It does mean (if true) that she's about as new as possible. Depending on what she did before, she may have one month of flying a jet.

GAC06 said:

---

It does mean (if true) that she's about as new as possible. Depending on what she did before, she may have one month of flying a jet.

---

Don't most airlines have a minimum for turbine time? Something like 500 hours have to be turbines, it can't all be piston engine?

Rapier108 said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

The longer Delta stays quiet about who flipped their plane, the worse this gets https://t.co/fJLPAGHmCA

— DC_Draino (@DC_Draino) February 19, 2025

This look legit or nah?

---

It looks like DC Draino is trying to create the narrative of a conspiracy/coverup.

People like him live to push narratives (in this case he is going for "muh, DEI" one and Delta is trying to hide it) to get the likes and retweets. (He put out plenty of lies and half truth during the campaign, mostly about DeSantis.)

We saw the same thing with the DCA crash. People screaming coverup when the military waited an extra day to identify the other Blackhawk pilot. There was no coverup; simply the family asked for an extra day before making her name public.

Too many people now live to be fed their daily dose of outrage, and this is true for both the left and right. There is an entire industry on social media which exists simply to feed that outrage.

Even if the CRJ pilot was new, that does not mean unqualified to fly the plane. It means less experienced and the real mistake would be by the other pilot for allowing her to land the plane in such poor weather conditions, especially if she hadn't done so before.

---

Sorry, but when these corporations constantly boast about being "diverse" or even "unmanned", and placing clear emphasis on hiring based on physical characteristics...even if they do not do this in practice (BIG assumption imo)...how is it not only natural to wonder if DEI could have been a factor?

They constantly signal to us that "merit" and "ability" are no longer first and foremost. Why wouldn't many ponder whether lack of a merit based approach could have been a very real factor?

Look at these clowns (sorry, not sure why I can never embed Instagram links):

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DGOjvtztSS-/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

https://www.instagram.com/p/DGQjpbTOeXI/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link&igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

In the past, yes. Even some majors have dropped that requirement. I doubt any regional has a turbine time requirement. Here's Endeavor's requirements, basically ATP minimums, the lowest minimum experience requirements allowed by law.

https://www.endeavorair.com/content/endeavor-air/en_us/careers/pilots/Qualifications.html

Still to be determined their total experience to date but a really good chance their time in the cockpit of a commercial airliner ended that day.

GAC06 said:

---

It does mean (if true) that she's about as new as possible. Depending on what she did before, she may have one month of flying a jet.

---

Again... IF TRUE
This would also indicate extremely low hours on type, yes?

Because even say flying corporate or cargo or they'd still hold an ATP yes?

Depends on the cargo, but no ATP required for most cargo and not for corporate. These days it's not uncommon for regionals to hire people without an ATP, and the new hires get their ATP as part of the initial training.

You need an ATP to fly for an outfit operating under CFR Part 121. That's airlines and cargo carriers like FedEx, UPS, and others. Most cargo isn't, and I don't think any corporate is but someone may correct me on that.

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

It does mean (if true) that she's about as new as possible. Depending on what she did before, she may have one month of flying a jet.

---

Again... IF TRUE
This would also indicate extremely low hours on type, yes?

Because even say flying corporate or cargo or they'd still hold an ATP yes?

---

If true, the DEI pilots seem to be crashing out lately.

GAC06 said:

---

The runway numbers are short of the touchdown zone but not by much. The touchdown zone starts 500ft down the runway, not one third of the way down. You're supposed to land no further than 3000ft or 1/3rd of the runway, whichever is shorter (unless landing performance/stopping margin dictates something more restrictive). Runway 23 is 11,120ft so a third down the runway is too far.

---

Appreciate the clarification. (I merely hold a YouTube type rating and cert)

The radio callout indicated they were on the ILS for 23. But the airport seems to have been operating under VFR correct? Waiting AC were holding at the RW threshold and not behind the ILS Hold lines. The "good" video was shot from the RW hold line and not the ILS hold line (is my terminology correct here?). So would it be correct to say they were visually flying the ILS or using the ILS for guidance on a visual approach?

I've seen some suggest that blowing snow could cause disorientation to someone that isn't used to it and cause them to lose visual contact/reference to the runway. I've experienced this driving in blowing snow. Last November in Colorado and more recently in central Saskatchewan. However the Radio Altimeter should continue to provide accurate callouts. Therefore loss of spatial reference should not inhibit initiation of the flare at the correct time.

One other question...
When you're keeping a windward wingtip lower, could you get a loss of lift situation due to uneven compression of the air under the lower wing vs the higher wing? Compressed air has to move faster which lowers pressure. In a wings level situation this is equal on both sides so it's unimportant. Can it become an issue, and even a negative feedback issue, in a wings-unlevel scenario close to the ground? I realize the flaps are still forcing air downward so perhaps they overcome this?

I know it's been posted before and some write it off because of dc draino, who does suck, but others also running with the info of one month licensed female FO in charge.

Won’t post her name and info but

The Delta plane crash was piloted by a woman who just got certified, by an operator airline that makes a big deal of having female pilots pic.twitter.com/uwC1DjvgDI

— ib (@Indian_Bronson) February 19, 2025

It's possible they were flying the ILS even if it's under VFR conditions. Even if flying a visual approach, it's common to be using the ILS if there is one for guidance. FAA says to use the ILS hold lines if conditions are 800ft ceiling and 2 miles vis or worse.

I think you're over analyzing the wing/crab/etc. For whatever reason they flew it into the runway without a flare.

Thanks!

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

The runway numbers are short of the touchdown zone but not by much. The touchdown zone starts 500ft down the runway, not one third of the way down. You're supposed to land no further than 3000ft or 1/3rd of the runway, whichever is shorter (unless landing performance/stopping margin dictates something more restrictive). Runway 23 is 11,120ft so a third down the runway is too far.

---

Appreciate the clarification. (I merely hold a YouTube type rating and cert)

The radio callout indicated they were on the ILS for 23. But the airport seems to have been operating under VFR correct? Waiting AC were holding at the RW threshold and not behind the ILS Hold lines. The "good" video was shot from the RW hold line and not the ILS hold line (is my terminology correct here?). So would it be correct to say they were visually flying the ILS or using the ILS for guidance on a visual approach?

I've seen some suggest that blowing snow could cause disorientation to someone that isn't used to it and cause them to lose visual contact/reference to the runway. I've experienced this driving in blowing snow. Last November in Colorado and more recently in central Saskatchewan. However the Radio Altimeter should continue to provide accurate callouts. Therefore loss of spatial reference should not inhibit initiation of the flare at the correct time.

One other question...
When you're keeping a windward wingtip lower, could you get a loss of lift situation due to uneven compression of the air under the lower wing vs the higher wing? Compressed air has to move faster which lowers pressure. In a wings level situation this is equal on both sides so it's unimportant. Can it become an issue, and even a negative feedback issue, in a wings-unlevel scenario close to the ground? I realize the flaps are still forcing air downward so perhaps they overcome this?

---

I think BlancoLireo covered this on his video, stating that at some airports during daylight hours the waiting aircraft does NOT have to wait behind the ILS Hold Lines.

Quote:

---

others also running with the info of one month licensed female FO in charge.

---

So what?

Someone in the industry can confirm, but I've been told that the first time a Southwest First Officer actually flies a 737 is on a routine flight with people in the back. They train in simulators, they don't practice in empty 737s

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Quote:

---

others also running with the info of one month licensed female FO in charge.

---

So what?

Someone in the industry can confirm, but I've been told that the first time a Southwest First Officer actually flies a 737 is on a routine flight with people in the back. They train in simulators, they don't practice in empty 737s

---

That's every airline. The pilot flying being new (if that's the case) is likely a contributing factor but it's not some smoking gun for DEI if it happens to be a woman

GAC06 said:

---

CanyonAg77 said:

---

Quote:

---

others also running with the info of one month licensed female FO in charge.

---

So what?

Someone in the industry can confirm, but I've been told that the first time a Southwest First Officer actually flies a 737 is on a routine flight with people in the back. They train in simulators, they don't practice in empty 737s

---

That's every airline. The pilot flying being new (if that's the case) is likely a contributing factor but it's not some smoking gun for DEI if it happens to be a woman

---

Unless she was a DEI hire instead of someone more competent.

They're hiring lots of pilots with the bare minimum experience requirements, so good luck making that case. If she passed the approved training, she was qualified to be there.

GAC06 said:

---

They're hiring lots of pilots with the bare minimum experience requirements, so good luck making that case. If she passed the approved training, she was qualified to be there.

---

She may have made the bare qualifications but if she edged out someone even slightly better because of her gender then it's yet another DEI hire failure. You're right they'll make it impossible to prove but it will add to another datapoint just like cigarettes causing lung cancer.

Sea Speed said:

---

Canyon is so defensive because his daughter is a pilot.

---

That probably plays in a little but also, everyone is so damn quick to hope for an accident to be the result of DEI. DEI is awful and should be squashed like the bug it is but that doesn't mean that a female pilot has to be incompetent. Similarly, rookies at any skill are more likely to have accidents and mistakes but that doesn't mean that this had to be because the pilot was new or that the pilot even was new.

It all gets kind of annoying when it's the first thing people run to with little to no actual substance.

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Canyon is so defensive because his daughter is a pilot.

---

That probably plays in a little but also, everyone is so damn quick to hope for an accident to be the result of DEI. DEI is awful and should be squashed like the bug it is but that doesn't mean that a female pilot has to be incompetent. Similarly, rookies at any skill are more likely to have accidents and mistakes but that doesn't mean that this had to be because the pilot was new or that the pilot even was new.

It all gets kind of annoying when it's the first thing people run to with little to no actual substance.

---

This, exactly.

Blue diamond for you.

The PIC was sent down to Endeavor from Delta mainline after numerous unsuccessful attempts to pass her mainline check ride.

Sea Speed said:

---

Canyon is so defensive because his daughter is a pilot.

---

Or because I have common sense and experience.

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Canyon is so defensive because his daughter is a pilot.

---

That probably plays in a little but also, everyone is so damn quick to hope for an accident to be the result of DEI. DEI is awful and should be squashed like the bug it is but that doesn't mean that a female pilot has to be incompetent. Similarly, rookies at any skill are more likely to have accidents and mistakes but that doesn't mean that this had to be because the pilot was new or that the pilot even was new.

It all gets kind of annoying when it's the first thing people run to with little to no actual substance.

---

At the same time DEI has become a serious issue. It's perfectly normal to ask if DEI had anything to do with it these days. Nothing wrong with that. And if there appears to be undue delays in information or obfuscation or signs of a coverup, it will only add to the speculation. That's just human nature. Best way to squash rumors is to get the truth out asap.

And as we have seen on this very thread, the poison that is DEI, is that you are guilty until proven innocent, if you aren't a straight, white, older, male.

Newsflash: Planes crashed before DEI. They crashed during DEI. If we wipe out the cancer of DEI, they will still crash.

JFABNRGR said:

---

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

GAC06 said:

---

The runway numbers are short of the touchdown zone but not by much. The touchdown zone starts 500ft down the runway, not one third of the way down. You're supposed to land no further than 3000ft or 1/3rd of the runway, whichever is shorter (unless landing performance/stopping margin dictates something more restrictive). Runway 23 is 11,120ft so a third down the runway is too far.

---

Appreciate the clarification. (I merely hold a YouTube type rating and cert)

The radio callout indicated they were on the ILS for 23. But the airport seems to have been operating under VFR correct? Waiting AC were holding at the RW threshold and not behind the ILS Hold lines. The "good" video was shot from the RW hold line and not the ILS hold line (is my terminology correct here?). So would it be correct to say they were visually flying the ILS or using the ILS for guidance on a visual approach?

I've seen some suggest that blowing snow could cause disorientation to someone that isn't used to it and cause them to lose visual contact/reference to the runway. I've experienced this driving in blowing snow. Last November in Colorado and more recently in central Saskatchewan. However the Radio Altimeter should continue to provide accurate callouts. Therefore loss of spatial reference should not inhibit initiation of the flare at the correct time.

One other question...
When you're keeping a windward wingtip lower, could you get a loss of lift situation due to uneven compression of the air under the lower wing vs the higher wing? Compressed air has to move faster which lowers pressure. In a wings level situation this is equal on both sides so it's unimportant. Can it become an issue, and even a negative feedback issue, in a wings-unlevel scenario close to the ground? I realize the flaps are still forcing air downward so perhaps they overcome this?

---

I think BlancoLireo covered this on his video, stating that at some airports during daylight hours the waiting aircraft does NOT have to wait behind the ILS Hold Lines.

---

See GAC06's reply. FAA (and I'm sure their corresponding agency in Canada) has rules in place regarding meteorological minimums for the different hold spots.

It's a fact that we've had two crashes in 20-days by people either on their check-ride or having recently failed their check-ride.

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Canyon is so defensive because his daughter is a pilot.

---

That probably plays in a little but also, everyone is so damn quick to hope for an accident to be the result of DEI. DEI is awful and should be squashed like the bug it is but that doesn't mean that a female pilot has to be incompetent. Similarly, rookies at any skill are more likely to have accidents and mistakes but that doesn't mean that this had to be because the pilot was new or that the pilot even was new.

It all gets kind of annoying when it's the first thing people run to with little to no actual substance.

---

I understand the trepidation but that is the logical conclusion many people warned about while dei was being pushed for years. When entities proudly claimed they were hiring based on dei criteria, you almost have to assume people were not hired for their actual skills and abilities but rather their immutable characteristics.

Another TXAG aviation thread crashes......but was it DEI FFS.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

It's a fact that we've had two crashes in 20-days by people either on their check-ride or having recently failed their check-ride.

---

We don't know that

Sea Speed said:

---

chickencoupe16 said:

---

Sea Speed said:

---

Canyon is so defensive because his daughter is a pilot.

---

That probably plays in a little but also, everyone is so damn quick to hope for an accident to be the result of DEI. DEI is awful and should be squashed like the bug it is but that doesn't mean that a female pilot has to be incompetent. Similarly, rookies at any skill are more likely to have accidents and mistakes but that doesn't mean that this had to be because the pilot was new or that the pilot even was new.

It all gets kind of annoying when it's the first thing people run to with little to no actual substance.

---

I understand the trepidation but that is the logical conclusion many people warned about while dei was being pushed for years. When entities proudly claimed they were hiring based on dei criteria, you almost have to assume people were not hired for their actual skills and abilities but rather their immutable characteristics.

---

If DEI was excoriated in light of evidence, no logical person would complain. But the fact is that it is only rumor at this point and many DEI rumors have been confirmed false including recent aviation incidents because people jumped on the bandwagon that was built by idiots and/or bots with a Twitter account.