tsts4
En-Route
I don’t get these posts. If you don’t like the content then don’t watch. Let others decide if if it’s worth their time. Personal opinions unless they are from like 3 people I know are meaningless,
Last edited:
Juan Browne - blancolirio
- Thread starter Lowflynjack
- Start date
Being in the aviation safety business, I get asked all the time about accidents…often times before I’ve even been made aware of try accident myself. Usually I’ll try to do some research, but Juan’s videos are a pretty easy and reasonable factual cheat sheet for getting up to speed on publicly available information. sometimes I’ll get info from just reading a thread here too.
He exists for the same reason I tune in to a former F-14 RIO’s YouTube channel when something naval or military related news breaks, or a Campbell University professor’s YouTube channel when something shipping related happens. I’m not an expert in either area, but those dudes seem more knowledgeable than me, and certainly more knowledgeable than the CNN/FOX/VOX/OAN talking head who’s going to—if history proves correctly— confidently spew nonsense without appropriate facts or context.
The reality is they may very well be considered tools by others in their industry, I honestly don’t know. But it’s a data point, to me the more sources of info the better. None of the so called experts in the YouTubeosphere are generating original research. They’re repackaging existing information that’s out there. But since I’m not subscribing to USNI News or Freightwaves, it’s easier for me to watch a 15 minute video and feel a little smarter.
That’s probably what 90% of Juan’s viewers feel as well.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
I'm pretty indifferent to the uboob cult of personality thing, but I think it's a bit reductive to conflate generic uboob monetizing, with targeted and malicious "ambulance chasing".
Mainstream media is pretty useless these days, and some of these YT channels beat the living snot out of them in normalized views anyways. I'm a democratizing maximalist; I say saturate the waves, information capture is tyranny. The Chinese model would have us eat the one-party opinion without input, because they argue letting laypeople speak is against public safety. I'll always accept the opportunity costs of the ignorance of the mob, over the tyranny of appeal to authority.
I couldn't care less about blancolirio and his banal (to me) aviation aggregation content. And that's fine as I'm not his target audience anyways. But let people other than the corporate captured or govt sanctioned media speak, good bad or indifferent. "Someone on the internet is wrong" is par for the course, you're gonna tire out if you insist on trying curate the medium into "peer-reviewed" silence.
That out of the way, the SM affair is also not without real impacts in offline life; it's no free lunch. Mover got clobbered on the USAF side over his SM footprint. Cost him actual jobs and difficulties with promotions that are still pending even today, many years removed. Then some 121ers started giving him grief recently when he quit the airlines. *clutches pearls*
A lot of it stems out of straight up high school level petty personality conflicts, of which there's plenty of in the fighter world (makes college sorority houses look well-adjusted by comparison). It's certainly one of the reasons I have very purposely stayed off camera on my social media, until and when I clean break from the job. I'm not new, I recognize my employability will crater when you start going publicly against the grain and start telling you people how you really feel on camera. Mover recognized it, he knew it was a one-way door, and his content is purposefully normie-digestable mind you, too bland compared to how polemic my positions would (ostensibly) be. Internet is forever type of thing.
Mainstream media is pretty useless these days, and some of these YT channels beat the living snot out of them in normalized views anyways. I'm a democratizing maximalist; I say saturate the waves, information capture is tyranny. The Chinese model would have us eat the one-party opinion without input, because they argue letting laypeople speak is against public safety. I'll always accept the opportunity costs of the ignorance of the mob, over the tyranny of appeal to authority.
I couldn't care less about blancolirio and his banal (to me) aviation aggregation content. And that's fine as I'm not his target audience anyways. But let people other than the corporate captured or govt sanctioned media speak, good bad or indifferent. "Someone on the internet is wrong" is par for the course, you're gonna tire out if you insist on trying curate the medium into "peer-reviewed" silence.
oh absolutely, having professional peers snicker at the inside baseball angle of one's SM content is pretty common. In fairness, there's a lot of impostors who gather token/vanity credentials/affiliations in a sector, get drummed out of the community for lack of credibility in the craft, then join the civilian "consultant/speaker" circles where normie civilians eat the mil jargon and 10%story slop up like it's breakfast at a UNICEF camp. The impostor monetizes said token adjacency without obvsiously disclosing how little respect they hold among peers with actual longevity in the industry in question.
That out of the way, the SM affair is also not without real impacts in offline life; it's no free lunch. Mover got clobbered on the USAF side over his SM footprint. Cost him actual jobs and difficulties with promotions that are still pending even today, many years removed. Then some 121ers started giving him grief recently when he quit the airlines. *clutches pearls*
A lot of it stems out of straight up high school level petty personality conflicts, of which there's plenty of in the fighter world (makes college sorority houses look well-adjusted by comparison). It's certainly one of the reasons I have very purposely stayed off camera on my social media, until and when I clean break from the job. I'm not new, I recognize my employability will crater when you start going publicly against the grain and start telling you people how you really feel on camera. Mover recognized it, he knew it was a one-way door, and his content is purposefully normie-digestable mind you, too bland compared to how polemic my positions would (ostensibly) be. Internet is forever type of thing.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
Seems pretty hard to avoid the content when someone tells you, based on a “stock photo” in that content, that someone you know died in a plane crash.
davela
Pre-Flight
Personally I like him and his analysis, and I am learning new things from watching his videos. For one thing, he's a more capable and experienced pilot than I'll ever be, I'm sure of that, and those are the pilots I tend to follow and listen to on social media or in real life ("Hoover" is another one). The same sort of accident analysis has always appeared in Flying, in AOPA publications, and King videos, etc., i.e. legacy media. This is just YouTube, a new medium. We learn by studying accidents. The current FIRC I'm working through at the moment, for instance, has such scenarios as part of the curriculum and completing it is mandatory to keep one's certificate. Too much fatal accident analysis in one sitting does sort of get to one's nerves after a while, but I suppose it goes with the territory.
Last edited:
SixPapaCharlie
May the force be with you
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2013
- Messages
- 17,547
- Display Name
- First Officer 6PC
My only challenge to these folks are these...
1. If the goal is to make us safer pilots, why only report on the incidents where the hole is still smoking?
Gimli glider (fuel management, stick and rudder), Fairchild B52 (hazardous attitudes, over banking), and many more well known incidences where the facts have come out, the dust is settled and you can look at the real, analyzed data and use it to make us safer pilots...
The answer is because that doesn't make money.
2. I'm not aware of pilots coming up with new ways to crash planes. Stall spin, fuel management, inadvertent IMC, etc. none of these guys are doing workshops or series focusing on why preventable accidents happen and help come up with ways for us to learn how to prevent them.
They find video they didn't film and lead with 6 seconds of a fireball.
If it's not 100% about the money, it's 99.9%
*.1% margin of error in this official highly opinionated study.
1. If the goal is to make us safer pilots, why only report on the incidents where the hole is still smoking?
Gimli glider (fuel management, stick and rudder), Fairchild B52 (hazardous attitudes, over banking), and many more well known incidences where the facts have come out, the dust is settled and you can look at the real, analyzed data and use it to make us safer pilots...
The answer is because that doesn't make money.
2. I'm not aware of pilots coming up with new ways to crash planes. Stall spin, fuel management, inadvertent IMC, etc. none of these guys are doing workshops or series focusing on why preventable accidents happen and help come up with ways for us to learn how to prevent them.
They find video they didn't film and lead with 6 seconds of a fireball.
If it's not 100% about the money, it's 99.9%
*.1% margin of error in this official highly opinionated study.
There are plenty thst do that. Hoover for one, your buddy Dan M.’s channel, Menrour Pilot, and probably a few more.
One new annoying trend is taking old incidents and creating analysis videos as though it just happened. Only in the video description do they mention that the incident took place place eight years ago (a former JFK tower controller’s new channel is guilty of this). I suppose it gets more clicks this way and the audience can surmise that the sky is falling because of all these incidents. Particularly with air traffic incidents, the reality is these incidents happened all along but we didn’t hear about them until folks like LiveATC came along and started monitoring ATC frequencies.
bonefishpete
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2024
- Messages
- 1,361
- Display Name
- Bonefishpete
What about the Air India crash? We still don't know the cause officially. I have a pretty good idea but if we took the " we must wait for the official outcome before we discuss " I would of forgotten all about it. Maybe they want everyone to forget!
Kenny Phillips
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 6,572
- Display Name
- Kenny Phillips
So you've never, say, read a newspaper (if you are old enough)?
If you take journalism 101, the question "What is the primary purpose of a newspaper?" is answered simply: to make a profit.
That being said, many of those online pundits do indeed want to help us. I'm thinking Juan is one of them.
Oh no! Someone in a (albeit semi-) capitalist society wants to make money in their field of expertise? What will the world come to next!
I don’t mean to pick on you or your answer, but the richest man in the world got there by having the government give every customer of his $7,500 of our money. Nobody seems bothered by that. A guy makes a few job of a YouTube channel and it’s the scandal of the century.
As to this notion that he’s an idiot, not respected, etc., I get this a lot too from commenters. Well maybe not a lot, but every YouTuber gets it. And I’ll say this: it always comes from someone with 14 subscribers who thinks they could do it better.
Like it or not, he’s gotten to where he is on YouTube by putting in the work (yes, it IS work) and by delivering something people want to watch.
And @SixPapaCharlie, this commentary is not directed at you, it was just your comment that I chose to reply to.
SixPapaCharlie
May the force be with you
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2013
- Messages
- 17,547
- Display Name
- First Officer 6PC
I take no offense.
If I were a hot chick with an airplane I'd be one of those Instagram girls making bank off my "assets" rather then skills in a heartbeat.
But I wouldn't be suggesting that I had pure motives.
I don't care how people make money but be honest about why you are doing it.
tsts4
En-Route
So someone forced you to watch his or somebody else’s channel? I understand taking issue with something someone has posted that you have a personal connection to, but in 99.9% of the time that’s not the case. The folks that hate him and/or other content creators and vice versa are only speaking to their respective choirs. It’s the to what end I don’t understand.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2019
- Messages
- 8,864
- Location
- Atlanta / Marietta
- Display Name
- Vintage Snazzy (so my adult children say)
- Home Airfield
- KPUJ
I see your point. Will we be seeing then "Texas Stud Muffin Pilot Air Crash Videos"? SixPappaCharlie calendars?
In all seriousness, news is about "making money". Newspapers of the past existed to sell advertising, and today's internet and streaming content is the same with subscription fees sometimes built in. Nothing wrong with that.
People are free to buy the information what they want, either by watching ads or paying a subscription directly. Even free information from Wikipedia is paid for by people voluntarily paying for it vis donations.
Unless the buyer reasonably wouldn't be aware that the product/news is inaccurate, fraudulent and harmful, just let the free market sort things out.
Part of this free and open market is the ability to comment on content and likeability. You don't like a guy because of this or that, his content is wrong, etc? All fair game which goes back to influencing what the customers think of and potentially buy the content.
Free market and free speech - what great ideas.
SixPapaCharlie
May the force be with you
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2013
- Messages
- 17,547
- Display Name
- First Officer 6PC
Lindberg
Final Approach
And conversely, there are some who seem super invested in defending them. Why do you care what anyone else thinks of Juan? If he's useful to you, watch him.
Llewtrah381
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,762
- Display Name
- Llewtrah
So, my understanding of USAF aviation is not equal to yours, even though I served for 24 years.
“There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." Asimov "A Cult of Ignorance", Newsweek, Jan. 21, 1980
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2014
- Messages
- 5,142
- Display Name
- Jack Fleetwood
Got my pre-order in today.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 2,261
- Display Name
- Andrew, CFI-I
The only thing different between blanco and the others, he doesn't wear his pilot shirts and bars for added credibility. If they were real "experts" as they portray, they would be running the legal side as experts for the real bucks. Then again, 1000s of people thought Trevor Jacob was an aviation sensation as well.
And don't forget the badge. You got to wear that too.
I like Juan Brown. He is modest, and he doesn't appear to be chasing fame.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
Your statement was that you don’t get “these posts.” These posts are in a thread about the .1%.
Last edited:
Definitely the badge. But while his presentation is a bit less dramatic than others, don't let him fool you his efforts are not about fame, ego, or the almighty dollar. This becomes especially obvious when he attempts to be "authoritative" on aircraft he has limited or zero experience with or needs to publicly repudiate some of his own overzealous comments. Reality TV at its best aviation style.
Lawson_Stone
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2022
- Messages
- 207
- Display Name
- Lawson_Stone
It might be best to think of a lot of these people as simply actors and actresses playing a part, and using their airplane as a set.
Exactly. They push the party line or the perceived party line if such hasn’t yet formalized. They really don’t do much analysis or critical thinking. At least that’s so with Ward and Juan. As to Sal on What’s Going On with Shipping, he provides actual analysis and thinking. And Sal extends implications for follow-on considerations.
MauleSkinner
Touchdown! Greaser!
He should change it so there’s less confusion.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
I have no idea what your point about "usaf aviation" is, the quoted blurb deals with anti-intellectualism, which was a completely different subject in my prior post, and had nothing to do with my acquaintance's issues with social media and petty reprisals. Digressing.
As to the point about speech, you're attributing a false equivalence to my position. Your quoted person is reaching anyways by starting off with a statement i happen to agree with (a culture with rising anti-intellectualism), then leap to make the commonly implied projection about what it means for public policy (we re all gonna die at the hands of the feeble minded and superstitious at the helm).
To be clear, the scope of my prior comment merely seeks to recognize the importance of letting idiots speak publicly. That was it. Im more concerned with the slippery slope of not allowing it, other systems make the public safety claim to an authoritarian end, i reject that. We can disagree on that, but to be clear you and I likely agree very closely on the existence and perils of anti intellectualism.
Sac Arrow
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- May 11, 2010
- Messages
- 21,566
- Location
- Charlotte, NC
- Display Name
- Snorting his way across the USA
I don't pay attention to armtube quarterbacks enough to even care, legit or not. Although I get the original point.
I disagree, with Ward there’s a fair amount of opinion and analysis when he has invited guests are on the show. Otherwise I think he generally tries to avoid opinion for the most part. I think he realizes thst his audience base spans a pretty wide range of the political scales so he’s pretty careful to avoid commentary that is too supportive or to condemning of the current administration.
I really like Sal, but much of the basis of his topics originate from industry publications. In most cases Sal’s not doing the original research, per se, but he is good at explaining the relevance to folks not in the industry.
These guys are part of the “explainer” genre of YouTube, and as a fifty something male, and can’t resist clicking.
Dana
Final Approach
And for 2028, the tailwheel pilot, the aerobatic pilot, the RV pilot, the warbird pilot, the crop duster, the STOL bro, the hot chick on the Internet pilot, the biplane pilot, the banner pilot, the meat bomber, the ultralight pilot, and the glider pilot...
sourdough44
En-Route
There are so many things one can be offended over/about. I don’t have a problem with the Juan channel, watch at times. Often he’s just summarizing the particulars from earlier reports. Yes he may add, ‘shouldn't be landing with that much tailwind’, whatever.
I can also understand an annoyance if the accident in question were to hit close to home, friend, whoever.
If someone were to annoy me, I just wouldn’t watch.
I can also understand an annoyance if the accident in question were to hit close to home, friend, whoever.
If someone were to annoy me, I just wouldn’t watch.
I have no vested interest either way, I’m just explaining my view from the other side, as not just a viewer but a YouTube content creator. What I don’t understand is the notion that because he makes money doing it, he’s a bad guy. His “motives” are wrong. That same view doesn’t seem to apply to people a particular commenter likes. My personal opinion is that he likes doing it and makes money doing it.
jonnyjetprop
Cleared for Takeoff
In a broader discussion, we could say that”don’t say anything until the final NTSB report is out”. That’s normally two years from the accident. Let’s be honest, airline accidents are broadly reported and generate interest that far out. Most GA accidents hardly move the needle outside the first day or two. IMHO, a pilot could glean positive safety information from reports like those on YT as long as you take them with a grain of salt that they may be somewhat exploitative and/or sensationalized. This is where I think Juan’s content seems to be better than most.
I have no issue with a content creator making money. It’s their time and effort and the general public decides if it’s worth it.
I have no issue with a content creator making money. It’s their time and effort and the general public decides if it’s worth it.
luvflyin
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- May 8, 2015
- Messages
- 17,446
- Location
- Santa Barbara, CA
- Display Name
- Luvflyin
- Home Airfield
- KVUO
Even the NTSB sometimes says something before the Final is out. On the preliminary they will put something that they feel is important for pilots to think about now. I think I’ve seen it more than once, but the one I remember is LAX05LA305. A bonanza departing P04 Bisbee Muni. High altitude airport and it was hot that day. Got off the runway but couldn’t climb any more and splatted. The Preliminary included a blurb about the importance of leaning for takeoff sometimes.
Llewtrah381
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,762
- Display Name
- Llewtrah
While I agree with the 1A right to do so (and strongly with the principles behind the 1A), and while misinformation has been around for as long as human history, the ability to flood the market with junk these days is astonishing. And is often done with malice.
When you said “I'll always accept the opportunity costs of the ignorance of the mob, over the tyranny of appeal to authority”, it’s easy to read that as “an authority on a subject is a tyrant and we, of course, abhor tyrants”. My point is the flooding of the market with things we wish to be true has created a false equivalency between opinions based on wishful thinking and actual reality. And the “tyrant of appeal to authority” phrase adds to that.
A becoming-less-recent medical situation proved that clearly: while the “authorities”, IMHO, did their best to help people despite making mistakes along the way (and largely acknowledging them, unless someone would weaponize that acknowledgment against them), the market was absolutely flooded with utter nonsense.
Chris Mixon
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2022
- Messages
- 105
- Display Name
- Chris Mixon
- Home Airfield
- KIYA
I like it, but where are the "Big Wheel Alaskan Bush Pilots", the "Missionaries " who land anywhere, the EMS is the Mission" "Cargo Dogs," and the "Floatplanes are the Best" pilots?
ateamer
En-Route
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2007
- Messages
- 2,982
- Location
- Port St. Lucie, FL
- Display Name
- ateamer
- Home Airfield
- FD88
The “Missionaries Who Land Anywhere” get plagued with commenters accusing them of flying for the cartels.
Expertise and authority do not go hand in hand. Have you read Michael Lewis The Premonition? How about Howard Zinn A People’s History of the United States? Geoffrey Wheatcroft Churchill’s Shadow? Norm Dixon On the Psychology of Military Incompetence? Fulbright The Arrogance of Power? Tuchman March of Folly? Stavridis Sailing True North? Dekker The Field Guide to ‘Human Error’? Kahneman and Klein A Failure to Disagree?
Seen how the official narrative regarding AF447 has changed recently? Yet these still miss the impacts of control law and trimming horizontal stab.
Airbus and Air France found guilty over 2009 AF447 crash
Paris appeals court overturns earlier acquittal in case involving the loss of an A330 over the Atlantic Ocean
www.airdatanews.com
How about the other stuff underlying 737 MCAS?
and a non-NYTimes fire walled link (same article)
Another I find interesting is American 587 in Nov 2001. This one gave us lots of reinforcement concerning maneuvering speed and what it really lets you do. Problems I have with it are that no one questioned the published maneuvering speed nor the differences in the definition of maneuvering speed versus the means for deriving its numerical value. The published maneuver speed was above that where they were at though full throw rudder, which should have been but was not limited by the rudder damper (mentioned in the NTSB report but not included in the causal statement), had a much slower acceptable speed. Seems there is an issue there. As is perhaps not having yaw and roll rate limits. Our numbers are calculated for symmetric pulls with pull being the operative word meaning only positive longitudinal, not negative nor in the other axes and especially not mixed axes. (Note the circular written after this concerning maneuvering speed, we have errors such as treating accelerations as forces, and a less embarrassing blind view that lighter weight reduces maneuvering speed, which is true if something other than the lifting structure be the critical factor but is only conditionally true under that condition (understandable the FAA would promulgate such as a generic view as they don’t know your specific aircraft nor when something other than lift structure becomes the critical factor).)
I, for one, wouldn’t reject authority automatically but I won’t accept it either. Same for expertise. Assuming no malice, they will have generally good points and considerations, but they will also be incomplete. Often, unfortunately, they have a narrative to push making this even more distorted. We don’t want to call out the F-35 as a problem jet as politics and national security wouldn’t really like such so pilots get blamed yet really the jet did it in Eielson, Hill, Eglin, South Carolina, and significantly contributed in the SCS. No, despite what authorities push, you cannot always go around.