A pilot flying a Delta Air Lines regional jet on Friday apologized to his passengers after making a hard turn to avoid colliding with a US Air Force B-52 bomber, audio from the incident shows.

The incident occurred on SkyWest Flight 3788, which was operating as a Delta Connection flight, from Minneapolis, Minnesota, to Minot, North Dakota, SkyWest said in a statement.

The flight landed safely in Minot “after being cleared for approach by the tower but performed a go-around when another aircraft became visible in their flight path,” the statement read.

  • pelespirit@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    95
    ·
    3 days ago

    Are we having air traffic control fall out? Having a close call and then someone in your flight path again isn’t great.

    • jonne@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      74
      ·
      3 days ago

      I mean, the ATC pipeline has already had issues for some decades when it comes to adding new recruits, and then DOGE came in and decided to offer buyouts and fire random employees on top of that. It’s only a matter of time before you get more accidents like the one in DC.

      • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        3 days ago

        Also you will start seeing folks leave from burnout and overwork sooner or later. Because that’s the corpo way, fucked over your workforce and need to desperately high more people? Nope just work the current ones to the bone until the whole situation inevitably spirals into an irreparable mess.

        The rail companies are gonna be making bank on parcel and letter delivery when the planes get permanently grounded because nobody wants to operate a business with no ATC. Also wonder how long till we start seeing state level run ATC?

        • jonne@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          3 days ago

          Nah, it’s always the prelude to privatisation. Someone will start up an ATC company and just take over the whole thing.

          • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 days ago

            Doesn’t mean the ATC won’t still collapse, knowing how this shit tends to go they’d probably gut the existing systems so badly that most companies would pull out of the industry at least in the US. Boeing’s fuck ups have driven down air travel relatively recently, it’s entirely possible airports would lose insurance and be shut down by the cities if things got bad enough one or two jets smashing into a suburb would be enough.

            Remember these folks are evil, greedy, and stupid. Not saying they can’t capture objectives but holding them? That’s another question.

            • jonne@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              ·
              3 days ago

              Oh of course, privatisation of infrastructure always ends up worse and more expensive. Look at the US railroads.

              • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 days ago

                At least with rails the absolute worst that can happen is a chemical spill, with planes and jets it could be as bad as a chemical airburst not even factoring in debris fields and other secondary shit. Frankly speaking I don’t think there is anyways to have a minimum viable ATC with a corporation at least not a publicly traded one since they’d probably sell it to some publicly traded company that’ll be bunk in five years.

                • jonne@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  I mean, you can have worse than chemical spills with trains. You can have entire towns blowing up. But yeah, you’ll probably get even worse with ATC.

        • stringere@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          wonder how long till we start seeing state level run ATC

          They’ll find a way to move it to the private sector before that.

      • fluxion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        3 days ago

        It’s cool bruh we’ll just have xAI run the show using their Nazi bot who will prioritize flights based on how Jewish their passengers’ last names sound

  • Frenchfryenjoyer (she/her)@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    Just saw a YouTube vid on this with the pilot apologising and the comments were blaming “DEI”. i felt so tempted to ask them what part of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion they have a problem with

  • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    The tower involved was not a Federal Aviation Administration tower

    Pardon? Who is operating a tower in North Dakota apart from the FAA? What is going on here? Why is there a tower in our United States that the FAA does not control?

    “Long story short, it was not fun, I do apologize for it and thank you for understanding,”

    lol, understatement

    • brandon@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      If I had to venture a guess I’d say it was probably the tower at nearby Minot AFB. Perhaps the commercial flight’s approach took them over the bases’ airspace or something.

      • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        3 days ago

        I’m having trouble coming to grips with us having multiple air controllers. I thought everything was FAA and the military had to coordinate with them.

        Good thing I don’t fly an airplane, I suppose.

        • grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          ·
          3 days ago

          They use the same ATC systems and protocols, so handoffs between airspace should be the same whether it’s a military or FAA tower.

          • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            So there’s a whole other ATC controlled by the military? I honestly have no knowledge of this and am surprised.

            • grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              15
              ·
              3 days ago

              Kind of. It is more the same system, just some towers are operated by the military and some by the FAA. Each has their own airspace they are responsible for, but civilian aircraft can fly through airspace managed by military ATC and vice versa.

              I’m not sure why it is like that nowadays. I guess in the beginning of ATC in the US it made sense for air bases to control the nearby airspace, and it probably just went from there, with maybe consolidation of towers as a cost-cutting measure along the way.

              Caveat: it’s been years since I’ve had to know any of this, so this might be outdated or misremembered.

              • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                3 days ago

                So why didn’t the military tower catch the helicopter in that DC crash? The FAA failed but the Army also failed? Two failures?

                • grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I’ve not read the report, but there’d only be one tower responsible for the airspace. Iirc, it was an FAA tower. What I heard happened was that the helicopter didn’t follow the tower’s instructions. But, again, I’m months out of date on that incident.

                  Imagine airspace like a tray of cookies baked too-close together. Some are bigger than others, some are weird shapes, some are sugar cookies, some are chocolate. But it’s a tray full of cookie. There’s only one cookie at each spot.

                  To stretch the metaphor further, imagine an ant walking across the tray. It’s still only on one cookie at a time and it doesn’t care if it’s chocolate or sugar. At the edge of a cookie there’s a handoff between cookies, where cookie A says “hey, cookie B, an Ant X is about to walk on you. Don’t let them crash into any other ants, k? They’re your responsibility now.”

                  Anyways, I’m going to go let my caffeine kick in.

            • Scubus@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              Im just hearing about this too, but that doesnt surprise me at all. Government black ops in mind, you can’t have civilian ATC personnel having classified information on the location of military aircraft nor their capabilities. Of course the military is going to have their own branch responsible for handling sesnitive info.

              • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Nah, I always thought that military shit flew through FAA ATC and they just handed it off to the next. I don’t know what to think now.

    • grysbok@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 days ago

      My guess is the Air Force. Iirc, the Army and Navy also operate their own ATC. I didn’t know they did approach control for civilian aircraft, but that seems to be the case.

    • Frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      2 days ago

      In aircraft and boats, the more maneuverable craft has the responsibility to evade. Since this flight was going to a small airport in North Dakota, I’m guessing it’s a small commuter plane that’s much smaller than a B-52.

      • foenix@lemmy.radio
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Pilot here: while that is generally true, for aviation the rule is that aircraft types that are in the same category have to give way to landing aircraft. Ie, a hot air balloon doesn’t need to give way to a landing fixed wing but a fixed wing and fixed wing do need to give way to the landing aircraft.

        The Delta pilot should be commended and the B52 should have been more aware of their situation.

        In addition, ATC clearance generally means you have right of way especially on a landing approach.

        • banditoitaliano@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          In addition, ATC clearance generally means you have right of way especially on a landing approach.

          I have to quibble with that a bit. An ATC clearance has no impact on right of way. IFR flights in VMC are still required to see and avoid.

          True that landing aircraft has right of way, although I’m not aware of any interpretation that simply being cleared for or on an approach is enough… unless you’re on the final approach segment you aren’t really “landing” yet. (I have no idea if that was the case here or not).

    • irish_link@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      60
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      A B52 flying in non training airspace is News. That same B52 causing issues with civilian an aircraft is News.

      Tell me how either of this let along both are not news.

      • x00z@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        This is national news in the US, yet this is the general “News” community. Maybe that’s what they are referring to.

    • JustAnotherPodunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yeah it was a go around. Not newsworthy at all. It’s actually a correct and a fairly routine response. The fact that it was a military plane is the only reason it was given any traction. And that’s not a unique occurrence either!

      Funny how the most down voted person is the only correct one here.

      Hell I’ve made military jets perform a go around because of me being too slow on approach. God forbid that hits the national news! “Local 172 pilot wastes taxpayer funds by flying anemic plane”