NTSB launches hearings on deadly Washington collision between a helicopter and passenger plane
The National Transportation Safety Board will question witnesses and investigators about how the actions of the Federal Aviation Administration and its air traffic controllers and the Army may have contributed to the nation's deadliest plane crash since November 2001. It's likely too early for the board to identify the cause of the crash.
The American Airlines plane from Wichita, Kansas collided with a Black Hawk helicopter while coming into land at Ronald Reagan National Airport and was the first in a string of crashes and near misses this year that have alarmed officials and the travelling public, despite statistics that still show flying remains the safest form of transportation.
Investigations have already shown the FAA failed to recognize a troubling history of 85 near misses around Reagan airport in the years before the collision, and that the Army's helicopters routinely flew around the nation's capitol with a key piece of locating equipment, known as ADS-B Out, turned off.
Aviation attorney Bob Clifford, who is working to file one of the first lawsuits against the government next month, said he hopes NTSB will look beyond the immediate factors that caused this crash to highlight the bigger ongoing concerns in the crowded Washington airspace.
'In this particular instance, there's a much broader picture. And that is the known problems that were being ignored about an unsafe environment for the commercial aircraft to be navigating with the military aviation helicopters in the area,' Clifford said.
Even though the final NTSB report won't be released until sometime next year, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz isn't waiting to propose changes. He introduced legislation Tuesday that would require all aircraft operators to use both forms of ADS-B, or Automatic Dependent Surveillance Broadcast, the technology to broadcast aircraft location data to other planes and air traffic controllers. Most aircraft today are equipped with ADS-B Out equipment but the airlines would have to add the more comprehensive ADS-B In technology to their planes.
'There cannot be a double standard in aviation safety,' Cruz said. 'We should not tolerate special exceptions for military training flights, operating in congested air space.'
The legislation would revoke an exemption on ADS-B transmission requests for Department of Defense aircrafts. It also would require the FAA to evaluate helicopter routes near airports and require the Army Inspector General to review the Army's aviation safety practices.
NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy said her agency has been recommending that move for decades after several other crashes.
'In 2008, we sent a letter to FAA stating the board believes that the equipage of aircraft with ADS-B In capability will provide — and I want to stress this — an immediate and substantial contribution to safety, especially during operations in and around airports,' she said.
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said that while he'd like to discuss 'a few tweaks,' the legislation is 'the right approach.' He also suggested that the previous administration 'was asleep at the wheel' amid dozens of near-misses in the airspace around Washington's airspace.
'In the past, people became complacent — leaders became complacent' Duffy said.
Homendy said the hearings over the next few days will be a 'fact-finding proceeding.' In addition, the NTSB will also post thousands of pages of evidence from the crash investigation online Wednesday morning.
FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford said that he expects 'we're going to have some very uncomfortable conversations over the next two and a half days' but that 'they need to be had in the clear light of day – and simply put the best interest of the traveling public ahead of any of our personal interests, perhaps.'
The hearings in Washington will involve NTSB board members, investigators and witnesses for organizations involved in the crash. Panels will focus on military helicopter routes in the Washington area, collision avoidance technology and training for air traffic controllers at Ronald Reagan National Airport, among other subjects.
Federal officials have also raised concerns over the nation's outdated. and understaffed air traffic control system. During January's mid-air crash above Washington, one controller was handing both commercial airline and helicopter traffic at the busy airport.
Duffy has announced a multi-billion-dollar plan to overhaul the system controllers use that relies on old technology like floppy disks.
___
Associated Press writers Leah Askarinam, Ben Finley and Rio Yamat contributed to this story.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Sudan's army denies bombing convoy taking aid to famine-hit area
Sudan's army has denied bombing a World Food Programme (WFP) convoy taking aid to a famine-hit area in the country's Darfur region. The paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) had blamed the army for Wednesday's air strike in the town of Mellit, which is under RSF control. A UN agency said a drone hit the convoy, and three lorries in the 16-vehicle convoy caught fire and were destroyed. All staff travelling in the convoy were safe, it added. Sudan plunged into a civil war in April 2023 after a vicious power struggle erupted between the army and the RSF, creating one of the world's worst humanitarian crisis. The RSF does not have an air force, but both sides use drones. The attack is the latest in a string of assaults on humanitarian operations in Sudan. "Humanitarian staff and assets must never be a target," the WFP said, urging the warring parties to respect international humanitarian law. Aid worker returns to base where he hid from bullets Sudan war: A simple guide to what is happening The convoy was headed towards a village near Mellit, a "famine-affected area" some 90km (56 miles) north-west of el-Fasher, the WFP said. The city, the army's last foothold in the Darfur region, has been besieged by the RSF for more than a year. It is one of the main areas of conflict in the civil war, and the RSF has intensified its battle for control of el-Fasher in recent weeks. Both sides have previously been accused of using starvation as a weapon of war by obstructing the delivery of aid and looting food. Five aid workers were killed in a similar attack in el-Fasher in June. Tens of thousands of people have died, and 12 million have been forced from their homes because of the conflict. More than 4.5 million refugees, mostly women and children, have fled to neighbouring countries. More BBC stories on the war in Sudan: 'Tortured and terrified' - BBC witnesses the battle for Khartoum 'Our children are dying': Rare footage shows plight of civilians in besieged Sudan city Oil-rich Sudanese region becomes new focus of war between army and rival forces The two generals at the heart of the conflict Go to for more news from the African continent. Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica BBC Africa podcasts Africa Daily Focus on Africa
The Hill
5 hours ago
- The Hill
It's time Trump told Putin, ‘Nyet!'
Although it was encouraging on Monday to see President Trump meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky shoulder-to-shoulder, alongside key NATO and European Union leaders in the Oval Office, Russian President Vladimir Putin preemptively delivered an answer to them by launching another intentional attack against Ukrainian civilians. This time it was in Kharkiv. Seven people were killed including a 15-year-old boy and a one-year-old baby girl. Putin's words are fleeting. His actions and that of his regime are what counts. And if we listen to him, he is making it clear that he still intends to get all of Ukraine, one way or the other — either at the negotiating table or on the battlefield. Team Trump must recognize that Putin is giving them the equivalent of the middle finger. Peace remains elusive in Ukraine. Putin continues to demand total possession of the Russian-occupied territories of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson while retaining Crimea. Zelensky and his European allies were quick to respond with a hard pass. Team Trump's threats of harsh sanctions came and went after his Alaska Summit with Putin failed to produce a ceasefire agreement. Putin laughed off the B-2 bomber flyover and proceeded to plant his flag in Anchorage. The former KGB foreign intelligence officer masterfully used the summit to bank propaganda wins at home, despite the White House's best spin efforts. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov set the tone as he arrived in Alaska by wearing a gray sweatshirt emblazoned with 'CCCP' — the Russian acronym for the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Putin's assault on the post-World War II order continued the following day when he arrived in the U.S. with an International Criminal Court arrest warrant on his head for war crimes in Ukraine. Yet instead of silver handcuffs, he was greeted with a red-carpet rollout on the tarmac, a limousine ride with Trump and was allowed to place flowers at the headstones of fallen Soviet World War II pilots at Fort Richardson National Cemetery. Putin appeared to convince Trump — again — that it is Zelensky who does not want peace, because he won't accept Moscow's conditions for capitulation. Meanwhile, Putin's army continues to bomb Ukrainian cities with ballistic missiles and drones and his ground forces continue their slow grind of attrition warfare. Russia keeps attacking — amassing over 1,072,700 casualties in the process. Ukraine keeps defending, and Trump's frustrations mount. Unlike with the other six peace deals and ceasefires Trump has negotiated, neither Russia nor Ukraine are prepared to concede anything. Trump is no closer to securing economic deals with Russia; his recourse has been to blame the victim, turning the screws on Zelensky. 'President Zelensky of Ukraine can end the war with Russia almost immediately, if he wants to, or he can continue to fight,' Trump recently posted. 'Remember how it started. No getting back Obama given Crimea (12 years ago, without a shot being fired!), and NO GOING INTO NATO BY UKRAINE.' Monday's round two summit with Zelensky and the European leaders was by all accounts successful. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron and Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni joined Zelensky and the President around the Resolute Desk, which presented a united front to Putin and 'yielded material outcomes on security guarantees.' Yet we have seen this movie before. The promise of a one-on-one meeting that never materializes. The man known as Grandpa in his bunker in Russia ultimately walks back any promise of direct interaction with his nemesis, Zelensky. Putin's Tuesday invitation to Zelensky to meet him in Moscow was disingenuous, and Ukraine promptly rejected it. Nonetheless, as Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated Sunday on ABC News, 'You're not going to end a war between Russia and Ukraine without dealing with Putin.' That is true, but the problem is, no one will say 'No' to Putin. The White House has become a Burger King drive-thru for Putin, where the Russian dictator seems to believe he can 'have it his way.' For Putin, peace requires Ukraine to withdraw from the Donbas — including abandoning its invaluable Fortress Belt that has thwarted Russian ground advances since the war began. If it does so, the White House believes Putin would accept a NATO-like Article Five U.S. security guarantees (perhaps watered-down) for Ukraine. Yet such a peace would be fleeting. Trump's Special Envoy Steven Witkoff is naively overvaluing Putin's offer to enshrine 'legislative language [in Russia's constitution] that they would attest to not attempting to take any more land from Ukraine after a peace deal [and] where they would attest to not violate any European borders.' Ukraine has already seen this one before. In the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, Russia, the U.K. and the U.S. made security guarantees to Ukraine in exchange for it signing the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The signatories agreed to 'respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.' Furthermore, they 'reaffirm[ed] their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons [would] ever be used against Ukraine.' The Budapest guarantee failed on Feb. 24, 2022, when Putin invaded Ukraine. Needless to say, Ukraine is once bitten, twice shy. By 'security guarantee,' they require a legally binding treaty that specifies ironclad commitments. As NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte told Fox News, 'All the details have to be hammered out.' Trump has ruled out sending U.S. troops to Ukraine. The Kremlin rejects the presence of NATO forces on the ground. NATO will not swim in the deep end without the presence of a U.S. lifeguard. And although Trump has suggested he will consider providing U.S. pilots and warplanes as part of the security guarantees, authorizing them to directly engage Russian aircraft — unless in self-defense — is unlikely. As optimistic as many want to be about the potential for a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia, nothing has changed. Even the most junior of intelligence analysts can see that the Kremlin is just angling for time. It needs time to reset, to gain tactical and strategic advantages, and set the conditions for a final push into Ukraine. No security guarantee that Russia agrees on will stop its next invasion. Putin cannot and will not accept an independent Ukraine. The war stops when Putin stops attacking. Getting Putin to that point is the solution. His cost calculus remains undetermined, but it is not measured in human lives. It is time Trump told Putin 'Nyet!'
10 hours ago
A soldier in New Zealand is sentenced to two years in military prison for attempted espionage
WELLINGTON, New Zealand -- A New Zealand soldier, who admitted trying to spy for a foreign power, was sentenced to two years in military prison followed by discharge from the army. The sentencing by a judge and a panel of three senior military officers Wednesday came two days after the man pleaded guilty to three charges, including attempted espionage. It was the first conviction for spying in New Zealand's history. The soldier's name was suppressed, as was the name of the country he sought to pass secrets to. Military court documents said the man believed he was engaged with a foreign agent in 2019 when he tried to communicate military information, including base telephone directories and maps, assessments of security weaknesses, his own identity card and log-in details for a military network. The wording of the charge said his actions were 'likely to prejudice the security or defense of New Zealand.' The soldier wasn't speaking to a foreign agent, but rather an undercover New Zealand police officer collecting intelligence on alleged right-wing extremist groups, documents supplied by the military court showed. Judge Kevin Riordan said the espionage attempts were unsophisticated, unlikely to cause harm and naive, but his actions were still serious. 'There is no such thing as a non-serious act of espionage," Riordan said, according to Radio New Zealand. "There is no trivial act of espionage.' The soldier came to the attention of law enforcement as part of an operation that was established after a March 2019 terrorist attack on two mosques in the city of Christchurch, when an Australian white supremacist opened fire on Muslim worshipers, killing 51. Officers spoke to the man twice about his involvement in a group, court documents showed, and after the government became aware he had expressed a desire to defect he was contacted by the undercover officer. When the soldier's hard drive was searched, investigators found a copy of Christchurch gunman Brenton Tarrant's livestreamed video of his massacre and a manifesto document he published online before the killings. Possession of either without permission is a criminal offense in New Zealand and the soldier, who pleaded guilty to that charge as well, joins several others convicted in New Zealand of having or sharing banned material. In a statement read to the court by his lawyer, the man said the two nationalist groups with which he was involved were 'no more than groups of friends with similar points of view to my own,' according to RNZ. The lawyer, Steve Winter, added that his client denied supporting the Christchurch shooter's ideology. The soldier, who was based at Linton Military Camp near the city of Palmerston North, also pleaded guilty to accessing a military computer system for dishonest purposes. The amended suite of three charges replaced 17 counts levelled against him earlier in the proceedings. New Zealand's Army Chief Maj. Gen. Rose King said there was no place for people like the soldier in the country's military. 'The actions of this individual were deplorable,' she said in a statement. 'They were incredibly poorly judged and brought risk to all of those he served alongside, as well as the wider New Zealand public.' The three charges carried maximum prison terms varying from seven to 10 years in New Zealand. He had been due to stand trial by court-martial before he admitted the offenses. His was the first charge in a New Zealand military court for espionage or attempted spying. The last time such a case reached the civilian courts was in 1975, when a public servant was acquitted on charges alleging he had passed information to Russian agents.
