[wk_end]

The NTSB - and aviation in general - as much as possible tries to avoid "pinning" issues on individuals. The purpose of an investigation isn't to ascribe blame, it's to try to understand what happened and how to prevent it from happening again, and prescribing "don't make mistakes" is not a realistic or useful method for preventing accidents from recurring.

[rectang]

Yes! But every news organization is leading with "I messed up." And the US President commented "They messed up", though it's unclear who that was in reference to.

Humans have a powerful need to affix blame and punish individuals. On the internet, you are forever the worst moment of your life.

We set air traffic controllers up to fail, and then when something goes wrong we torture them until they die, and then torture their memory after they die.

[jimbokun]

The current US President is the last person we should listen to when it comes to deciding anything important.

[rectang]

By using the role name rather than proper name, I'd hoped to spare HN from a tangent like this. My point doesn't rest on the nature of single individual, but instead applies to a human tendency. Politicians and press both play to the base impulses of a mass audience, unlike the NTSB. This is not the first time that a politician has scapegoated individuals when systemic failure occurs.

[estearum]

I actually can't remember or imagine another POTUS even getting to a level of specificity required to scapegoat an individual for something like this. The usual (and correct) answer is to say: "We don't know yet what happened, but there will be a full investigation and we will make the changes necessary to prevent it from happening again."

Pretty easy!

It doesn't serve us well to act like this administration is anything other than extremely aberrational.

[rectang]

Look, if you were to review my comment history you would have no doubt about where I stand on the current administration.

But scapegoating any single politician for the systemic problems of aviation is as unhelpful as scapegoating the controller for the crash at Laguardia.

[tw04]

I’ll scapegoat a single politician. Ronald Reagan - he owns 100% of the responsibility for the current state of things when he refused to negotiate better working conditions in 1981. The entire US is still feeling the aftermath.

[estearum]

I didn’t see anyone scapegoating him for anything other than engaging in direct personal attribution which is counter to aviation safety culture, basic leadership principles, and minimum decorum standards ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[SecretDreams]

Agreed. Respect and decorum are gone with the most recent POTUS. It's not okay to ascribe this aviation incident to the ATC controller. However, it is fully okay to call the POTUS and staff out for attacking so many individuals, at such a deeply personal level, over issues that are clearly systematic and that have clearly gotten worse under current leadership.

[alistairSH]

extremely aberrational

Is it still an aberration the second time 'round?

[estearum]

Yes

[soperj]

He lost the vote the first time. He lost to a corpse the second time he ran, it was like Weekend at Bernie's.

[jimbokun]

Sure but most of his predecessors knew enough to not weigh in beyond regret for the tragedy and loss of life until after the investigators did their job.

[wat10000]

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who are legally obligated to listen to him for many important decisions.

[hectormalot]

Indeed. Similar accident (USAir 1493/Skywest 5569) shows that thinking exactly.[1] Was easy to pin on the controller, they went far beyond that in their analysis. Almost always impressed with the professionalism of those organizations. I sometimes wonder how software would look if we had such investigations for major incidents.

1: https://admiralcloudberg.medium.com/cleared-to-collide-the-c...

[film42]

I hope it comes down to the NTSB recommending more controllers (or better conditions for controllers) to avoid task saturation, not just more process. It's incredible what a single controller is capable of doing, but for major areas like NYC, it's not enough.

[awakeasleep]

Understand what happened and prevent it from happening again, so long as this can be done without expanding staffing, reducing OT, structural change, etc

[tialaramex]

No. Safety investigation agencies deliberately aren't regulators. The NTSB may decide that their recommendation is that every air passenger should be carrying a melon, and that results in a press release, a letter to the FAA saying that's what they recommend, that's all.

Deciding to change policies to effect the recommendation isn't their role. That's why you will so often see a safety investigatory body repeatedly recommend the same thing. The UK's RAIB (which is for Rail investigations) for example will often call out why a fatal accident they've investigated wouldn't have happened if the regulator had implemented some prior recommendation, either one they're slow walking or have rejected.

The investigators don't need to care about other factors. Are melons too expensive? Not their problem. Only unfriendly countries grow melons? Not their problem. They only need to care about recommending things that would prevent future harm which is their purpose.

[rectang]

> Deciding to change policies to effect the recommendation isn't their role.

And if it was the role of investigators to change policy, then there would be enormous pressure from industry to reach convenient conclusions, poisoning the investigation process.

[navigate8310]

NTSB's primary role is to investigate and they are darn good at it.

[TheSpiceIsLife]

The NTSB also isn’t the organisation that makes any changes nor, as you suggest, assigns any penalties.

The NTSB only makes recommendations.