The same icon/spot on a post shouldn’t alternate between to wildly separate functions.

Yeah, a small icon that you need to hover over to find what it is. Does the view button on my Xbox controller crosspost as well? It has the same picture that is totally a universal symbol. Meanwhile, when scrolling through posts I absolutely love the feature where the same exact place to click does different things on different posts. Sometimes it expands a picture like RES, sometimes it opens a whole new page, it’s always a fun guess on whether you’re going to see content or lose your spot in your feed!

Either way I have generally seen crossposts on reddit as being abused by spambots and as such, favor unique posts in relevant communities rather than single button spamming a dozen at a time. To each his own.

This was the first post I made and I slightly tweaked the phrasing as I went on. To be honest I haven’t found the cross-post button yet, the UI here is leaving a fair amount to be desired, so I just went through my subscribed communities and found places it would fit in and posted it again since Lemmy is generally a barren wasteland with low participation.

What do you mean correctly labeled? In the flying one where the Riverfire festival is well known I used the more specific phrasing. To the average person Riverfire literally means nothing so I left it out for the more generic description.

Both actual communism and actual libertarianism sound great on paper. In practice… not so much.

Always is, which is even more fun when you’re an actual pilot.

Funny, I’ve never gone on to kill innocent people, or anyone. I’ve delivered vaccines to remote islands and flown critical patients though. Hell, I’ve even carried multiple pallets of cupcakes. But sure, tell me my personal morals about what you don’t know about my job, which seems to be a trend here where you seem to have very strong opinions on something you have zero experience with.

It’s not one wrong move. There is a buffer put into everything they are doing making sure that it would take multiple very specific actions to go wrong, with two people at the controls and two more monitoring their every move.

There isn’t a single thing with 0% risk, that is a stupid standard to have for anything in life from a risk management perspective. If the risk to something is less than the inherent risk of walking down stairs or driving to work then avoiding it just because isn’t being smart, it’s being ignorant. It doesn’t take one bad mechanical failure, there are redundancies. Potential failures are calculated, studies and mitigated. In the early days of airplanes and low level flying it was very risky and there were many accidents; we have learned from them and applied the lessons. No, the risk isn’t 0, but it is well within the tolerance of risks that you take every day.

The profile they were flying is wildly different from what is being done here. If an engine fails it can fly on 3 just fine, that is why for low levels any time there is a ridge crossing you have a 3-engine climb point so that should you lose an engine you can still clear the obstacle. Control surfaces are redundant and controlled by multiple hydraulic systems. Should you lose 3 of 4 hydraulics you can still control it. The plane has been stress tested to know safe limits for forces placed on it, any time these are exceeded in depth inspections are required before it flies again. Beyond that it has known service life intervals for all parts, to include structural bracing, that have mandatory inspections far before failure.

The Alaska airshow crash was pure pilot error by exceeding permitted limits for demonstrations. They quietly changed the profile to try and make it more impressive and eventually pushed it too far. It is also surprisingly hard to recreate in the simulator because the plane literally just wants to fly and prevent that crash from happening. Meanwhile Riverfire is the exact opposite with every step of the process being fully open and inspected by the community and flight safety professionals involved.

BTW, I am a C-17 pilot and a trained flight safety officer/mishap investigator. I have personally walked through the remaining wreckage of the Elmendorf crash. What are your qualifications to decide how safe or dangerous this is?

It’s no big secret, they have 360 in cockpit views showing the process from the crew’s point of view. They’re also flying with their flaps out which limits them to below 250 knots.

Very little in flying is left to chance or simple human execution. If there is an actual risk, it has been identified, discussed and mitigated from multiple angles. That is why the C-17 has a min crew of 3 and they fly this with at least 5. Two pilots and two additional observers in the jump seats. Every obstacle is known, charted, identified and visually acquired before they are allowed to continue without climbing. The route is closely monitored and built into the mission computer to ensure they are sticking to it. There are calculated margins and buffers with triggers should any be breached with sufficient excess to allow an escape maneuver before anything bad happens. People who don’t know what they are talking about thinking it is dangerous doesn’t make it dangerous.

Chinooks are used for specific tactical insertion. C-17s are both strategic and tactical airlift, the latter of which involves delivery (either by airdrop or landing at forward fields) in radar contested environments which is accomplished with low level flying. 300 feet above ground level at 300+ knots is normal for this. They are flying much slower here to give a better show, which gives them a much tighter turn radius and more time to react. It’s also a meticulously planned and practiced route.

Simple low level flying is one of the safer things they show off at airshows. This really isn’t anywhere near as dangerous as people with no experience or training in it think it is.

Morale, recruiting and training value. Low level flying is one of the C-17’s main mission sets. If it wasn’t doing it here it would be doing the exact same thing somewhere else.

I mean, it’s an annual airshow. It’s done every year without an issue, it’s not more dangerous than normal military flying if done correctly.

It’s a regular thing, not sure why you think it’s CGI.

It’s for an annual airshow.

It’s all about prep and planning. Unlike flight sim they don’t just go and weave through whatever environment they want. There are detailed route studies with all obstacles, terrain and towers identified; custom maps made highlighting the safe corridor, climb points and obstacle required to be in sight to continue without climbing. For something live Riverfire they then practice it in a simulator as well.

It’s an annual airshow. They’re over a wide river and well clear of buildings and people.