Swizzle

I won't laugh when they fix the acquisition system and MAJCOM JCIDs/CONOPs by actually enforcing MAJCOMs supporting it with proper resources, holding vendors accountable with great technical data/operational test reports, and providing the necessary warfighter material on a reasonable timeline. This infers MAJCOMs doing their part ISO DoDI5000.89-DAF99-103 and DAFI 63-series... honestly, safely, quickly, and effectively with adept operator input. Get deep and serious into some long lead logistics and QFA! As Napoleon Bonaparte said, “Amateurs talk strategy. Professionals talk logistics”. USAF HQs are all strategy, no functional logistics. For example MC rates of...well, anything. Bobs cherry picking shit of their own interest without suitable and effective data backing the decision for the operators needs to stop. Where their report card!? Till then I laugh, as it's all reclaimed-water ball wash. What strategy is next? B2B!?

They were cherry picked beyond belief.

Poor them.

It's too high in the public interest to keep quietly stuffed into military flight safety privilege-'drawer' in the interest of national security. Also, it is too hard to justify national security interest when 64 non-military died by, what readily appears to be, 3 military people. NTSB will release their report version. Army will probably have their own too. Yay big gov't. They'll probably have differences in reporting strangely.

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/DCA25MA108.aspx Wearing Nogs, Rx/Tx's stepped on, Helo pilot alititude callout errors with Helo IP corrections, Helo pilot checkride....this will be a good final report to read and heed (as if it already wasn't).

A major takeaway from this mishap IMHO is altimetery in low-level and/or deconfliction environments is a major, FAFO risk and hazard for aircrew to understand, as well as respect.

Uuummm...it absolutely does, and maybe in this situation, have an influence on TCAS. Big question: what was the altimeter source+setting and broadcast altitude method used by each leading up to the collision? They could have been different. From FAA: "Can you please explain the altitude and velocity reports that ADS-B provides? ADS-B reports two kinds of altitudes: barometric and geometric. The barometric altitude transmitted by the ADS-B is actually pressure altitude which is the altitude seen on your altimeter when the altimeter setting is set to 29.92. Geometric altitude is calculated by GPS as the height of the aircraft above the earth ellipsoid. These two altitudes are not the same, but having both allows for applications that require one or the other as an altitude source and provides a means of verifying correct pressure altitude reporting from aircraft. ADS-B reports horizontal and vertical velocity relative to the Earth. This velocity is useful for air traffic control functions and ADS-B applications. ADS-B does not report vertical or horizontal airspeed. Airspeed is provided by other aircraft sensors." So theoretically ADS-B provides better, more accurate GPS based altimetery than without, so TCAS can make a better TA/RAs and decrease aircarft seperations becuase of better 4D info. And if both were utilizing ADS-B through TCAS, then the decinfliction is that much more harmonized, and better as standardized/equal starting point. Riddle me this on low altitude/WAAS environments!? Why does "ADS-B will require at least one Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS)-capable GPS receiver connected directly to the transponders." https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/equipadsb/capabilities/benefits https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/technology/equipadsb/resources/faq

On assignments/dreamsheets/pipe-dreams: Defense Resources Management Institute in Monterrey, CA and myself each marked each other number one/matched, after I was interviewed by their hiring/screening panel which went very well (having a Master's in Finance and university teaching certificate helped). Then when the wait was over, AFPC gave me orders to FTU not DRMI. At the time was coming non-current/unqualified from 30 months non-flying AU Fellowship. They said needed IP ASAP to pacing unit, to make the 'sausage'. So end up at FTU to secondary method requal which wasn't yet approved, then when approved took six month to get RQ ride one scheduled and complete first attempt. Said F-it send me to check in ride two, passed. That's was 25% of the assignment time before departing. #AFPC+FTUwinning

Master Training Strategery: Make the training realistic to MDS/MWS', give them the most outdated trainer, divergently provide lots of flight hours (in VR/AR) but somehow even more useless non-flight CBTs or record management monitor duties, offer them promotion hope only via Exec/aide de camp/CAG/social aide positions before winging and tell them to suck it up and don't f*** it up after winging, maybe pro-solo if you're nice. Then blame aircrew when they run afoul, next release a BtB SRF/FCIF (because they might have forgot what they didn't learn by staying at the Holiday Inn Express run by contract on-base) and modify dress and appearance regs change as cherry on top; Ensure the video explanantion is mandatory to watch. Lastly, amend the retention/take rate tracker to make the slides green by changing the denominator, to variable a demoninator of course. Oh, all the while 19th is making short-lived experiments/SGTOs to buy time until the staff PCS' and/or seperates (chaff). But overall you must kill all aircrew traditions, rationale, and culture at any cost; best done by making aircrew do all ADCON functions themselves for themselves to keep them busy with other than aircrew duties. Wait until next recession to hire unsuspecting FNGs.

Easy...everything will be, or have, gold as well as have his name on it.

Bottom pic looks like a comet, that tail of something is, well, something. Needs investigation.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DFcE08TxmLU/

https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/small-aircraft-crashes-near-reagan-national-airport-fireboats-respond.amp All traffic suspended. Ground stop too.