|
|
Post by americanpride on Apr 6, 2005 19:45:46 GMT -8
I was watching Air Force One the other day, and I thought about something.
Beyond shooting down an aircraft, what are our response plans on how to neutralize an airborne threat?
Is it possible to retake an aircraft in the air? Consider (suspend disbelief for a moment) if from a second aircraft, a man could be harnessed along a cable, and guide himself to a rear or lower entryway of the aircraft, and then proceed to breach it, would it be possible? Of course, after breaching the entryway, the take-down would have to proceed in a very tight time frame to prevent the hi-jackers from crashing the aircraft with operatives on board.
Now I know that we have the capability to stack teams along a cable; could that be employed in the same situation on an airborne aircraft?
|
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on Apr 6, 2005 20:31:18 GMT -8
I was watching Air Force One the other day, and I thought about something. Beyond shooting down an aircraft, what are our response plans on how to neutralize an airborne threat? Is it possible to retake an aircraft in the air? Consider (suspend disbelief for a moment) if from a second aircraft, a man could be harnessed along a cable, and guide himself to a rear or lower entryway of the aircraft, and then proceed to breach it, would it be possible? Of course, after breaching the entryway, the take-down would have to proceed in a very tight time frame to prevent the hi-jackers from crashing the aircraft with operatives on board. Now I know that we have the capability to stack teams along a cable; could that be employed in the same situation on an airborne aircraft? Frankly, I don't think the US has any response plan. I don't think one is really possible either. I've flown a lot in the past year and hi-jacking is probably the last thing on my mind. After September 11th, if a passenger even so much as makes an attempt to get close to the cockpit, I'm sure the rest of the passangers would tackle him. Not to mention that the pilot door is locked and they have a gun on-board. All I know is that if a guy starts running towards the front of the plane, I'm gettin the fuck outta my seat and beating the shit out of him. But the US needs a real policy on shoe bombs. Some airports are very strict about taking off your shoes (Newark is for one) but others aren't. I went through Orlando last month and they never said anything to me. Either we check them or we don't. There has to be a set policy on this. Which brings me to another question. Why didn't Richard Reid just go to the bathroom to light his shoe on fire? Why do it in front of everyone? Kinda makes me think about the level of intelligence of our enemy... Back to your question though, there is no possible policy. It would be impossible to transfer a strike team (or even one guy) from one plane to another travelling 35,000 feet in the air at 550mph. If terrorists were able to take over a plane it would be up to the passangers at that point. |
|
|
|
Post by MARIO on Apr 6, 2005 21:18:20 GMT -8
I was watching Air Force One the other day, and I thought about something. Beyond shooting down an aircraft, what are our response plans on how to neutralize an airborne threat? Is it possible to retake an aircraft in the air? Consider (suspend disbelief for a moment) if from a second aircraft, a man could be harnessed along a cable, and guide himself to a rear or lower entryway of the aircraft, and then proceed to breach it, would it be possible? Of course, after breaching the entryway, the take-down would have to proceed in a very tight time frame to prevent the hi-jackers from crashing the aircraft with operatives on board. Now I know that we have the capability to stack teams along a cable; could that be employed in the same situation on an airborne aircraft? Air Force One -- ONE OF MY FAVORITE MOVIES! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by americanpride on Apr 6, 2005 21:47:55 GMT -8
Yeah, it would be mighty difficult to transfer a team from one aircraft to another. But I would think that a man suspended from a controlled cable from the platform could, in theory, "land" on the top of the target aircraft and proceed to travel to the designated entryway. I do not know the culminating point at which the speed of the aircraft in question would make it impossible for a human being to carry out such a task. I'm assuming the speed that parachutists and HALO/HAHO jumpers leave an aircraft is much lower. With that in consideration, I think the mission-fatal obstacle would be breaching the aircraft. If a man cannot operate at that speed without any degree of efficiency, then the mission cannot proceed. Unless of course there was a designed a new breaching device for just this task. The Army employs a obstacle clearing explosive that literally launches out of a box (man portable) or the back of an armored vehicle. It is a tube that fires over the obstacles at a great distance, lands on them, and then is exploded to destroy the obstacles. If that concept can be modified so that the breacher would only have to attach the end of a tube to the breach-point, or even guide it and allow it to attach itself (some sort of "sticky" substance), it could then be electronically operated from the platform and literally blow the door inward - perhaps even without using explosives. Of course, then we'd have to consider the effects that would have on the aircraft as a whole. I'd volunteer to test it out.  |
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on Apr 6, 2005 21:59:04 GMT -8
Yeah, it would be mighty difficult to transfer a team from one aircraft to another. But I would think that a man suspended from a controlled cable from the platform could, in theory, "land" on the top of the target aircraft and proceed to travel to the designated entryway. I do not know the culminating point at which the speed of the aircraft in question would make it impossible for a human being to carry out such a task. I'm assuming the speed that parachutists and HALO/HAHO jumpers leave an aircraft is much lower. With that in consideration, I think the mission-fatal obstacle would be breaching the aircraft. If a man cannot operate at that speed without any degree of efficiency, then the mission cannot proceed. Unless of course there was a designed a new breaching device for just this task. The Army employs a obstacle clearing explosive that literally launches out of a box (man portable) or the back of an armored vehicle. It is a tube that fires over the obstacles at a great distance, lands on them, and then is exploded to destroy the obstacles. If that concept can be modified so that the breacher would only have to attach the end of a tube to the breach-point, or even guide it and allow it to attach itself (some sort of "sticky" substance), it could then be electronically operated from the platform and literally blow the door inward - perhaps even without using explosives. Of course, then we'd have to consider the effects that would have on the aircraft as a whole. I'd volunteer to test it out. Too bad Zuni isn't here to ask him but I've heard the winds get mighty fast that high up. The atmosphere 5 miles up is much different than that on the ground. For example, it could be calm on the ground but go on the roof of a 15-story building and it will be really windy. Now, multiply that to a 5-mile high building. You get the idea. I've heard winds can be as fast as 100mph that high in the air. Now, travelling 550pmh with winds at 100mph, just imagine trying to operate in an enviornment like that... |
|
|
|
Post by mateo on Apr 8, 2005 5:17:53 GMT -8
I was watching Air Force One the other day, and I thought about something. Beyond shooting down an aircraft, what are our response plans on how to neutralize an airborne threat? Is it possible to retake an aircraft in the air? Consider (suspend disbelief for a moment) if from a second aircraft, a man could be harnessed along a cable, and guide himself to a rear or lower entryway of the aircraft, and then proceed to breach it, would it be possible? Of course, after breaching the entryway, the take-down would have to proceed in a very tight time frame to prevent the hi-jackers from crashing the aircraft with operatives on board. Now I know that we have the capability to stack teams along a cable; could that be employed in the same situation on an airborne aircraft? SOunds like it would make a pretty cool video game. I think they already did it in a movie called Executive Decision. |
|
|
|
Post by americanpride on Apr 8, 2005 11:57:35 GMT -8
SOunds like it would make a pretty cool video game. I think they already did it in a movie called Executive Decision. Well, it's feasible. If hi-jacking aircraft is to be a weapon of our enemy, we cannot afford to resolve to shoot down every hi-jacked aircraft. The American people would not stand for it. |
|
|
|
Post by FightingFalcon on Apr 11, 2005 20:31:18 GMT -8
SOunds like it would make a pretty cool video game. I think they already did it in a movie called Executive Decision. Haha that movie was....interesting. I'd like to see you transfer like 10 guys from plane to plane tho.... |
|
