As I sit down to write this, I am overwhelmed with sadness for the lives lost in this tragic crash—an accident that should never have happened. Even now, as families are still being notified, speculation about the cause and potential fixes is already rampant. But watching cable news and speaking with confidence does not make someone qualified to determine the cause of such a complex failure in our aviation system. Unfortunately it doesn’t stop them from trying.
At this moment, we know very few facts. Some are clear, while others may be misinterpretations due to a lack of understanding. For example, I’ve already heard speculation that the Army pilots were on the wrong frequency because they weren’t answering Reagan Tower. Fact: They weren’t responding on VHF—they were on UHF, the primary communication channel for most military aircraft.
There’s another critical factor to consider: how the human eye perceives movement. Think about a deer or rabbit that freezes when it senses a predator—it becomes much harder to spot. The same principle applies in aviation. When two aircraft are on a collision course, they remain stationary relative to each other on the pilot’s windscreen. While they grow larger as they approach, they don’t appear to move, making them far harder to detect. In contrast, an aircraft that will just miss you moves across your field of vision, which makes it more noticeable.
Now, imagine this happening at night. A dark aircraft may only be visible by its lights, and a stationary light in the sky can easily blend into city lights below. The human brain, conditioned to look for moving objects in flight, might not register it as an immediate threat. Because, after all, airplanes don’t just sit still in the sky…
Did the Army pilots see the CRJ? We may never know. They told ATC they had it in sight, which shifts responsibility for separation away from ATC onto them. But did they mistake another aircraft for the CRJ? Did they misjudge closure speed? Were they wearing Night Vision Goggles (NVGs), making depth perception even harder? A friend of mine who flew attack helicopters with NVGs told me that using them in a city wouldn’t make sense—but news reports claim they were. And that brings me back to my original point: there’s too much speculation right now, too much misinformation, too many contradictions.
So let’s do two simple things:
1. If you believe in God, take a moment to pray: Ask for mercy for the victims, their families, and gratitude for the time they had together.
2. Let the experts investigate.
The NTSB is the world’s premier aviation accident investigation board. They have an unparalleled ability to reconstruct incidents down to the smallest detail. I once worked on a crash investigation where a single feather embedded in the pilot’s flight suit was sent to the Smithsonian’s “Bird Lady,” who identified the species and even the gender of the bird that shattered the windshield. That’s the level of detail they work with. They will determine exactly what happened here—without needing uninformed opinions from the court of public opinion.
Yet, in the rush of the news cycle, self-anointed “experts” are already spouting nonsense. I’ve heard absurd claims that ATC is “broken” and that AI could install imaginary “stop signs in the sky” for helicopters. (Uh hint “Captain Expert” helicopters can’t just stop in place.) This ass-clown then mispronounced Fort Belvoir as “Fort Bóliva.” I had to stop listening.
The real tragedy is that many will only hear these initial, misguided takes—never the actual facts that emerge from the investigation. That’s unfair to those involved.
We will soon know what went wrong. More importantly, we will learn from it. Aviation regulations are, as they say, often written in blood—and while we cannot undo this loss, we can ensure it leads to meaningful safety improvements. It is an incredibly costly way to learn, and I wish it were never necessary. But that is the path forward. Let’s allow the facts to emerge before rushing to judgment.
That’s just my opinion… I could be wrong.
RePete – out.