Plane crash DCA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why was hwe name released after the family asked not to?

Look, it's amazing it was kept quiet this long. There was no way we weren't going to find out. We'll find out about the VIP too.

[Anonymous]

Rest in peace Captain Lobach. Thank you for your service to this country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are focused on the assumption it was a black woman. In terms of DEI, a woman crew member of a BH of any color, white included, would absolutely be considered a DEI hire.

right and who where the DEI hires who decided it was a good idea to run training missions in the middle of one of the business stretch of airway in the world?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are focused on the assumption it was a black woman. In terms of DEI, a woman crew member of a BH of any color, white included, would absolutely be considered a DEI hire.

I think most see DEI as benefitting women, especially when it comes to the military.

Agreed. People here are quick to focus on the POC aspect of DEI, but in the military, especially on a BH, it was a white female hire who is taking the DEI hit. Who knows what went wrong up there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why was hwe name released after the family asked not to?

Look, it's amazing it was kept quiet this long. There was no way we weren't going to find out. We'll find out about the VIP too.

Just curious what significance the name of the purported VIP has to the crash?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are focused on the assumption it was a black woman. In terms of DEI, a woman crew member of a BH of any color, white included, would absolutely be considered a DEI hire.

Only if the credentials don’t match that of her peers. Show us her background.

Libs think DEI means black chicks and Republicans think it means people that don’t deserve it but get it anyways, probably because they’re black chicks but not always. If they’re just a chick the question remains if their credentials meet that of other high level, accident free, pilots

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How much has Elon Musk said about this? Let’s be honest - he’s the one actually running the government at the moment. And if he’s unusually quiet about this incident (I have no idea as I’m not on his site) that would be noteworthy, since he seemingly can’t stop himself from weighing in on everything else.

Well now the NTSB has announced it will ONLY be communicating to the press via the app formerly known as Twitter. This is graft, this is corruption. Why the hell is a government bureau only being allowed to communicate through a social media channel owned by Elon. This seems like a crime if I ever saw one.

What? Seriously? No briefings?

You people are hysterical, and I don't mean funny. The NTSB announced that due to the huge amount of requests, they will not be notifying the press of briefings, news, etc., through email. Instead will do public notifications on X for where and when the briefings will take place. Get a grip.

Why force people to use X!?!?

The Elon apologists are out in force. Somehow the NTSB previously managed to function without limiting themselves to one channel of communication. They are ONLY using X. It is a private platform and the federal government should not be forced to use a single privately owned media channel, especially when the person ordering its use also happens to own it. That is corruption. That is graft. That is a crime. Put plainly, Musk is using is political power for his own person financial gain.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How much has Elon Musk said about this? Let’s be honest - he’s the one actually running the government at the moment. And if he’s unusually quiet about this incident (I have no idea as I’m not on his site) that would be noteworthy, since he seemingly can’t stop himself from weighing in on everything else.

Well now the NTSB has announced it will ONLY be communicating to the press via the app formerly known as Twitter. This is graft, this is corruption. Why the hell is a government bureau only being allowed to communicate through a social media channel owned by Elon. This seems like a crime if I ever saw one.

What? Seriously? No briefings?

You people are hysterical, and I don't mean funny. The NTSB announced that due to the huge amount of requests, they will not be notifying the press of briefings, news, etc., through email. Instead will do public notifications on X for where and when the briefings will take place. Get a grip.

Why force people to use X!?!?

The Elon apologists are out in force. Somehow the NTSB previously managed to function without limiting themselves to one channel of communication. They are ONLY using X. It is a private platform and the federal government should not be forced to use a single privately owned media channel, especially when the person ordering its use also happens to own it. That is corruption. That is graft. That is a crime. Put plainly, Musk is using is political power for his own person financial gain.

How can this possibly be legal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People are focused on the assumption it was a black woman. In terms of DEI, a woman crew member of a BH of any color, white included, would absolutely be considered a DEI hire.

Spoken by someone with zero real military experience.

Women pilots have been kicking ass in the Blackhawks for decades now. They don’t get there by their T&A.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are focused on the assumption it was a black woman. In terms of DEI, a woman crew member of a BH of any color, white included, would absolutely be considered a DEI hire.

Only if the credentials don’t match that of her peers. Show us her background.

Libs think DEI means black chicks and Republicans think it means people that don’t deserve it but get it anyways, probably because they’re black chicks but not always. If they’re just a chick the question remains if their credentials meet that of other high level, accident free, pilots

The reasons Republicans think that is because that’s what they’ve always done- given positions to white men who didn’t deserve them because they were white men and friends with so and so.

It’s like the cheating spouse who is always suspicious or falsely accusing the faithful spouse of cheating.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rest in peace Captain Lobach. Thank you for your service to this country.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:28 years old.

Can someone explain how someone so young in the military was… a both a high ranking helicopter pilot and moonlighting as a White House aide?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why was hwe name released after the family asked not to?

Honestly I don’t see under what grounds they could request that and have it honored. It’s the first major airline accident in the U.S. in 25 years- of course the names of the military members involved were going to be revealed along with the manifest of everyone on the commercial flight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:28 years old.

Can someone explain how someone so young in the military was… a both a high ranking helicopter pilot and moonlighting as a White House aide?

White House social aides are military officers who attend to people at social functions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People are focused on the assumption it was a black woman. In terms of DEI, a woman crew member of a BH of any color, white included, would absolutely be considered a DEI hire.

Only if the credentials don’t match that of her peers. Show us her background.

Libs think DEI means black chicks and Republicans think it means people that don’t deserve it but get it anyways, probably because they’re black chicks but not always. If they’re just a chick the question remains if their credentials meet that of other high level, accident free, pilots

I know many female ex-mil pilots who kick ass (including my primary flight instructor who now works for Delta, and a long time friend who flew F-16s), and I was assuming this woman in the role of DC VIP transport would have unquestionable credentials, because the people I know in those roles, and I know they beat out other lesser candidates. I assumed that all this childish, hateful bad mouthing would all be groundless

I am concerned that her memorial notices are saying she had 450 hours but that she earned her wings in early 2021. That is a very shockingly low number for someone who is active duty (I would assume at least 200 hrs a year), it looks like she was Guard for some of that and was currently active duty and living in Woodbridge. I see she was working as XO and the WH and other aux roles.
Which is fine, but in mil usually you pick a lane and go into a command track for that kind of stuff if you want to go career and get promoted (and then just fly occasionally to keep a "paper" qualification above your desk) , or you if you are not "career" (she planned on going to med school), you get your hours in and compete if you want to be picked cream-of-crop pilot roles like VIP transport that go to the best 10%.

There seems to be a mismatch that I can't logically resolve since she is in a very elite VIP unit with those few hours spread over so many years. I am not going to fall for the DEI BS, but I am honestly trying to figure out what the chain of events logically led her to be the PIC in this scenario. I'm a little rattled as to why she was in that situation . I'm made mistakes in the air and I've been lucky to still be here, and I am not the best pilot by any means, but somehow she was put in this situation and this was evidently an error with astounding consequences...