On the afternoon of Thursday April 10, 2025, a pilot and a family of five lost their lives when a tour company Bell 206L-4 helicopter, broke up and fell into the Hudson River near Jersey City, New Jersey.

In the following days, weeks and month, many have proffered their views on what may have happened. Many, in the early days, were quick to proffer mast bumping as the cause but as more information became available, it was apparent that mast bumping was unlikely the cause.

Within a month, the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued a preliminary report detailing the facts as they are understood this early in the investigation. A preliminary report provides an outline of the facts as known at the time and may change as the investigation progresses.

 (https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/ERA25MA171.aspx)

So, what do the facts essentially tell us? Well, from the report, the helicopter was proceeding south along the New Jersey side of the river near the George Washington Bridge. Again, from the report, as the helicopter approached the Holland Tunnel ventilation towers near Jersey City, it was at an altitude of between 625 and 650ft. The helicopter’s altitude increased to 675ft before it separated into three major pieces and entered a rapid descent. Those pieces were the fuselage (including the engine), main rotor system (including both main rotor blades, transmission and roof-beam structure), and the tail boom (including the tail rotor).

The report goes on to report on the pilot’s experience and recent helicopter maintenance activities.

So, in a nutshell, we have a helicopter that broke up mid-air into three sections. Most video online shows the final moments of the fuselage falling into the water. Yet there is one video that shows the initial breakup. In this video, the helicopter could be seen flying seemingly level when it suddenly develops a severe yaw before breaking up and falling into the Hudson River. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wnOn5WAKTqc). From the video, the sequence of breakup appears to show an initial severe yaw, followed by (or as a consequence of) the tail boom separation, and further descent before the transmission/rotor assembly departs the fuselage. One question is what, if anything, does the altitude increase before the breakup indicate?

That’s just one question among many. What caused the yaw? What was the failure sequence? What was the originating failure that cascaded to this breakup? What caused the originating failure (design, maintenance, operation or some external factor?). Even after 50 years of service, it seems there are things still to learn, even about a helicopter model with such a long aviation lineage. Whatever the indications were (if any) before the breakup, the breakup itself appeared sudden.

The NTSB has the expertise and resources to get to the root cause(s) of the accident, but it will take time as they rule in, or out, issues, considerations and relevant evidence. Even unlikely issues, such as for example, were the birds reported in the vicinity a factor (although they weren’t obvious in the breakup video)?

As an ex-aviation accident investigator, I can say that the golden rule was to never approach an investigation with a predetermined sequence or cause in mind; let the evidence tell the story. Where there are inconsistencies, doubts or holes, these must be addressed in the investigation and the final report. That’s why it takes time, sometimes many months, before a final report can be issued. I remember all the chatter about the Salmon River Chinook accident back in 2022. Who would have thought that the likely culprit would be an errant electronic tablet becoming stuck beneath a control pedal, leading to the loss of control of the helicopter?

And the public, in general, knows that good investigations take time. Aviation has built up an enviable record of being able to investigate itself. It has demonstrated that it learns lessons from occurrence including accident and apply that knowledge to figure out how to reduce the chances of accidents happening. Aviation authorities collect data and analyses that information to be make well-informed recommendations for changes in design and rules. This is one reason why millions of people entrust their lives to airline companies and helicopter operators. Most data and reports are freely available online.

Yet what truly astounds are the armchair experts who appear and seem to have ‘the answers’ within moments of the accident. Although there are those who are measured in what they say, there are others who, well, say way too much. While it is human nature to want to quickly know the answers, we, in the industry, really need to hold onto our opinions and not profess to know ‘what happened’ before the facts and investigations are all in. While the discussion is always worthwhile within the confines of the industry, public comments without the understanding of context can be damaging to the individuals involved and to the industry.

Often such commentary also feeds the naysayers – those who want to shutdown anything that they may consider intrusive. NIMBYs (Not In My Back Yard) seem to proliferate in big cities like New York city. Almost immediately following this accident, they were out in force highlighting their dislike of helicopter operation in NYC (for whatever true reason) by protesting how ‘obviously’ hazardous these helicopter operations are to people on the ground.

Often, there is little fact behind these safety arguments - the public has such little exposure to the consequences of a New York City tour helicopter accident. The operate over the river(s), not overhead populated areas. Unscrupulous people use accidents like this to argue that the operations should not be allowed based on safety where there is so little risk posed to the public, the risk is far less than the risks people face driving or even going to the corner store.

These people unfortunately are given extensive airplay by the mainstream media in their never-ending search for the bad news story.

For the investigators, while they don’t have onboard recording devices in this case, they do have video, they do have the wreckage, and they do have much more – so it is now time for them to piece together the evidence and in time, issue a report that will contribute to our understanding of how to make helicopter aviation even safer than it already is.