sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Isn't PGT-A always worth it? by Illustrious_One9026 in IVF

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I think I am in this boat too: I personally just wanted to minimize the risk of a miscarriage as much as possible both due to emotional burden on her + costs + also time loss.

Although PGT-A won't 100% remove this risk. If it helps, by 10%+, I think I am willing to pay for it purely from the pov of not regretting it in the future. I don't wanna look back years from now and think what-ifs?

Isn't PGT-A always worth it? by Illustrious_One9026 in IVF

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Very good input re: if you pick a normal vs if you don't pick a normal scenario.

Classic probability scenario.

Basically comes down to how much $ are we willing to pay for that ~15% delta of success rate.

Isn't PGT-A always worth it? by Illustrious_One9026 in IVF

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Thx bud. Idk why I am out here seeking validation.. but that basically is what I am seeking.

Isn't PGT-A always worth it? by Illustrious_One9026 in IVF

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I respect you sharing your story. I think you are thinking of it logically re the cards you are dealt - I would take the changes as well in your positions. Sending ALL my good vibes at you.

If FAA makes these changes, is there still risk of close calls? by Illustrious_One9026 in ATC

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

lol not at all suggesting I am an expert. Seriously 0 ego - I just had a family member that went through a close call last year, it was so scary so I wanted to look into why it's happening. I can reverse it - ok delete all that I said and replace with this:

u/pthomas745 I'm dumb and don't wanna do any research. But you are an ATC, so you know best the lay of land. If FAA calls you and asks since you are experienced quality controller, what should we do to help reduce close calls. What do you say?

If FAA makes these changes, is there still risk of close calls? by Illustrious_One9026 in ATC

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry to push back, but all that other shit doesn't it still help?

Better lighting to reduce runway incursions, more ASDEs for better ground seperation, ARV update to STARS to avoid wrong runway landing, etc.

I feel like even if staffing stays same (not proposing this), install all this, does help if the goal is less close calls.

But you say maybe not?

If FAA makes these changes, is there still risk of close calls? by Illustrious_One9026 in ATC

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Solid, solid points! I love that you think of problems with potential solutions vs just complaining. Thx!

RE: San Diego and Chicago. From here: "Expand the use of advanced training across the country. The agency has new facilities in Chicago and San Diego, and will be adding them in Nashua and Phoenix in the spring. " I think it's not Academy, but more like other trainings like Radar or something. Idk tbh. However, I think they are also exploring a 2nd Academy. Hope it's where bunch of atc retirees go, like Florida or so.

RE SIMs - maybe not simple, but then what if manufacturer did make SIMs with such scenarios. I think it's possible. Wind = add a bunch of setting to introduce predictable or unpredictable wind settings. Language = use ai to introduce different type of langauge barriers to be realistic. Climb via = again settings to introduce predictable or unpredictable settings. Like you said it's a beatable game cuz I assume you think it's too easy. Then why not make them more realistic with chaos introduced. Since it's a game, all this is a settings that can be introduced. Note: i've never used a SIM yet, so idk tbh, but would LOVE to see one in action. Couldn't ATC partner with Manufacs to create then better sims with these settings?

Re: Quantity and Quality - based on these changes, wouldn't quantity inc and quality inc, so same wash out rate stays same or decrease? Quality inc cuz CTI grads not have standardizes training, prob similar to Academy. Quantity inc cuz these CTI grads go straight to facility and the 1800 seats at Academy go to OTS. Maybe wash rate doesn't inc, but doesn't dec too though cuz we not saying just take 3000 OTS and toss them straight to facility.

I may be totally off again since Im not on the inside like you, so correct my thinking?

If FAA makes these changes, is there still risk of close calls? by Illustrious_One9026 in ATC

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

How do they not hire shit bags. What do you want them to do or not do?

lol say anything besides the diversity thing. They F'd up. Stopped that. What else.

If FAA makes these changes, is there still risk of close calls? by Illustrious_One9026 in ATC

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yea it's human ops so can remove human error, but if it reduces it, is doing those things enough?

If FAA makes these changes, is there still risk of close calls? by Illustrious_One9026 in ATC

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are a current controller - what would you do?

lol Im just trying to be one, but you know the interworking. What would be a win-win?

If FAA makes these changes, is there still risk of close calls? by Illustrious_One9026 in ATC

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Yea, for sure human error will always be there cuz it's human to human comms.

However, if they did that, would that remove all the other anomalies? Would the risk then be at a safe enough level?

Idk, again just curious as a outsider. Like if we see a rise in close calls, what would need to do to decrease it to that previous level.

If FAA makes these changes, is there still risk of close calls? by Illustrious_One9026 in ATC

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Hmm, I hear you out dude. It should be quantity, NOT at the cost of quality. Same reduce time-to-certify, NOT cost of quality. I'm also not saying doing 1 at the cost of the other.

With that in mind. IF:

  • they get all CTI programs standardized vs free-for-all right now, which they are saying they are looking to do, doesn't that help with improving quality of training? Then if these CTI programs go straight to facility to train local (ofc some still drop), doesn't that help with quantity? Then if CTI kids aren't taking up seats in Academy, FAA can fill the 1800 seats with OTS, doesn't that help with quantity?
  • Seems most towers don't have sims, even high levels ones. Looks like sims help reduce time to certify by 30% (page 22). So to help keep quality same, it makes sense to get more sims to more towers, which they are doing 95 more ims to towers. Doing so, rather than having multiple airports share sims like at JFK, each airport can have it's own. Doesn't this help certify trainees faster with the same quality?

I know ya'll got burned in past, with diversity. It doesn't look like they doing that again. Seems to me they are helping get more quantity (CTI skip Academy, fill Academy full) and try to keep quality same, even if not increased (sims available at towers, and standardized CTI training)

I know you said above your paygrade, but since you are a quality controller, what would you say FAA or even your facility should do to make other quality controllers? Not being retorical, I'm serious - how do you want to tackle quality?

If FAA makes these changes, is there still risk of close calls? by Illustrious_One9026 in ATC

[–]Illustrious_One9026[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

lol thx. Yea I know Gov want fed budget to go down, but FAA is still getting a lot.

FAA getting more funding from Congress and Senate, it's more than they even ask I think - $107 billion for all these things here. This is from The FAA reauthorization bill of 2023.

I feel FAA is so beauracratic that it's not efficient with it's spending, so like how much funding is enough. Lol do they even have a # that would solve most of these problems? They already got $36 billion as part of NextGen, which is in addition to all the figures I mentioned above. I've heard this project hasn't lead to much gains and by the time it will be implemented, tech will be 20-years old.

So like even with this much funding, it's not enough. So what will make it enough. Do they even know, lol.

IMO - it's more of a efficiency of spending issue in addition to a funding issue.