Skip to comments.
BA again grounds flight 223 to Washington and Monday’s 263 to Riyadh
BBC
| 15 Feb 04
Posted on 02/15/2004 11:33:37 AM PST by Patriot1998
BA cancels flights again for today amd Monday to DC and SA...
TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: airlinesecurity; ba; ba223; iad; lhr; riyadh; saudiarabia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
To: Patriot1998
Oh, you mean that (ahem) "exaggerated" terror threat? Cynthia Tucker's admonitions must not have reached HSA.
heavy sarcasm off. I'm glad they're being proactive.
2
posted on
02/15/2004 11:37:52 AM PST
by
bootless
(Never Forget)
To: Patriot1998
This 223 thing is really getting wierd
3
posted on
02/15/2004 11:38:53 AM PST
by
mylife
To: Patriot1998
Does anyone know why they aren't waiting till the last minute to cancel? Have they ruled out trying to catch these guys at the airport, or do they think the threat will be automated somehow?
4
posted on
02/15/2004 11:40:06 AM PST
by
mewzilla
To: Patriot1998; Admin Moderator
oops=duplicate you hit post 2x.
5
posted on
02/15/2004 11:47:38 AM PST
by
TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig
(Hey, Sweet Pea, Wontcha dance with me. Come on, come one, come on and dance with Meeeeeeeeeee!)
To: mewzilla
I was curious about the same thing, filling the flight with marshals or is it possible a bomb that they couldn't afford to even let it get off the ground?
To: olde north church
I was wondering the same thing this morning. Came up with the notion that it has to do with spoofing the transponder. It must have something to do with the worry that somehow the transmitted location of BA 223 wont correspond to actual position...or that there will be a confusion.
What do y'all think?
To: olde north church
Well, I could see some scenarios that wouldn't require a bad guy being on board. Maybe that's what they're worried about.
8
posted on
02/15/2004 12:13:16 PM PST
by
mewzilla
To: mewzilla
Two BA 223's (one a charter bad-guy aircraft). One gets right behind the other on Dulles approach. Folks at ATC think they've got a computer glitch. No one calls NORAD?
To: mewzilla
9/11 was simple and brutal. Bombs are also usually very simple. Cancelling some of these flights makes no sense. A different flight could be attacked. Something odd is going on here.
10
posted on
02/15/2004 12:19:24 PM PST
by
eno_
(Freedom Lite - it's almost worth defending)
To: eno_
It is odd, but they likely don't know what to do, they have some kind of intercept, so they cancel it for safety's sake.
the strange part is: why don't they change the flight number on this, and see if the new intercepts "move" to the new flight number assignment.
To: eno_
Actually it does considering what they've been seeing on some of the planes lately. Tinkering in the bathroons, for example. Like I said, I can think of a lot of things the bad guys could do that wouldn't require someone being on the flight that was attacked. If the good guys've got specific info on a flight, and they're not entirely sure what they're dealing with, I can see why'd cancel. This is actually scarier to think about since there might not be a passenger manifest ping to alert you. Yikes.
12
posted on
02/15/2004 12:23:18 PM PST
by
mewzilla
To: mewzilla
Any such threat could be readily moved to any flight. Why cancel
this flight?
Perhaps to create the appearance that something is being done when actually all transatlantic flights are sitting ducks.
13
posted on
02/15/2004 12:27:02 PM PST
by
eno_
(Freedom Lite - it's almost worth defending)
To: mewzilla
It really *is* odd that BA just doesn't change the Fl. #. Presumably they are flying a variety of equipment already (not the same exact aircraft)....although United used to fly a really old 747 from Chicago to Honolulu back and forth over and over for years.
To: mewzilla
"Have they ruled out trying to catch these guys at the airport, or do they think the threat will be automated somehow?" We'll probably never know. I'd rather be safe than sorry. We have to trust what-ever info they have.
15
posted on
02/15/2004 12:33:59 PM PST
by
blam
To: oceanview
"why don't they change the flight number"
I've wondered that too. Or better yet, work out to change the flight designation and alter the schedule enough to set the timing askew. It might mean having to rearrange a whole series of connections, but that might be cheaper than so many cancellations, and might lead to a break in stopping what's going on, and catching the potential perpetrators.
In any event, who would even want to book a ticket on that flight these days? Must be lots of cancellations.
16
posted on
02/15/2004 12:34:27 PM PST
by
Cap Huff
To: eno_
I'm assuming because there's a specific problem at Heathrow. And they haven't found it yet.
17
posted on
02/15/2004 12:36:27 PM PST
by
mewzilla
To: Cap Huff
I think most people are so clueless as to what is really going on in this WOT, the flights are probably booked solid.
To: oceanview
Sadly, that is probably true.
19
posted on
02/15/2004 12:47:11 PM PST
by
Cap Huff
To: oceanview
I'm on it on Friday. I booked six months ago. I'm coming back from Iraq. Plenty of people like me are coming back on that flight.
This cancellation stuff takes on a whole new dimension when it affects you personally.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson