Wow. First missiles and now this... F-15s dispatched to intercept prior to it being crashed.
https://komonews.com/news/local/stolen- ... ac-airport
Sports Hernia wrote:Yep, surprised he was able to take off safely with how busy sea-tac is.
That’s also a fairly big plane to fly for a non-pilot.
Uncle Si wrote:Sports Hernia wrote:Yep, surprised he was able to take off safely with how busy sea-tac is.
That’s also a fairly big plane to fly for a non-pilot.
he flipped that thing upside down, then back again before skimming the lake and climbing. he had to be a pilot...
getnasty wrote:Would somebody that wasn't a pilot even be able to start the thing?
chris98251 wrote:911 proved that you can learn to fly a commercial plane with simulators and computers and the internet, being a employee I would bet he had asked many questions and may have even had the chance to fly with some guys and observe. Who knows if he had taken classes earlier in life as well.
pmedic920 wrote:They say he crashed it.
I’m truly thinking they may have shot him down.
Wonder if we’ll ever know what actually happened.
Shooting him down would have been 100% justified IMHO.
OkieHawk wrote:pmedic920 wrote:They say he crashed it.
I’m truly thinking they may have shot him down.
Wonder if we’ll ever know what actually happened.
Shooting him down would have been 100% justified IMHO.
I guarantee they didn't shoot him down, too much risk of things going wrong with that over civilian airspace.
SmokinHawk wrote:OkieHawk wrote:pmedic920 wrote:They say he crashed it.
I’m truly thinking they may have shot him down.
Wonder if we’ll ever know what actually happened.
Shooting him down would have been 100% justified IMHO.
I guarantee they didn't shoot him down, too much risk of things going wrong with that over civilian airspace.
Not so sure that's true. Watch carefully at 0:13 in this video, in the lower-left hand corner. Looks like a missile was possibly fired at it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/11/us/s ... tolen.html
OkieHawk wrote:pmedic920 wrote:They say he crashed it.
I’m truly thinking they may have shot him down.
Wonder if we’ll ever know what actually happened.
Shooting him down would have been 100% justified IMHO.
I guarantee they didn't shoot him down, too much risk of things going wrong with that over civilian airspace.
pmedic920 wrote:OkieHawk wrote:pmedic920 wrote:They say he crashed it.
I’m truly thinking they may have shot him down.
Wonder if we’ll ever know what actually happened.
Shooting him down would have been 100% justified IMHO.
I guarantee they didn't shoot him down, too much risk of things going wrong with that over civilian airspace.
You guarantee it because of the risk to civilians?
What would that risk be if he flew it in the “public market” downtown?
Come on man.
OkieHawk wrote:pmedic920 wrote:OkieHawk wrote:pmedic920 wrote:They say he crashed it.
I’m truly thinking they may have shot him down.
Wonder if we’ll ever know what actually happened.
Shooting him down would have been 100% justified IMHO.
I guarantee they didn't shoot him down, too much risk of things going wrong with that over civilian airspace.
You guarantee it because of the risk to civilians?
What would that risk be if he flew it in the “public market” downtown?
Come on man.
I've been with the military my entire adult life, to include now as civil service working on the same air frame I fixed for the bulk of my 20 year career. An aircraft whose sole purpose was to direct combat, and I've been onboard during real world situations so I say again, they would not fire in that kind of situation, period.
The risk for civilian casualties outweighs everything else. I'm sorry if you don't believe that, but that doesn't make it any less true.
OkieHawk wrote:pmedic920 wrote:OkieHawk wrote:pmedic920 wrote:They say he crashed it.
I’m truly thinking they may have shot him down.
Wonder if we’ll ever know what actually happened.
Shooting him down would have been 100% justified IMHO.
I guarantee they didn't shoot him down, too much risk of things going wrong with that over civilian airspace.
You guarantee it because of the risk to civilians?
What would that risk be if he flew it in the “public market” downtown?
Come on man.
I've been with the military my entire adult life, to include now as civil service working on the same air frame I fixed for the bulk of my 20 year career. An aircraft whose sole purpose was to direct combat, and I've been onboard during real world situations so I say again, they would not fire in that kind of situation, period.
The risk for civilian casualties outweighs everything else. I'm sorry if you don't believe that, but that doesn't make it any less true.
pmedic920 wrote:OkieHawk wrote:pmedic920 wrote:OkieHawk wrote:
I guarantee they didn't shoot him down, too much risk of things going wrong with that over civilian airspace.
You guarantee it because of the risk to civilians?
What would that risk be if he flew it in the “public market” downtown?
Come on man.
I've been with the military my entire adult life, to include now as civil service working on the same air frame I fixed for the bulk of my 20 year career. An aircraft whose sole purpose was to direct combat, and I've been onboard during real world situations so I say again, they would not fire in that kind of situation, period.
The risk for civilian casualties outweighs everything else. I'm sorry if you don't believe that, but that doesn't make it any less true.
Risk to civilians is the reason that I thought they may have, or they may in similar situations.
It’s a different climate these days.
I’m not saying they did shoot it down.
I am saying there is/was a possibility.
Now that we know more about the dialogue that took place, I think it’s not likely myself.
But if you think for 1 second that our military under the umbrella of national security wouldn’t shoot down a commercial aircraft to SAVE lives. you’re bat shit crazy.
It’s all a matter of the scenario at hand.
Why do you think they scrambled fighter jets ?
I “GUARANTEE” it wasn’t just to get a better look.
pmedic920 wrote:
Risk to civilians is the reason that I thought they may have, or they may in similar situations.
It’s a different climate these days.
I’m not saying they did shoot it down.
I am saying there is/was a possibility.
Now that we know more about the dialogue that took place, I think it’s not likely myself.
But if you think for 1 second that our military under the umbrella of national security wouldn’t shoot down a commercial aircraft to SAVE lives. you’re bat shit crazy.
It’s all a matter of the scenario at hand.
Why do you think they scrambled fighter jets ?
I “GUARANTEE” it wasn’t just to get a better look.
Sports Hernia wrote:Uncle Si wrote:Sports Hernia wrote:Yep, surprised he was able to take off safely with how busy sea-tac is.
That’s also a fairly big plane to fly for a non-pilot.
he flipped that thing upside down, then back again before skimming the lake and climbing. he had to be a pilot...
Fair point.
Aros wrote:Lon we love you brother but you are off on this one. Those F-15s were there as interceptors, not to engage the plane with armament. Video CLEARLY shows they were NOT armed. They were their to intercept and control the situation by pushing the plane as far away from populated areas as possible. In that regard they did their job well.
Now it helps that the person in question had no desire to harm others. He spent most of his time flying over water. It seems clear to me that he had NO intention to kill anyone other than himself. I believe the F-15 pilots received that intel as well mid flight.
Rich Russell admitted he was floored by how quickly the plane had exhausted fuel resources. Like I said before, Occams's Razor applies brilliantly here. Sometimes it's not a conspiracy. Sometimes, it is exactly what it appears to be. In this case, the man ran out of fuel where he told ATC he was going to nose dive in. That's precisely what happened.
Aros wrote:Lon we love you brother but you are off on this one. Those F-15s were there as interceptors, not to engage the plane with armament. Video CLEARLY shows they were NOT armed. They were their to intercept and control the situation by pushing the plane as far away from populated areas as possible. In that regard they did their job well.
pmedic920 wrote:Some opinions may be that “we” would “never” shoot down a civilian aircraft. We would “never” risk the life of civilians.
Fact is, the possibility does exist, making user of “never” the one that is wrong.
For special events like the Super Bowl or last month's Inauguration, the Secret Service runs the show, and its senior agent on the ground will be the one to authorize action. “It will only happen when everything else has been tried,” says Bucci, and everything else usually works. To date, a civilian plane has never been shot down in the US, not even the gyrocopter a publicity seeker landed on the lawn of the US Capitol in 2015—in some of the most restricted airspace in the country.
OkieHawk wrote:pmedic920 wrote:Some opinions may be that “we” would “never” shoot down a civilian aircraft. We would “never” risk the life of civilians.
Fact is, the possibility does exist, making user of “never” the one that is wrong.
I'm just going to leave this here. A quote from the article, emphasis mine:For special events like the Super Bowl or last month's Inauguration, the Secret Service runs the show, and its senior agent on the ground will be the one to authorize action. “It will only happen when everything else has been tried,” says Bucci, and everything else usually works. To date, a civilian plane has never been shot down in the US, not even the gyrocopter a publicity seeker landed on the lawn of the US Capitol in 2015—in some of the most restricted airspace in the country.
If your only objection is my use of the word never, get over it. Of course there is a possibility of things happening, but it has never happened yet, and won't happen in the future.
Hell, we've only shot down one civilian airliner, and that was towards the end of the Korean war. We just don't do those things man, especially now.
pmedic920 wrote:
I don’t fault you. I assume this kind of information is handled on a “need to know” basis.
Many jobs/ workers in the military don’t “need to know”, you probably fall into that category.
It’s ok though, you are still very important, and so is the job you do/did.
Have a great day Sir, or not if that’s more to your liking.
SmokinHawk wrote:chris98251 wrote:911 proved that you can learn to fly a commercial plane with simulators and computers and the internet, being a employee I would bet he had asked many questions and may have even had the chance to fly with some guys and observe. Who knows if he had taken classes earlier in life as well.
I don't think 9/11 proved that whatsoever. The alleged hijackers were professionally trained. That said, we still haven't been given the full story on what truly happened that day.
It is currently Fri Feb 15, 2019 3:51 pm