India To Shoot Down Hijacked Planes

[alert5]

India adopts tough hijack policy (http://www.radarvector.com/2005/08/india-adopts-tough-hijack-policy.html)

The Indian government has adopted a policy allowing it to shoot down hijacked passenger aircraft if they are convinced the plane would be used as a missile.

[Sven Sixtoo]

Sounds like India taking the line that makes sense. Have they done different previously?

[Holodek7]

Same Tack that every other place takes...or did someone actually think those fastjets were 'escorts'. Don't kid yourself; If you tell ATC you have hijack issues, you are summoning your own executioner.

[Sven Sixtoo]

Isn't that a bit sensationalist?
Even following 9/11, as far as I know nobody (other than USS ******** in the Gulf and KAL 007) has shot down a civil airliner, even if they thougt it was about to be used as a weapon.

[Carnage Matey!]

I would suggest that if you've got hijack issues these days your own executioners are probably already on board!

[rsoman]

Isn't that a bit sensationalist?
*******
Without a doubt, it is. And if there is a VIP politician on board (or any of his/her folks ranging from grand uncles to grand aunts, grand parents to grand children) then all these brave words will be conveniently forgotten.

Not kidding. The only way to get things done in India is either be a politican or know someone who knows a politician!


Dont forget this is a country where these great men and women tried to force open the aircraft door where the pilot dared to take off without the airconditioning being cold enough for the high and mighties! And then spent hours and hours in the parliament castigating the pilot's "ignorance" and demading action against him befitting his "crime" , all dutifully reported by "your's obedient" local media!

[Airbubba]

rsoman is absolutely right - but you just can't say that, it's politically incorrect...

[Farmer 1]

I seem to remember the Russians shooting at another aeroplane - long before 9/11, and before gps. I think it was another KAL aircraft, though I may be wrong. It was on a polar flight, from where all bearings are south. Unfortunately, the navigator chose the wrong south, and headed towards Russian airspace.

Memory's fading, I'm afraid - can't even remember if the aircraft survived.

[Left Wing]

If there is a DGCA official on board; quite sure the pilots would love to shoot it down :}

Makes a good headline for pax on the early morn flt as they get their free newspapers.


KAL 007 http://www.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!/articles/read.main?id=75

[rsoman]

Left Wing

I think the incident Farmer 1 was referring to was a Korean 707 flying from Paris to Seoul (KE 902) via Anchorage which was shot at by a SU-15 near Murmansk on April 1978 after it strayed off course. Plane managed to crashland on a frozen lake but 2 of the 97 pax lost their lives.

An interesting link here


http://heninen.net/flight-902/english.htm

Cheers

[radeng]

According to the BBC news report on Radio 4, the penalty for hijacking is to be hanging, too.

Seems somewhat counter productive, though. Presumably, hijackers would be less likely to negotiate in that case.

Pity, 'cos it seems a fair punishment to me!

[Left Wing]

http://www.kashmirherald.com/profiles/jaishemohammad.html

http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/jandk/terrorist_outfits/index.html

[donpizmeov]

But with such a fine network of ATC comms coverage, how the hell would they know you were highjacked?
Would it not be a bit better if they concentrated on providing a ATC service that worked, spending the few billion dollars required to make VABB a safe airport to operate into, rather than persue these pipe dreams?
I think with the amount of red tape to be gone through the target Airplane would be out of fuel before the the servicable fighter was found and launched.

Don

[A330AV8R]

Post 9/11 2001 ??? were in 05 at the moment so that just goes to show u at what speed of light the govt. works to get these issues sorted ! so what exactly were they doing for the last 4 years ???

3 x 100000000 m/s it ain't !!!!!

:ok:


Somewhere in a Jetstream

[rugmuncher]

Surprised by this new policy ?

Thye US has been doing it for years, what's new?

TWA 800 !

UA 93 ! & AA77!

Lost count of the number of time we got "locked up" by USS ???? in the gulf coz they never updated their codes daily.

Also, where is American Airlines Boeing 727-223/Adv N844AA ?
Anybody found it yet?

[Holodek7]

Sensationalist?...Only to the naive...Escorts Eh?...

[sikeano]

i am glad the indians decided to do something about these cowboys :O
and if the hijackers survive this they will be hanged :cool:
no rest for the wicked aye

[relax737]

rsoman, there was another one, Ithink a KAL 747 shot down by Russian fighters off Kamchatka about 1980/81. All on board killed when it crashed into the sea aftyer losing part of the left wing outboard of #1...heat seeking missile up the pipe I think.

There was some suggestion that it had strayed intentionally

[arrow1]

The actual decision to shoot down a civil airliner that is presumably hijacked is bound to be very difficult. I am not sure how many political leaders have this capability considering that most of their time is spent in cutting deals and compromises.

[Hobgoblin]

Something that has been bugging me since 9/11 is the fact that I distinctly remember the CNN anchor saying on the day that there is an UNCONFIRMED report of one of the airliners ( the one that ended up in a field in Pennsylvania ) having been shot down by F-16s.

This was while all kinds of reports were coming in thick and fast and new developments were broadcast all the time.

I almost fell off my chair and remained glued to the television for the rest of that day but that report was never repeated - not even as in " we're so sorry for the mistake blah blah blah never happened blah blah blah, now the real facts are blah blah blah "

Before anyone bites my head off, please note that I did say the anchor said it was unconfirmed and that subsequently I never heard a mention of it again.

As hard as it may seem in a case like that one would have some hard decisions to take and I thank the Lord that I will never have to make that kind of decision, however it seems to me that one would have to decide on the basis of the greatest good for the greatest number.

If anyone recalls the same report please let me know (anonymously if you want) as I am dying to know if I imagined things.

Again I would like to stress that I heard this report only once and was so stunned that I couldn't believe my ears ( which is why it stuck in my memory I presume ) and also that the newsperson said it was an unconfirmed report ( could that be journalistic shorthand for " a load of b*ll*cks"?).

Should I get my coat, then?

[noflow]

The USA has a similar policy.

Only a few key individuals have authority to authorize the shootdown. I think it's our idiot in chief, VP Cheney, and the chaiman of the JCS.

[BlueEagle]

My understanding is that the 'shot down' theory arose because the aircraft had crashed in open countryside and not into a building. Subsequent investigation and colation of the several mobile 'phone messages that came from the 'plane indicated that some of the pax tried to regain control from the hijackers and it is thought the hijackers then either flew it into the ground or lost control completely. As mentioned, my understanding.

[Hobgoblin]

Thanks BlueEagle,

I have also heard the later version of events and I am not disputing the findings of the investigation, however the only time that I have heard the words "shot down" mentioned was during that one newscast. Never again afterwards.

I do not subscribe to any conspiracy theory ( eg Man never landed on the moon, JFK was shot by the CIA or the Mafia or the Boogeyman, or Mcdonald's actually use real beef:p ) but cannot help wondering if anyone else actually heard the same thing as I did on the day it happened?