F-16 Pilots Considered Ramming Flight 93

Aviation Week's Aviation Now ^ | September 9, 2002 | William B. Scott

[Poohbah]

I never advocated that our F-16 pilots be kamikazes.

Right. So, in essence, you've advocated--very forcefully, I might add--that you wanted the military to LOOK like it was doing something instead of ACTUALLY doing something useful. That is my point. You prefer symbolism to substance.

I said repeatly that they might have been able to distract the hijackers.

The only distraction that would have actually worked would have been the distraction of an F-16 or F/A-18 smacking into Flight 77 with a great deal of "smash" (closing velocity) on, or else hosing the plane with a load of 20 mike-mike, or shooting the plane with an air-to-air missile.

When someone is willing to fly an airplane into a building, their mind is literally not in our neat, ordered, rational world. What might work against someone like you (distraction maneuvers) will NOT work against someone who is stone crazy and fixated on doing something that horrific.

[Tuco-bad]

Right. So, in essence, you've advocated--very forcefully, I might add--that you wanted the military to LOOK like it was doing something instead of ACTUALLY doing something useful. That is my point. You prefer symbolism to substance.

So you believe air defense did the proper thing by WATCHING on TV Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, as you believe nothing else could be done or tried?

[VOA]

I think that on one of the news shows (20/20? DateLine?) that one NYC official
said that he'd ordered NYC helicopters (Port Authority/NYPD?) to
attempt to stop any incoming jet if possible after it was clear that
a terrorist attack was underway.

I can't recall if the official said he knew this was essentially ordering a suicide
ramming, but I think he and the pilots at least understood that was the deal.

[Poohbah]

So you believe air defense did the proper thing by WATCHING on TV Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, as you believe nothing else could be done or tried?

Yes. DO try to keep your panties unbunched and separate your emotional response from a reasoned response.

There was one thing that could be tried--but it wasn't something that could be ordered.

[VaBthang4]

Yep...

Airliners arent hardened. Ball ammo will slice through its exterior like it was aluminium foil.

Even shedding through a section of wing...you wouldnt have to slice the wing off...just shooting through a section of it will bring it down...hydraulics, feul and electrical systems flow through an airliners wing.

An aweful thing considering the innocent life that would be lost but when you factor in the mathmatics of any impact on a major governmental facility and there isnt alot of drama...per se...you just do it.

[Hillarys Gate Cult]

Good point. High-explosive incendiary (HEI) are are expensive compared to TP (target practice, what they called "ball" or training rounds in this article) rounds. A 20mm training round can do plenty of damage. It causes large ragged hole in an aircraft and the effects of air that normaly passes over a plane's surfaces do the rest to enlarge the hole. They can also take out an engine easily with it to force the plane to land.

[Poohbah]

Airliners arent hardened. Ball ammo will slice through its exterior like it was aluminium foil.

Umm...I always thought aircraft exteriors WERE aluminum foil (well, kinda THICK foil, but not overly so).

[Publius6961]

Wish I knew more about the source of this article.
Does anyone have links to Parts 1 and 2 of the series?

Thanks in advance.

[VaBthang4]

~grin~

Well...I think that is stretching the spirit of the word "foil" but I'll go with that.

:o)

[Poohbah]

Just my attitude that the only way I'd feel sanguine about someone hosing twenty-mike-mike in my direction is if I'm under ten meters of reinforced concrete :o)

[Tuco-bad]

There was one thing that could be tried--but it wasn't something that could be ordered.

Anything COULD be tried - the POINT is NOTHING was tried!

[Poohbah]

Anything COULD be tried - the POINT is NOTHING was tried!

Are you constitutionally unable to separate style and substance? No wonder why you worship Shrillary!

Either you do something effective, or you waste time. Glad to see you're a time-waster.

[Tuco-bad]

Either you do something effective, or you waste time.

Yeah - let's not waste time doing something that MIGHT not be effective, let's watch Flight 77 hit the Pentagon on TV.

[hc87]

Wish I knew more about the source of this article.

Aviation Week is an aerospace and aviation trade journal that is pretty well regarded. A friend of mine who used to fly scout helicopters for the Army turned me on to the magazine years ago. I can't find on-line links to parts 1 and 2, but I'm sure you could find them in the print edition of the magazine.

[Poohbah]

Yeah - let's not waste time doing something that MIGHT not be effective

Taco-Spud, unlike you, I have actually dealt with Islamist whackjobs in the far-off duchy of Lebanon. It wouldn't have been effective to attempt to "distract" the Islamakazi, unless said distraction consisted of a midair impact with an F-16 at 400+ knots of closure.

So go back to searching for nekkid pitchers of Britney Spears, and kindly leave the business of fighting a war to the grownups. G'Day.

[Tuco-bad]

Taco-Spud, unlike you, I have actually dealt with Islamist whackjobs in the far-off duchy of Lebanon. It wouldn't have been effective to attempt to "distract" the Islamakazi, unless said distraction consisted of a midair impact with an F-16 at 400+ knots of closure.

Yeah - you're right, we "coulda" done NOTHING - except of course watching on TV Flight 77 smacking into the Pentagon.

Yeah - sure!

[Poohbah]

This is my last post to you on this (or any other) topic.

FOXTROT OSCAR

[Tuco-bad]

This is my last post to you on this (or any other) topic.

Yeah - sure!

[Hot Tabasco]

Read it

[Publius6961]

Bookmark