An article with more info on the two young crewmembers killed in New York accident.

[Swede]

They came from different corners of Canada, took different roads to the cockpit. On Sunday evening, they found themselves on the same flight, and what the passengers would later say about them is more than any obituary could.

https://news.amomama.com/519003-pilots-involved-in-air-canada-laguardia.html?utm_campaign=623_1409508&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook_celebritist&utm_term=celebritist&fbclid=IwY2xjawQwuTVleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETE3U2NiN0oxWjBHb0M1Mzlsc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQQMjIyMDM5MTc4ODIwMDg

[ZDU]

1. It was not an accident.

Please know this is not an attack upon the person posting the original post.

Changing the way we think about events and the words we use to describe them affects behavior. Crashes occur when a link or several links of a chain are broken. Use of the word "accident" implies that the crash was outside human control or influence. In reality, this crash was the predictable result of specific actions. (Was the air traffic controller over tasked? Were they multitasking beyond acceptable standards and expectations? Was the tower short-staffed?)

Since we can identify the cause of crashes, we can take action to alter a compounding effect and avoid collisions.

The concept of "accident" works against bringing all appropriate resources to bear on the enormous gravity if this incident. Use of "accident" fosters the idea that the resulting deaths, damage, and injuries were unavoidable.

"Crash" or "collision" are more appropriate terms.

I credit George Reagle, USDOT, for this insight. This concept and way of thinking also applies to motor vehicle crashes, fatalities, and serious injuries.