On Aviation
Science & Tech • Travel • Business
Wow, Aviation! Our Retirements Could Truly Be at Risk!
Are you aware that your retirement might be at risk? What is going on with Social Security? Should we not even be concerned about this because many of us have 401(k)s? But wait! What about Medicaid? What does the future look like for these programs?
September 14, 2023
post photo preview

Months ago in this newsletter, we touched on the topic of retirement for the overall US workforce and in particular that of the aviation industry. We were at the time concerned that there might be a retirement issue, as to whether or not our retirement is at risk. In an article regarding social security, we stated that:

Many, however, have wondered about the viability of the program. Younger workers are concerned that the program will not be around for them to be able to get the money they paid in. While those workers that are about to or have already retired are concerned that the value of that payout is being eroded by inflation. That being said, there is somewhat of a feud between older and younger workers, where younger workers believe that they are paying into a system that might not be there for them when they retire yet they have to keep paying for those who have already retired.

Furthermore, understanding that many of us in the aviation space have other ways of taking care of our retirement such as 401(k)s and other retirement plans such as annuities, we also stated this about what the future might look like for those plans:

While many of us who operate in the aviation industry have 401(k) plans and may not think twice about Social Security insurance, it is worth noting that 401(k)s are only as good as the strength of the overall economy. This is because funds that are placed in 401(k)s are reinvested into the economy, when the economy is doing great 401(k) portfolios look great. However, when the economy is doing poorly (which we believe is going to be happening over this decade) then 401(k) portfolios take a big hit. We saw some of this during the great recession of c. 2008.

Now, here is a question. What about Medicaid? Do the same challenges faced by Social Security also face Medicaid? While the challenges are slightly different, the underlying problem is the same. That is the problem of how to fund these programs well into the future. 

On Aviation™ Note: One might believe that these entitlement programs are properly funded because there’s some money set aside somewhere from our tax dollars to fund this program. Unfortunately, this is not the case as it stands today. Most of the money that has been collected for these programs or either invested in the US treasury or has been spent on other programs. Therefore, by some account, it would seem as if the programs are being funded each year by the amount of money being collected each year. Therein lies the major problem.

In this week’s On Aviation™ full article, we share some Insights into the challenges faced by Social Security and Medicaid. Highlighting some of the hardships that are to be encountered moving forward, while proposing some solutions to the current problem.

For related readings, see also: ‘Aviation: Jobs Jobs Jobs!’, ‘Aviation: Making Ends Meet’, ‘Why is it More Expensive to Give Thanks?’, ‘Lowering Real Wages | Increasing Debt’, ‘Labor: Should I Participate?’, ‘Jobs "Boom" : Is it really?’, ‘Aviation: Can We Be Frank About The Jobs Market?’, ‘Aviation: Are Our Retirements At Risk?’, ‘2023: The Year of Job Losses?’, ‘Inflation Slows, Great News for Income Earners? Well…’, ‘Massive Increase In The Cost of Living!’, and ‘Don't Be Fooled By The Numbers!


America’s federally sanctioned entitlement programs, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security, each face bankruptcy in the next few years. Medicare and Medicaid were created in 1965 as part of President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society legislation. Social Security was created in 1935 to provide retirement income for Americans who reached the age of sixty-five. These three entitlement programs consume about fifty cents of every federal budget dollar, or $2.7 trillion in fiscal year 2023.

Medicare is a federal health-insurance and healthcare program available for enrollment when a person reachesthe age of sixty-five. An American who has worked for a minimum of ten years is eligible for enrollment. Employees and employers each pay a minimum Medicare tax of 1.45 percent based on the employees’ wages. Once enrolled in the program, one pays a monthly insurance premium that changes every year. Sixty-five million people are enrolled as of 2022. There is a penalty for late enrollment. The amount of people on Medicare is roughly equal to the estimated state populations of Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, and Illinois combined.

Medicare made net benefit payments of $689 billion in 2021. It comprised 20 percent of national healthcare spending and 12 percent of the federal budget in 2020. Medicare covers about 80 percent of medical costs, but dental and eye procedures are not covered.

Medicaid is a joint federal and state program that, together with the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), provides health coverage to over 72.5 million Americans, including children, pregnant women, parents, seniors, and individuals with disabilities. Medicaid is the single largest source of health coverage in the United States. Most participants are under the age of sixty-five. The amount of people on Medicaid is roughly equal to the estimated state populations of California and Texas combined.

For a state to participate in Medicaid, federal law requires that state to cover certain groups of individuals. Qualifying low-income families children and pregnant women, and individuals receiving Supplemental Security Income (SSI) are examples of mandatory eligibility groups. The Affordable Care Act of March 2010 (Obamacare) created the opportunity for states to expand Medicaid to cover nearly all low-income Americans under age sixty-five. Roughly twelve million people signed up after 2010.

Medicaid’s costs are swamping state budgets, climbing from 9 percent in 1989 to 20 percent today. A majority of its funding is from every American taxpayer, and a minority of funding is from each participating state’s taxpayer. Medicaid payments were $117 billion in 2000 and $589 billion in 2023. They are projected to be $879 billion in 2033.

Social Security is one of the largest government programs in the world as of 2023, paying out hundreds of billions of dollars each year. In 2021, 179 million people paid taxes into Social Security. The current tax rate for Social Security is 6.2 percent for the employer and employee each, or 12.4 percent total from the employee’s wages.

Sixty-seven million Americans will receive Social Security in 2023. The estimated combined populations of the US states of Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina, Michigan, New Jersey, and Virginia will be equivalent to the amount of Americans on Social Security as of 2023. Social Security provides retirement benefits and disability income to qualified people and their spouses, children, and survivors. Workers must be at least sixty-two years old and have paid taxes into Social Security over a minimum of ten years to qualify for its benefits.

The adult lifespan was about fifty-eight years in 1930 and seventy-nine years in 2020. The number of workers payingpayroll taxes was about five for every beneficiary in 1960 compared to about 2.7 for every beneficiary in 2023. America’s population is aging and its families are having fewer children. This poses a problem for Social Security funding.

Some Americans are receiving Medicare and Social Security benefits at the same time: as we say in America, they are double-dipping.

Bankruptcy Reality

A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report from 2015 revealed that $60 billion of Medicare’s budget was lost in 2014 to waste. The GAO found 23,400 fake or bad addresses on Medicare’s list of providers.

Medicare has repeatedly suffered vast cost overruns, has been reformed countless times, and has imposed a seemingly endless series of price controls on doctors and hospitals. Price controls reduce competition from the free market, leading to less efficiency and higher prices.

The Medicare board of trustees projected that the reserves of the Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund, which finances Medicare Part A, will be depleted in 2031. The program’s income will be able to cover 89 percent of scheduled benefits after that. How will hospitals and physicians handle an 11 percent shortfall in Medicare reimbursement payments?

Public literature on the future bankruptcy of the Medicaid program is near nil, so predicting a date for bankruptcy is not possible. However, the Social Security board of trustees in its 2023 report forecasts reserves in the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund will be depleted in 2033. Ongoing tax revenue will be enough to pay 77 percent of scheduled benefits after that point. Beneficiaries in that year will see their monthly payment reduced by 23 percent. Many American retirees today rely solely on Social Security to pay groceries, home insurance premiums, and utilities. Could you survive a 23 percent reduction in your income year over year?

Possible Solutions

America entitlement programs will not become bankrupt overnight but over many decades. Reforms will not solve this problem quickly, but they would be steps toward a more sustainable situation. Some possible reforms to Medicare and Social Security are to allow taxpayers under the age of forty-five to renounce future benefits with no federal tax impact and to live on their 401(k), Roth IRA, or other income, considering all their past tax payments lost. Another option is to allow such people renounce their benefits and to redirect their future tax payments to separate 401(k)-type retiree healthcare and retirement accounts under their oversight. Current and future Medicare and Social Security beneficiaries could also opt to receive reduced benefits based on financial realities before or after the programs’ bankruptcies.

Ryan McMaken, executive editor at the Mises Institute, penned a Mises Wire article in January 2023 titled “Raise the Social Security Age to (at Least) 75,” posing possible reforms. George Reisman penned a lengthy Mises Wirearticle in April 2011 titled “How to Eliminate Social Security and Medicare” with more detailed solutions.

Medicaid reforms that address fraud are being pursued by many states and the federal government. Some methods of Medicaid fraud are found on the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services’ fraud checklist. The current list of people subject to federal enforcement actions can be found on the Office of Inspector General’s website. The enforcement actions shown have yielded fines tied to a fraud conviction.

A one-size-fits-all reform is not possible. Some say to abolish each program right now and let the free market provide guidance out of the chaos. But the logistics of caring for an aging and ailing family member are not easy even when the family is prepared financially, physically, and spiritually. The reality of federal entitlement reform is before us, and the everyday people will bear the brunt of these entitlement programs’ bankruptcies.

_________________

Author: 

Stephen Anderson is a graduate of The University of Texas at Austin and lives in Texas.

_____________________

This article was published in the Mises Wire on August 28, 2023, with the title “America's Big Three Entitlement Bankruptcies Are Inevitable”. The views expressed are the author’s, and do not constitute an endorsement by or necessarily represent the views of On Aviation™ or its affiliates.


Thank you for reading this week's On Aviation™ full article. Do you believe that there is a real problem with Social Security and Medicaid, or there is nothing to be concerned about at this time? Please share your thoughts in the comments below. Remember to check out our On Aviation™ Podcast and continue the conversation on our Twitter and Instagram.

Orlando - On Aviation™

community logo
Join the On Aviation Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
0
What else you may like…
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Deflation and the Aviation Industry

In this episode of the On Aviation™ Podcast, Daniel and Orlando had another Fireside chat. This time focusing on the concept of deflation and what this means for the aviation industry, and the overall economy in general. Ever wonder what is the definition of inflation, deflation, or disinflation? Ever consider what these conditions mean for businesses and individuals? Ever wonder why we end up in these conditions in the first place? In this episode, we discuss all of the above and more.

Deflation and the Aviation Industry
Aviation Fireside Chat

In this episode of the On Aviation™ Podcast, Daniel and Orlando had a Fireside chat about a wide variety of topics within aviation. Touched on disparate topics such as runway incursions, the FAA investing $100M to curb runway incursions, the pilot-in-command being the ultimate authority for the safety of a flight, fractional aircraft ownership and the economy, the aviation industry, and much more.

Related Links:

Pilots Abort Landings At A Few Hundred Feet To Avoid Runway Disaster (SFO and Tenerife mentioned): https://jalopnik.com/pilots-abort-landings-at-a-few-hundred-feet-to-avoid-ru-1850474556

The FAA Investing $100M in a Bid to Curb Runway Incursions: https://www.flyingmag.com/faa-investing-100m-in-bid-to-curb-runway-incursions/

14 CFR § 91.3 Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F/part-91/subpart-A/section-91.3

Fractional Ownership: ...

Aviation Fireside Chat
What’s New In Aviation Tech?

In this week’s On Aviation™ Podcast, we discuss what’s new in aviation technology. We discussed Boeing launching a new data tool for net-zero emissions targeting, the progress of electric vertical takeoff and landing vehicles (EVTOL), 5G technology and its effects on airlines, what some companies like Garmin are doing about it, and much more.

What’s New In Aviation Tech?
Sustainable Aviation Fuels: An Update

If you were like us, over the past few months you have not heard as much about sustainable aviation fuels (SAF) as we heard about them in 2021 and 2022. However, from what we’re seeing, the aviation industry is still very much interested in developing SAFs. What we have found is that the information about sustainable aviation fuel is not being picked up as frequently as it used to two years ago by the mainstream.

For those who were wondering what SAFs are exactly. Please see our article ‘Sustainable Aviation Fuels (SAFs): Changing the aviation industry, and its economics’, Where we discuss in detail what SAFs are, some of the benefits, some of the challenges, and speculate on the future of SAFs.

In another article, 'Aviation and Renewable Energy' we share another point of view on sustainable energy as opposed to traditional fossil fuels.

Whatever your point of you on sustainable aviation fuel as opposed to traditional fossil fuels, it is clear that technological advancement can ...

2023: The Year of Job Losses?

We are aware that our readers are well informed and have been keeping up to date with what’s been going on in the economy, the aviation industry, and in particular as it relates to jobs. Here’s an important question: Will 2023 be the year of job losses?

The above question is important for two reasons. First, the Federal Reserve believes that a hot job market (a job market where unemployment is low) helps to cause high inflation. - full disclosure, we disagree with this. Therefore, the Federal Reserve will be doing what it takes to increase unemployment which it believes will reduce inflation. That means many more people will be out of work. Second, there were a lot of malinvestments - investments in businesses and ventures that would not have occurred under normal market conditions - due to the Federal Reserve keeping interest rates low. As interest rates rise companies and investors will find it prudent to reduce those prior investments and re-calculate where they put money. This means ...

Aviation Economic Impact

Many times in this newsletter series we have discussed the fragility of the aviation industry, not just here in the United States, but also across the world. Aviation and aerospace is an industry that is highly regulated. In fact, the United States has the least regulated aerospace industry in the world relative to other countries. Yet, it is still very much regulated.

Notwithstanding all these regulations, the industry is still very fragile to economic shocks, as a result, Lawmakers and Regulators tend to anticipate challenges to the industry globally and preempt any foreseen challenges with either fresh regulations or economic support.

Many would argue that a lot of the challenges and fragility within the aviation and aerospace industry is the result of the massive amount of regulations. Yet, others argue that it is the lack of more regulations that are the cause of its fragility. Whatever your thoughts on the matter are, it is clear that the aviation industry is much more efficient and ...

post photo preview
‘It’s DEI!’: ‘Nonsense, It’s DOGE!’
Is it possible that the recent Delta CRJ-900 accident at Toronto Pearson International Airport had nothing to do with either DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) or DOGE (Department of Government Efficiency)?

In today's polarized climate, it has become almost instinctive to attribute aviation accidents to either DEI-driven hiring practices or efforts to improve government inefficiencies, depending on which side of the political spectrum you lean toward. However, while these debates are often heated, they may not always be grounded in fact. The reality is that aviation is an incredibly complex system, involving numerous factors that contribute to incidents and accidents.

While it is understandable that emotions are high and that political narratives often shape public perception, it is essential to base our conclusions on factual, verifiable information. In the case of the Delta Connection CRJ-900 operated by Endeavor Air, which crashed upon landing at Toronto Pearson International Airport, preliminary evidence suggests that the cause of this accident had little to do with DEI or DOGE.

Thus, before rushing to judgment, let’s examine what actually happened, using open-source information and expert analysis, to piece together a probable cause. Ultimately, the Transportation Safety Board of Canada (TSB) will release its official findings, but we can already draw important insights based on what is currently known.

Get Involved: Do you believe structural fatigue played a role in this crash? Could crosswind mismanagement have been a factor? Please share your thoughts in the comments below.

On Aviation™ Note: Once again, we must underscore the need for peer-reviewed research to determine whether DEI initiatives have impacted aviation safety trends. What we do know is that becoming an airline pilot remains one of the most rigorously regulated professions in the world, with stringent training and qualification requirements reviewed every six months. Additionally, as financial pressures mount on airlines, maintenance concerns have become an increasingly relevant factor in aviation safety investigations. For this accident, investigators will be scrutinizing maintenance records to determine why the right wing detached so easily upon impact.

With that in mind, let’s examine the known facts surrounding this incident.


What Happened?

On February 17, 2025, a Delta Connection CRJ-900 operated by Endeavor Air suffered a hard landing at Toronto Pearson International Airport (YYZ). The aircraft was carrying 80 passengers and crew, and while there were no fatalities, 18 individuals sustained injuries.

Key Facts About the Incident

  • The aircraft was on final approach to Runway 23 at 2:12 PM local time.
  • Winds at the time of landing were reported as 270° at 23 knots, gusting to 33 knots, creating a right-quartering crosswind.
  • The aircraft landed hard, causing the right wing to detach, flipping the aircraft onto its roof.
  • The crash resulted in a fire, but prompt emergency response ensured all passengers were evacuated safely.
  • There was blowing snow reported at the time of landing, but it was less than 1/8 of an inch.

One of the most critical questions investigators are asking is: Did the aircraft impact the runway with such force that it snapped the wing, or was there an existing structural weakness?

Analysis of the Approach and Landing

From the available ADS-B flight data, we can reconstruct the aircraft’s final moments before impact.

Was the Approach Stabilized?

A stabilized approach is a critical factor in safe landings. If an approach is unstable—meaning high descent rates, improper speeds, or last-second corrections—it increases the risk of a hard landing.

Examining preliminary flight data, the descent rate in the final moments was:

  • 576 feet per minute at 1,725 feet altitude.
  • 928 feet per minute at 110 knots (ground speed).
  • 672 feet per minute just before touchdown.

A descent rate of 1,000 feet per minute or higher at low altitudes is generally considered unstable, but this data suggests a mostly stabilized approach.

However, the final data point indicates a sudden increase in descent rate. This "sinker" effect—a rapid descent right before landing—may have led to an excessive impact force on touchdown.

The Role of Crosswind Conditions

Crosswind landings require precise handling. In strong gusting winds, pilots must: Keep the upwind wing (right wing, in this case) slightly lower to prevent drift;  Use opposite rudder to keep the aircraft aligned with the runway; Manage power carefully to avoid a sudden drop in descent rate.

If power was reduced too early, or if gusts shifted suddenly, the aircraft could have suffered a momentary loss of lift, resulting in a sudden, hard impact—a possible contributing factor.

Structural Integrity: Was the Wing Already Compromised?

A major concern in this crash is how easily the right wing detached upon impact. Investigators will be reviewing: Past maintenance records of the aircraft; Structural fatigue or previous damage to the wing; Material failure under stress conditions.

In a similar incident in Scottsdale, Arizona, a Learjet suffered a landing gear collapse, and investigators later found a pre-existing maintenance issue that contributed to the failure.

Was something similar at play here?

The Runway Condition Factor

Another area of focus is the runway condition at the time of landing. The Runway Condition Report (RCR) was rated 5-5-5, meaning the runway was mostly clear with some light frost or snow. However, blowing snow across the surface can create visual illusions, potentially making it difficult for pilots to judge height and distance before landing.

This visual disorientation, combined with gusting winds, may have led to a misjudged flare (the moment before touchdown), increasing the impact force.

Conclusion

Based on available data, the possible contributing factors to this accident are: A sudden sinker effect in the final seconds before landing; Gusty crosswinds affecting the flare and touchdown; Possible pre-existing structural weaknesses in the right wing; Visual disorientation caused by blowing snow.

There is no evidence at this time to suggest that DEI hiring practices or DOGE inefficiencies efforts played a role in this accident. Instead, standard aviation safety factors—such as weather, aircraft integrity, and pilot inputs—appear to be the primary contributors.

On Aviation™ Note: While the public debate around DEI and government efficiency in aviation continues, we must remain grounded in factual analysis rather than political narratives. The NTSB’s final report will provide a definitive cause, but based on preliminary data, this crash appears to be a classic case of environmental challenges, pilot technique, and aircraft integrity.


Thank you for reading this week's On Aviation™ full article. Do you believe structural fatigue played a role in this crash? Could crosswind mismanagement have been a factor? Please share your thoughts in the comments below. Remember to check out our On Aviation™ Podcast and continue the conversation on our Twitter and Instagram.

Orlando Spencer - On Aviation™


References

Read full Article
post photo preview
Potomac Collision: The Real Cause?
As new details emerge regarding the Potomac River mid-air collision, we can now establish several key facts that point toward the real cause of this tragic accident.

As new details emerge regarding the Potomac River mid-air collision, we can now establish several key facts that point toward the real cause of this tragic accident. While the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) will ultimately determine the official cause, open-source information and independent investigators have provided compelling evidence that allows us to piece together the probable cause before the NTSB's final report.

Additionally, it is now believed that there was not just a single controller in the tower that night—multiple controllers, including supervisors and supporting personnel, were present. However, not all were on the radio, which is a standard practice in air traffic control operations.

Key Takeaways:

  • ATC initiated "visual separation," reducing safety margins to near zero.
  • The controller ignored multiple warning signs that a collision was imminent.
  • The helicopter misidentified the CRJ and failed to pass behind it as directed.
  • The crash highlights the dangers of transferring separation responsibility in busy airspace.

Get Involved: Do you believe ATC is primarily at fault, or does the helicopter crew bear equal responsibility? Could systemic FAA policies be a factor in this tragedy? Please share your thoughts in the comments below.

With this context in mind, let’s take a deeper look into what may have truly caused this disaster.


Was This a Clear Case of ATC Error?

A new analysis by aviation investigator Dan Gryder presents a strong case that this mid-air collision was the result of an Air Traffic Control (ATC) error. Gryder argues that the controller facilitated an unsafe scenario by using a specific ATC provision known as "Visual Separation."

The ATC’s Responsibility: Preventing Collisions

According to the FAA’s ATC manual (7110.65AA), the primary purpose of the Air Traffic Control system is to prevent collisions and ensure separation between aircraft. This separation can be maintained in three ways:

  1. Vertical Separation – Keeping aircraft at least 1,000 feet apart.
  2. Lateral Separation – Ensuring aircraft remain at least 3 to 5 miles apart.
  3. Visual Separation – A special clearance where one aircraft takes responsibility for avoiding another, reducing separation standards to near zero.

ATC must ensure that at least one of these separation standards is always maintained. However, in the case of the Potomac collision, all three failed.

The Critical ATC Communication Breakdown

The "Visual Separation" Loophole

Before the crash, the DCA Tower controller instructed the National Guard helicopter (Pat 25) to confirm it had the regional jet (CRJ-700) in sight and to request visual separation—a critical phrase in ATC terminology.

  • The helicopter responded: "Request visual separation."
  • The controller approved: "Visual separation approved."

This ATC clearance shifted responsibility from the controller to the helicopter crew. In other words, the controller was no longer responsible for ensuring safe separation—it was entirely up to the helicopter pilot.

This move is technically legal, but as this tragedy demonstrates, it is not always safe.

The Fatal Mistake: The Helicopter’s Misjudgment

Once the controller handed off separation responsibility, the helicopter pilot failed to maintain safe clearance.

Several critical errors likely played a role:

  • Misjudged the CRJ's location: The helicopter crew may have mistaken another aircraft for the CRJ, leading them to track the wrong plane.
  • Limited visibility at night: City lights can make aircraft difficult to see.
  • NVG (Night Vision Goggle) Limitations: The helicopter crew was reportedly using NVGs, which reduce peripheral vision and depth perception.

Could ATC Have Prevented the Crash?

Despite transferring responsibility to the helicopter, the controller still had multiple warnings before impact:

  • Visual alarms in the tower indicated the two aircraft were converging.
  • Audible collision alerts sounded in the ATC tower.
  • The controller had a clear visual of the aircraft through the tower window.

However, instead of issuing an emergency correction—such as ordering the helicopter to turn or descend—the controller simply reaffirmed the "Visual Separation" clearance, making sure it was on record before the crash.

This last-minute confirmation of visual separation suggests the controller was more focused on protecting the legality of the clearance rather than preventing the actual collision.

Conclusion: A Systemic Failure?

The Potomac River collision was likely a preventable ATC failure due to an overreliance on "visual separation" procedures. While the helicopter pilot ultimately failed to avoid the CRJ, the controller’s clearance enabled an unsafe situation to develop. So, ATC initiated "visual separation," reducing safety margins to near zero; the controller ignored multiple warning signs that a collision was imminent; the helicopter misidentified the CRJ and failed to pass behind it as directed; and the crash highlights the dangers of transferring separation responsibility in busy airspace.

On Aviation™ Note: This case underscores a major flaw in ATC procedures—the reliance on "visual separation" in complex, high-risk environments. If an ATC controller can legally absolve themselves of separation responsibility, should this procedure be allowed at all in dense, urban airspace?


Thank you for reading this week's On Aviation™ full article. Do you believe ATC is primarily at fault, or does the helicopter crew bear equal responsibility? Could systemic FAA policies be a factor in this tragedy? Please share your thoughts in the comments below. Remember to check out our On Aviation™ Podcast and continue the conversation on our Twitter and Instagram.

Orlando - On Aviation™


References

  • Gryder, D. (2025, February 4). What Caused This? A Deal Was Made [Video]. YouTube.
  • Blocolario. (2025, January 29). Potomac Mid-Air Collision DCA 1/29/25 [Video]. YouTube.
  • The Aviation Safety Network. (2025). Potomac Mid-Air Collision DCA 1/29/25. Retrieved from https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/474365
  • VasAviation. (2025, January 30). Audio of MID-AIR CRASH into Potomac River | Regional Jet and Black Hawk Helicopter [Video]. YouTube.
  • VasAviation. (2025, January 30). Audio of MID-AIR CRASH into Potomac River | Regional Jet and Black Hawk Helicopter [Video]. YouTube.
Read full Article
post photo preview
Potomac Mid-Air Collision: DEI?
In the aftermath of the mid-air collision over the Potomac River in Washington, DC, many are asking: what caused this tragedy?

Unsurprisingly, the conversation surrounding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in aviation has resurfaced. But is DEI truly a factor in this disaster?

In this newsletter, we aim to review the facts as they stand approximately one week after the tragedy. While some are discussing a change in FAA hiring standards for air traffic controllers, with claims that traditional hiring qualifications were adjusted and more qualified individuals were rejected in favor of DEI-based hiring policies, we will focus on the available facts before drawing conclusions.

For reference, here are links to some of the ongoing reports on FAA hiring practices:

Get Involved: Who do you believe is ultimately at fault for this tragedy? Pilot error? ATC mismanagement? A systemic failure? Please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Now, let’s examine the facts of the accident as they stand today.


What Happened?

On January 29, 2025, a PSA Airlines CRJ-700 regional jet (operating for American Eagle) collided mid-air with a U.S. Army National Guard UH-60 or VH-60 Black Hawk helicopter near Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (DCA). The crash occurred at approximately 400 feet above the ground while the CRJ-700 was on final approach to Runway 33 at DCA.

A Breakdown of the Events

  • The Regional Jet's Approach: The CRJ-700 was flying a sidestep maneuver from Runway 1 to Runway 33—a standard but demanding approach at DCA. The aircraft was performing a stabilized approach and was where it was supposed to be.
  • The Helicopter's Route: The National Guard helicopter was operating out of Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling and crossing the Potomac River as per a published and approved helicopter transit procedure.
  • Air Traffic Control (ATC) Interaction:
  • The Collision:

Analyzing the Possible Causes

Investigators are examining several critical factors that may have contributed to the crash:

Did the Helicopter Misjudge the Situation?

Despite confirming that it had the CRJ-700 in sight, the helicopter did not successfully pass behind the jet as instructed. Possible contributing factors include:

  • Background Lighting Issues: Nighttime conditions can camouflage an aircraft’s lights against city lights, making detection difficult.
  • Aircraft Confusion: The helicopter crew may have mistakenly tracked the wrong aircraft (another American Airlines jet was also in the vicinity).
  • Limited Situational Awareness: Helicopters and commercial jets were operating on separate radio frequencies, reducing the ability to hear each other’s communications.

The Role of Night Vision Goggles (NVGs)

Reports suggest that the helicopter crew was using NVGs during the flight. While NVGs enhance vision in low-light conditions, they also:

  • Restrict peripheral vision, making it harder to spot nearby aircraft.
  • Reduce depth perception, complicating the ability to judge distance and trajectory accurately.
  • May have contributed to the misjudgment of the CRJ’s position.

Air Traffic Control and Procedural Factors

  • Runway Change: The CRJ was originally cleared for Runway 1 but was asked to circle and land on Runway 33, potentially increasing the risk of conflict.
  • Tightly Controlled Airspace: Washington, DC’s airspace is one of the most restrictive and congested in the world, with numerous aircraft operating in close proximity.

The Limitations of TCAS (Traffic Collision Avoidance System)

  • TCAS does not issue a resolution advisory (RA) below 1,000 feet, meaning that:
  • If the helicopter did not have its transponder on, it may not have been visible to the CRJ’s TCAS system.

The DEI Debate: Fact or Speculation?

There has been speculation that FAA hiring practices influenced air traffic control decisions leading up to the accident. What do we know?

  • There is an ongoing lawsuit alleging that the FAA changed hiring criteria for air traffic controllers, rejecting some traditionally qualified candidates in favor of DEI-based selections.
  • However, there is no direct evidence linking this policy change to the Potomac mid-air collision.
  • The FAA’s role in this specific incident remains under investigation and should not be prematurely linked to DEI without concrete findings.

On Aviation™ Note: At this time, no peer-reviewed research or official investigation has confirmed that DEI initiatives contributed to this accident. While the FAA’s hiring policies deserve scrutiny, it is essential to rely on facts and data rather than speculation.


Conclusion

This tragic accident has shaken the aviation industry, marking the first major airline accident in the U.S. since 2009. As investigations unfold, key questions remain: Did the helicopter misjudge the CRJ’s position? Did night vision goggles play a role in obscuring the pilot’s depth perception? Was there a failure in air traffic control procedures? Was there an issue with TCAS or transponder functionality? While some are quick to blame FAA hiring policies and DEI initiatives, the actual causes are still under investigation. It is essential to wait for the full NTSB report before making definitive conclusions.


Thank you for reading this week's On Aviation™ full article. Who do you believe is ultimately at fault for this tragedy? Pilot error? ATC mismanagement? A systemic failure? Please share your thoughts in the comments below. Remember to check out our On Aviation™ Podcast and continue the conversation on our Twitter and Instagram.

Orlando - On Aviation™

References

Blocolario. (2025, January 29). Potomac Mid-Air Collision DCA 1/29/25 [Video]. YouTube.

The Aviation Safety Network. (2025). Potomac Mid-Air Collision DCA 1/29/25. Retrieved from https://asn.flightsafety.org/wikibase/474365

VasAviation. (2025, January 30). Audio of MID-AIR CRASH into Potomac River | Regional Jet and Black Hawk Helicopter [Video]. YouTube.

VasAviation. (2025, January 30). Audio of MID-AIR CRASH into Potomac River | Regional Jet and Black Hawk Helicopter [Video]. YouTube.

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals