Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikkupikku | Hacker News Reader

I'm not saying the article's thesis is wrong, much of it rings true to me, but we have very comprehensive data and statistics concerning air travel so I'm deeply unimpressed by this article instead hanging its argument on a hodgepodge list of incidents instead of digging into the data to get some proper numbers.

View on HN

We have "proper numbers" for the full range of issues covered in the essay? From airport aesthetics to El Paso being shut down because of lack of coordination around anti-drone testing, or something?

The article is not just about safety, or some other singular topic with clear statistics.

Just because this sentiment will get some cheap upvotes from people who didn't engage with the article doesn't be that the author should have searched for keys under streetlights to provide a false appearance of rigor.

This is an essay from the Atlantic Daily, which is responding, in real time, to the events of the day. It's a minor work of commentary, it is not supposed to be in-depth reporting, and it's bit odd to feel ought to have been a work of investigative reporting, which the Atlantic also does, seperately.

> but we have very comprehensive data and statistics concerning air travel

somehow I feel like conditions may have changed since that data was collected. just a hunch.

Safety / incident data collection and publishing from the FAA and NTSB are basically live, you'll get incidents logged within days at most and preliminary reports usually within a few weeks. What lags the most are data analysis and interpretations, but major newspapers should probably be prepared to do their own data analysis if they're making grand proclaiments like the collapse of an industry...

We have "very comprehensive data and statistics" indicating that US aviation is not nearing collapse? I don't understand what you mean.

He means that anyone making an argument that aviation safety has deteriorated should be using the stats to back it up, instead of anecdotal evidence.

This is a common kind of "data or nothing" fallacy. Data doesn't reliably capture evidence for the thesis "TSA agents and aviation workers are burning out and ICE is going to make it worse". The part that data is good for hasn't happened yet over a long enough timeline to reflect properly.

If the argument is "deadly accidents are up over the past decade", then yes, of course, we must point to data.

If the argument is, "the aviation industry might be on the verge of a steep decline in availability and/or safety due to recent political/financial problems", then what do you mean "show the data"? That doesn't make sense. It's a concern based on observation, which is fine if it's not presented as a fact.

And if it turns out that a specific accident is due to said forces - what, we don't address those forces, because "data"?

I agree, but the article does specifically mention crashes as a symptom we're already seeing:

> Fatal crashes, overstressed controllers, and endless security lines reveal a system teetering on the brink of failure.

I have not read the entire article (paywalled), but the introduction sure seems to strongly imply that we're already seeing an unusually high rate of crashes.

+1 but this is The Atlantic so having a reasonable expectation would keep you sane.

I think they mean they would prefer more rigorous statistical analysis.

"Rigor cleans the window through which intuition shines" - Ellis Cooper

"Collapse" isn't within the statistical distribution though, so you'd still to apply judgement in any case. I suppose it's a word with many definitions.

> "Collapse" isn't within the statistical distribution though

Uh? Maybe you could explain what you mean by this a bit more.

1. It's not a rigorously defined term.

2. "System collapse" would be unexplored territory, so how would statistical analysis be able to infer when it occurs?

1. Not really. If the crash rates we're seeing under the Trump administration are higher than any similar length period in the last ~10 years, we should start to worry.

2. See above.

I don't think you can make any statistical argument from accident data from a single year.

Yes, there is universal data out there. But those events are so rare that you almost never can differentiate a normal year from an abnormal one.

You absolutely can see a difference. [0] The term of art is "Runway Incursions", and the stats definitely show our airports are working at the limits of safety.

[0]: https://www.buckycountry.com/2025/09/22/runway-close-calls-u...

That's a 7 years graph, where category A incursions change by 0.7σ, and total incursions are basically horizontal.

What statistical conclusion are you taking from it?

Category A and B incursions increased by 2.8σ. Further, it was 7 years of increases in a row. Either factor on its own would indicate a process out of statistical control.

Well, a tired, overextended air traffic controller at LaGuardia just caused two pilots to die last night while landing. How many deaths would communicate "We have likely reached system failure"? I presume for some, it's going to have to be a few airframes worth of passengers unfortunately. There is a shortage of air traffic controllers. Those working are being pushed to failure. The system as a whole is degrading. These are facts, based on evidence and observations.

There is currently a shortage of ~3k controllers (as of this comment), and the time to train and put new controllers into service is significant. Excess retirements reduces time to system failure due to labor shortages. https://www.faa.gov/air-traffic-controller-qualifications

> Entry-level applicants must complete required training courses and spend several months at the FAA Academy in Oklahoma City. Applicants are paid while in training. After graduating the academy, individuals are placed in locations across the country and must gain 2-3 years additional training, both classroom and on-the-job experience, before becoming a certified professional controller. This rigorous training includes close supervision and evaluation by senior controllers that ensures controllers are competent, professional, know their airspace environment and can deal with the pressures and high pace of the job.

Controllers in training quit due to a lack of pay whenever a government shutdown occurs. This impairs the talent pipeline to improve system performance anytime a shutdown occurs.

https://www.reddit.com/r/newyorkcity/comments/1s1eh14/i_mess...

US air traffic controllers start resigning as shutdown bites - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45860865 - November 2025 (365 comments)

Flights to Los Angeles Airport halted due to air traffic controller shortage - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45715771 - October 2025 (11 comments)

> The shutdown is having real consequences, as some students at the controller academy have already decided to abandon the profession because they don’t want to work in a job they won’t be paid for, Duffy said. That will only make it harder for the FAA to hire enough controllers to eliminate the shortage, since training takes years. He said that the government is only a week or two away from running out of money to pay students at the academy.

Air traffic controller shortages cause widespread flight delays amid government shutdown - https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/air-traffic-controller-... - November 1st, 2025

> “Currently nearly 50 percent of major air traffic control facilities are experiencing staffing shortages, and nearly 90 percent of air traffic controllers are out at New York–area facilities,” the FAA said in a statement posted on X on Friday evening.

Do you feel lucky?

> How many deaths would communicate "We have likely reached system failure"?

"Failure" is really a matter of opinion rather than some objective tipping point. The air system is unlikely to ever actually "fail", and at worst will just become some arbitrary level of degraded that some people will loudly label "failed".

There are plenty of examples around the world of countries with variously degraded air systems, that are far worse than the US status quo but still are not "failed".

There's Egypt, which has labeled crashes caused by bad design as "someone used a bomb and blew it up" for political reasons: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/07/fire-not-bomb-...

Yemen, in the midst of a perennial civil war, still runs commercial flights: https://www.pprune.org/terms-endearment/653181-yemenia-expat...

Russia, with airplane parts sacntioned for years, still runs commercial flights.

Even if the US undergoes a USSR-style sudden collapse, the aviation system is not going to "fail" in the sense of completely breaking and stopping.

>Yemen, in the midst of a perennial civil war, still runs commercial flights

Not any more, they don't:

> The General Director of Sanaa International Airport, Khaled al-Shaief, said in a post on his X account that the strike had completely destroyed the last of the civilian planes that Yemenia Airways was operating from the airport.

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-says-it-has...

That's just from Sanaa. There are still flights to/from other cities in Yemen, mainly Socotra and Aden.

Additional citation:

LaGuardia pilots raised safety alarms months before deadly runway crash - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47503965 - March 2026

Note also that they deliberately choke off the hiring funnel before they even get applicants, and deliberately dispose of experienced controllers. Air traffic controller applicants must be under 31 years old for initial hire. The mandatory retirement age is 56. Although there are limited exceptions to both rules.

Air traffic controllers require a significant investment by the federal government, I take no issue with age limits for both investment (lower bound) and safety reasons (upper bound) (if the data says it is reasonable, I'll always defer to the data).

I take exceptional issue with the fact that their pay is not considered essential. There should be no way for this critical infrastructure to be not considered essential. ATC pay should flow regardless of actions of any branch of the federal government, and there should be robust systems in place to ensure these workers are not pushed beyond reasonable work limits. Fix the system or break the system forcing a fix. If it continues to work "good enough" without a fix, no changes will be made.

This assumes that controllers over 56 years old are statistically "unsafe," presumably due to perceived cognitive speed and ability. So unsafe that the concern overrides experience, familiarity with systems, and other key benefits of tenure. I'd love to see that data.

My understanding is the 56 year old age limit is due to burnout and other accumulated negative risk factors from the profession. You have a shelf life like a professional athlete due to the sustained high cognitive load and stress of the workload. Replies open to additional references and citations.

It would make an interesting reality TV show to have a group of 60-70 year olds attempt to perform a simulated 8 hour ATC shift under "live fire" conditions.

https://web.archive.org/web/20260323212332/https://www.crisi...

https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/media/Fatigue_Report.pdf

https://news.siu.edu/2025/07/072225-siu-research-focuses-on-...

https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/58231

An elderly woman ran into a bus stop at 70mph, killing 4 people. Their claim was “I couldn’t stop, I don’t know what happened”

They were given 200 hours community service. I think this happened today.

78 years old at the time, now 80, sentenced to probation.

https://people.com/family-four-killed-bus-stop-outrage-drive...

https://www.sanfranciscopolice.org/news/sfpd-arrests-driver-...

(SFPD Case #240-160-569)

Why you got to pick an asian woman as your example though?

I was trying to show that elderly people probably shouldn't be air traffic controllers by providing an extremely recent example of an elderly person ending the lives of an entire family using a car. I didn't mention that the driver was asian. You did. :)

Also, their pay comes from a fund filled by airport fees, not the general budget.

Those age limits should apply to all political offices

I'm curious: If your boss emailed you and all of your coworkers with mass buyout offers and demanded that they quit their job how many do you think would take up the offer? 10%? 20%? Do you think it would be enough to cause significant organizational issues?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com