Comment by ethin

1 day ago

I have a bad feeling that this is not going to end well. Especially given that this administration is... Rather incompetent. I hope that safety is like number one on their list of priorities but somehow I doubt it

I would rather things be done "incompetently" than nothing being done at all.

  • > I would rather things be done "incompetently" than nothing being done at all.

    Engineers of today aren't better than engineers of yesterday, they just have access to new technology (and new footguns).

    I'd rather have a well-designed legacy system that does the job well, than an incompetently designed "modernized" system that doesn't.

    • > Engineers of today aren't better than engineers of yesterday

      Our ability to wield technology has gone up, while our ability to engineer and understand that technology (as a whole) has gone down.

      Age should be the most suspect of arguments against the design of a system. Enumerate specifically its flaws and not just that it is old. System design doesn't wear out, it is abstract, like mathematics.

      3 replies →

  • I don't. Incompetence costs lives. Using old tech that has worked for decades costs a couple dollars extra to maintain for a system worth millions.

    • You can justify any waste with that argument. Saying things will cost lives is just a way to interject bureaucracy to slow down a project. You are the enemy of progress even if you don't realize it.

      1 reply →

  • Why? Do you want more people to die? The only way to migrate a system like this safely is to do it competently and slowly.

  • Nothing being done at all means the system continues working as it is. Something being done incompetently means more people die.

I find the frequent comments like this honestly bizarre, they act like the entire civil service turns over every 4 years.

  • Far from it. I know for a fact the civil service (normally) doesn't change per administration. But the key word is "normally". Pretty much nothing this administration has done is normal. Do you really expect most of the people involved in this transition to know what they're doing, given that many of them are yes-men?

I agree, nothing says poor priorities like upgrading the air traffic control system. It removes the opportunity for graft, only supports the monied elite who can afford to fly and don't care about climate change, and diminishes the opportunities for crises to exploit.

Instead, the United States government should have continued the policies and values that led to Next Gen, ERAM, STARS, and AAS.

  • what do you mean. a lot of poor people fly as well. I won't would even risk to say that poor people fly more often. For example migrant workers flying lets say Bulgaria-Ireland every few months

    • I think what readthenotes1 is trying to say is what I was hinting at in my comment: this administration cannot be trusted to do this properly or in the service of actually making the ATC system better. They're instead doing it because the 1% says that modern == better (which for a safety-critical system is usually not actually true). The proper thing this administration should be doing is to do this as a failover at first but keep the existing ATC system running until the new system is just as safe and as capable as the original, but I get the feeling they won't do that.