3 ms·
Did you not read the article you are commenting on?
by kuhewa 5y ago
Did you not read the article you are commenting on?
- macintux 5y agoIn fairness, the article doesn’t include any statements from the FAA that couldn’t be gleaned strictly from the original video, so it’s not an entirely ridiculous hypothetical.
- kuhewa 5y agoWell yeah, their investigation was presumably based in large part on the video. But they still did an investigation and found he actually intentionally crashed the plane, per the article.
- macintux 5y agoTrust me, I’m not arguing for the hypothetical.
- brewdad 5y agoGo watch one of those Air Disasters shows on Discovery or whatever. The FAA doesn't assume anything.
- nullc 5y ago> The FAA doesn't assume anything. That's why I'd love to read their analysis, they're very interesting. I'd have reasonable confidence in an FAA investigation. NYT however, I would be completely unsurprised to see them fabricating the existence of a FAA investigation entirely -- or them repeating the youtubers claim of an FAA investigation without ever checking. Googling for site:.gov "Trevor Jacob" (and the name reversed) turns up nothing but the aircraft registration.
- arlcode 5y agoThe NTSB report is probably not done yet and this is part of some immediate regulatory response to ensure that the guy doesn't do any more of that shit.