Anonymous wrote:So that we can have a more worthwhile and informed discussion, it would be great if each poster would end their post with the following abbreviations (with meaning)
NM. (I have no military experience.)
NFM. (No one in my family has ever served in the military.)
NNFM. Combo of above.
M. (I have served in the military, with years noted — as in M5 or M20)
MA. (I am, or have been, an aviator in the military.)
AV. (I am, or have been, a rotary-wing Army aviator.)
This would give readers
a chance to understand if a poster is just making stupid comments and is ignorant of everything military/military aviation but enjoys posting nonetheless, or if the poster has something thoughtful, and even informed, to say about this incident based on military experience.

Yeah, no.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else’s mind still blown that DC airspace is used for training? I guess I thought all those military helicopters were actually doing legitimate military work, not training. I get that training is a necessity but still.

Tell me you have no experience with the military without telling me…

This thread really illuminates how many people in our society do not understand basic information about the military because they have never served. Many people today have not only never served, they have no family or friends who have ever served. Thus, they have no context for understanding events that involve the military.

Ok, we get it. You’re special. Stop being so condescending. Of course a non military person isn’t going to know how the military operates. Why would you think otherwise with a superiority complex.

Anonymous wrote:So that we can have a more worthwhile and informed discussion, it would be great if each poster would end their post with the following abbreviations (with meaning)
NM. (I have no military experience.)
NFM. (No one in my family has ever served in the military.)
NNFM. Combo of above.
M. (I have served in the military, with years noted — as in M5 or M20)
MA. (I am, or have been, an aviator in the military.)
AV. (I am, or have been, a rotary-wing Army aviator.)
This would give readers a chance to understand if a poster is just making stupid comments and is ignorant of everything military/military aviation but enjoys posting nonetheless, or if the poster has something thoughtful, and even informed, to say about this incident based on military experience.

What abbreviation does one use for civilian aviator experience?

So that we can have a more worthwhile and informed discussion, it would be great if each poster would end their post with the following abbreviations (with meaning)
NM. (I have no military experience.)
NFM. (No one in my family has ever served in the military.)
NNFM. Combo of above.
M. (I have served in the military, with years noted — as in M5 or M20)
MA. (I am, or have been, an aviator in the military.)
AV. (I am, or have been, a rotary-wing Army aviator.)
This would give readers a chance to understand if a poster is just making stupid comments and is ignorant of everything military/military aviation but enjoys posting nonetheless, or if the poster has something thoughtful, and even informed, to say about this incident based on military experience.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She was the DEI that was the focus immediately afterwards?

The Administration was trying to rile people up into assuming the pilot was an incompetent black woman. I don’t know how many posts I read on here and X stating the pilot was a black woman.

No. Most just assumed a woman. And they assumed right. Trump was obviously told who was senior command on that helicopter and then popped off right after on live TV.

Yes, but he popped off about ATCs, not about pilots. He suggested strongly that the cause of the crash was an ATC who was a DEI hire.

You're giving the man who doesn't know the difference between a mental asylum and political asylum way too much credit here. He doesn't know what he's saying as it's coming out of his mouth.

Trump was seized with the helicopter’s altitude. We later learn it was flying too high. Trump was seized with DEI. We later learn the chopper’s top command was a young female. Trump was seized with ATC. We later learn the tower was short staffed because a supervisor let 1 of 2 ATCs leave early. And we don’t yet know the names, gender or ethnicity of those 3 airport workers, which could bolsters Trump’s themes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She was the DEI that was the focus immediately afterwards?

The Administration was trying to rile people up into assuming the pilot was an incompetent black woman. I don’t know how many posts I read on here and X stating the pilot was a black woman.

No. Most just assumed a woman. And they assumed right. Trump was obviously told who was senior command on that helicopter and then popped off right after on live TV.

Yes, but he popped off about ATCs, not about pilots. He suggested strongly that the cause of the crash was an ATC who was a DEI hire.

It could be both! We don’t yet know the names of the ATC supervisor, ATC who went home early, and sole on-duty ATC. Could very well be both ATC error and pilot error. Trump was clearly seized with both the helicopter’s incorrect altitude and ATC.

I think you are giving him too much credit. He wasn’t seized with anything other than the desire to divide and sew division. It doesn’t matter in the slightest what the gender/race/etc of the people are. What matters is that we had 48 hours of the 4chan crowd and his basement dwelling flying monkeys in general making up wild accusations for no other reason than to gin up resentment over perceived DEI. Even those who aren’t part of his crowd would no doubt hear some of the chatter and think, gee, did DEI really hurt these innocent people? And thus:mission accomplished.

Again, the accurate specifics do not matter. Remember how often in the last administration when asked about some big problem he had promised to solve in 5 minutes never came to fruition? Over and over and over again his answer was the same: it’ll be ready in two weeks. And no one followed up in two weeks because there were 17 other scandals in the interim that pushed it off the front burner.

And when there’s no DEI issue proven here, eh, it was still successful bc Americans argued about it for a weekend.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She was the DEI that was the focus immediately afterwards?

The Administration was trying to rile people up into assuming the pilot was an incompetent black woman. I don’t know how many posts I read on here and X stating the pilot was a black woman.

No. Most just assumed a woman. And they assumed right. Trump was obviously told who was senior command on that helicopter and then popped off right after on live TV.

Yes, but he popped off about ATCs, not about pilots. He suggested strongly that the cause of the crash was an ATC who was a DEI hire.

It could be both! We don’t yet know the names of the ATC supervisor, ATC who went home early, and sole on-duty ATC. Could very well be both ATC error and pilot error. Trump was clearly seized with both the helicopter’s incorrect altitude and ATC.

Very safe bet president Trump was given all 6 names (3 airport, 3 in the helicopter) before his live tirade.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She was the DEI that was the focus immediately afterwards?

The Administration was trying to rile people up into assuming the pilot was an incompetent black woman. I don’t know how many posts I read on here and X stating the pilot was a black woman.

No. Most just assumed a woman. And they assumed right. Trump was obviously told who was senior command on that helicopter and then popped off right after on live TV.

Yes, but he popped off about ATCs, not about pilots. He suggested strongly that the cause of the crash was an ATC who was a DEI hire.

You're giving the man who doesn't know the difference between a mental asylum and political asylum way too much credit here. He doesn't know what he's saying as it's coming out of his mouth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else’s mind still blown that DC airspace is used for training? I guess I thought all those military helicopters were actually doing legitimate military work, not training. I get that training is a necessity but still.

Tell me you have no experience with the military without telling me…

This thread really illuminates how many people in our society do not understand basic information about the military because they have never served. Many people today have not only never served, they have no family or friends who have ever served. Thus, they have no context for understanding events that involve the military.

I understand that 70 people are dead because the military inexplicably decided to do training in a civilian area. Being that I am a civilian over whose neighborhood they train, I think I have every right to ask questions.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else’s mind still blown that DC airspace is used for training? I guess I thought all those military helicopters were actually doing legitimate military work, not training. I get that training is a necessity but still.

Tell me you have no experience with the military without telling me…

This thread really illuminates how many people in our society do not understand basic information about the military because they have never served. Many people today have not only never served, they have no family or friends who have ever served. Thus, they have no context for understanding events that involve the military.

So true. The seriousness of the stuff my dad was responsible for as a freshly minted junior officer in the Navy when he was like 22 and assigned to an aircraft carrier just boggles my mind.

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else’s mind still blown that DC airspace is used for training? I guess I thought all those military helicopters were actually doing legitimate military work, not training. I get that training is a necessity but still.

Tell me you have no experience with the military without telling me…

This thread really illuminates how many people in our society do not understand basic information about the military because they have never served. Many people today have not only never served, they have no family or friends who have ever served. Thus, they have no context for understanding events that involve the military.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

I would argue that it is a channel that is guaranteed to reach far more people than some antiquated email list.

That’s not the point and you know it. Government agencies duty to communicate transparently to the people it serves should not be beholden to private for-profit interests, and Elon should not be profiting because he has cozied up to Trump. That’s called corruption and in this country there are laws against it. The American taxpayer’s are not a piggy bank for tech bros to raid.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

A couple of days to scrub her socials, google search, public records, and who knows what else? This young lady was clearly another “JD Vance” they were grooming for high office.

I’m sure they did scrub her social media and everything else. But only to prevent voyeurs peeking at all the details of her private life. I was ROTC (and active duty) and I knew her type. She sounds exactly like all of us: classic overachiever, wants to do what is right. I highly doubt there was anything remotely nefarious or controversial on her social media. She probably knew better as an officer to even post anything of political opinion as well. I don’t know anything about flying, but I’m very confident there is no “gotcha” about her character

Not very believable at this point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
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.

A couple of days to scrub her socials, google search, public records, and who knows what else? This young lady was clearly another “JD Vance” they were grooming for high office.

I’m sure they did scrub her social media and everything else. But only to prevent voyeurs peeking at all the details of her private life. I was ROTC (and active duty) and I knew her type. She sounds exactly like all of us: classic overachiever, wants to do what is right. I highly doubt there was anything remotely nefarious or controversial on her social media. She probably knew better as an officer to even post anything of political opinion as well. I don’t know anything about flying, but I’m very confident there is no “gotcha” about her character

Anonymous wrote:

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

Point is these questions should apply no matter the person's race, gender, or other characteristics... not "oh, it's a white dude? free pass" and "oh, it's not a white dude? possible DEI, scrutinize background". White dudes can get opportunities because of connections, family, etc. rather than pure objective merit just as well as anyone else.

John McCain was called a nepo baby his entire career. Vance was a desk jockey who got into YLS thanks to DEI. White men aren’t above ridicule and accountability.