Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did people read the NYT article yesterday? I understand there were many things that went wrong that night, including understaffing in the tower, but why the hell was a pilot with inferior flying skills in the area that night? I was struck by the description of her lack of talent as a pilot. I’m sorry if that is hurtful to her family.

Can someone paste the relevant part, or post a link to the article?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/01/us/politics/dc-plane-helicopter-crash.html

....That same week, Mr. Eaves, assigned to give her the annual flight exam, told his girlfriend that he feared Captain Lobach was unprepared for the flight, according to an N.T.S.B. interview document.
Captain Lobach, recalled the girlfriend, was described by Mr. Eaves as “not where she should be,” according to the document. It was the girlfriend’s impression, investigators said in the document, that Mr. Eaves “thought the other pilot was not grasping things they should have understood by that point in her flying career.”
Nonetheless, Mr. Eaves was professional and even jovial during the Jan. 29 flight, according to a transcript of the cockpit voice recorder.....

....He appeared to try to soothe Captain Lobach’s embarrassment over a directional mistake by joking that he was “all game” to blow by a town at low altitude but that they would have to make a “blood pact” not to discuss it with anyone later.
She appeared to have recognized the tongue-in-cheek suggestion, replying, “Nope, right.”
But the exam did not go smoothly.
More than an hour before the crash, during a portion of the flight with choppy winds, Mr. Eaves took the flight controls from her, according to the transcript.
At another point, when they were evidently practicing landing and other maneuvers on a rural airfield, she was forced to “go around” one landing area on short notice — a tactic that is often used when an aircraft cannot land safely, aviators told The Times. When Mr. Eaves asked her about the mistake, she blamed the height of her chair, according to the transcript.
She also erroneously turned left when she should have gone right to avoid winds, and turned northward toward Great Falls, Va., when she should have been heading south to return to the Army base, prompting Mr. Eaves to ask her where they were going, according to the transcript.
At one point, the transcript says, she described herself as “dizzy,” but quickly added that it was “not too bad.”

Little missteps might be relatively forgivable on a deserted airfield or at thousands of feet in elevation, where there is less traffic. But once the Black Hawk entered the Washington area’s airspace — known as Class B, the busiest grade — there was very little margin for error when problems emerged.

Anonymous wrote:After reading the NY Times article about the hearing, I don't know how anyone could think this was still a VIP transport in disguise. It is quite clear that it was a training/certification exercise that went very wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ll never forget that Trump’s first instinct, barely 10 days into his term, was to blame DEI for this disaster. Unforgivable.

Yes. Except it seems that is what happened.

Anonymous wrote:I’ll never forget that Trump’s first instinct, barely 10 days into his term, was to blame DEI for this disaster. Unforgivable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s pretty clear that this entire “investigation” has been structured in such a way to put all the blame on the female pilot.

Not on the two men flying the more maneuverable jet.

Not on the man sitting next to Lobach, either.



They’re trying to put the blame on her.




So predictable.

The jet cannot move out of the way easily. The helicopter can. What are you missing? There is zero to suggest that the airline guys did anything at all wrong. The blame seems to be on her to a major degree. Just the way it is.

Anonymous wrote:It’s pretty clear that this entire “investigation” has been structured in such a way to put all the blame on the female pilot.

Not on the two men flying the more maneuverable jet.

Not on the man sitting next to Lobach, either.



They’re trying to put the blame on her.




So predictable.

Anonymous wrote:It’s pretty clear that this entire “investigation” has been structured in such a way to put all the blame on the female pilot.

Not on the two men flying the more maneuverable jet.

Not on the man sitting next to Lobach, either.



They’re trying to put the blame on her.




So predictable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did people read the NYT article yesterday? I understand there were many things that went wrong that night, including understaffing in the tower, but why the hell was a pilot with inferior flying skills in the area that night? I was struck by the description of her lack of talent as a pilot. I’m sorry if that is hurtful to her family.

Can someone paste the relevant part, or post a link to the article?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/01/us/politics/dc-plane-helicopter-crash.html

....That same week, Mr. Eaves, assigned to give her the annual flight exam, told his girlfriend that he feared Captain Lobach was unprepared for the flight, according to an N.T.S.B. interview document.

Completely unrelated to the point of this article but I noticed they reference his girlfriend...but his obituaries mentioned his widow and children. So, is this just an error and they interviewed his wife? Or like...what cause the alternative is this is how his wife finds out he had an affair.

Really, man/woman? This is what you are wondering ?

Yes, that is my only concern in all of this. (I'll note that was sarcasm for you.)

I immediately said "Completely not the point of this article," implying I understand the point of the article. I am simply confused how this man's gf was interviewed by NTSB when he was married. Did the NTSB identify her as his gf incorrectly? I would hope that they are being very detail oriented in the investigation, so that wouldn't be great.

Are you suggesting that the report is a fabrication?

This is clearly going over your head, so let me be very, very explicit for you:

Misidentifying someone as a "girlfriend" when they were a wife is a mistake that may not seem like much, but to me, it indicates that the NTSB is not paying much attention to details. They interviewed this woman themselves, according to the report, so it's not like they're relying on information from a third party who got it wrong. It is concerning that in the investigation of a passenger jet crash they would get something so blatantly wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did people read the NYT article yesterday? I understand there were many things that went wrong that night, including understaffing in the tower, but why the hell was a pilot with inferior flying skills in the area that night? I was struck by the description of her lack of talent as a pilot. I’m sorry if that is hurtful to her family.

Can someone paste the relevant part, or post a link to the article?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/01/us/politics/dc-plane-helicopter-crash.html

....That same week, Mr. Eaves, assigned to give her the annual flight exam, told his girlfriend that he feared Captain Lobach was unprepared for the flight, according to an N.T.S.B. interview document.

Completely unrelated to the point of this article but I noticed they reference his girlfriend...but his obituaries mentioned his widow and children. So, is this just an error and they interviewed his wife? Or like...what cause the alternative is this is how his wife finds out he had an affair.

Really, man/woman? This is what you are wondering ?

Yes, that is my only concern in all of this. (I'll note that was sarcasm for you.)

I immediately said "Completely not the point of this article," implying I understand the point of the article. I am simply confused how this man's gf was interviewed by NTSB when he was married. Did the NTSB identify her as his gf incorrectly? I would hope that they are being very detail oriented in the investigation, so that wouldn't be great.

Are you suggesting that the report is a fabrication?

This is clearly going over your head, so let me be very, very explicit for you:

Misidentifying someone as a "girlfriend" when they were a wife is a mistake that may not seem like much, but to me, it indicates that the NTSB is not paying much attention to details. They interviewed this woman themselves, according to the report, so it's not like they're relying on information from a third party who got it wrong. It is concerning that in the investigation of a passenger jet crash they would get something so blatantly wrong.

Lesson: don't trust the current ntsb they are overlooking details. What if he was in process of a divorce and had a girlfriend?

I mean, possibly, but getting a girlfriend before you're fully divorced is a risky move in divorce court that most attorneys would advise against, and his wife spoke a few times after the crash and referred to him as "my husband" so I believe this is more likely an error.

Anonymous wrote:It’s pretty clear that this entire “investigation” has been structured in such a way to put all the blame on the female pilot.

Not on the two men flying the more maneuverable jet.

Not on the man sitting next to Lobach, either.



They’re trying to put the blame on her.




So predictable.