it did.
we are missing the big picture. even if the chopper is at 200 feet the difference is only 100 feet btw the two. Thats a bad design to start with, an accident waiting to happen and it did. gocaigo8421 发表于 2025-02-02 05:50
gocaigo8421 发表于 2025-02-02 05:50 we are missing the big picture. even if the chopper is at 200 feet the difference is only 100 feet btw the two. Thats a bad design to start with, an accident waiting to happen and it did.
相撞前的30秒内，直升机和AA客机基本上相向而行，直升机不可能看不到AA客机的头灯。 而出现在画面里的第3架飞机，无论位置和方位都不可能对直升机形成干扰。
Federal accident investigators on Saturday said the commercial plane involved in Wednesday’s deadly crash in Washington appears to have tried to pull up a second before it collided with a U.S. Army helicopter. “Sounds of impact were audible about one second later,” National Transportation Safety Board investigator Brice Banning told reporters at a news conference. Banning said the aircraft’s flight data recorder showed that the plane had started to increase its pitch.
The independent agency also said it had been able to verify based on initial data that the impact occurred as the airplane was flying at roughly 325 feet when a Black Hawk helicopter slammed into it.
The agency wouldn’t say what altitude the helicopter was flying at but the air route it was using should have limited it to no higher than 200 feet.
Other preliminary data appear to indicate that air traffic controllers at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport were operating with radar scope data showing that the helicopter was flying at an altitude of 200 feet at the time of impact, Banning said. That radar data has “less fidelity,” he said.
“Our team is looking into that,” he said. When asked what would explain the apparent discrepancy between the two reported altitudes, NTSB board member Todd Inman said: “That’s what our job is — is to figure that out.” The data recorder from the Army helicopter has been retrieved, but investigators are in the process of removing some water that seeped into it, said Inman, who added the agency is “confident” they’ll be able to get data from it. Inman said the helicopter flight was approved to use night vision goggles but could not yet confirm whether the pilots were wearing them. The goggles could have limited their field of view.
撞击前一秒开始拉升，这个说的是AA客机。问题都在直升机，直升机没有做出任何反应，直直的撞上去，有人说第3架飞机干扰，根本不存在干扰。
直升飞机 处于 违规高度，
就这一点就够了，
为什么处于违规高度？ 三个飞行员都没有发现？
塔台是否有发现，有没有检测 直升机 高度的机制，
都是问题
脑洞一下，会不会恐袭，恐怖分子把飞机控制设备弄失灵了？
紧急时刻运输华府高官？ 这些大佬以后没人愿意坐这种飞机吧。看看这女飞行员的资历，还是当白宫社交秘书合适，飞行任务交给她害人啊。
油管上100个人里99个都这么问。 这件事太明显太不可思议，感觉哪里整盅了。
这个真的很诡异，会不会直升机收到什么命令要立即升高？
刚刚在cnn网站上看到报道说对于直升机的高度不同渠道数据有出入：大众看的平台上显示350，但塔台显示的是200，至于为什么出现不一致现在还在调查
会不会有骇客侵入了？
是客机发到tracking平台的信息显示高度300+，推断相撞时直升机也在300+，但空管那儿看直升机是200（不知道指的是雷达探测高度还是飞机自己报的）。tracking平台收到的直升机高度信息显示撞击前几秒黑鹰已经从300降到200。
空管的雷达显示屏数据应该是同时显示探测高度和飞机自己发的数据。
Air Traffic Control Radar Beacon System (ATCRBS)The ATCRBS, sometimes referred to as secondary surveillance radar, consists of three main components: Interrogator. Primary radar relies on a signal being transmitted from the radar antenna site and for this signal to be reflected or “bounced back” from an object (such as an aircraft). This reflected signal is then displayed as a “target” on the controller''''''''s radarscope. In the ATCRBS, the Interrogator, a ground based radar beacon transmitter-receiver, scans in synchronism with the primary radar and transmits discrete radio signals which repetitiously request all transponders, on the mode being used, to reply. The replies received are then mixed with the primary returns and both are displayed on the same radarscope. https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim_html/chap4_section_5.html#:~:text=The%20equipment%20is%20also%20designed,the%20effectiveness%20of%20radar%20systems.
调查清楚事故直接原因是必要的。这样才能正确评估所需容错率。
Exactly！这种设计本来就是invite disaster，环环相扣，以前没出事就是靠有人长眼，肯定有无数次擦肩而过，near miss还自以为牛逼。这一次，每一环都没长眼！就完菜了。中国文化讲夜郎自大，龟兔赛跑，就是从小教育小孩子别这么sb，凡事留余地，对人对己都好。所以中国机场跑道就没这么交叉设计的，更别提还让军机飞来飞去添乱。
+1
可惜了那么多无辜人的生命给这些错误买单
的确根本不应该在民航航线上训练，万一出事了呢。就算是再有经验的飞行员，也不能保证万无一失。一定要的话，就不能在半夜弄几个不载乘客的空飞机来陪着训练吗。
因为 出事以前
一直这么练
大概率是白宫和两院坐黑鹰的紧急撤退路线。
对
Continuity of government 训练，
如果这是 飞行员故意的自杀行为，那这帮政府官员会更 害怕，
政审出问题了
最后一个建议其实是可行的，半夜军方的各种运输机顺便运点花花草草。
但官僚就是不出事没人敢动 ，，，
这条线搞不好从冷战时就一直飞，我们大伙儿不知道而已。
一直没出事的一个原因，可能是当年飞行员素质高，即使空军的预备役。
但现在飞行员短缺是现实问题，能找到的飞行员少，要求自然只能放宽。
另外也不排除电子系统没有更新换代，5G 会干扰过去的一些雷达电子设备。过去的电子环境简单很多。
但这种干扰是长尾概率，毕竟飞机有容错冗余，所以一直没人管，老经验就不怕。
直升机是雷达隐形的吗
如果是笔直往上飞撞上去客机的，这个自杀的概率不是很大。
因为黑鹰标配没有雷达，就算 DIY 装一个，也只能装一个小的下视雷达。
因为头上是螺旋桨怎么装雷达？
华人版大妈们可能把黑鹰和阿帕奇搞混了 ，，， 美国空军黑鹰的定位是买菜的烤肉拉好吧 ，，， 阿帕奇才是飙车的别摸我 ，，， 阿帕奇确实有 720 度全景雷达，在螺旋桨上面的那个鼓包。但阿帕奇死贵 ，，，
这自杀要黑鹰瞄准上方客机腹面撞上去，而不是追尾，500 小时不一定撞的准 ，，， 想当年日本自杀神风突击队，撞那么一大号航母，也经常没撞上 ，，，
会不会当时忽然发现距离客机过近，一紧张，操纵杆拉反了 😓
我觉得一种猜测，是雷达高度表，因为瞬间被电子信号干扰，比如 5G，而报错。
通常雷达高度表和惯导联动，如果被电子信号比如 5G 干扰，跟惯导对不上，会两手一摊说飞行员自己看着办。
因为是低空飞行，飞行员一般选择拉起飞机。毕竟下面是河面，躲不过。上面有民航但也是概率，话说子弹击中子弹也是小概率事件，历史上还没发生过。
但概率论说，常在河边走，小概率也会湿鞋 ，，，
当然只是猜测，具体要看专家们基于数据的分析。