http://us.news2.yimg.com/f/42/31/7m/dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20010913/ts/att ack_afghan_radio_dc_1.html
"Sorry, the bombers are past the failsafe point." re
----- Original Message ----- From: "M.Blackmore" <mblackmore at oxlug.org> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 4:54 PM Subject: Shoot down on sight... horrifying future air travel scenario
> Shoot down on sight... horrifying future air travel scenario
>
> Anyone discussing anywhere the implications of these hijackings for air
> travel?
>
> Isn't a possible response of any national defence/government to destroy
> any future hijacked aircraft to prevent them becoming suicide weapons?
> We've now seen the casualties and damage that aircraft of moderate sizes
> can do in urban areas in worst case scenarios ...
>
> So we have a wonderful prospect: any hijacking potentially becomes an
> immediate government death sentence.
>
> One can have scenarios where execution might not be immediate - give
> instructions to land at military bases or remote airstrips where little
> damage can be done by crashing an aircraft, but if not obeyed and if the
> aircraft is in the vicinity of any major surface installations - boom.
>
> Suddenly flying has become a lot more lethal. Whereas before a hijack was
> dangerous, but mostly leaving a good chance of survival, now any breach of
> security could mean summary execution of the passengers and crew.
>
> Absolutely spiffing :-(
>
> This is in the context that there are suspicions that the 4th aeroplane
> was shot down by the US military over Ohio... any more light on that?
>
> This was an event affecting things worldwide. We are under the approaches
> to Heathrow and the transatlantic air routes here in central England. It
> was mid/later afternoon local time that it became clear what was happening
> in the USA. By evening and nightfall there were engine sounds above the
> clouds which were not the normal civilian traffic - a lot of tankers from
> nearby Brize Norton in evidence, and other engines which I suspect were
> interceptors. That is the sort of time that aircraft turned back over the
> Atlantic, before they reached the point of no return, would have got back
> into UK airspace.
>
> Later on the long hauls from the various USA and Canada origins would have
> been arriving after their 6-12 hour flights, and one could hear on a few
> occassions what sounded like interceptor engines at lower altitudes.
>
> Probably these US originating aircraft would have been of most concern.
>
> Disturbing thoughts arise about aircraft on landing approach being tailed
> in by armed interceptors, just in case ...
>
> It is quite reasonable to suppose that the RAF had standing patrols,
> probably ranging well into the Atlantic, just in case anything had started
> straying where it shouldn't as it entered European airspace. These are
> densely urbanised countries - the response time to prevent Canary Wharf
> becoming a second WTC is very short indeed. I wouldn't be surprised if
> there were shoot down orders if any aircraft flying in from the USA had
> made any untoward moves.
>
> What did people in N.America observe of air defence mobilisation?
>
> I bet that standing air patrols to cover civilian aircraft will now become
> a permanent feature of UK air defence, given how much shorter the time to
> respond is over densely populated areas compared to radar detection of
> intruders. I bet the same goes for other countries including the USA
> around major urban areas.
>
> I wonder if we will ever be told about air defence policies?
>