WH bans all future flyovers

foxnews.com ^ | April 27, 2009 | major garrett

[Free ThinkerNY]

WH bans all future photo-shoot flyovers with AF1 backup plane

WH official tells Fox these flights have been banned but would not confirm a Wall Street Journal report that a planned flyover on May 5-6 in Washington, with the US Capitol as a backdrop, had been scrubbed.

[BIGLOOK]

They pulled two of your links, Highlander. Thanks for the one that got through.

[SeaHawkFan]

Filming “Hot Shots - Part Trois”?

[Salamander]

A stack of “Kickers”, no doubt....:)

[mad_as_he$$]

Hey morons buy a copy of Photoshop and make all the pretty pictures you want.

[Empireoftheatom48]

Just practicing the grand fly over and landing at Noter Dame!!

[Titus-Maximus]

This is more of the “let them eat pizza” syndrome of flying in a pizza cook from St Louis to the White House and then offer the canard that “he had business in Washington anyway”. Since when do pizza cooks travel from city to city? (I know my favorite pizza chef down at Fratelli’s is often traveling around the world with his pizza gear, he was gone so much the rumor was he was a hit man for the CIA. Right.)

Obama sends a plane for a photo op and scared the bejesus out of the city. The height of irresponsibility. Arrogance, irresponsibility and non-accountability - a very bad amalgam. Get used to it.

[JerseyHighlander]

I think I made a mistake in the html, the videos are still up:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn0tMMYEkQU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxE0iazfIBg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7H_8kQoVVFg

[fso301]

It could have been with an automated or remote-operated camera.

Not that I know everything but I know of no such device.

Or from a nearby helicopter which wouldn’t have attracted any attention.

As far as I know, no helicopter was identified as part of the contingent.

If it was just a pair of single seaters, someone has some explaining to do. If the single seaters just happened to have tinted canopy glass, more explaining is needed. Someone should determine the names of any civilians aboard AF1 today to see if this was a sightseeing trip for some fat cats or other friends of the prez.

[GnuHere]

Shhh! They’ll seize on this talking point by the next news cycle!

[cookcounty]

" The money for this flight was already in the defense budget so there was no extra expenses involved."

Spoken like a true government worker!

[El Gato]

Someone needs to find out what variant F-16's flew today?

If the photos were taken from an F-16, it was very likely a two seater, specially outfitted for air to air photos.

But, if I had to guess, I'd guess that there was another aircraft up there doing the photography.

The Air Force has done this sort of thing for a long time. One of the prototype B-70s was lost during a photo shoot highlighting aircraft with engines from General Electric. I've seen the surving B-70 at the Air Force Museum at Wright Patterson AFB, although it was still outside then, over 20 years ago.

[GovernmentShrinker]

If people had been *thinking* they could have come up with a carefully worded statement, to provide to authorities for public release, mentioning the planned flights, how the aircraft would be close to buildings, not-to-worry because it’s a military exercise, without specifying that an Air Force One aircraft would be part of the exercise. Still, I think if Bloomberg (or his deputy commissioner) had been informed as to the type of flight path, proximity to buildings, etc, Bloomberg would have put a stop to it, or at least gone on the evening news the night before and gotten heavy media saturation by pitching a public fit, saying he’d requested it be cancelled, but White House/Defense refused, etc. Would have had the effect of getting the population of the area very clear on how bad these flights were expected to look, and thus prevented the panic. Too early to blame the NYPD deputy commissioner who didn’t pass on the notice, because it seems doubtful that the notice contained a meaningful description of what was planned. New Yorkers are not spooked by just any planes overhead, even at reasonably low altitudes, and if, as reported, the notice contained a request not to disseminate the information to the public, a reasonable reader would have assumed that the details of the planned flights didn’t involve activities that would cause reasonable people to panic and flee their offices and homes. Some of the people who have reported their first hand experiences said they looked out their office window and saw jet engines coming straight at them, due to the sharp turns that were being made.

[ChinaThreat]

It makes sense not to notify 10 million people when you are going to fly a very important military asset at low altitude. However, doing this in the first place is what is fishy as you put it. It doesn’t add up. Why risk such an expensive piece of a machinery, terrify a major urban area, for a nice photo. Unless this president is a greater egomaniac than we already suspect from his garish campaign, there is more to this story.

I have to admit. The whole thing is a little creepy. If they were doing psy op to gauge people’s reactions, why use AF1? That just doesn’t make any sense. For what possible reason would they run this flight with a 747 marked with the presidential seal? If a photo op is the cover story, well its a good one. But there is just something that doesn’t add up here.

[fso301]

If the photos were taken from an F-16, it was very likely a two seater, specially outfitted for air to air photos.

I'm ok with that as long as one or more twin seat variants were present today.

[GovernmentShrinker]

There are so many helicopters hovering around Manhattan every day that nobody would have noticed an extra.

I would think there might be some emergency situations where fighter pilots would need to take photos of AF1 (e.g. a mechanical/structural problem that would have some exterior evidence, or if AF1 had been hit by some unidentified projectile), and that F-16s used to escort AF1 might have the necessary equipment to do that. I’d actually be surprised if they did NOT have the capacity to take high-resolution photos from the F-16s.

[HawaiianGecko]

  I wonder how much it cost the rest of us taxpayers to scare the hell out of New York taxpayers?  And just for a photo-op...

[keepitreal]

Wouldn’t it be a more logical answer to just say “Sorry, we really screwed up. We have another flyover planned and we’ll make sure everyone is informed.”

This response is so like my kids - “Fine, I just won’t do it at all.”

[Red Steel]

Spoken like a true government worker!

Then delete all military training flights until the next war. See how that works out. And btw, I'm not a government worker.

[AH_LiveRight]

“The URL contained a malformed video ID.
We are currently performing site maintenance. Be cool - we’ll be back 100% in a bit. “

YouTube has sent the first link to the bit-bucket.

[El Gato]

I’d actually be surprised if they did NOT have the capacity to take high-resolution photos from the F-16s.

That analysis implies that there are particular F-16s which escort AF-1. But that is clearly not the case. I've seen it escorted by F-16s, from different units, F-14s, F/A-18s, F-15s, and even F-22s.

They may routinely carry hand held cameras, but for a photo shoot like this you'd want a bit more than that. Something that could be put in the back seat of any two seat fighter. (Which would be everything but the F-22).

I still suspect there was another aircraft, at higher altitude, lost in the haze that was evident in the videos posted above, that was taking the photos.