Air Force One seen by BA pilot

Big John wrote:

I want to put together an agenda where airline pilots will load and
unload the bird if it is hi-jacked (hi-jackers have no access to
cockpit).

No aileron (bank) or rudder (yaw) inputs other than what is need to
keep bird on a straight line. Only elevator input with a clean bird
(no flaps, etc.).

The figures given seem to be about 2.5 +G's and 1.5 -G's. I'm not sure
those are the figures I want? Are these 'company' figures for
passenger comfort or airframe longevity or the manufactures structural
limits that should not be exceeded at any time? Also what is design
ultimate if it is available?
Isn't that essentially what the El Al captain did back in the 70s?

A tall tale. If another aircraft really had eyeballed "AF1" and called up
as stated, the AF1 pilot would have just ignored the call.

Also very unlikely that any other aircraft would be able to get into visual
range -- AF1 would have deviated to maintain greater separation. They do
have better than average radar, you know. :-

Thats what I thought. Also, I just realized how stupid it sounds
saying that I assume TFRs are in place wherever AF1 goes, but I do
assume there is some sort of TFRthingamajig overseas.

Gary Mishler wrote:

"Jay Somerset" wrote in message
...

A tall tale. If another aircraft really had eyeballed "AF1" and called up
as stated, the AF1 pilot would have just ignored the call.

It's been widely reported in both broadcast and print media and has been
confirmed through gov't sources. Knight Ridder Newspapers even printed a
quote from the AF1 captain. No one is trying to keep it a secret.

Pilots Didn't Radio Air Force One, Airline Says
WASHINGTON POST Page A03

"We have spoken to the British Airways captains who were in the area at the
time and neither made comments to Air Force One nor did they hear any other
aircraft make the statement over the radio," Verrier said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...-2003Dec1.html

mateo

Not sure. Todays pilots and airline Companies don't want to do it as I
read. (

Big John

On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 22:03:03 -0500, Mateo wrote:

Big John wrote:

I want to put together an agenda where airline pilots will load and
unload the bird if it is hi-jacked (hi-jackers have no access to
cockpit).

No aileron (bank) or rudder (yaw) inputs other than what is need to
keep bird on a straight line. Only elevator input with a clean bird
(no flaps, etc.).

The figures given seem to be about 2.5 +G's and 1.5 -G's. I'm not sure
those are the figures I want? Are these 'company' figures for
passenger comfort or airframe longevity or the manufactures structural
limits that should not be exceeded at any time? Also what is design
ultimate if it is available?
Isn't that essentially what the El Al captain did back in the 70s?

This method was discussed quite a lot in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 and
both Boeing and Airbus tested it out in the simulators. The presentation I
got from them both was that this was not a viable option. It may have, and
may will, work in exceptional circumstances in an isolated case, but their
view was that it wasn't worth developing a procedure and training pilots to
do it. A bulletproof door on the cockpit was a much better solution.

Shawn
"Big John" wrote in message
...
mateo

Not sure. Todays pilots and airline Companies don't want to do it as I
read. (

Big John

On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 22:03:03 -0500, Mateo wrote:

Big John wrote:

I want to put together an agenda where airline pilots will load and
unload the bird if it is hi-jacked (hi-jackers have no access to
cockpit).

No aileron (bank) or rudder (yaw) inputs other than what is need to
keep bird on a straight line. Only elevator input with a clean bird
(no flaps, etc.).

The figures given seem to be about 2.5 +G's and 1.5 -G's. I'm not sure
those are the figures I want? Are these 'company' figures for
passenger comfort or airframe longevity or the manufactures structural
limits that should not be exceeded at any time? Also what is design
ultimate if it is available?
Isn't that essentially what the El Al captain did back in the 70s?

"John Gaquin" wrote in message ...
Given the incessant and "uncontrolled" leakage that goes on these days,
Everyone should note that no one (NO ONE) in Congress was informed, and only
a few hand picked press who were on the craft.

Actually, they weren't hand picked.

They were just whoever was on the list for White House media pool duty.

Turns out this didn't quite happen as reported. A slight juggling of
facts and a nice story hits the airwaves. Still unfolding.

http://news.excite.com/odd/article/id/370183|oddlyenough|12-04-2003::10:07|reuters.html

-lance smith


(Milo) wrote in message . com...
The news mentioned that while AF1 was enroute to Baghdad Int., a
British Airways pilot saw AF1 and asked (on the horn) "is that AF1?".
Then AF1s' pilot responded "No, it's a Gulfstream". At first I
thought that was funny but then after thinking about it, I'm wordering
how true this is. First of all, did that BA pilot have binoculars?
How did he see AF1 with the TFR in place, I assume they are in effect
wherever AF1 goes in the world. ***I just thought of something as I
was typing this, maybe there was no TFR because Pres. Bush "wasn't
onboard" and it wouldn't have offically been AF1, as far as call sign
and ATC goes, at the time.*** Secondly, if none of that is the case,
why would the BA pilot would ask that question over the radio and what
are the chances the 2 aircraft would be on the same freq.? Just
wondering and speculating, not that it matters either way. If this
did happen, the pilot of AF1 has a great way of saying "Shut the hell
up man, this isn't what you think" wink wink. Very funny.

How did he see AF1 with the TFR in place, I assume they are in effect
wherever AF1 goes in the world.

I don't think the US has that much power that they can get other nations to play the silly airspace
games we go through here.

Margy

Shawn

I'd love to get the final report of their testing to compare with my
years of experience with both plus and negative G's.

Any idea where I might get same?

My second suggestion is to dump the cabin pressure and drop the masks.
If the terroriests have to put on a mask they will be limited to the
2-3 foot hose length from ceiling to mask. Would limit their activity
in cabin.

All of the things I would propose, together would stop any action in
cabin on the part of terroriests I believe?

Have a nice day.

Big John


On Thu, 4 Dec 2003 09:18:16 -0000, "ShawnD2112"
wrote:

This method was discussed quite a lot in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 and
both Boeing and Airbus tested it out in the simulators. The presentation I
got from them both was that this was not a viable option. It may have, and
may will, work in exceptional circumstances in an isolated case, but their
view was that it wasn't worth developing a procedure and training pilots to
do it. A bulletproof door on the cockpit was a much better solution.

Shawn
"Big John" wrote in message
.. .
mateo

Not sure. Todays pilots and airline Companies don't want to do it as I
read. (

Big John

On Mon, 01 Dec 2003 22:03:03 -0500, Mateo wrote:

Big John wrote:

I want to put together an agenda where airline pilots will load and
unload the bird if it is hi-jacked (hi-jackers have no access to
cockpit).

No aileron (bank) or rudder (yaw) inputs other than what is need to
keep bird on a straight line. Only elevator input with a clean bird
(no flaps, etc.).

The figures given seem to be about 2.5 +G's and 1.5 -G's. I'm not sure
those are the figures I want? Are these 'company' figures for
passenger comfort or airframe longevity or the manufactures structural
limits that should not be exceeded at any time? Also what is design
ultimate if it is available?
Isn't that essentially what the El Al captain did back in the 70s?

Big John wrote

All of the things I would propose, together would stop any
action in cabin on the part of terroriests I believe?

John, all of these things have been proposed and discussed at
length by various committees of the ALPA and FAA for as far
back as hijackings have occured. Despite the fact that I was
never an ALPA member (against my religion), ALPA has probably
done more for aircarrier safety than has the FAA. Those pilots
really are concerned about their own butts.

Bob Moore