The whole country is like a Three Stooges comedy movie:...
The whole country is like a Three Stooges comedy movie: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-12-02/joe-biden-pardons-his-son-hunter-during-last-weeks-in-office/104672384
Kneejerk Trump (or is it just plain jerk) is a bloody legend: "Less than 24 hours after the Washington DC air disaster that killed 67 people, Donald Trump has blamed the crash on past Democratic leaders and initiatives to boost diversity in aviation. Offering no investigation findings or specific evidence, the president also suggested both air traffic controllers and the helicopter pilot could be at fault." Stuff the sensitiveness lets play politics...what a prick.
Here’s my theory, based on what we know so far. Like all theories, it is exactly that and will turn out to be completely wrong, or completely right, or every possible option in between. The tower gave the CRJ (the jet) as traffic to the helicopter and asked them if they could see it. Apparently they said they could, and the controller then cleared them to maintain visual separation with that aircraft and pass behind it. This is not unusual, although it carries obvious risks. The helicopter made a right turn and basically flew straight into the CRJ, which was on short final approach. The thought is that the helicopter crew misidentified an Airbus that was further back on final for a different runway (runway 01, whereas the CRJ was on final for 33). Without the benefit of a diagram, 01 is basically a north / south runway with the Airbus approaching from the south. Runway 33 is northwest / southeast with the CRJ approaching from the southeast. The helicopter was to the north of both aircraft. It is possible that the helicopter crew saw the Airbus and decided it was the (much closer) CRJ and made the right turn in a way which would have seen them pass behind the Airbus (thinking it was the CRJ). The simply didn’t see the CRJ and flew straight into its path while watching the Airbus. This is not nearly as implausible as you might think, as flying on a clear night over a very bright city with all the lights etc it’s not that hard to miss the lights of a low flying aircraft, especially if you’re looking in slightly the wrong direction. None of which has anything to do with DEI, granted.
Does it matter? Here's another couple of Trumpism's: " The reporter suggested that he would go to the site to meet with first responders. "I will be meeting with some people that were very badly hurt, with their family members," Trump replied. There are no reports of anybody hurt in the crash. ...and: "Sitting at his desk, Trump was asked whether he planned to visit the crash site. "What's the site? The water? You want me to go swimming?" he said.
Certainly looks as though ATC have a part to play according to some reports/transmissions. Why wouldn't they just tell the chopper to stop and hover until all the traffic had buggered off?...IMO
Of course it matters. The ABC has been found guilty more than any other media organisation in Australia of selective quoting, misleading narratives, and downright being blatantly wrong in their reporting and every time they have to be dragged kicking and screaming to issue a correction or they just completely ignore the directive. Anything to do with Trump as reported by the ABC should be ignored.
After listening to the ATC recording, I agree that it was pilot error on the part of the chopper. Standard operating procedure in the media is to amplify a part of Trump's comments devoid of context. Democrats and lefties here enjoy hating on him but it's otherwise pointless. The DEI piece is factual. There is a policy to hire disabled people for ATC and in every aspect of US Govt people of colour and females are prioritized over males with skill and experience. There are diversity targets that must be met by management. This is also true in Australia, UK, France, etc. e.g. I am legally compelled to have 50% female directors in my listed company, regardless of their ability.
While I’m not saying ATC don’t share some responsibility, if they ask an aircraft whether they have traffic in sight, the aircraft says they do, and then ATC issue a directive to that aircraft to “maintain visual separation and pass behind” the onus is then entirely on the pilot to do exactly that. ATC has no further formal role to play. In this instance there is some confusion (which will be cleared up very quickly) as to whether the helicopter pilot acknowledged and understood that direction. If they didn’t, then ATC remains responsible for separation.
Oh, I’m well aware of the facts around DEI, particularly in aviation. I’ve witnessed it’s effects first hand for many years. But we don’t know if that had anything to do with this accident. More likely under-staffing and poor procedures, IMO (on the ATC side). And a mistake by the helicopter crew in mis-identifying the traffic.
Steve it's all over all the TV networks here,the 'State's and GB. It's also on all the printed news networks......it's a real thing not BS or beatup.
I understand a female in the right seat of the Blackhawk and all wearing nvg's. The nvg's do effect perception.
Are you ****ing joking??!!! Sky are wrong all the time, fake news is all they do They quote overseas twaddle like school girls Trump will probably issue a pardon for himself any day And BTW I vehemently disagree with what Biden did with his pardons on his way out of office and then we have Trump pardoning those thugs from the J6 episode FMD what a disgrace
Now that I’ve heard the recording it does seem as though the fault lies with the chopper crew. They actually asked for visual separation after saying they could see the CRJ. ATC did nothing wrong, and in fact some time after granting it they asked the helicopter again to confirm they could see it and would pass behind. The onus is on the crew to maintain visual separation and if at any point they lose sight of the traffic or there is any doubt they should advise ATC immediately who then come back into the picture and provide separation. It’s a little odd that in light of this event all people want to talk about is Trump. You may not have noticed but all I did was ask if the original quote came from the ABC, which appears to have resulted in a hissy fit from those with TDS. What I said about the ABC is factually correct and easily verified.
Since 2018, the ABC has been investigated by ACMA some 23 times, most regularly for bias, accuracy, and impartiality. Admittedly the finding has been “no breach found” more often than not, but there have still been several breaches with penalties applied. Sky News has been investigated twice in the same timeframe. There have also been several high profile court cases in the last few years where a conservative person who has been unfairly crucified by an ABC report has won the case, and the taxpayer has had to fund the lawyers and the payout. Next question?
Fair play. It’s important to distinguish what happens on Sky News before 5pm and after 5pm. At 5pm they literally have a big thing come up on the screen saying “Opinion starts now”. In other words, news has now stopped and what follows is opinion. It’s honest. On the ABC they continuously present what is obviously opinion as news and current affairs. It’s dishonest. If it makes you feel better, while I agree with Trump in general about DEI he was wrong to bring that into the discussion about this accident. Not necessary or helpful. The reason I questioned Simon’s original quote was because it is not in fact a quote from Trump but a quote from a report which shows obvious bias. Why didn’t they just quote Trump?
The ABC are an absolute joke, left wing echo chamber and nothing else. This here is a classic example of how they control the narrative Questions about ABC platforming ‘radical fringe Jewish voice’ https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/questions-about-abc-platforming-radical-fringe-jewish-voice/news-story/fc0bae6906959df3d2ab9b0af1dd6d6f If you don’t have a subscription, this is the guts of it Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
Spot on. That is an appalling story. Yet in their warped minds brining this peanut into the discussion would be bringing “balance” because she’s Jewish. Pathetic.
