I mean, I don't think you can rule anything out at this stage. It certainly seems likely that this was not intentional, but I don't think we can say that 100% certain yet. HOWEVER, people who are looking at the video and thinking that is strong evidence this was intentional need to stop and remember something very simple--space is three-dimensional. You simply cannot make any comparison to 'it's as if you drove into a semi' or that sort of thing. I think people are imagining this as though they are looking at an overhead view of a highway collision, which it simply isn't. Most obviously, it's clear that there is elevation change with the jet descending and the helo ascending, but just looking at the video people are imagining it as though they were at identical elevations the entire time. |
Ever heard the saying, when you hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras? Alternatively known as Occam's Razor. I'm just a statistics sort of person. |
Guys. Kobe's "expert" pilot literally flew into the side of a f&%@ing mountain. Accidentally.
Helos are scary. Accidents happen all the time. |
It links to a different (Vegas) incident. Can you provide the correct link? |
Yes, but the weather and visibility were an issue that night. It was clear, though breezy when this accident occurred. |
FAA has now restricted helos from DCA's airspace. |
That’s what I think. The “training” part is covering for someone. Just my opinion. I’m the one who thinks the current government will lie about such details. PP |
And the driver was told before merging ‘do you see that 18 wheeler’ and the driver replying ‘yes’ |
No. That’s not how that works according to aviation pros. |
The problem is that "the simplest explanation is probably the right one" could lead people directly to suicide. Because it's very simple -- why would a helicopter fly right into an airplane? Death wish I guess. The explanations about visibility along that route at night complicate that kind of conclusion though. It's an alternate theory -- maybe the helicopter literally could not see the plane. Worth looking into! But is that automatically more simple or elegant an explanation? Not even a little. While pilots sometimes can't see oncoming planes, perhaps even often can't see them, it is not true that they can never see them. In fact we already have evidence that helicopters can at least sometimes see them, even at night, as we look at these other "near misses" where in some cases the helicopters shifted course to avoid collision. The "horses not zebras" advice is designed for, for instance, ER doctors who are constantly faced with people facing life threatening symptoms and need to diagnose and treat quickly to save lives. They are trained to go for the simplest and most likely explanation because 9/10 times it will be correct and they'll save a life. Whereas if they sit around examining all possible explanations, people will die waiting. But this is the opposite situation. People have already died. The cause is already an event that is extremely out of the ordinary -- a midair collision. We don't need to make a snap judgment about what is most likely here. We need to take our time, examine all possible explanations, and try to get it 100% right. This is not a situation where Occam's razor applies. |
How will all those VIPs get home? |
Plenty of BTDT pilots HAVE stated that visibility is an issue at night in that area. Keep up. |
Does a black hawk helicopter have duplicate controls for a pilot and a copilot? Can you disable one or the other for training purposes? |
The helos shouldn't even be there. |
Again. This is space. Space is 3d. Landing aircraft are descending at hundreds of feet per minute and the helicopter rose sharply. Please stop with the analogies about road conditions. |