8 ms·

Here [1] is the ATC conversation. She sent IDAHO30 (military aircraft) to go looking for them. IDAHO30 did not find the jetpack. [1] - https://www.youtube.co

Here [1] is the ATC conversation. She sent IDAHO30 (military aircraft) to go looking for them. IDAHO30 did not find the jetpack. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jblAQXY8AKo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jblAQXY8AKo

valar_m 6y ago
ATC talks a lot faster than I would have expected. Seems like that would be problematic.
- Denvercoder9 6y ago
  It's necessary in busy airspace such as around LAX, due to limited frequency-time. Pilots are used to it.
- NikolaeVarius 6y ago
  "Problematic". seriously?
  - dylan604 6y ago
    Show HN: New JS Library to revolutionize Problematic ATC
  - scubbo 6y ago
    I'm not the person you're responding to, but - yeah, that's a perfectly reasonable word in this situation. "Likely to cause problems". They're not (I assume!) trying to make any social-justice-related implications. (I don't actually agree with the evaluation - ATC and associated parties are probably well-adjusted to that speed of communication)
    - spoopyskelly 6y ago
      That's exactly how the social justice types operate: they inject themselves into a subculture they know nothing about, but feel like should assert control over and start calling things they don't understand "problematic". That's how you end up with pronoun rules in ATC operations.
      - hackmiester 6y ago
        Are you okay?
      - scubbo 6y ago
        Are you claiming that the word "problematic" was not in use before it started being used in social justice contexts?
    - zaarn 6y ago
      ATC and Pilots use a subset of language, they get by with mostly the same 200 words and the formats of most calls is largely the same. So you know what to expect. Additionally, ATC and Pilots require readback, ie you say what you understood. Only when ATC understands your readback will they assume you understood anything.
- bdamm 6y ago
  Everyone is using a restricted subset of language. 90% of the communication ATC uses is with the same 200 words or so, and most of the people involved (ATCs, pilots) know what is expected next.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    Exactly. I'm going to get my clearance in the same format every time. It will be a clearance limit, route, altitude, frequency, and transponder code. The automated weather information will come in the same order at every airport, etc. It is much easier to follow once you have experience with the system.
- ominous_prime 6y ago
  All safety and instruction communication must be read back and identified. If the read-back is incorrect, or the pilot responds with "say again" (or even "speak slower"), then the controller can slow down, but the controller never just assumes understanding.
stickfigure 6y ago
The meat of the actual conversation: > [Airliner] We just saw a bright object at about 6000 ft > [ATC] Can you say that one more time? > [Airliner] We just saw a flying object - like a flying object passing by at 6000' > [ATC] Flying object, was it a UAV or was it a jetpack? > [Airliner] Like a jetpack. Too shiny and too far. "PERSON IN JETPACK SEEN OVER LAX!" seems to overinterpret that exchange.
- dylan604 6y ago
  > [ATC] Flying object, was it a UAV or was it a jetpack? this has occurred enough times that this is now a question ATC rattles off. just.wow.sad.
  - bigbubba 6y ago
    By wording their question like that, they may actually be priming pilots to report ambiguous sightings as jetpack sightings.
    - erdos4d 6y ago
      That's the point. Nothing good comes from ambiguity in these matters, in fact it could be quite damaging to the careers of those involved if they reported anything that sounded vaguely UFO-ish. Best to have a catch-all like jetpack, drones, etc so there won't be any unpleasant questions later.
      - bigbubba 6y ago
        If you are implying deliberate misdirection by ATC, then I do not agree. It's more likely ATC prompted the pilot with the jetpack possibility because they believe it's happened before recently in that area. I think ATC, expecting a jetpack, may have inadvertently primed the pilot to interpret an unknown object as a jetpack.
  - ALittleLight 6y ago
    Sad? I was just thinking how awesome that was. If I read that this exchange happened in 2020 when I was a child I would think the future was going well. (Obviously I do not condone jetpacking in restricted airspace)
dyingkneepad 6y ago
Oh wow, thanks for the link. I had heard this job was super stressful, but hearing the lady talk nonstop like that for only 6 minutes gave me a completely different perspective. Shit is insane, I was tense. I can't imagine doing it for 8 hours every day...
- bdamm 6y ago
  That's why there's an intake age limit. They like the start ATCs off when they're young. Also the reason why, if you ever get to visit an ATC center, you'll see a lot of tattoos. Inking is very popular among ATCs.
- innocenat 6y ago
  Not sure if this clip was cut or not, but VASA (and almost all other ATC channel) trimmed silence part.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  Controllers work in sprints with breaks in between. I don't think anyone could do the job for even 4 hours straight (in anything other than the sleepiest tower position).
  - innocenat 6y ago
    It's not legal to work 4 hours straight, at least in the US. The legal maximum time is 2 hours.
    - sokoloff 6y ago
      My hometown tower (KLWM) sees very little traffic and I feel like I talk to the same controller all morning long. It's possible they've got two people working each shift, but that doesn't match my experience and when I asked for a tower tour a few years ago, I specifically had to wait for a day where they had multiple controllers in the tower. (They are a contract tower [NFCT] equipped with D-BRITE but primarily controlling traffic visually, if that makes a difference.) 14 CFR § 65.47 provides for a maximum of 10 consecutive hours.
jjwiseman 6y ago
I'm not sure why the YouTube video claims that IDAHO30 is a military aircraft; As far as I know there's no evidence of that, and IDAHO is often used by non-military law enforcement. In particular it's been used by the Riverside PD. It was probably either a local police department, or feds. See for example page 2: https://catalog.archives.gov/OpaAPI/media/7603178/content/dc-metro/rg-237/7419198-9-11-faa/5.%20Miscellaneous/(e)%20Other/5%20DCC%20991%20Order%207110.67D%20Special%20Aircraft%20Ops.pdf?download=true https://catalog.archives.gov/OpaAPI/media/7603178/content/dc... Page 21: http://www.sjpd.org/records/pc-13650_library/unit%20guidelines/sjpd%20air%20support%20operations%20manual%20july%202019_redacted.pdf http://www.sjpd.org/records/pc-13650_library/unit%20guidelin... https://www.scandiego.com/viewtopic.php?t=1701 https://www.scandiego.com/viewtopic.php?t=1701
- hardware1997 6y ago
  It's used by San Francisco Sheriff as well....Auxiliary Air Squadron.....Civilian volunteers who own planes...very common in CA Sheriff's Departments
- hardware1997 6y ago
  Usually used by local sheriff auxiliary air squadrons....San Francisco has one....civilian plane owners volunteering to assist LE....
- jjwiseman 6y ago
  This LA Times article says it was a law enforcement aircraft: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-10-16/is-someone-really-flying-around-lax-in-a-jet-pack https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-10-16/is-someo...

valar_m 6y ago

ATC talks a lot faster than I would have expected. Seems like that would be problematic.

Denvercoder9 6y ago
It's necessary in busy airspace such as around LAX, due to limited frequency-time. Pilots are used to it.
NikolaeVarius 6y ago
"Problematic". seriously?
- dylan604 6y ago
  Show HN: New JS Library to revolutionize Problematic ATC
- scubbo 6y ago
  I'm not the person you're responding to, but - yeah, that's a perfectly reasonable word in this situation. "Likely to cause problems". They're not (I assume!) trying to make any social-justice-related implications. (I don't actually agree with the evaluation - ATC and associated parties are probably well-adjusted to that speed of communication)
  - spoopyskelly 6y ago
    That's exactly how the social justice types operate: they inject themselves into a subculture they know nothing about, but feel like should assert control over and start calling things they don't understand "problematic". That's how you end up with pronoun rules in ATC operations.
    - hackmiester 6y ago
      Are you okay?
    - scubbo 6y ago
      Are you claiming that the word "problematic" was not in use before it started being used in social justice contexts?
  - zaarn 6y ago
    ATC and Pilots use a subset of language, they get by with mostly the same 200 words and the formats of most calls is largely the same. So you know what to expect. Additionally, ATC and Pilots require readback, ie you say what you understood. Only when ATC understands your readback will they assume you understood anything.
bdamm 6y ago
Everyone is using a restricted subset of language. 90% of the communication ATC uses is with the same 200 words or so, and most of the people involved (ATCs, pilots) know what is expected next.
- sokoloff 6y ago
  Exactly. I'm going to get my clearance in the same format every time. It will be a clearance limit, route, altitude, frequency, and transponder code. The automated weather information will come in the same order at every airport, etc. It is much easier to follow once you have experience with the system.
ominous_prime 6y ago
All safety and instruction communication must be read back and identified. If the read-back is incorrect, or the pilot responds with "say again" (or even "speak slower"), then the controller can slow down, but the controller never just assumes understanding.

stickfigure 6y ago

The meat of the actual conversation: > [Airliner] We just saw a bright object at about 6000 ft > [ATC] Can you say that one more time? > [Airliner] We just saw a flying object - like a flying object passing by at 6000' > [ATC] Flying object, was it a UAV or was it a jetpack? > [Airliner] Like a jetpack. Too shiny and too far. "PERSON IN JETPACK SEEN OVER LAX!" seems to overinterpret that exchange.

dylan604 6y ago
> [ATC] Flying object, was it a UAV or was it a jetpack? this has occurred enough times that this is now a question ATC rattles off. just.wow.sad.
- bigbubba 6y ago
  By wording their question like that, they may actually be priming pilots to report ambiguous sightings as jetpack sightings.
  - erdos4d 6y ago
    That's the point. Nothing good comes from ambiguity in these matters, in fact it could be quite damaging to the careers of those involved if they reported anything that sounded vaguely UFO-ish. Best to have a catch-all like jetpack, drones, etc so there won't be any unpleasant questions later.
    - bigbubba 6y ago
      If you are implying deliberate misdirection by ATC, then I do not agree. It's more likely ATC prompted the pilot with the jetpack possibility because they believe it's happened before recently in that area. I think ATC, expecting a jetpack, may have inadvertently primed the pilot to interpret an unknown object as a jetpack.
- ALittleLight 6y ago
  Sad? I was just thinking how awesome that was. If I read that this exchange happened in 2020 when I was a child I would think the future was going well. (Obviously I do not condone jetpacking in restricted airspace)

dyingkneepad 6y ago

Oh wow, thanks for the link. I had heard this job was super stressful, but hearing the lady talk nonstop like that for only 6 minutes gave me a completely different perspective. Shit is insane, I was tense. I can't imagine doing it for 8 hours every day...

bdamm 6y ago
That's why there's an intake age limit. They like the start ATCs off when they're young. Also the reason why, if you ever get to visit an ATC center, you'll see a lot of tattoos. Inking is very popular among ATCs.
innocenat 6y ago
Not sure if this clip was cut or not, but VASA (and almost all other ATC channel) trimmed silence part.
sokoloff 6y ago
Controllers work in sprints with breaks in between. I don't think anyone could do the job for even 4 hours straight (in anything other than the sleepiest tower position).
- innocenat 6y ago
  It's not legal to work 4 hours straight, at least in the US. The legal maximum time is 2 hours.
  - sokoloff 6y ago
    My hometown tower (KLWM) sees very little traffic and I feel like I talk to the same controller all morning long. It's possible they've got two people working each shift, but that doesn't match my experience and when I asked for a tower tour a few years ago, I specifically had to wait for a day where they had multiple controllers in the tower. (They are a contract tower [NFCT] equipped with D-BRITE but primarily controlling traffic visually, if that makes a difference.) 14 CFR § 65.47 provides for a maximum of 10 consecutive hours.

jjwiseman 6y ago

I'm not sure why the YouTube video claims that IDAHO30 is a military aircraft; As far as I know there's no evidence of that, and IDAHO is often used by non-military law enforcement. In particular it's been used by the Riverside PD. It was probably either a local police department, or feds. See for example page 2: https://catalog.archives.gov/OpaAPI/media/7603178/content/dc-metro/rg-237/7419198-9-11-faa/5.%20Miscellaneous/(e)%20Other/5%20DCC%20991%20Order%207110.67D%20Special%20Aircraft%20Ops.pdf?download=true https://catalog.archives.gov/OpaAPI/media/7603178/content/dc... Page 21: http://www.sjpd.org/records/pc-13650_library/unit%20guidelines/sjpd%20air%20support%20operations%20manual%20july%202019_redacted.pdf http://www.sjpd.org/records/pc-13650_library/unit%20guidelin... https://www.scandiego.com/viewtopic.php?t=1701 https://www.scandiego.com/viewtopic.php?t=1701

hardware1997 6y ago
It's used by San Francisco Sheriff as well....Auxiliary Air Squadron.....Civilian volunteers who own planes...very common in CA Sheriff's Departments
hardware1997 6y ago
Usually used by local sheriff auxiliary air squadrons....San Francisco has one....civilian plane owners volunteering to assist LE....
jjwiseman 6y ago
This LA Times article says it was a law enforcement aircraft: https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-10-16/is-someone-really-flying-around-lax-in-a-jet-pack https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-10-16/is-someo...