STANDTO
16th Aug 2002, 14:04
Today's Daily Mail carries a 3 page article on pp36-38 regarding the fate of flight 93. The copyright appears to have generated from the Independent.
It is, yet another range of conspiracy theories on the big question of whether this a/c was in fact shot down on 9/11. There are a number of issues within this which would point to a shoot down (allegedly) One is the 1000lb engine part that was found 2000 yds away, and the other is the mail and other papers from the a/c found 8 miles away. If I remember rightly, eight miles was about the length of the debris trail at Lockerbie.
My own view is, that, if it was shot down, then it is never likely to come into the public domain. Although a perfectly legitimate action was taken under the circumstances, the public outcry would be such, that it would probably bring down the US Administration. This is particularly so, if it was to be argued on the grounds, that the passengers were about to retake the aircraft and with the aid of ATC may have been able to facilitate an emergency landing.
9/11 happened. It should never have happened. What annoys me now, is that it could happen again, and although it would doubtless result in an AMRAAM up the tailpipe, the ability for someone to hijack an aircraft still exists. Flying out of one of the main UK airports within the last twelve months, I inadvertedly found, at the other end, a packet of screwdrivers in my hand luggage which had been there for months. Some of the plastic cutlery provided with in flight meals has remarkable injurious potential, and I am sure the phrase 'Lindy's Pencil Kill' will mean something to some of you.
The airline business is generally on its backside, and perhaps it is time to go back to the time where air travel was the domain of the exclusively rich. This would come about due to the fact that the necessary security to ensure ultimate safety would make the costs justifiably prohibitive. It might just prevent some poor military aviator having to set up behind an airliner with considerably more than 40 passengers and crew on board.
Apparently, there is a web site with all this in it too,
www.flight93crash.com.
I havent looked at it. I might add that I am only reading the Mail because my father in law is over! I am also aware of the existence of the Pentagon thread.
So,
"Is the abject lack of proper security within commercial and general aviation, ultimately putting military aviators in an untenable position? Discuss.
:confused:
It is, yet another range of conspiracy theories on the big question of whether this a/c was in fact shot down on 9/11. There are a number of issues within this which would point to a shoot down (allegedly) One is the 1000lb engine part that was found 2000 yds away, and the other is the mail and other papers from the a/c found 8 miles away. If I remember rightly, eight miles was about the length of the debris trail at Lockerbie.
My own view is, that, if it was shot down, then it is never likely to come into the public domain. Although a perfectly legitimate action was taken under the circumstances, the public outcry would be such, that it would probably bring down the US Administration. This is particularly so, if it was to be argued on the grounds, that the passengers were about to retake the aircraft and with the aid of ATC may have been able to facilitate an emergency landing.
9/11 happened. It should never have happened. What annoys me now, is that it could happen again, and although it would doubtless result in an AMRAAM up the tailpipe, the ability for someone to hijack an aircraft still exists. Flying out of one of the main UK airports within the last twelve months, I inadvertedly found, at the other end, a packet of screwdrivers in my hand luggage which had been there for months. Some of the plastic cutlery provided with in flight meals has remarkable injurious potential, and I am sure the phrase 'Lindy's Pencil Kill' will mean something to some of you.
The airline business is generally on its backside, and perhaps it is time to go back to the time where air travel was the domain of the exclusively rich. This would come about due to the fact that the necessary security to ensure ultimate safety would make the costs justifiably prohibitive. It might just prevent some poor military aviator having to set up behind an airliner with considerably more than 40 passengers and crew on board.
Apparently, there is a web site with all this in it too,
www.flight93crash.com.
I havent looked at it. I might add that I am only reading the Mail because my father in law is over! I am also aware of the existence of the Pentagon thread.
So,
"Is the abject lack of proper security within commercial and general aviation, ultimately putting military aviators in an untenable position? Discuss.
:confused: