Passenger says she had "surgically implanted bomb"
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rennes
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Passenger says she had "surgically implanted bomb"
US Airways B767 from CDG to CLT, 188 souls aboard, diverted to BGR with F-15 escort this afternoon. Allegedly, a female passenger claimed to have an explosive device implanted inside her body. Currently being evaluated for mental problems...
Plane diverted after crazed woman claims to have BOMB surgically implanted inside her body | Mail Online
Plane diverted after crazed woman claims to have BOMB surgically implanted inside her body | Mail Online
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to this US Airways flight diverted after passenger claims to have device surgically implanted inside her | The Lookout - Yahoo! News she was traveling alone with no baggage. Wasn't necessarily a false alarm, but who knows?
This might be a tactic referred to as probing.
Might also be a nut job.
Might also be a nut job.
Like short range surface to air missiles in the middle of a city during the Olympics - it just seems it's part of the posture these days; no one knows what they are for.
Yeah - got it - might not crash on a big tall building. Otherwise perfectly OK to be shot down certainly killing everyone on the 'plane and the wreckage falling into a less publicity valuable area of housing or such.
Rubbish.
Rubbish.
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 3,336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Piltdown:
Twofold:
1. To provide some measure of reassurance to the passengers that the diversion is being supported.
2. Once the captain and the F-15s are on the same page as to where the fight is diverting to, if the flight instead goes to some other plan, then the F-15 commander will be communicating as to "why are you doing that?" If there are no answers then the commander goes up the chain of command for instructions, possibly including shooting the airliner down.
So what exactly was the job of the F15's? To shoot it down if she failed? Witness a human catastrophe? Put pressure on the crew? Answers on a postcard please.
1. To provide some measure of reassurance to the passengers that the diversion is being supported.
2. Once the captain and the F-15s are on the same page as to where the fight is diverting to, if the flight instead goes to some other plan, then the F-15 commander will be communicating as to "why are you doing that?" If there are no answers then the commander goes up the chain of command for instructions, possibly including shooting the airliner down.
Yeah - cos nothing reassures passengers quite like seeing the 'plane that will be tasked with shooting them down and nothing quite dissuades a suicide bomber...
Rubbish.
Rubbish.
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: FG central
Age: 53
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought heat seeking air to air missiles were only meant to destroy an engine. Of course, in a military type aircraft, the resultant engine separation is bad, but for a wing mounted engine, survivable? With the result of forcing a landing/ditching?
And carefully placed cannon rounds could also achieve a similar, less catastrophic result?
Maybe fighter escort has a useful role after all?
And carefully placed cannon rounds could also achieve a similar, less catastrophic result?
Maybe fighter escort has a useful role after all?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ONE:...very glad that BGR had portable stairs. Some guys would pull the slide trick.
Two...you guys and the F15's...imagine this: you are a bad guy hijacking a plane, you see one F15 pull up abeam the cockpit...you know you can't get away with flying into a building like 911. Two...for those of you in the know, the OTHER F15 is sitting on your tail just in case you try something funny.
Three...we have to face facts...it is better to lose 200 people on a plane than to lose 2000 in a "crash into a building" scenario...after all you will lose the 200 anyway!
Two...you guys and the F15's...imagine this: you are a bad guy hijacking a plane, you see one F15 pull up abeam the cockpit...you know you can't get away with flying into a building like 911. Two...for those of you in the know, the OTHER F15 is sitting on your tail just in case you try something funny.
Three...we have to face facts...it is better to lose 200 people on a plane than to lose 2000 in a "crash into a building" scenario...after all you will lose the 200 anyway!
Interesting ethical call that. Kill 200 of your citizens (& those of other countries) for certain with the wreckage falling god knows where (given by the time it is obvious it is going to hit a Very Important Building it'll be over a densely populated area anyway) or letting the 'plane carry on because you can't be certain there will be a happier eventuality.
Still Rubbish.
Not one convincing argument so far.
Still Rubbish.
Not one convincing argument so far.
The only possible reason to have a fighter jet hanging around is so the pilot can observe the manner the 'plane is flying in and possibly visually communicate with those on board.
The whole 'shoot down the hijacked airliner' idea it total BS. The idea that we would ever shoot down a 'plane load of innocent people because of what might happen is manifestly perverse and unethical.
There - that good enough?
The whole 'shoot down the hijacked airliner' idea it total BS. The idea that we would ever shoot down a 'plane load of innocent people because of what might happen is manifestly perverse and unethical.
There - that good enough?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Planet Earth for a short visit
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's been done before, ask Air India and others.
btw the ASRAAM I worked on in development starts off in infra red then reverts to 'flightdeck mode' if it becomes visual prior to impact, thus killing the pilots not just a shot into an engine. The database included civilian aircraft too!
btw the ASRAAM I worked on in development starts off in infra red then reverts to 'flightdeck mode' if it becomes visual prior to impact, thus killing the pilots not just a shot into an engine. The database included civilian aircraft too!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: fort sheridan, il
Posts: 1,656
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK load toad
what do you do? let thousands die or just hundreds? there really isn't another choice in the scenario you are thinking about.
how about the F15's fly directly in front of the engines of the 767 and then go to full afterburner, sucking the oxygen out of the air and causinga dual engine flameout on the 767? and then the 767 glides down and lands in a lovely park where hot dogs are being sold for twenty five cents.
what do you do? let thousands die or just hundreds? there really isn't another choice in the scenario you are thinking about.
how about the F15's fly directly in front of the engines of the 767 and then go to full afterburner, sucking the oxygen out of the air and causinga dual engine flameout on the 767? and then the 767 glides down and lands in a lovely park where hot dogs are being sold for twenty five cents.
I can imagine the following possibility: after the "successful" shooting down some foreign TV broadcasts the terrorists' talk (recorder prior to the hijack): "We will hijack the plane. We want to exchange the passengers with the Guantanamo prisoners", ended with an obvious propaganda remark: "America killed its own citizens".
Next time they hijack the plane, a USAF guy in charge will have - supposedly - a much tougher decision to make...
