From the KHON TV website:
https://www.khon2.com/local-news/honolulu-woman-sentenced-after-intentionally-severing-faa-communication-lines/

A former Federal Aviation Administration employee has been sentenced for intentionally and maliciously severing communication between air traffic control and several aircrafts in flight.

Can't read it, being located in Europe. But the author should know that the plural of aircraft is aircraft.

ushermittwoch wrote:

Can't read it, being located in Europe. But the author should know that the plural of aircraft is aircraft.

This seems to be a growing issue (at least from my perspective). I suspect it may be a result of more and more articles being written by bots/AI.

Edit: Written with the understanding that "American English" is not the only English standard.

2 years of probation and 5000 dollar fine. that's nothing for something both malicious and dangerous.

Meanwhile, people are sitting in jail for smoking a joint.

Motive? There are court filings on Pacer, but it's not free. And, they might not speculate.

Used Google:

https://www.oig.dot.gov/library-item/38010

https://www.justice.gov/usao-hi/pr/former-federal-aviation-administration-employee-sentenced-severing-air-traffic

B52overSMF wrote:

Written with the understanding that "American English" is not the only English standard.

In any English-speaking/writing standard, it is 'aircraft.'

Yes, yes it is.

ushermittwoch wrote:

Can't read it, being located in Europe. But the author should know that the plural of aircraft is aircraft.

I just changed my VPN location to the US and it worked

Aaaanyway....going back to the topic:

They did take away her retirement benefits, which they estimated at over $500,000 after 26 years at the agency.

That's a start.

I would like to see the guilty plea and any explanation offered as to why she did what she did, and, in broad-brush terms so as not to reveal anything secret, exactly what she did.

(EDIT: So I pulled this up on PACER. The presentence memo, which contains I assume a lot of stuff not relevant to the charge itself, is sealed and/or restricted, so no go on that. Everything else lacks detail beyond what was said here, and there's no transcript of the pilot's testimony at sentencing. There's no FBI affidavit or whatever in support of the Information (the charging document), so there is nothing in the Court record as to the actual details of what she did, other than "cutting off" communications.

It doesn't seem that she actually physically "cut" anything in the sense of snipping wires.)

B52overSMF wrote:

ushermittwoch wrote:

Can't read it, being located in Europe. But the author should know that the plural of aircraft is aircraft.

This seems to be a growing issue (at least from my perspective). I suspect it may be a result of more and more articles being written by bots/AI.

Edit: Written with the understanding that "American English" is not the only English standard.

My pet hate is use of the word 'plane'. When I was in Royal Air Force air cadets as a teenager back in the 1980s, we got in big trouble if we referred to aircraft as 'planes'. We were told that the use of 'aircraft' instead of 'plane' was one thing that differentiated a professional airman from an amateur. It has stuck with me ever since.

'Aircrafts' might be correct use if one was referring to a variety of aircraft in the plural? Like 'fishes' which is used when making reference to a number of species of fish.

Back on topic: what was his motivation? The two linked articles in reply #6 make no reference to why he did it, only that he pleaded guilty.

She didn't get sentenced, she got probation for messing with people's lives.... unbelievable

It was a plea deal offered in return for her to plead guilty. That’s why the sentence doesn’t seem too harsh.

If the prosecutors offered/ accepted that deal, it’s probably because they felt there was a chance she could possibly walk away free after the trial.

Thenoflyzone wrote:

It was a plea deal offered in return for her to plead guilty. That’s why the sentence doesn’t seem too harsh.

If the prosecutors offered/ accepted that deal, it’s probably because they felt there was a chance she could possibly walk away free after the trial.

Another issue is that with Covid19, many US State level courts have suspended jury trials. I know in the state I live in, they've said jury trials could be backed up for three years due to Covid19. That may have had some weight on the prosecutors decision. They're likely going to have to pick their battles. We also don't know much about the case against the lady (i.e. how strong it was), and that too would have influence over the decision to try/settle.

vhtje wrote:

B52overSMF wrote:

ushermittwoch wrote:

Can't read it, being located in Europe. But the author should know that the plural of aircraft is aircraft.

This seems to be a growing issue (at least from my perspective). I suspect it may be a result of more and more articles being written by bots/AI.

Edit: Written with the understanding that "American English" is not the only English standard.

My pet hate is use of the word 'plane'. When I was in Royal Air Force air cadets as a teenager back in the 1980s, we got in big trouble if we referred to aircraft as 'planes'. We were told that the use of 'aircraft' instead of 'plane' was one thing that differentiated a professional airman from an amateur. It has stuck with me ever since.

'Aircrafts' might be correct use if one was referring to a variety of aircraft in the plural? Like 'fishes' which is used when making reference to a number of species of fish.

Back on topic: what was his motivation? The two linked articles in reply #6 make no reference to why he did it, only that he pleaded guilty.

Off topic! “Aircraft” are any vehicle that flies—blimps, balloons, airplane, helicopters, gliders and so on. “Airplanes” (or aeroplanes) are a subset of aircraft that use fixed wings and power to fly.

DaCubbyBearBar wrote:

She didn't get sentenced, she got probation for messing with people's lives.... unbelievable

She was sentenced to probation. Sentencing doesn't always mean prison. If she had 28 years in, she's no spring chicken and the loss of her retirement benefits is a bigger hit than anything else. She'll be working for the rest of her life.
As far as different types of the English language dealing with plurals in different ways, the obvious one is the American "math" versus British "maths".

From justice.gov., The United States Attorney's Office - District of Hawaii.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-hi/pr/former-federal-aviation-administration-employee-sentenced-severing-air-traffic"On January 4, 2019, she willfully and maliciously severed communications between Air Traffic Control in Honolulu and aircraft flying in U.S. airspace above and around Honolulu, in an area known as Sector 4, which covers flights between Oahu and Maui, Lanai, Moloka’i, Kaho’olawe, and the Big Island. The main and standby communication lines between Hawaii Air Traffic Control and pilots of approximately six planes during one incident and approximately four planes during a second incident were affected by the outages. In total, pilots could not hear instructions from Air Traffic Control for a total of two minutes, as a result of the outages caused by the defendant."

So, to clarify:

The event happened on 01/04/2019.
Two incidents occurred, in an area knowns as Sector 4.
Both main and standby communication lines were affected.
Two incidents.
Pilots could not communicate for a total of 2 minutes.

As an aside - if the pension were forfeited, maybe it can be used to proof the system to make sure that this does not happen again?

johns624 wrote:

DaCubbyBearBar wrote:

She didn't get sentenced, she got probation for messing with people's lives.... unbelievable

She was sentenced to probation. Sentencing doesn't always mean prison. If she had 28 years in, she's no spring chicken and the loss of her retirement benefits is a bigger hit than anything else. She'll be working for the rest of her life.
As far as different types of the English language dealing with plurals in different ways, the obvious one is the American "math" versus British "maths".

Maybe, maybe not. $500k pension at 48yrs old doesn't sound like its her whole retirement savings piggy bank (most likely has an IRA/401k as well)...$500k isn't enough for anyone to retire on, even if she still had ~10yrs left until retirement. If she doesn't have another retirement vehicle, then yes...she will be working until the bitter end

I wonder what percentage they used to come up with the $500K? You'd be surprised at how many people don't have any retirement/investment accounts of their own.

ushermittwoch wrote:

Can't read it, being located in Europe. But the author should know that the plural of aircraft is aircraft.

Well said! ..just like shrimp....beer....deer....... aircraft turn final....not finals...there is only one final the plane is flying.... the plural idiocy is funny!

Cheers

airportugal310 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

DaCubbyBearBar wrote:

She didn't get sentenced, she got probation for messing with people's lives.... unbelievable

She was sentenced to probation. Sentencing doesn't always mean prison. If she had 28 years in, she's no spring chicken and the loss of her retirement benefits is a bigger hit than anything else. She'll be working for the rest of her life.
As far as different types of the English language dealing with plurals in different ways, the obvious one is the American "math" versus British "maths".

Maybe, maybe not. $500k pension at 48yrs old doesn't sound like its her whole retirement savings piggy bank (most likely has an IRA/401k as well)...$500k isn't enough for anyone to retire on, even if she still had ~10yrs left until retirement. If she doesn't have another retirement vehicle, then yes...she will be working until the bitter end

It wouldn't surprise me at all if a lifer federal employee relied solely on that pension for retirement.

Then again I would expect a bigger pension than that after 26 years.

Antarius wrote:

2 years of probation and 5000 dollar fine. that's nothing for something both malicious and dangerous.

Meanwhile, people are sitting in jail for smoking a joint.

Seriously. Losing her pension was waaay worse that this.

LX015 wrote:

Antarius wrote:

2 years of probation and 5000 dollar fine. that's nothing for something both malicious and dangerous.

Meanwhile, people are sitting in jail for smoking a joint.

Seriously. Losing her pension was waaay worse that this.

Even then, pension + 2 years of probation and 5000 dollar fine is still pittance. If we take the charges and reporting at face value, this is terrorism. Others have ended up in Abu Ghraib for less.

airportugal310 wrote:

johns624 wrote:

DaCubbyBearBar wrote:

She didn't get sentenced, she got probation for messing with people's lives.... unbelievable

She was sentenced to probation. Sentencing doesn't always mean prison. If she had 28 years in, she's no spring chicken and the loss of her retirement benefits is a bigger hit than anything else. She'll be working for the rest of her life.
As far as different types of the English language dealing with plurals in different ways, the obvious one is the American "math" versus British "maths".

...$500k isn't enough for anyone to retire on......

Of course it is, once you've paid your mortgage and move to a proper country with universal health care (like Portugal) ..... and stop being greedy - and hey presto retirement _ unless of course You've got a criminal conviction like this silly lady

A big thank you to the last four posters for getting this thread back on topic and keeping it there. Now, to her motive. I'm no expert, but I have been a manager. It has been my experience that someone who commits an act like this is not doing it for laughs!