Business
Clues From D.C. Plane Crash Suggest Multiple Failures in Aviation Safety
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/dd3a8/dd3a8f71b7a403a5a9d44493da7d0bfdefbf40d3" alt="Clues From D.C. Plane Crash Suggest Multiple Failures in Aviation Safety Clues From D.C. Plane Crash Suggest Multiple Failures in Aviation Safety"
Clues emerging from the moments before the deadly collision Wednesday night between an Army helicopter and an American Airlines passenger jet suggest that multiple layers of the country’s aviation safety apparatus failed, according to flight recordings, a preliminary internal report from the Federal Aviation Administration, interviews with current and former air traffic controllers and others briefed on the matter.
The helicopter flew outside its approved flight path. The American Airlines pilots most likely did not see the helicopter close by as they made a turn toward the runway. And the air traffic controller, who was juggling two jobs at the same time, was unable to keep the helicopter and the plane separated.
An F.A.A. spokesman said the agency could not comment on the ongoing investigation, which is being led by the National Transportation Safety Board. Crash investigators will spend the next several months reviewing flight data, recordings from inside the cockpits, weather patterns, as well as interviewing controllers and others involved to try to figure out what went wrong.
But the catastrophe already appeared to confirm what pilots, air traffic controllers and safety experts had been warning for years: Growing holes in the aviation system could lead to the kind of crash that left 67 people dead in the Potomac River in Washington.
Even before an official cause is determined, there were signs Wednesday that pilots and air traffic controllers at Reagan National were not operating under optimal conditions.
The duties of handling air traffic control for helicopters and for planes at Reagan National on Wednesday night were combined before the deadly crash. That left only one person to handle both roles, according to a person briefed on the staffing and the report.
Typically one person handles both helicopter and plane duties after 9:30 p.m., when traffic at Reagan begins to lessen. But the supervisor combined those duties sometime before 9:30, and allowed one air traffic controller to leave, according to the person, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the investigation into the crash. The crash occurred just before 9 p.m.
While there were no unusual factors causing a distraction for controllers that night, staffing was “not normal for the time of day and volume of traffic,” the preliminary F.A.A. report said.
On Thursday, five current and former controllers said that the controller in the tower should have more proactively directed the helicopter and the plane to fly away from each other. Instead, the controller asked the helicopter to steer clear of the plane.
Some of the current and former controllers said the darkness could have made it more difficult for pilots to accurately gauge the distance between themselves and other aircraft. Some wondered whether the helicopter pilots mistook a different plane for the American jet.
The helicopter was supposed to be flying closer to the bank of the Potomac River and lower to the ground as it traversed the busy Reagan National airspace, four people briefed on the incident said.
Before a helicopter can enter any busy commercial airspace, it must get the approval of an air traffic controller. In this case, the pilot asked for permission to use a specific, predetermined route that lets helicopters fly at a low altitude along the bank on the east side of the Potomac, a location that would have let it avoid the American Airlines plane.
The requested route — referred to as Route 4 at Reagan National — followed a specific path known to the air traffic controller and helicopter pilots. The helicopter confirmed visual sight of a regional jet and the air traffic controller instructed the helicopter to follow the route and fly behind the plane.
But the helicopter did not follow the intended route, the people briefed on the matter said.
Rather, it was above 300 feet, when it was supposed to be flying below 200 feet, and it was at least a half-mile off the approved route when it collided with the commercial jet.
A senior Army official urged caution in making any assessments until the helicopter’s black box could be recovered and analyzed, along with other forensic data.
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing inquiry, said the Black Hawk’s pilots had flown this route before, and were well aware of the altitude restrictions and tight air corridor they were permitted to fly in near the airport.
Safety lapses in aviation have been increasing for years, leading to an alarming pattern of close calls in the skies and at airports involving commercial airlines. They have occurred amid rising congestion at the country’s busiest airports, including Reagan National, where the frequent presence of military flights makes controlling traffic even more complicated.
At the same time, a chronic shortage of air traffic controllers has forced many to work six-day weeks and 10-hour days — a schedule so fatiguing that multiple federal agencies have warned that it could impede controllers’ abilities to do their jobs properly. Few facilities have enough fully certified air traffic controllers, according to a Times investigation in 2023. Some controllers say little has improved since then.
The air traffic control tower at Reagan National has been understaffed for years. The tower there was nearly a third below targeted staff levels, with 19 fully certified controllers as of September 2023, according to the most recent Air Traffic Controller Workforce Plan, an annual report to Congress that contains target and actual staffing levels. The targets set by the F.A.A. and the controllers’ union call for 30.
An F.A.A. spokesman said on Thursday that Reagan National currently employs 25 certified controllers out of their goal of 28.
The controller who was handling helicopters in the airport’s vicinity Wednesday night was also instructing planes that were landing and departing from its runways. Those jobs are typically assigned to two controllers, rather than one, the internal F.A.A. report said. This increases the workload for the air traffic controller and complicates the job.
Controllers can also use different radio frequencies to communicate with pilots flying planes and pilots flying helicopters. While the controller is communicating with pilots of the helicopter and the jet, the two sets of pilots may not be able to hear each other.
As the passenger jet’s pilots were approaching the airport, they were asked by air traffic control to pivot the landing from one runway to another, according to the F.A.A. report, a person briefed on the incident and audio recordings of conversations between an air traffic controller and the pilots. That request may have introduced another complication shortly before the collision.
The American Airlines flight had originally been cleared by the traffic control tower to land on the airport’s main runway, called Runway 1. The controller then asked the pilot to land on a different, intersecting runway instead — Runway 33 — which the pilot agreed to do.
That decision, according to the person who was briefed on the incident and four other people who are familiar with the airport’s air traffic, happens routinely when regional jets like the American Airlines aircraft are involved. The decision may also have been made to help keep air traffic moving efficiently by not clogging the main runway, the people said.
Runway 33 is shorter, requiring intense focus from pilots landing their planes. The last-minute change raised questions within the F.A.A. on Thursday morning about congestion at Reagan National, the person briefed on the event added.
Robert Isom, American’s chief executive, said at a news conference on Thursday that the pilots of the passenger plane involved in the crash had worked for PSA Airlines, an American subsidiary, for several years, The captain had been employed by the airline for almost six years, while the first officer had worked there for almost two years.
“These were experienced pilots,” he said.
Nicholas Bogel-Burroughs contributed reporting.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6781a/6781a0fd8834eed59ed9ab9ebc47c1517b716739" alt=""
Business
LAEDC estimates up to $8.9 billion in lost economic output from Palisades, Eaton fires
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0c20e/0c20efb6c1e6429736a3a6d8080f50af9cf81e22" alt="LAEDC estimates up to .9 billion in lost economic output from Palisades, Eaton fires LAEDC estimates up to .9 billion in lost economic output from Palisades, Eaton fires"
Los Angeles County could lose $4.6 billion to $8.9 billion in economic output over the next five years from the Palisades and Eaton fires, a Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. study released Thursday predicts.
Federal, state and local governments are estimated to miss out on up to $1.4 billion in tax revenue from 2025 to 2029, depending on how long it takes to rebuild, the report said.
“Speed matters in the recovery process, particularly from an economic perspective,” former California Gov. Gray Davis said during a Zoom news conference Thursday.
The faster the fire areas are rebuilt, the quicker the economy will recover, Davis and L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger said. Both sit on the board of the Southern California Leadership Council, which commissioned the report.
“This report is clear in communicating that our strongest path forward is expediting the rebuilding of our homes, businesses and communities,” Barger said.
The report analyzed three trajectories of recovery: a quick recovery ending in 2028 and matching an earthquake-model recovery timeline from the Federal Emergency Management Agency; a recovery ending in 2032 that doubles FEMA’s timeline; and one ending in 2034 that triples the timeline.
“Across all scenarios, the initial direct economic loss in the burned areas amounted to $1.26 billion of sales revenue (or 90% of baseline level) and about 8,200 jobs (or 85% of baseline employment)” for 2025, according to the study.
Employment losses in Los Angeles county could reach up to 49,110 job-years (which refers to a person working full time for a year) based on recovery time, the study said, with labor losses ranging from $1.9 billion to $3.7 billion.
Los Angeles County industries that will take the brunt of the economic damage include real estate and rentals, retail trade, and professional and scientific technical services. The real estate and rental sector alone is expected to lose $515.8 million to about $1 billion, the study estimated.
Property damage, which was analyzed by counting 20,218 land parcels within the burn area, could range from $28 billion to $53.8 billion based on how long recovery lasts, the study said.
The nonprofit’s president and chief executive, Stephen Cheung, clarified during Thursday’s online news conference that the value did not include losses to businesses outside the burn area, such as those that suffered utility shutoffs or other setbacks.
In comparison with the new study, a Times analysis found that 13,338 land parcels affected by the fires were valued at $16.7 billion, after adjusting for the level of damage to each structure as determined by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. Tax revenue would decrease by $61 million or more per year, according to the data The Times reviewed.
Business
Trump Takes Aim at Chinese Shipping Amid Widening Trade War
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/744fe/744fea49a7068f5c6e416ff7a10fd81997dca6de" alt="Trump Takes Aim at Chinese Shipping Amid Widening Trade War Trump Takes Aim at Chinese Shipping Amid Widening Trade War"
The Trump administration has opened a broad new front in its global trade conflict, proposing to affix levies reaching $1.5 million on Chinese-made ships arriving at American ports.
Such fees would apply even on vessels made elsewhere if they are operated by carriers whose fleets include Chinese ships — an approach that risks increasing costs on an array of imported cargo, from raw materials to factory goods.
Given their potential to increase consumer prices, the levies could collide with President Trump’s promises to attack inflation. Nearly 80 percent of American foreign trade by weight is transported by ship, yet less than 2 percent is carried on American-flagged vessels, according to Gavekal Research.
As detailed on Friday by the Office of the United States Trade Representative, the proposal reflects the “America First” credo animating the Trump administration. It is engineered to discourage reliance on Chinese vessels in supplying Americans with products, while aiming to spur the revival of a domestic shipbuilding industry after a half-century of veritable dormancy.
Taken together with Mr. Trump’s expansive tariffs, the approach to shipping is a rebuke of the trading system constructed by the United States and its allies after World War II. Faith in the view of the world as a teeming marketplace has given way to hostility toward globalization in favor of the pursuit of self-sufficiency.
The proposal would advance the mission to isolate China while diminishing American reliance on its industry — a rare area of bipartisan consensus in Washington. The plan was the result of an investigation, started during the Biden administration, into the dominance of the Chinese shipping industry, in response to a petition filed by labor unions.
Almost one-fifth of container vessels arriving at American ports are made in China, and a far higher share on trading lanes spanning the Pacific, according to ING, the Dutch banking giant.
“A significant portion of imports entering the U.S. via ports would be directly subject to hefty fines,” the bank’s researchers concluded in a report published Monday. “These additional expenses would likely be passed on from the carrier to shippers and, ultimately, to importers and exporters.”
The administration is fielding comments on the proposal through March 24. Mr. Trump could then impose the levies by executive order.
The plan envisions a range of fees on ships unloading at American ports depending on the percentage of Chinese-made vessels in a carrier’s fleet. In addition to the rate of up to $1.5 million for Chinese-built ships, it outlines levies reaching $1 million per port call for carriers whose orders for new ships draw heavily on Chinese shipping yards.
Major carriers typically stop at two or three American ports per route, meaning their levies could exceed $3 million on journeys bringing $10 million to $15 million in revenue, estimated Ryan Petersen, chief executive of Flexport, a global logistics company.
“The proposed fees are huge, and they will get rolled into what shippers have to pay, and hence consumers,” said Willy Shih, an international trade expert at Harvard Business School. “It’s a really aggressive move that reflects an administration that is either out of touch with how the world really works or that doesn’t care and wants to cause chaos.”
Upheaval may suit the designs of Mr. Trump, who has sought to pressure companies to make their products in the United States. But increased shipping costs could hamper that effort, given that more than one-fourth of American imports are components, parts or raw materials, according to World Bank data. Higher costs on such cargo challenge the economics of making finished goods in the United States.
The Trump proposal aims to counter the dominance of the Chinese shipbuilding industry, which makes more than half the world’s commercial cargo vessels, up from 5 percent in 1999, according to the Office of the United States Trade Representative.
At least 15 percent of American exports would have to be shipped on U.S.-flagged vessels within seven years of the new policy, and 5 percent of fleets would have to be built in the United States.
“There is no physical way in hell that U.S. shipyards can do that,” said Lars Jensen, chief executive of Vespucci Maritime, a container shipping consultancy based in Copenhagen. “The technical term for this proposal would just be ‘stupid.’”
The wait for a new container ship from an existing shipyard already stretches more than three years, he said. An American industry would be starting almost from scratch, requiring billions of dollars and many years.
The effort would also require steel — a commodity made more expensive by Mr. Trump’s tariffs.
In the meantime, the levies would create fresh opportunities for established shipyards in South Korea and Japan.
If enacted, the proposal would scramble international transportation, sowing extra uncertainty for businesses already grappling with Mr. Trump’s various tariff proposals.
Importers would most likely reduce their use of American ports by shipping into Mexico and Canada, and then using trucks and rail to deliver to the United States.
“Those ports are often congested,” noted Mr. Petersen, the Flexport chief executive. “They won’t be able to absorb much capacity.”
Business
California legislators propose bills to expand film and TV tax credit program
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/13b72/13b72bc32a892473896baa803dea8059cdb38cc7" alt="California legislators propose bills to expand film and TV tax credit program California legislators propose bills to expand film and TV tax credit program"
California legislators are proposing two bills that would make changes to the state’s film and TV tax credit program in an attempt to lure production back to the Golden State.
The details of the bills are still being negotiated by stakeholders, state legislators said during a press conference Wednesday afternoon at the Los Angeles headquarters of the Screen Actors Guild — American Federation of Television and Radio Artists.
But the idea is to modernize the program’s components to ensure California’s film and TV tax credit program is more competitive with other states’, Assemblymember Rick Chavez Zbur, one of the bills’ co-sponsors, said during the press conference.
Key provisions under discussion include an increase to the effective rate of the program and an expansion of the kinds of productions that will qualify for film and TV tax credits, with a focus on those types that are leaving the state and provide “the best jobs,” Zbur said. Another is to ensure that underrepresented communities, such as formerly incarcerated people, have expanded pathways into production jobs.
“This is one of California’s foundational industries,” Assemblymember Isaac Bryan, a co-sponsor of one of the bills, told The Times. “It is an economic driver for the state, and also continues to amplify the cultural creativity and the storytelling that California does unlike any place in the world.”
California’s film and TV tax credit program has created nearly 200,000 jobs and generated $26 billion in statewide economic activity, said state Sen. Ben Allen. But the program is oversubscribed, and more than 75% of projects that get rejected for a tax credit go elsewhere, he said.
Wednesday’s announcement comes about four months after Gov. Gavin Newsom unveiled a proposal to more than double the amount of money allocated annually to the state’s film tax credit program. The program’s current total is $330 million; Newsom’s proposal would increase that amount to $750 million, making California the top state for capped film incentive programs.
While state legislators and industry representatives have said the governor’s proposed increase would help address so-called runaway production, many also have said that simply upping the cap wouldn’t be enough to turn the tide and that changes to the structure of the program were necessary.
Hollywood workers have endured a difficult last few years, starting with the pandemic, when production shut down and many lost job opportunities, and continuing on to the dual writers and actors strikes in 2023 and the recent fires in Southern California, which paused production again and destroyed homes.
“For many years now, we have taken the industry for granted,” Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said during the press conference, while flanked by representatives of the major Hollywood unions and small business owners who rely on the local industry. “I don’t want to stand here five years from now and reminiscence about an industry that has left us.”
-
Technology1 week ago
Vision Pro apps: the good, the bad, and the ridiculous
-
News1 week ago
Dominican officials cram thousands of inmates facing no charges into overcrowded prisons
-
Politics1 week ago
Top federal agency exposed for spending billions on migrants in a single year
-
Culture1 week ago
Are NFL players as college coaches here to stay? Why DeSean Jackson, Michael Vick can work
-
News1 week ago
Kamala Harris Has Scrambled the California Governor’s Race Without Entering It
-
Culture1 week ago
Book Review: ‘Theory & Practice,’ by Michelle de Kretser
-
Lifestyle1 week ago
‘Modern Love’ Podcast: Why Gossiping Could Help Your Love Life
-
Technology1 week ago
Reddit vs. Wall Street: the latest in the GameStop saga