Etihad Jet lands Stansted tailed in by Fighter Jet
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Wales
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Something doesn't quite add up. Usually any disruptive behaviour on a flight would result in either aircraft continuing to final destination or diversion if it was really bad but would request for police to meet the aircraft on arrival at the gate.
There must be something particular in this disruptive passengers behaviour or any specific threats that would result in the Typhoon's being scrambled.
There is something not quite adding up here. I am guessing the reason in the delay of the aircraft leaving was due to full search of the aircraft to make sure there was nothing untoward on board.
There must be something particular in this disruptive passengers behaviour or any specific threats that would result in the Typhoon's being scrambled.
There is something not quite adding up here. I am guessing the reason in the delay of the aircraft leaving was due to full search of the aircraft to make sure there was nothing untoward on board.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Away from home Rat
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and hopefully the disruptive passenger will have a lot of time spent at Her Majesties pleasure to relise what a 
he has been.. Let it be a lesson to all the other that think an aircraft or flight crew is a personnel plaything to abuse.
he has been.. Let it be a lesson to all the other that think an aircraft or flight crew is a personnel plaything to abuse.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Abroad
Posts: 1,172
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You do realise that, whatever the media misrepresentations, and despite the incompetence of our politicians, shooting down a civilian aircraft is a) highly illegal, and b) explicitly forbidden in the upcoming EASA regulations (check the section on interceptions). The gullibility of quite a number of people really amazes me.
Nobody wants another 9-11
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: ireland
Age: 38
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
shooting down a civilian aircraft is a) highly illegal, and b) explicitly forbidden in the upcoming EASA regulations
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK, US, now more ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀
Age: 41
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the purpose of going to Stansted was??
Verbally abusive or rowdy passenger, diversion, fighter jet..
Seriously crazy politicians' reactions these days.
Verbally abusive or rowdy passenger, diversion, fighter jet..
Seriously crazy politicians' reactions these days.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Oz
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And the purpose of going to Stansted was??
Although our friend wiki says:
Stansted has been designated by the UK Government as its preferred airport for any hijacked planes requesting to land in the UK. This is because its design allows a hijacked airliner to be isolated well away from any terminal buildings or runways, allowing the airport to continue to operate while negotiations are carried out, or even while an assault or rescue mission is undertaken. Staff at the airport receive special training for dealing with hijacks.[13] For this reason Stansted has been involved in more hijack incidents than might be expected for an airport of its size.
LH2 wrote,
Do you honestly think that the airliner wouldn't be shot down? The whole aim would be to prevent that airliner from being used as a missile and reaching a high profile target. Tough choice, yes. What next suicidal hi-jackers pressing EASA regulations against the window so that QRA Pilots can see them before they head off to plough into a target? If the scenario develops then that airliner is going to be shot down.
TJ
The gullibility of quite a number of people really amazes me.
TJ
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
You do realise that, whatever the media misrepresentations, and despite the incompetence of our politicians, shooting down a civilian aircraft is a) highly illegal, and b) explicitly forbidden in the upcoming EASA regulations (check the section on interceptions). The gullibility of quite a number of people really amazes me.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sussex UK
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From UAE Media
See here.....
RAF fighter jets escort Etihad flight after passenger threats - Transport - ArabianBusiness.com
It seems a 37 year old Brit caused the incident.
A spokeswoman for Abu Dhabi-based Etihad said it was a "simple case of inappropriate comments made on the flight and a disruptive passenger. There was no threat to the safety of the aircraft or the passengers.”
RAF fighter jets escort Etihad flight after passenger threats - Transport - ArabianBusiness.com
It seems a 37 year old Brit caused the incident.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Age: 39
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
1 Post
But under what circumstances would a shoot-down be authorised? When the hijacker gets on the radio and says "Hur hur, I'm going to crash this thing into Buckingham Palace!!!"?
If you wait long enough for it to become clear that the plane is actually hijacked and the hijackers are intending to crash into something, 9 times out of 10 you'll have waited so long that the plane is over a populated area and shooting it down will do just as much damage, if not more.
Anyone who thinks shooting down a civilian airliner full of passengers is a serious option is in fantasy land. It will never happen.
If you wait long enough for it to become clear that the plane is actually hijacked and the hijackers are intending to crash into something, 9 times out of 10 you'll have waited so long that the plane is over a populated area and shooting it down will do just as much damage, if not more.
Anyone who thinks shooting down a civilian airliner full of passengers is a serious option is in fantasy land. It will never happen.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Philippines
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Etihad Jet Lands Stansted Tailed In By Fighter Jet
I was a passenger on this flight. The Airbus Etihad flight EY19 from Abu Dhabi arrived in UK airspace over Southend a little ahead of schedule. The co-pilot gave us the information about conditions at Heathrow and that we would soon be on the ground. I had my in-flight entertainment screen set to the map showing the position of the aircraft. Nothing at this stage suggested to any of us that something was wrong. I noticed that we banked right and made a couple of circles over Essex. I thought nothing of this expecting the flight deck to receive permission to start their approach. I thought something was odd only when the destination on the map changed to London Stansted . Nothing was said over the PA and I was one of the first to realise that we were not at LHR (the M11 looks a lot like the M4 at altitude). As we landed we all heard the scream of a high performance jet fly over the top of us. We realised then that we had had an escort. Still nothing over the PA until we were well on our way to a quiet spot out of the way on the airfield.
I was sat close to the rear of the aircraft in the centre section (seat 46C). The flight was not full so there were plenty of empty seats. Several hours earlier a male had moved into the two window seats (46A and B) across the isle from me and made himself comfortable there. Some time later a member of the cabin crew asked him to vacate the seats and they brought another man from elsewhere on the plane. He sat down in 46B. It was never clear to me or any of the other passengers around me why this was done. None of us engaged him in conversation. His manner was a little restless but nothing about him suggested that he was the worse the wear for drink or in any way aggressive. When asked if he wanted anything he did ask for a double scotch, but this request was politely over-looked and the pax made no demands.
So, we had landed unexpectedly at STD. As we pulled up at our isolated parking zone the captain told us where we were and that there was a security problem. We were instructed to remain in our seats. I was not near a window, but could see a couple of airport vehicles standing off to the port side. My fear at this stage is that there might be a bomb on board. The atmosphere on board remained good humoured throughout the whole event.
After a long while the rear starboard door was opened and armed police entered. Two of them started purposefully down the isle as next to me as if they were going to walk to the end, but after two paces they were beside my seat and suddenly pounced on the passenger sat beside me. They cuffed him and let him out.
This seemed to surprise the pax as much as it did the rest of us.
After landing and as we taxied a few of us exchanged our first words with the man. He spoke with a Scottish accent. He said that it was his first trip back to UK in 30 years. He had a packet of Peter Stuyvesant cigarettes in his hand and made the comment that you could smoke anywhere 30 years ago. Strange I though, as he would have been a child at that time. He spoke of cars from that era specifically mentioning the Ford RS Cosworth and road legal McLaren cars. He also mentioned a friend he had on the plane who was in 1st class. He was a 'hippy type ... you know, long hair and glasses. No offence' he said, directing his comment at the bespectacled passenger sat in front of me. So, this man did have some odd conversational skills, but nothing that really set off any alarm bells with the rest of the passengers in my vicinity.
After his removal and after several hours the aircraft was moved to a place where they located the man's luggage in the hold and refuelled. We had landed at midday and before 5pm we were airborne again making the short hop to Heathrow. The story does not end there.
Upon landing at LHR passengers got up and waited in the isles to disembark. The captain made an announcement. Heathrow were 'not ready to receive us''and would pax return to their seats. This done two policemen I think I recognised from STD came from the front of the aircraft and led away a second man of about 65 years of age from seats A and B several rows ahead of me. I later saw the police and the man at the carousel in the baggage claim area. Additionally all passports were checked by half a dozen or so immigration personnel as we left the aircraft.
The outside temperature at STD was about 6 degrees C. the aircon kept running throughout the event making the cabin a little cool if anything. I could have done with a hot drink and a bun toward the latter stages but no hospitality of any kind was offered. But everyone stayed in good spirit throughout.
I was sat close to the rear of the aircraft in the centre section (seat 46C). The flight was not full so there were plenty of empty seats. Several hours earlier a male had moved into the two window seats (46A and B) across the isle from me and made himself comfortable there. Some time later a member of the cabin crew asked him to vacate the seats and they brought another man from elsewhere on the plane. He sat down in 46B. It was never clear to me or any of the other passengers around me why this was done. None of us engaged him in conversation. His manner was a little restless but nothing about him suggested that he was the worse the wear for drink or in any way aggressive. When asked if he wanted anything he did ask for a double scotch, but this request was politely over-looked and the pax made no demands.
So, we had landed unexpectedly at STD. As we pulled up at our isolated parking zone the captain told us where we were and that there was a security problem. We were instructed to remain in our seats. I was not near a window, but could see a couple of airport vehicles standing off to the port side. My fear at this stage is that there might be a bomb on board. The atmosphere on board remained good humoured throughout the whole event.
After a long while the rear starboard door was opened and armed police entered. Two of them started purposefully down the isle as next to me as if they were going to walk to the end, but after two paces they were beside my seat and suddenly pounced on the passenger sat beside me. They cuffed him and let him out.
This seemed to surprise the pax as much as it did the rest of us.
After landing and as we taxied a few of us exchanged our first words with the man. He spoke with a Scottish accent. He said that it was his first trip back to UK in 30 years. He had a packet of Peter Stuyvesant cigarettes in his hand and made the comment that you could smoke anywhere 30 years ago. Strange I though, as he would have been a child at that time. He spoke of cars from that era specifically mentioning the Ford RS Cosworth and road legal McLaren cars. He also mentioned a friend he had on the plane who was in 1st class. He was a 'hippy type ... you know, long hair and glasses. No offence' he said, directing his comment at the bespectacled passenger sat in front of me. So, this man did have some odd conversational skills, but nothing that really set off any alarm bells with the rest of the passengers in my vicinity.
After his removal and after several hours the aircraft was moved to a place where they located the man's luggage in the hold and refuelled. We had landed at midday and before 5pm we were airborne again making the short hop to Heathrow. The story does not end there.
Upon landing at LHR passengers got up and waited in the isles to disembark. The captain made an announcement. Heathrow were 'not ready to receive us''and would pax return to their seats. This done two policemen I think I recognised from STD came from the front of the aircraft and led away a second man of about 65 years of age from seats A and B several rows ahead of me. I later saw the police and the man at the carousel in the baggage claim area. Additionally all passports were checked by half a dozen or so immigration personnel as we left the aircraft.
The outside temperature at STD was about 6 degrees C. the aircon kept running throughout the event making the cabin a little cool if anything. I could have done with a hot drink and a bun toward the latter stages but no hospitality of any kind was offered. But everyone stayed in good spirit throughout.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Colchester, Essex
Age: 32
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you answered your own question there with "we're taking no chances"
Put yourself in the captain's shoes....man on plane makes comments that could relate to terrorism, hi-jack or something that may endanger the safety of his aircraft, crew and passengers.
Would you want it on your conscience if you'd thought "aah it will be alright" and then end up getting hi-jacked and flown into Canary Wharf.
Put yourself in the captain's shoes....man on plane makes comments that could relate to terrorism, hi-jack or something that may endanger the safety of his aircraft, crew and passengers.
Would you want it on your conscience if you'd thought "aah it will be alright" and then end up getting hi-jacked and flown into Canary Wharf.
So every time a passenger gets noisy they'll have Typhoons bombing around? I find this all very scary and too knee-jerky for comfort...
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Bishops Stortford
Age: 64
Posts: 143
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the BBC, he pleaded guilty and is now remanded in custody until his court appearance on March 10.
By the way, who will pick up all the various bills for this? I imagine the total for 2x Typhoon and 1x VC10 could be substantial, quite apart from divert costs.
By the way, who will pick up all the various bills for this? I imagine the total for 2x Typhoon and 1x VC10 could be substantial, quite apart from divert costs.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the BBC (BBC News - Man admits aircraft bomb hoax after plane diverted):
So that would explain why it was intercepted and diverted....
A man has pleaded guilty to making a bomb hoax following an incident on board an aircraft which was diverted to Stansted Airport.
The court heard he was drunk when he told a flight attendant that a fellow passenger had a gun and had "threatened to blow himself up".
The court heard he was drunk when he told a flight attendant that a fellow passenger had a gun and had "threatened to blow himself up".
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: South Wales
Posts: 1,253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The court heard he was drunk when he told a flight attendant that a fellow passenger had a gun and had "threatened to blow himself up".
If somone made those comments in the air how on earth could someone then say in the press.
Essex police said it was not a terrorism-related incident.
"There had been no direct threat to the safety of the plane," she added.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hertfordshire
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nicknight, excellent balanced, non-sensational, factually correct, articulate post.
What on earth is it doing on here ? !!!!!!
Mods, bar this imposter !
What on earth is it doing on here ? !!!!!!
Mods, bar this imposter !
Last edited by Will Hung; 25th Jan 2011 at 16:09. Reason: spelling
ButFli,
That is why regular exercises are held.
BBC News - RAF jets take off in 'hijacked planes' terror test
The whole point is to stop it reaching a high profile target. The option of shoot down is there regardless. There is no way that an airliner that has obviously deviated from its flight path and unresponsive to ATC or QRA is going to be allowed to carry on to plough into a target.
There is no way of knowing what the intended target is. It could be a nuclear power station, or a crowded football stadium. Tough choice, but anyone that thinks it will be allowed to carry on to its course selected by a hi-jacker in control as per 9/11 is living in a fantasy land.
TJ
That is why regular exercises are held.
BBC News - RAF jets take off in 'hijacked planes' terror test
The whole point is to stop it reaching a high profile target. The option of shoot down is there regardless. There is no way that an airliner that has obviously deviated from its flight path and unresponsive to ATC or QRA is going to be allowed to carry on to plough into a target.
There is no way of knowing what the intended target is. It could be a nuclear power station, or a crowded football stadium. Tough choice, but anyone that thinks it will be allowed to carry on to its course selected by a hi-jacker in control as per 9/11 is living in a fantasy land.
TJ