4 ms·
Doesn't really pass the sniff test. Why would you need a 10 day closure to deal with a drone incursion? I'm guessing DoD and the FAA were squabbling over a tes
by noelsusman 8mo ago
Doesn't really pass the sniff test. Why would you need a 10 day closure to deal with a drone incursion?
I'm guessing DoD and the FAA were squabbling over a test the military wanted to run, and it didn't go up the chain fast enough to get resolved before testing was scheduled to begin.
Edit: Here's the actual notice from the FAA[1]. Note that it was issued at 0332 UTC, but the restrictions weren't scheduled to go into place until 0630 UTC. Either the FAA is clairvoyant, or Sean Duffy is lying.
[1]https://tfr.faa.gov/tfr3/?page=detail_6_2233 https://tfr.faa.gov/tfr3/?page=detail_6_2233
- indoordin0saur 8mo agoWas it meant to be "up to 10 days" rather than 10 days? If the drones are no longer flying over the airport it makes sense they'd open it back up.
- noelsusman 8mo agoThe closure was for 10 days full stop. I can't think of a reason to do that in response to an active threat.
- schiffern 8mo agoThis is OpSec 101. Making the public closure too "tight" around the operational timeline could (negligently) leak operational details. You can always cancel a closure later.
- iAMkenough 8mo agoIs saying "indefinitely" or "until further notice" any worse than "10 days?" The specificity of the timeline was what caught my eye.
- vachina 8mo agoIndefinitely infers permanence. You’ll scare everyone off with that language.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- SketchySeaBeast 8mo agoIs Opsec 101 to increase the estimate by two orders of magnitude? "We think this operation will take about 10 weeks, so we're estimating 10 years."
- schiffern 8mo agoThe answer is "long enough to avoid giving away operational details," not some robotically applied constant multiplier like 10x. We also don't know whether they expected this to take 1 day or more. Just because it worked out quickly doesn't mean that's the "worst case" operational timeline.
- lazyasciiart 8mo agoIsn’t that how estimating timelines should work?
- brynnbee 8mo agoI think the point was to get headlines and attention, as someone else said it sounds like the FAA is frustrated that the DoD isn't cooperating, and this seems like a possible attempt to make this frustration public to pressure DoD into playing more nicely.
- nkrisc 8mo agoCharitably guessing that if they don't know how long they'll need to keep airspace closed then you give yourself plenty of time and rescind early if necessary, as opposed to continually issuing extensions which could cause confusion.
- hshdhdhj4444 8mo agoOr you say “until further notice”. Indeterminate end dates are not a new problem.
- zthrowaway 8mo agoFAA restrictions aren’t applied in a hand wavy fashion.
- afavour 8mo agoThis story would suggest otherwise.
- zthrowaway 8mo agoIn what way?
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- nkrisc 8mo agoCan you imagine how much more wild the speculation would have been if they had said that instead?
- dlcarrier 8mo agoThey don't have a mechanism for doing that. A military base near me has had continuous flight restrictions for decades. Each notice lasts a few months (e.g. https://tfr.faa.gov/tfr3/?page=detail_5_8746 https://tfr.faa.gov/tfr3/?page=detail_5_8746) and before it expires they issue a new one.
- stefan_ 8mo agoDing ding. Always assume weaponized incompetence in this administration: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/airspace-closure-followed-spat-over-drone-related-tests-and-party-balloon-shoot-down-sources-say/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/airspace-closure-followed-spat-... > FAA Administrator Bryan Bedford on Tuesday night decided to close the airspace — without alerting White House, Pentagon or Homeland Security officials, sources said. In the meantime, the politician responsible of course made up a quick lie and yall ran with it, fantasizing about cartel MANPADs: > Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said in a statement, "The FAA and DOW acted swiftly to address a cartel drone incursion."
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- HillRat 8mo agoRecent updates say this was a unilateral call by FAA because DOD was refusing to coordinate with them for creating safety corridors for DOD drones and/or HEW usage. Issues came to a head after DOD shot down a highly threatening mylar party balloon, which FAA evidently considered to be a somewhat reckless use of military weaponry in a US city's airspace.
- downrightmike 8mo agoreckless use of military weaponry in a US city's airspace.
- cornellwright 8mo agoCan you share a source for this? It's not in the updates to the NYT article.
- CGMthrowaway 8mo agohttps://www.cbsnews.com/news/airspace-closure-followed-spat-over-drone-related-tests-and-party-balloon-shoot-down-sources-say/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/airspace-closure-followed-spat-...
- learingsci 8mo ago[flagged]
- dmbche 8mo agoI think you're looking for Facebook, not HN
- Hikikomori 8mo agoBalloon looked brown?
- prpl 8mo agoAdditionally, that airport would be used to coordinating with the military due to proximity of both Fort Bliss and White Sands. It sounds like the DOD was being unusually indifferent to the concerns, and after deadly prior mishaps, the FAA has to be particularly careful here.
- knowitnone3 8mo ago[dead]