Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh. I am a nervous flyer and am scheduled to fly out of DCA tomorrow. Seriously considering canceling the trip. Would you fly out of there tomorrow?

Yes,

All airports have risks.

All flights have risks.

But given on January 20: FAA director fired
➡️ January 21: Air Traffic Controller hiring frozen
➡️ January 22: Aviation Safety Advisory Committee disbanded
➡️ January 28: Buyout/retirement demand sent to existing employees
➡️ January 29: First American mid-air collision in 16 years

This will get worse. Buckle up everyone. Don the con is in control and his type of control is to burn us to the ground and take all the US treasury money as his piggy bank.

Shame on you for insinuating the new administration’s actions caused yesterday’s crash. I mean that. You need to reflect on why you are such an awful person to trivialize this tragedy that killed nearly 70 people.

It’s fair to say the actions taken are likely to hurt aviation safety in the future but unless you can tie them directly to something in the control tower at National, this was just an awful coincidence.

In the future, teach yourself to not leap to conclusions in events like this. Your post was deeply offensive and callous, and you should take some time to explore why you are such an awful person that would go there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will avoid DCA and now it looks like people should avoid SFO as well. The San Carlos tower near SFO now has 0 air traffic controllers due to resignations over low pay.

Only the RJ's can land on 33. Just avoid the RJ's, which I do anyway. They are more claustrophobic, fly at lower speeds and have minimal bin space.

I feel like Luke Skywalker at the end of The Last Jedi: "everything you just said is wrong"

SOME RJs are more claustrophobic than mainline narrowbody jets- some are not. The Embraer 170/175/190/195 is perfectly comfortable to me personally, and has bins big enough to fit a regular carryon size suitcase. And those can land on 33 at DCA.

Normal cruise speeds:

A320- mach 0.78
737-700- mach 0.781
E175- mach 0.75
E190- mach 0.78
CRJ700- mach 0.78
CRJ200- mach 0.72

Fly them all you want. It matters not to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh. I am a nervous flyer and am scheduled to fly out of DCA tomorrow. Seriously considering canceling the trip. Would you fly out of there tomorrow?

Yes,

All airports have risks.

All flights have risks.

But given on January 20: FAA director fired
➡️ January 21: Air Traffic Controller hiring frozen
➡️ January 22: Aviation Safety Advisory Committee disbanded
➡️ January 28: Buyout/retirement demand sent to existing employees
➡️ January 29: First American mid-air collision in 16 years

This will get worse. Buckle up everyone. Don the con is in control and his type of control is to burn us to the ground and take all the US treasury money as his piggy bank.

Shame on you for insinuating the new administration’s actions caused yesterday’s crash. I mean that. You need to reflect on why you are such an awful person to trivialize this tragedy that killed nearly 70 people.

It’s fair to say the actions taken are likely to hurt aviation safety in the future but unless you can tie them directly to something in the control tower at National, this was just an awful coincidence.

In the future, teach yourself to not leap to conclusions in events like this. Your post was deeply offensive and callous, and you should take some time to explore why you are such an awful person that would go there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will avoid DCA and now it looks like people should avoid SFO as well. The San Carlos tower near SFO now has 0 air traffic controllers due to resignations over low pay.

Only the RJ's can land on 33. Just avoid the RJ's, which I do anyway. They are more claustrophobic, fly at lower speeds and have minimal bin space.

I feel like Luke Skywalker at the end of The Last Jedi: "everything you just said is wrong"

SOME RJs are more claustrophobic than mainline narrowbody jets- some are not. The Embraer 170/175/190/195 is perfectly comfortable to me personally, and has bins big enough to fit a regular carryon size suitcase. And those can land on 33 at DCA.

Normal cruise speeds:

A320- mach 0.78
737-700- mach 0.781
E175- mach 0.75
E190- mach 0.78
CRJ700- mach 0.78
CRJ200- mach 0.72

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will avoid DCA and now it looks like people should avoid SFO as well. The San Carlos tower near SFO now has 0 air traffic controllers due to resignations over low pay.

Only the RJ's can land on 33. Just avoid the RJ's, which I do anyway. They are more claustrophobic, fly at lower speeds and have minimal bin space.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will avoid DCA and now it looks like people should avoid SFO as well. The San Carlos tower near SFO now has 0 air traffic controllers due to resignations over low pay.

Only the RJ's can land on 33. Just avoid the RJ's, which I do anyway. They are more claustrophobic, fly at lower speeds and have minimal bin space.

Do the lower cruising speeds always matter? I get that for Kansas to DC they do, but for a route like DCA to NYC or BOS you spend so little time cruising and so much time positioning before and after cruise. RJs have the option of short or long runways and are more maneuverable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Will avoid DCA and now it looks like people should avoid SFO as well. The San Carlos tower near SFO now has 0 air traffic controllers due to resignations over low pay.

Only the RJ's can land on 33. Just avoid the RJ's, which I do anyway. They are more claustrophobic, fly at lower speeds and have minimal bin space.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would think DCA is going to be exponentially safer for the foreseeable future. The FAA has already restricted helicopter flights in the area.

+1 FAA restricted helicopter flights in DC for now.

Anonymous wrote:I would think DCA is going to be exponentially safer for the foreseeable future. The FAA has already restricted helicopter flights in the area.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh. I am a nervous flyer and am scheduled to fly out of DCA tomorrow. Seriously considering canceling the trip. Would you fly out of there tomorrow?

Yes,

All airports have risks.

All flights have risks.

But given on January 20: FAA director fired
➡️ January 21: Air Traffic Controller hiring frozen
➡️ January 22: Aviation Safety Advisory Committee disbanded
➡️ January 28: Buyout/retirement demand sent to existing employees
➡️ January 29: First American mid-air collision in 16 years

This will get worse. Buckle up everyone. Don the con is in control and his type of control is to burn us to the ground and take all the US treasury money as his piggy bank.

Shame on you for insinuating the new administration’s actions caused yesterday’s crash. I mean that. You need to reflect on why you are such an awful person to trivialize this tragedy that killed nearly 70 people.

It’s fair to say the actions taken are likely to hurt aviation safety in the future but unless you can tie them directly to something in the control tower at National, this was just an awful coincidence.

In the future, teach yourself to not leap to conclusions in events like this. Your post was deeply offensive and callous, and you should take some time to explore why you are such an awful person that would go there.

Well the current admin is blaming the last administration, so there's that.

Anonymous wrote:Will avoid DCA and now it looks like people should avoid SFO as well. The San Carlos tower near SFO now has 0 air traffic controllers due to resignations over low pay.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ugh. I am a nervous flyer and am scheduled to fly out of DCA tomorrow. Seriously considering canceling the trip. Would you fly out of there tomorrow?

Yes,

All airports have risks.

All flights have risks.

But given on January 20: FAA director fired
➡️ January 21: Air Traffic Controller hiring frozen
➡️ January 22: Aviation Safety Advisory Committee disbanded
➡️ January 28: Buyout/retirement demand sent to existing employees
➡️ January 29: First American mid-air collision in 16 years

This will get worse. Buckle up everyone. Don the con is in control and his type of control is to burn us to the ground and take all the US treasury money as his piggy bank.

Shame on you for insinuating the new administration’s actions caused yesterday’s crash. I mean that. You need to reflect on why you are such an awful person to trivialize this tragedy that killed nearly 70 people.

It’s fair to say the actions taken are likely to hurt aviation safety in the future but unless you can tie them directly to something in the control tower at National, this was just an awful coincidence.

In the future, teach yourself to not leap to conclusions in events like this. Your post was deeply offensive and callous, and you should take some time to explore why you are such an awful person that would go there.