Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Commercial jet collides with Black Hawk helicopter near Reagan airport

mediaite.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

701–710 of 738 posts

Re: Commercial jet collides with Black Hawk helicopter near Reagan airport

#701

Post by ty6853 »

llamaimperative wrote: post #694
ty6853 wrote: post #668

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your specific concern was Koresh having sex with children. Are you moving the goal posts, or was that not your concern? How does he have sex with kids in adult jail? Or do you mean what should happen when someone doesn't pay $200 for an NFA stamp ( in this case i beleive for alleged machine guns or destructive devices), which is another crime they were accused of. In that case I'd say asset or wage garnishment is a b…

You were suggesting the raid on Waco was about taxes and all the chaos was totally avoidable. I’m arguing it was not really about taxes and it was almost certainly not avoidable. Neither “arrest him outside” nor “don’t use CS gas” were likely to avoid the outcome. You can prove your point by describing how it was avoidable. If your answer is “let people operate child sex slavery compounds if they’re sufficiently well…

Koresh having further sex with kids is 100% avoidable with him in jail. As far as I know no one else in the compound was accused of diddling children.

Re: Commercial jet collides with Black Hawk helicopter near Reagan airport

#702

Post by grajaganDev »

somename9 wrote: post #635
skellington wrote: post #627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying it's right. I'm saying people will ask. It's unfortunate.

Controller is definitely not White from the audio. Also, the helicopter pilot was female.

Wrong - please provide a source.

The pilot's wife has released photos.

Re: Commercial jet collides with Black Hawk helicopter near Reagan airport

#703

Post by theGnuMe »

warner25 wrote: post #596
theGnuMe wrote: post #139

Maybe the military shouldn’t fly training flights there. Just an idea.

It's a bad idea. That unit's [1] task is to provide transportation to senior government officials and security forces around the capital, including to and from that airport. If they didn't train to operate there, then their first time doing so would be with someone like the Secretary of Defense onboard or during some other mission that's critical to national security. "Training" here also doesn't imply some 21 year-o…

I am appalled with your opinion.

If the system can’t be safely designed with a safe margin of error then it is too dangerous.

There are alternative ways and locations to train.

If there’s a nat sec issue have the planes hold.

Re: Commercial jet collides with Black Hawk helicopter near Reagan airport

#704

Post by insane_dreamer »

chgs wrote: post #688
throw0101c wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The reformed federal workforce will be built around four pillars: […] > 4. Enhanced standards of conduct: The federal workforce should be comprised of employees who are reliable, loyal, trustworthy, and who strive for excellence in their daily work. Employees will be subject to enhanced standards of suitability and conduct as we move forward. Employees who engage in unlawful behavior or other misconduct will be pri…

> Employees who engage in unlawful behavior Convicted felon, that sort of thing?

Only if you’re president

Re: Commercial jet collides with Black Hawk helicopter near Reagan airport

#705

Post by rayiner »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #391
rayiner wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Maybe if the orders weren't so ineptly or maliciously ambiguous and overly broad, then people would have more confidence that safety critical jobs aren't being cut.

What’s ambiguous about this order?

Re: Commercial jet collides with Black Hawk helicopter near Reagan airport

#707

Post by Slava_Propanei »

venusenvy47 wrote: post #357
windowshopping wrote: post #248

The real question, I feel, is whether the current U.S. government as it exists in 2025 is still capable of continuing to improve things, and whether it's still putting all the lessons of the past into practice - or whether we were just coasting on a combination of luck and the vestigial safety left to us by the diligence of the past.

Considering that the head of the FAA and TSA were forced to resign, and a hiring freeze on air traffic controllers is suddenly in effect, I don't think the current government wants to improve flight safety. https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport/2025-0...

[dead]

Re: Commercial jet collides with Black Hawk helicopter near Reagan airport

#708

Post by rayiner »

ModernMech wrote: post #554
TheCoelacanth wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe if the orders weren't so ineptly or maliciously ambiguous and overly broad, then people would have more confidence that safety critical jobs aren't being cut.

I think they really do want to hollow out the federal government, and we should expect things like planes falling out of the sky as part of that. Given the release of this memo[1] offering the buyout of any federal employee who wants to step down, what I think we are looking at is the Musk-Vance-Thiel axis of the MAGA movement is implementing Curtis Yarvin's "R.A.G.E." plan to install a king dictator atop a neo-feuda…

You’re throwing around all these buzzwords like “dictator” and “feudalist,” but what’s the word that refers to government employees openly declaring “Resistance” to agenda of the duly elected president? Because that’s not “democracy” either, right?

Trump literally campaigned with Musk on this very issue. He explained at length what he was going to do in long form podcasts and in lengthy rallies. Musk was Trump’s closer in the key swing state of Pennsylvania. And people voted for that.

Trump made his case to the American public that, no matter who wins the election, democrats control the government through their control of the bureaucracy. And it’s a reasonable case: do you truly believe the federal workforce will implement Trump’s immigration policies with the same enthusiasm as Biden’s DEI policies? Trunk made this case to voters, with Musk at his right hand, and voters hired him to do this. A plurality trust the billionaire who is on their side over two million federal workers who, although not individually powerful, collectively wield enormous power.

Re: Commercial jet collides with Black Hawk helicopter near Reagan airport

#709

Post by mapt »

mncharity wrote: post #608
sorokod wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There will be a list of scenarios competing for that "last place". Operating rooms, certain military/police situations and self driving cars come to mind. A shared characteristic here is that errors lead to fatal outcomes exacerbated by unclear accountability.

Yes, but, as with collision avoidance systems... Years ago a VA thoracic surgeon was trying to find someone to build them a tool to listen in an OR for surgeon commands and team member acks, and if it saw a command without an ack, to nudge. Context is surgeons are both team managers and individual specialists, and when heads down as specialist, the managerial role gets load shed. So a dropped command may not be caugh…

The speculation on pilot Youtube is that the helicopter in this incident observed a light in the sky, one of several in the closely spaced train of landing jets on approach to National Airport.

The helicopter pilot asked multiple times for permission to assume liability for visually avoiding the plane in the approach path, and the tower warned about the plane, and he confirmed he could see it. Several times, he insisted he had it in his sights, and it was not on a collision course, and requested and was granted permission to continue through the flight path on that basis. And he did successfully avoid that dot in the sky.

He was looking at the dot in the sky that was about 60 seconds behind the plane that he ultimately collided with.

If that is the case, there is certainly a chance that an automated warning signal from an automated tracking network (not "you're within five miles of another aircraft on the map, watch out" but "your current 3d trajectory is within ten seconds of collision with another aircraft") may have averted this. That isn't AI, it's just having the plane keep secondary track of ADS-B inside the cockpit. And it sounds from a cursory search like it's already standard for commercial planes to have an ADS-B receiver and a Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS), just maybe not 1980's military helicopters.

Re: Commercial jet collides with Black Hawk helicopter near Reagan airport

#710

Post by y33t »

rayiner wrote: post #96
derektank wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some regulations are written and blood but some regulations are written to cover someone's ass and the two should not be treated equally. We shouldn't give equal respect to the Federal Aviation Regulations and to OPM's Qualification Standards for Federal Jobs; doing so deligitamizes the importance of the former.

If everyone writing regulations were as rigorous as the FAA people wouldn’t be clamoring to reduce regulations.

Ehh...FAA is kind of crazy and subject to a certain conceit. That's not to say they're bad, or always wrong, but they are a little nuts. For instance there's a rule that says you can't fly under a bridge. A floatplane pilot was on the water, increased his speed so that his floats got on a plane, while still on the water. FAA decided this was flying, even though he was going below stall speed and was by definition not flying. Courts until recently deferred judgement to the agencies that made the rules, and the guy lost his case (and his pilot's license? Don't recall). Also see how shooting a drone flying over your property (even if they don't have a transponder and are literally watching your kids) gets treated as downing an aircraft. Also see the recent kerfuffle between FAA and FCC with 5G. That was just nuts.
Post reply on HN