OV9

Think he cares how it looks?

He’ll not be running again after this term so he likely doesn’t give a fuck.

He’s a vile disgusting person.

Also wouldn’t surprise me if he somehow strong arms a way to increase his term or be able to run again.

It's been a busy week, so here's a bit of a summary of one of the biggest things - where he basically turned off government money to anything that wasn't the military or direct government payments to people (IE social security).

And then capitulated 48 hours later when people who are not so far up his arse they could taste his brain, told him that might have been a mistake.

He completely bulldozers the guy who highlights that the FAA DE&I policy he's targetting as the cause of the accident was in place - demonstrably, on their website - during the entirety of Trump's first term..... link should take you to the correct timestamp....



Will be interesting to see the litigation claims that will be triggered from the POTUS's new approach to stating on national TV the probable personal accountability for the deaths of 70-odd people before any investigation has taken place....

240PP wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 6:35 pm He’ll not be running again after this term so he likely doesn’t give a fuck.

They are already manoeuvring to give him a third term. Or maybe extending the length of this one. Either. He’s not going to leave willingly.

Having seen something that is apparently the air traffic control radar and the radio transcript they tell the helicopter to pass behind the jet. Seems they didn’t follow instruction

jamcg wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 7:15 pm Having seen something that is apparently the air traffic control radar and the radio transcript they tell the helicopter to pass behind the jet. Seems they didn’t follow instruction

They confirm that they see the plane (around 1min08) - I assume they must have been looking at something else.

mik wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 7:28 pm
They confirm that they see the plane (around 1min08) - I assume they must have been looking at something else.

Excellent analysis here, with a hypothesis that sounds very possible.
RIP all.

Edit: might need to click here instead to get around embedding issues

I've just seen this.

First off all - classy official comms.

Secondly - check the date.

mik wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 8:36 pm

mik wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 7:28 pm
They confirm that they see the plane (around 1min08) - I assume they must have been looking at something else.

Excellent analysis here, with a hypothesis that sounds very possible.
RIP all.

Edit: might need to click here instead to get around embedding issues

Presumably it was a black, transgender, dwarf, lesbian with dyslexia, asbergers, one leg and astigmatism flying the helicopter? Damn that DEI.

Changing tack - looks like Trump might struggle to get all his supersycophants into the roles he planned for them

Rich B wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 9:13 pm Presumably it was a black, transgender, dwarf, lesbian with dyslexia, asbergers, one leg and astigmatism flying the helicopter? Damn that DEI.

I mean, to be fair, the US Military is not exactly a hotbed of the finest minds known to society. In fact, it's a prime destination for high school dropouts.

They're not all violent, knuckledragging thickos, but hoo boy militaries around the world don't lack 'em, and in fairness they mostly mold them into pretty solid, reasonably sensible, functional people by the time they finish up their service.

On that basis, it could well be the accident was caused by DEI

Also. check the date on this. Fuckin' nailed it.
Also, the current fuckwit bootlicker line is to pretend that press conference never happened, and to point people at the (more carefully curated) official statement, and claim that he never said anything about DEI, he's not politicising the death of dozens of people, many of whom haven't been recovered from the river yet.

...which was rather undermined by him very publicly and loudly signing an executive order into INVESTIGATING THE HARM CAUSED BY BIDENS DEI POLICIES.

First couple of minutes of the vid here, he drops them all in it again, leaving them literally nowhere to turn other than outright denying reality.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/w ... y-policies

They’ve found the black boxes, so at least there will be some hard evidence there, rather than any made up bollocks said to fit someone’s agenda

I do get the feeling it’ll be arrogance on the military’s side that’s caused it, as atc told the helicopter what to do, so I’m not sure how them being a minority caused it

Be interested to see what @IanF makes of it

Beany wrote: Thu Jan 30, 2025 9:38 pm I mean, to be fair, the US Military is not exactly a hotbed of the finest minds known to society. In fact, it's a prime destination for high school dropouts.

And also to be fair - flying a helicopter is not easy, they don’t let any yahoo jump in and have a go, and even then you certainly don’t get a Blackhawk on your first day. So unless it’s something massively irresponsible like the Blackhawk pilot was letting his mate have a go for the LOLZ I think this might be a genuine accident/misjudgement.

We’re not letting donold off the hook for his insane DEI rants though.

If it ends up being as simple as "there's a plane near you, can you see it?"; "yeah, I can see a plane in the distance so it's all good", that seems like an overly basic procedure given the risk! I'm assuming there's more to it than that, but off the radio comms the fact that there is even that dialogue surprised me a little.

If only there was a pilot on the forum to explain all this...

@jamcg - the investigation team will undoubtedly be under significant pressure to accelerate their normal process.

It's amazing how much info is available nowadays from highly knowledgeable providers.

One of the busiest airspaces in the world, with military helicopters regularly tracking under the commercial airliner approach paths (on approved helicopter routes, where they are supposed to maintain a maximum altitude of below 200ft, so it looks like this 'copter could have been somewhat high?). I suspect that every day, there are situations where commercial and military aircraft are in relatively close proximity and ATC agrees that the 'copter movements are performed under visual separation - as confirmed by the 'copter pilots - it's now agreed the 'copter pilots are controlling separation and ATC aren't. Risks are present but accepted, and every day nothing goes wrong....

I suspect that the Mick West video above has correctly identified that - under the low-light conditions - the 'copter pilots mistakingly identified the 737 approaching behind the CRJ, as the CRJ. ATC asks them to confirm that they have the CRJ in sight - ATC don't give any directional indication (like "around 10 o'clock from your position") - only requesting confirmation that they have seen it - I assume that is normal. Even if ATC had given some kind of directional guidance - the lights of the 737 would have been in a broadly similar direction - so that might not have provided any further help. Also 'copters aren't necessarily pointing in exactly the direction they are travelling... so such guidance might be more unhelpful than helpful.

Add in that TCAS systems on both were likely to be inactive (or only partially active - possibly audio warning suppressed?) due to the low altitudes, the fact that the CRJ was switched from runway 01 (10 degrees from North) to runway 33 (330 degrees from North) so their approach plan had to alter relatively close to the airport, that airliner and copters are on different radio frequencies so can't hear the discussions that ATC are having with the other, and the difficulty for the airliner to spot any of the lights on the copter with all the background lights from the airport and city. Swiss cheese model.....

mik wrote: Fri Jan 31, 2025 9:44 am @jamcg - the investigation team will undoubtedly be under significant pressure to accelerate their normal process.

And not just that, they'll be under pressure to start with the correct MAGA answer and work backwards from there.

And I agree with the rest of your post.

That Trump press conference is batshit crazy.. maintain visual separation is commonly used at US airfields - responsibility for not hitting another aircraft is passed from ATC to the pilot. It’s not done anywhere else I can think of other than the US.

From the adsb video, it appears the helicopter was at the correct height and was given an instruction that should’ve kept it clear, but as the CRJ was on a circling approach, which involves low level manoeuvring, so didn’t appear to be headed for the airport, plus the helicopter was not on the same radio frequency must have confused the helicopter pilot into thinking the CRJ was flying elsewhere or alternatively they didn’t see it at all and thought the aircraft to their right was the one they were to pass behind (as the airfield was to the right, I can see that happening). Normally, to help identify the correct aircraft, ATC will give you a clock dial direction (eg. at your 11o’clock) to try and prevent this error, but I didn’t hear that in the transcript.

Finally, from the CRJ - seeing a helicopter against a city’s lights on a constant angle (ie no movement left to right) when you are attempting to find and line up with your landing runway (30 secs from landing) is not easy. Especially so when you’re both looking left and the helicopter is off your right hand side. Not sure on a CRJ, but TCAS (traffic collision avoidance system) has two modes - resolution advisory (climb, descend, increase rate, level off instructions) and traffic advisory (TA) (it alerts you there is another aircraft nearby). Below 750 radio altimeter (height above the actual ground) we only get TA’s as otherwise you’d not be able to land at an airfield. They come up on the Nav Display, a secondary screen at that stage of flight to be honest, as you’ll mostly be looking out the window visually manoeuvring the aircraft, with a quick scan of your PFD (primary flight display) to check speed, rate of descent, heading etc.

Juan Brown's Blancolirio channel is an excellent source of measured information on aviation incidents.