Live Updates: Federal Investigators Set to Begin Hearings On D.C. Plane Crash
Federal investigators on Wednesday are expected to begin providing the clearest picture yet of what went wrong earlier this year when an Army Black Hawk helicopter crashed into an American Airlines regional jet outside Washington, D.C., killing 67 people and touching off a crisis of confidence in air travel safety.
The National Transportation Safety Board, which has spent the last six months investigating the accident, is set to convene the first of three days of public hearings at 9 a.m. Eastern. Federal aviation safety officials, military brass and other parties involved in the crash are scheduled to testify about the events leading up to the midair collision near Ronald Reagan National Airport on the evening of Jan. 29.
The board is also expected to release approximately 10,000 pages of new documents related to the crash at the same time the hearing begins, including transcripts of the cockpit recordings from both American Airlines Flight 5342 and the Army Black Hawk and of the air traffic control transmissions to all aircraft in the area.
The documents are also expected to include a combined transcript illustrating how all of those communications overlapped in real time, as well as factual reports about the air control tower, aircraft and the people involved in operating them that night.
Though the board already issued a preliminary report and urgent recommendations, and the Federal Aviation Administration has already implemented safety measures to reduce the risk of a similar episode in the nation's capital, there are still a number of unanswered questions. They include why an Army helicopter on a pilot evaluation mission flew higher than was allowed in the vicinity of one of the nation's most congested airports, what led to the air traffic control tower being understaffed that evening, and various communication failures that might have contributed to the fatal collision.
N.T.S.B. investigators are not expected to reach any conclusions about the cause of the accident, though the board's chairwoman, Jennifer Homendy, has promised that those, and final safety recommendations, will be issued by next January.
Yet the hearings are expected to present revealing insights into the circumstances surrounding the collision, as aviation safety officials face increasing pressure to implement policy changes to ensure that no such accident can take place in the future.
The marathon hearings have been organized as a series of five panels, each of which will highlight a facet of the circumstances that contributed to the accident. The first will focus on the helicopter's data systems and altimeters, devices that measure altitude. Subsequent panels will address helicopter routes through the airspace surrounding the airport, procedures governing air traffic control training and staffing, technology to help avoid collisions, and how the stakeholders collect and assess safety data.
Some of those issues have already been the subject of considerable federal scrutiny.
In March, the N.T.S.B. released urgent recommendations, calling on the Federal Aviation Administration to permanently prohibit helicopter operations in the airspace around Reagan National Airport when certain runways were in use, and to design alternate flight routes for rotor aircraft. The F.A.A. took the recommendations a step further, permanently closing the helicopter corridor known as Route 4 at all times, and making the zones where helicopters can operate around the airport smaller and farther away.
The F.A.A. has also limited when helicopters on special government missions may fly in the vicinity of the airport without real-time tracking technology turned on, ordering that such flights may take place only if the area is cleared of commercial aircraft. The Army Black Hawk involved in the Jan. 29 crash had that technology, known as ADS-B Out, turned off.
Lawmakers have also seized on real-time tracking technology as an area ripe for legislation. In the last two months, senators have introduced at least three bills that would require nearly all aircraft to have and use technology that allows them to be seen by air traffic controllers in real time, as well as similar technology to allow pilots to receive similarly fast communications from other aircraft and ground operations regarding traffic, weather and other considerations important for safe flying.
The most recent bill, from Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas and the chairman of the panel overseeing aviation safety, was unveiled on the eve of the N.T.S.B. hearings, with the endorsement of Ms. Homendy, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and Bryan Bedford, the F.A.A. administrator.
The authors of those bills hope that requiring aircraft to operate with improved tracking technology will improve the chances of avoiding accidents and other near misses, which are a frequent occurrence at congested airports like Reagan National.
In its preliminary investigative report on the crash, the N.T.S.B. noted that there had been 85 incidents between October 2021 and December 2024 in which planes had been less than 200 feet apart vertically. Details of those episodes are unclear, though the hearing may provide additional insight.
But there is near universal agreement that a national shortage of air traffic controllers — along with an outdated air traffic control system — has also put aircraft in greater danger, especially in congested areas.
Earlier this month, Congress approved $12.5 billion to modernize the country's air traffic control system — money that lawmakers and agency officials see as a down payment on what must be a wider overhaul.
Greg Jaffe contributed reporting.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
28 minutes ago
- Forbes
How To Manage People Who Talk Too Much At Work Without Shutting Them Down
I grew up in a family of talkers who drove our teachers crazy. I remember sitting in my English 102 class during college with just two weeks left in the semester. My professor looked at me and said, 'You have an A. Don't come back. You talk too much.' I took the two weeks off, but it made me feel bad. He was right and I was rude. I would talk to the person next to me because I was bored and wanted to kill time. That is different from the person who has to always insert themselves in meetings to demonstrate their knowledge. There are two types of people who talk too much at work: one who is bored and one who wants to be recognized. Nearly every office has someone who fills every silence, often without realizing it. In many cases, the talker just wants to connect, share ideas, or stay engaged. But when one person dominates conversations, it can be disruptive and lead to low productivity. Why Managing People Who Talk Too Much At Work Is A Skill Managing someone who talks too much requires understanding what drives the behavior. It might be boredom, anxiety, habit, or a desire to feel seen. In meetings, it might mean someone repeats ideas, interrupts others, or goes off on tangents. Outside of meetings, it can include constant chatting that distracts those trying to concentrate. It might seem harmless, but over time it can hurt productivity. Effective leaders know how to manage these situations with empathy. Just like I felt bad when my teacher said that to me, people get their feelings hurt if they feel silenced. Leaders need to guide their talkers to help redirect that energy in ways that create value. What Makes People Who Talk Too Much At Work Do It? Too much talking can be annoying for others, especially if they don't know why. Corporate Natalie, a young executive and content creator, recently shared a video on Instagram making fun of people who jump into every conversation. She jokingly called them 'the interjector.' It was funny because we all can relate to being around people like that. My generation laughed about this through characters like Michael Scott from The Office, who constantly interrupted and found ways to make himself part of every conversation. There are usually two kinds of talkers: those who are bored and those who are trying to stand out. The bored talker is often just trying to pass the time. They don't mean to be disruptive, but their behavior can throw others off track. These employees often benefit from more engaging work, new challenges, or clear tasks that give them something meaningful to do. Instead of correcting their talking, it helps to redirect it by giving them more responsibility or asking them to contribute in ways that require preparation. Recognition-seeking talkers often worry that being quiet means being forgotten. They feel pressure to prove their value by saying something in every meeting or joining every discussion. These employees need coaching around influence, trust, and contribution. When leaders explain that visibility comes from preparation, results, and listening just as much as from speaking, it resets how these employees think about participation. Either way, too much talking can be frustrating to the rest of the team. That's why the way you address talkers depends on what's really driving the behavior. When you know the difference, you can fix the right problem. Some of the behavior depends on personality. Extraverts may feel uncomfortable with silence and use talking as a way to stay engaged. Introverts are more likely to find that constant talking disruptive. Extraverts may feel more pressure to be seen and talk more often as a result. That desire to be visible can backfire when it turns into talking too much or interrupting others. Introverts, on the other hand, may feel frustrated when they can't find space to contribute. It's helpful to create opportunities that respect both styles, especially when those quieter employees have insights worth hearing. How Leaders Can Guide People Who Talk Too Much At Work Without Causing Shame If you're managing someone who talks too much, whether in meetings or during the workday, it's important to create boundaries that support better communication. One approach is to set meeting norms, like hearing from three people before anyone speaks a second time. This avoids making them feel singled out and invites broader participation. You can also assign talkers roles that make them feel like they aren't being shut out. Let the talker be the person who summarizes ideas or has a specific place within the agenda. That still involves them but in a way that encourages listening. Outside of meetings, you might say, 'I've noticed you like to communicate with the team. Let's set up specific ways to help you do that, to help others keep their focus.' Framing it as collaboration instead of correction makes the conversation easier to receive. How Curiosity Helps People Who Talk Too Much At Work Focus On Listening One of the most powerful ways to shift behavior is to build curiosity. When people become more curious, they don't need to be the one doing all the talking. They begin to ask more questions and spend more time listening. This leads to better conversations, deeper relationships, and fewer disruptions. Curiosity changes the focus away from being heard to learning something new. That kind of mindset helps people develop empathy and understand when to speak and when to hold back. It teaches them that silence can be space for someone else to give their insights. What To Do When People Who Talk Too Much At Work Make It A Habit That Interrupts Others If someone continues to talk too much despite coaching, structure becomes essential. You can create designated times for open discussion. You can rotate roles in meetings so different people guide the conversation. If interruptions are happening often, it's important to address them directly. In one-on-one conversations, ask direct but supportive questions: 'What are you hoping to share?' or 'Is this the best time to talk about this?' These questions encourage reflection and give the person a moment to pause. Why Managing People Who Talk Too Much At Work Shapes How Teams Work Together The way you address excessive talking sends a signal to everyone else. If you reward constant commentary, people may believe that's the only way to stand out. If you shame someone publicly, others may pull back even when they have something important to say. The goal is to reinforce that thoughtful contributions matter more than frequency. That includes recognizing the people who think carefully before they speak, who prepare behind the scenes, and who bring useful content rather than just speak for no real purpose. These individuals often feel overlooked when others dominate the conversation, but their input can be just as, if not more, valuable. Managing People Who Talk Too Much At Work Thoughtfully Every office has people who talk too much at work. The difference is how that behavior is handled. By managing it with curiosity and structure, you can turn distraction into contribution. You give talkers a way to be heard while making sure others get space, too. That leads to a more balanced, thoughtful, and productive environment. When I think back to that English class, I realize that professor let me get away with too much for too long. Had he said something earlier, I would have learned sooner that my behavior wasn't okay. It shouldn't have taken getting kicked out of class to recognize the impact I was having. Leaders who take the time to guide these behaviors early help everyone, especially the talkers, grow.
New York Times
28 minutes ago
- New York Times
‘I Asked Her Name So I Could Thank Her for the Lovely Conversation'
12 Minutes Dear Diary: I was waiting for an uptown bus to meet my mother at the Met. It was one of the first hot June days, and I was sitting on the bench in the shade when an older woman walked up to the stop. 'Twelve minutes?' she said, looking at the countdown clock and then at me. 'I hope the new mayor fixes the buses.' 'I hope so too,' I said. 'Sometimes that sign isn't always right though. I always check on my phone.' I showed her how I check the M.T.A. website on my phone to see how far away the bus is. I like to know so I can decide whether it's worth waiting. We waited together for what probably was 12 minutes. I learned that her daughter was expecting a child and lived in Brooklyn. She said she had gone to the store that day to get some items for the baby. I congratulated her — her first grandchild! And a girl no less. We chatted about art in New York City until the bus arrived, and we sat next to each other on the bus so we could continue talking. Submit Your Metropolitan Diary Your story must be connected to New York City and no longer than 300 words. An editor will contact you if your submission is being considered for publication. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Earthquake hits New York City and New Jersey late Saturday as residents report buildings shaking
Residents in New York and New Jersey were shaken late Saturday night by a minor earthquake. According to the United States Geological Survey, a magnitude 3.0 earthquake struck at 10:18 p.m., with its epicenter in Hasbrouck Heights, New Jersey, just north of Newark. The quake took place six miles below the ground, and around 13 miles from Midtown Manhattan. As well as New Jersey, tremors have been reported across all five boroughs of the city, according to a USGS map. New York City Emergency Management acknowledged the quake in a post on X. 'A magnitude 3.0 earthquake is reported to have occurred in or near New Jersey. Tremors may have been felt in parts of New York City. NYC Emergency Management is monitoring for impacts and coordinating with agency partners,' the agency wrote. The agency noted that no follow up was needed by residents unless they saw the quake cause damage. 'Be prepared for possible aftershocks. These may follow minutes, hours, or even days after the initial quake. No immediate protective action is needed unless you experienced damage,' the agency said. 'If you felt shaking, check for hazards such as shifted items, falling debris, or cracks.' No injuries or reports of serious damage have come out of either New York or New Jersey at the time of this report. Magnitude 3.0 earthquakes are fairly minor, but it's unusual for New Jersey or New York to have quakes strong for residents to notice. Last year, New Yorkers felt a 4.8 magnitude quake across the city which struck near Lebanon, New Jersey. Many took to social media to express confusion over the event. 'I thought my downstairs neighbor was banging something around lol, didn't even think earthquake,' one X user wrote. Another user wrote that they thought a truck was passing by their building. 'So can we agree that none of us felt an earthquake in nyc,' a third added. Harlem resident Bradford Billingsley wouldn't agree. He told the New York Times his coffee table rattled while he was spending time with a friend. 'We both felt a sudden jolt and looked at each other and said, 'was that an earthquake?'' he said. Mayor Eric Adams reposted the city's Emergency Management post, but didn't offer further comment on the quake. Earlier in the week an 8.8 magnitude quake hit off the eastern coast of Russia, triggering tsunami warnings in California, Alaska, Hawaii, Japan, Canada, and Russia.
