666
Female pilot in crash Trump blamed on DEI was top 20% Army cadet
(www.thedailybeast.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Feb 2025
666 points (99.0% liked)
politics
31035 readers
121 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
- No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
- No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
The controller advised PAT25 (helicopter) to pass behind the CRJ. The controller then asked PAT25 to confirm visual of the CRJ, and stated the CRJ's height and vector (I believe it was descending through 1,400 ft at that point in a circling approach to runway 33).
The pilot of PAT25 confirmed visual of the CRJ. Once the pilot confirmed visual of the other aircraft, it was on her to avoid it.
Unfortunately, she was obviously looking at a different aircraft in the landing sequence, because she flew directly into the path of the CRJ instead of waiting for it to pass as instructed.
Possible the pilot misunderstood the ATC instruction, but it seems like she just was looking at the wrong aircraft.
Was another aircraft in the area? (possibly, it's even more reason to be angry that a busy airport like this with very specific guidelines is understaffed) I haven't looked at the radar at the time. If this was the initial error that led to the crash, the followup error possibly was that the single ATC person at the time was not able to go back and confirm that the helicopter was on a path that showed them understanding the correct plane and action to take. One or more assumptions led to the crash.
Yes there was another aircraft. Current speculation is that the helicopter pilot gave visual confirmation but was looking at the wrong plane. And further, because of the area they were in, the lights were blending in with the lights from the buildings on the ground in the background. Which would be an explanation as to why the correct plane was not identified. If that’s all true, and Trump is going to continue with this DEI shit, then the next argument will probably be that a male pilot would have had better vision to identify the correct plane despite the lights blending in with the city lights below. Because eyes.