Everybody assumes that her headset was working correctly---but everything is consistent with a failure of the headset. I once had a good Koss headphone for stereo hi-fi listening, but when it got old, it got cranky. An unplugged lead is all that would be necessary.
Why leap to a condemnation when a simple (but terrible) communication fault could have been the cause?
And how would he have known? By telepathy? What does intentionality have to do with the necessity for emergency action? And, as someone else has said, there is no guarantee that grabbing control would have helped the matter. If she was deaf to the situation, any such interference could have resulted in a struggle for control. You need to step back and rethink your picture of the world. I don't think you are a helicopter pilot.
The condemnation is the event itself. Complete and total catastrophic failure of ability and duty. Strawman arguments do not assist in fact finding measures of critical events. The chopper didnt fly itself into a plane. (Someone) did.
Not to mention the headsets and comms would all be part of a pre lift off check list performed and verified prior to clearance to proceed with the lift off.
I highly doubt you would feel so whimsical about who was responsible if YOUR spouse, kid, friend or family member was on the airplane hit or killed in the helicopter.
As though equipment cannot fail after a check-off. Give me a laugh. That's why we design systems with multiple redundancies.
No amount of misery or sorrow has any bearing on the facts of what happened, and so far, there is nothing to prove that human malfeasance was at fault, if everything is explicable by a material fault. People are running away from Occam's Razor.
All I see here is raging misogyny hiding behind DEI condemnation. And I resent being called "whimsical" when I have been dead serious about this event in every comment I make.
Yes equipment failures occur. It is possible no doubt. And you answer that issue in the very next sentence with redundancies in place. Which in a military aircraft, this one in particular I have flown in many times including utilizing the comm headset system, moves the needle further away from possible to highly unlikely to occur or be the event as a catalyst for catastrophic failure.
As for others misogynistic comments I take no credit or care what others have to ramble on about. Looking at this event as a result or failure of DEI is reasonable and worthy to dissect properly.
It is. In which case the basis of evidence should rest on pertinent facts, not leading assumptions. As I always point out, "unlikely" does not mean "impossible." But thank you for your service.
Everybody assumes that her headset was working correctly---but everything is consistent with a failure of the headset. I once had a good Koss headphone for stereo hi-fi listening, but when it got old, it got cranky. An unplugged lead is all that would be necessary.
Why leap to a condemnation when a simple (but terrible) communication fault could have been the cause?
Because the nonDEI copilot would have done something if it wasn't intentional by the DEI pilot.
And how would he have known? By telepathy? What does intentionality have to do with the necessity for emergency action? And, as someone else has said, there is no guarantee that grabbing control would have helped the matter. If she was deaf to the situation, any such interference could have resulted in a struggle for control. You need to step back and rethink your picture of the world. I don't think you are a helicopter pilot.
The condemnation is the event itself. Complete and total catastrophic failure of ability and duty. Strawman arguments do not assist in fact finding measures of critical events. The chopper didnt fly itself into a plane. (Someone) did.
Not to mention the headsets and comms would all be part of a pre lift off check list performed and verified prior to clearance to proceed with the lift off.
I highly doubt you would feel so whimsical about who was responsible if YOUR spouse, kid, friend or family member was on the airplane hit or killed in the helicopter.
As though equipment cannot fail after a check-off. Give me a laugh. That's why we design systems with multiple redundancies.
No amount of misery or sorrow has any bearing on the facts of what happened, and so far, there is nothing to prove that human malfeasance was at fault, if everything is explicable by a material fault. People are running away from Occam's Razor.
All I see here is raging misogyny hiding behind DEI condemnation. And I resent being called "whimsical" when I have been dead serious about this event in every comment I make.
Yes equipment failures occur. It is possible no doubt. And you answer that issue in the very next sentence with redundancies in place. Which in a military aircraft, this one in particular I have flown in many times including utilizing the comm headset system, moves the needle further away from possible to highly unlikely to occur or be the event as a catalyst for catastrophic failure.
As for others misogynistic comments I take no credit or care what others have to ramble on about. Looking at this event as a result or failure of DEI is reasonable and worthy to dissect properly.
It is. In which case the basis of evidence should rest on pertinent facts, not leading assumptions. As I always point out, "unlikely" does not mean "impossible." But thank you for your service.