Things you cannot say without raising security concerns...

On Jun 14, 4:01 pm, Jim Stewart wrote:
Without casting doubts on your accuracy,
I'd have to say that the story just doesn't
ring right.

It sounds silly, but nevertheless is apparently true:

http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/148115.html

When asked over the radio what his destination was, the pilot, a 10-year-plus veteran with commercial airlines and private industry, said he preferred not to say.
Mann said that under the circumstances the pilot was not required to give a destination.
“He didn’t say hijack. … He was trying to explain why he didn’t have to give his destination,” Mann said.
“We work in a hostile business environment,” he said, and competitors could try to use such information to steal clients.
The pilot was speaking about a “hostile takeover” of a company, said Maj. Roger Yates of the Clay County Sheriff’s Department.
The air traffic controller frantically tried to verify what he had heard, but the pilot had turned off his radio, Yates said.

I'd say the authorities did the right thing not to disregard these
comments. If you are the pilot of a small airplane, and an armed
passenger attempts to hijack it (unlikely, but not impossible), you may
want to hint your condition to ATC without giving away to the passenger
that you are alerting them. That way they can be ready when you land.

Granted, this particular set of comments is a bit oblique, but it might
be what the pilot thought would keep the passenger off guard. Then, to
avoid hearing ATC say "are you being hijacked?", change frequencies.
The passenger might know about 7700 - ATC doesn't know whether this is
the case.

Now, an F16 interception is probably the wrong response. But I suspect
it hasn't been thought through.

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

tjd wrote:
On Jun 14, 4:01 pm, Jim Stewart wrote:
Without casting doubts on your accuracy,
I'd have to say that the story just doesn't
ring right.

It sounds silly, but nevertheless is apparently true:

http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/148115.html


OK, Now I understand what happened. ATC didn't understand what was said and
couldn't contact the pilot to clear it up.

"The air traffic controller frantically tried to verify what he had heard,
but the pilot had turned off his radio, Yates said."

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
tjd wrote:
On Jun 14, 4:01 pm, Jim Stewart wrote:
Without casting doubts on your accuracy,
I'd have to say that the story just doesn't
ring right.

It sounds silly, but nevertheless is apparently true:

http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/148115.html


OK, Now I understand what happened. ATC didn't understand what was said
and couldn't contact the pilot to clear it up.

"The air traffic controller frantically tried to verify what he had heard,
but the pilot had turned off his radio, Yates said."

He's flying over an AF base and turns off his radio?

In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
tjd wrote:
On Jun 14, 4:01 pm, Jim Stewart wrote:
Without casting doubts on your accuracy,
I'd have to say that the story just doesn't
ring right.

It sounds silly, but nevertheless is apparently true:

http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/148115.html


OK, Now I understand what happened. ATC didn't understand what was said
and couldn't contact the pilot to clear it up.

"The air traffic controller frantically tried to verify what he had heard,
but the pilot had turned off his radio, Yates said."

He's flying over an AF base and turns off his radio?

I like the bit about, "As a courtesy, the pilot informed the air traffic
tower at the base that he was entering the base¹s airspace."

"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
"The air traffic controller frantically tried to verify what he had
heard,
but the pilot had turned off his radio, Yates said."

He's flying over an AF base and turns off his radio?

I like the bit about, "As a courtesy, the pilot informed the air traffic
tower at the base that he was entering the base¹s airspace."

Good manners are SOOO important.

In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
tjd wrote:
On Jun 14, 4:01 pm, Jim Stewart wrote:
Without casting doubts on your accuracy,
I'd have to say that the story just doesn't
ring right.

It sounds silly, but nevertheless is apparently true:

http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/148115.html


OK, Now I understand what happened. ATC didn't understand what was said
and couldn't contact the pilot to clear it up.

"The air traffic controller frantically tried to verify what he had heard,
but the pilot had turned off his radio, Yates said."

He's flying over an AF base and turns off his radio?

Once one reports clear of the CDAS there is not longer any requirement
to remain on frequency.

john smith wrote:
In article ,
"Matt Barrow" wrote:

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote in message
...
tjd wrote:
On Jun 14, 4:01 pm, Jim Stewart wrote:
Without casting doubts on your accuracy,
I'd have to say that the story just doesn't
ring right.

It sounds silly, but nevertheless is apparently true:

http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/148115.html


OK, Now I understand what happened. ATC didn't understand what was
said and couldn't contact the pilot to clear it up.

"The air traffic controller frantically tried to verify what he had
heard, but the pilot had turned off his radio, Yates said."

He's flying over an AF base and turns off his radio?

Once one reports clear of the CDAS there is not longer any requirement
to remain on frequency.

I didn't say there was. The point is that the controller heard him say
something that made him think there was a problem. To confirm he tried to
contact him and he didn't answer. This would have magnified the concern he
already had.

What do you think would have happened to the controller if he had just blown
off his concern and the aircraft had been hijacked? Keep in mind that about
90% of the post 9/11 changes have been nothing more than CYA procedures.

In article ,
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net wrote:

What do you think would have happened to the controller if he had just blown
off his concern and the aircraft had been hijacked? Keep in mind that about
90% of the post 9/11 changes have been nothing more than CYA procedures.

All they had to do was listen to the tapes.
They have them right there in the facility with them.