Breaking news...a commercial flight over London

[theking]

...is being escorted by fighter jets...no details yet.

[PornGreen]

you do know this isn't cnn, right?

[Barefootsies]

you do know this isn't cnn, right?

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Article/201009115909290

[theking]

you do know this isn't cnn, right?

Yes...I know...it is gofuckyourself...now feel free to do so.

[Rochard]

you do know this isn't cnn, right?

You know that GFY is quicker than CNN, right?

[spazlabz]

I have no problem with these types of threads being posted on GFY

[SimonScans]

The flight had run out of regular meals and someone was offered the kosher?

[woj]

what was the point of escorting the plane anyway?

[CaptainHowdy]

[~Ray]

[TheDA]

what was the point of escorting the plane anyway?

If there is a danger of it being taken over and slammed into the centre of the city, they will try to limit the damage and blow it out of the sky.

That's the theory anyway. Whether someone would actually have the balls to make that decision....???

[Sly]

What exactly is the point of having two fighter jets escort a commercial jet?

Worst-case scenario, the plane would need to be shot down for whatever reason... you need two fighter jets to do that?

[TheDA]

What exactly is the point of having two fighter jets escort a commercial jet?

Worst-case scenario, the plane would need to be shot down for whatever reason... you need two fighter jets to do that?

It's been that way for years. They get plenty of practice when the Russian military encroach on the airspace

[pornguy]

Well it used to be faster than CNN.

[Sly]

It's been that way for years. They get plenty of practice when the Russian military encroach on the airspace

For military purposes I could see. Civilian purposes just seems like overkill. We do the same thing I believe. Maybe the idea is if one jet fails, you have the second jet as backup to blow the tuna can out of the sky.

[PornGreen]

Yes...I know...it is gofuckyourself...now feel free to do so.

thanks pathfinder

[yutenjiboy]

CNN = Certainly Not News

[theking]

For military purposes I could see. Civilian purposes just seems like overkill. We do the same thing I believe. Maybe the idea is if one jet fails, you have the second jet as backup to blow the tuna can out of the sky.

Two jets are used to herd the flight too where ever they want the flight to go...one jet cannot easily accomplish this...end of story.

[Altwebdesign]

ended well!

[Juicy D. Links]

what was the point of escorting the plane anyway?

i think if fighter jets have to escort a plane that means some shit ie: bomb/unruly passenger or anything... this time around they will blow the plane out of sky in case its hijacked...

[theking]

what was the point of escorting the plane anyway?

Two fold...to shoot it down if it becomes necessary...but primarily to herd the flight to where ever they want it to go.

[Pipecrew]

it's always funny because i am sure when the passengers see two figher jets they are thinking "oh thank god we are saved!" meanwhile there is a good chance they are there to shoot your ass down.

[Domain Diva]

primarily to herd the flight to where ever they want it to go.

And how do you think they would do that ?

[u-Bob]

CNN = Certainly Not News

good one

[justinsain]

And how do you think they would do that ?

They give them a choice.

Comply or die

[theking]

And how do you think they would do that ?

Close order flight...and warning shots...both have been done before and both are effective...the final alternative is to shoot it down.

[Domain Diva]

They give them a choice.

Comply or die

When you are a suicide bomber or as I guess a terrorist who would give thier life for thier cause (most would i think) is this really a good option ?

[Domain Diva]

Close order flight...and warning shots...both have been done before and both are effective...the final alternative is to shoot it down.

I would guess for the majority of terrorists the final alternative would be looked at as a mission accomplished , so the only one use I can see for fighter jets is to be available for shooting down the aircraft.

Do you think a terrorist is going to listen to orders based on a threat of death ???? the answer is more than likely to be NO.

[theking]

I would guess for the majority of terrorists the final alternative would be looked at as a mission accomplished , so the only one use I can see for fighter jets is to be available for shooting down the aircraft.

Do you think a terrorist is going to listen to orders based on a threat of death ???? the answer is more than likely to be NO.

Not all hijackers/terrorists are cut from the same mold or have the same goal. Back in the days when hijackings were a frequent event around the world...the flights were sometimes herded to places the hijackers did not want to go. Not everyone that hijacks an aircraft is willing to die...some of course are willing to die.

[Sly]

I would guess for the majority of terrorists the final alternative would be looked at as a mission accomplished , so the only one use I can see for fighter jets is to be available for shooting down the aircraft.

Do you think a terrorist is going to listen to orders based on a threat of death ???? the answer is more than likely to be NO.

Terrorists and suicide bombers usually have a goal. If they don't complete their mission, which would happen if they were shot down, perhaps they would retreat and find another goal while in jail.

[PornGreen]

it's always funny because i am sure when the passengers see two figher jets they are thinking "oh thank god we are saved!" meanwhile there is a good chance they are there to shoot your ass down.

i doubt many passengers are stupid enough to think they are saved when they see military jets with missiles a few feet from their commercial aircraft.

[blackmonsters]

And how do you think they would do that ?

I think that if I was flying a plane and a plane got on my right side then I'd turn
left. But if there was also a plane on my left side then I would crash into it by
turning left.

So if I was flying a plane and there were a plane on my left and right side then I
would think that turning either way would cause a crash and I would continue to
fly straight forward. And then realizing that I was not going to go anywhere
except straight; I would then decide to either go ahead and crash into
one of those planes or obey the commands they are issuing over the radio to me.

I would think that.

[theking]

I think that if I was flying a plane and a plane got on my right side then I'd turn
left. But if there was also a plane on my left side then I would crash into it by
turning left.

So if I was flying a plane and there were a plane on my left and right side then I
would think that turning either way would cause a crash and I would continue to
fly straight forward. And then realizing that I was not going to go anywhere
except straight; I would then decide to either go ahead and crash into
one of those planes or obey the commands they are issuing over the radio to me.

I would think that.

There you go...a man with a logical thinking brain...an uncommon thing for people that post on this board.

[Domain Diva]

Back in the days when hijackings were a frequent event around the world...the flights were sometimes herded to places the hijackers did not want to go.

Yes " Back in the days " but todays terrorists are not simply hijackers but bent on death for as many as possible including themselves.

[Domain Diva]

Terrorists and suicide bombers usually have a goal. If they don't complete their mission, which would happen if they were shot down, perhaps they would retreat and find another goal while in jail.

they know the jail sentence would or could be a lifetime plus the torture or whatever that takes place doesnt make me think this would be considered by most terrorists.

[Si]

Guess the race thread?

[theking]

Yes " Back in the days " but todays terrorists are not simply hijackers but bent on death for as many as possible including themselves.

I will simply repeat...not all "terrorists" are cut from the same mold with the same dedication...or have the same goal.

[Domain Diva]

I would then decide to either go ahead and crash into
one of those planes or obey the commands they are issuing over the radio to me.

I would think that.

I agree and I think most terrorists wouldnt obey the commands but opt for the crashing into one of the jet fighters ..it would make thier day to not only know they took down the plane they hijacked but also a military jet too !

Put yourself in the mindset of someone whos mission is maximum death and destruction.

[theking]

they know the jail sentence would or could be a lifetime plus the torture or whatever that takes place doesnt make me think this would be considered by most terrorists.

It does not have to be considered by most "terrorists"...some...or even one...will be sufficient.

[Domain Diva]

I will simply repeat...not all "terrorists" are cut from the same mold with the same dedication...or have the same goal.

I agree but l would also say that most would be plane hijackers of today are not looking to reach agreements over political issues/etc such as you mentioned " Back in the days ".

[theking]

I agree and I think most terrorists wouldnt obey the commands but opt for the crashing into one of the jet fighters ..it would make thier day to not only know they took down the plane they hijacked but also a military jet too !

Put yourself in the mindset of someone whos mission is maximum death and destruction.

You keep saying "most" and leaving out the "one" that is different than most.

[scuba steve]

You know that GFY is quicker than CNN, right?

this is true, i find out more here faster than i do from news stations.

the credibility on the other hand...

[Domain Diva]

You keep saying "most" and leaving out the "one" that is different than most.

ok so I guess we have reached a conclusion...

if the terrorist agrees and doesnt mind taking commands jet fighters will be able to herd him to a location they agree on ..if on the other hand which is more likely , that the terrorist is hell bent on maximum death.... jet fighters cant do shit !

[theking]

ok so I guess we have reached a conclusion...

if the terrorist agrees and doesnt mind taking commands jet fighters will be able to herd him to a location they agree on ..if on the other hand which is more likely , that the terrorist is hell bent on maximum death.... jet fighters cant do shit !

Now you have finally got it...the fighters are there to do what they can...and if they succeed in forcing a single flight into obeying their commands...that is mission accomplished for their part.

And of course they can do shit...they can shoot the flight down if it becomes necessary to do so...which may cause the "terrorists" original mission to be aborted.

[iSpyCams]

I think that if I was flying a plane and a plane got on my right side then I'd turn
left. But if there was also a plane on my left side then I would crash into it by
turning left.

So if I was flying a plane and there were a plane on my left and right side then I
would think that turning either way would cause a crash and I would continue to
fly straight forward. And then realizing that I was not going to go anywhere
except straight; I would then decide to either go ahead and crash into
one of those planes or obey the commands they are issuing over the radio to me.

I would think that.

I would be thinking: "what the hell am I doing flying a plane? I have no idea how to fly a plane! There could be SNAKES on this motherfucking plane!"

[Phoenix]

I would be thinking: "what the hell am I doing flying a plane? I have no idea how to fly a plane! There could be SNAKES on this motherfucking plane!"

same here man..id be asking for a pilot..lol

my time on a flight simulator..or steering a glider one time isn't going to cut it

hopefully by then i'd wake up