Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Miles&Points > MilesBuzz
Reload this Page >

Operation Noble Eagle: worth it?

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Operation Noble Eagle: worth it?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 31, 2001 | 11:08 pm
  #1  
Original Poster
10 Countries Visited20 Countries Visited30 Countries Visited20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: "Sinner on the mainland; he's a sinner on the sea"
Programs: AA, UA, HH, WOH, Bonvoy
Posts: 6,088
Operation Noble Eagle: worth it?

Heard a report on NPR about Operation Noble Eagle, the CAP our reservists fly over US cities. Talked about the immense cost and the burden on the machinery (not designed for this operational tempo) as well as the manpower. Also mentioned many of our reservists are taking massive pay cuts to serve.

Given the mission (to down a hijacked airliner), is it really worth it in light of the cost?

In reality, would an American pilot actually "push the button" to kill an airliner if ordered to do so? And if he did, the destroyed jet would probably still fall on a populated area, causing death and destruction, so what's the point?

I see this as just another costly measure that gives us the illusion of security, not unlike the guardsmen standing by with unloaded weapons...

[This message has been edited by se94583 (edited 12-31-2001).]
se94583 is offline  
Old Dec 31, 2001 | 11:21 pm
  #2  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Programs: I am an AS employee, but my comments do not represent the company in any official capacity.
Posts: 4,343
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by se94583:
In reality, would an American pilot actually "push the button" to kill an airliner if ordered to do so?</font>
I certainly hope they would!



[This message has been edited by eastwest (edited 12-31-2001).]
eastwest is offline  
Old Dec 31, 2001 | 11:38 pm
  #3  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: omaha,Ne,usa
Programs: UAL, AA, Hilton, Marriott, and Northwest
Posts: 465
I guess I have to agree/disagree with you. I am not sure that the complete cap that has been flying over many major cities is necessarily worth it but I have several friends from college that are Air Force controllers. We have had a need to have ready 5 aircraft and more patrols for probably 30+ years now. I think they would all do it if they could not scare the aircraft with either warning shots or jet buffeting. It would most likely cause less damage than anything that a suicidal terrorist would most likely hit. The pilots and ground controllers will pick the best area to down them or atleast the least worse place. That is part of the reason why the are flying constant cap is that so they can attack planes before they get over major cities.

This is atleast one area the gov seems to be thinking about though. Aircraft sortie rates and cap are being reduced significantly in many areas. That will reduce costs, but they don't seem to be going all the way back to the pre 9-11 thinking which is good. As to Nat Guard call up. This is one area that probably is not to bad because the pilots and ground crew people are some of the same ones that might have been laid off by airlines. The planes are actually made to fly these types of missions. We fly have flown these types of caps over Iraq for 10 years. Air crews get very bored doing it but with a large number of intercepts and practice intercepts happening every day I do not feel real bad for them. Flight hours/takeoffs and landing always improve a pilot. Some hours are just less effective at the amount of improvement.

The one area that I still think is most stupid is calling up nat guard troops at the airport. They are nearly completely wasted at airports and since many are civilian police officers, they would be much better used in their civilian capacity. The only real function that they could be used for is to do fixed position defense. That means stopping a repeat of Rome or Ben Gurion airport attacks. Yet they are not being positioned or preped for that mission. The greatest lunancy is to place them in this kind of duty and not issueing them with bulletproof vests or have them issued the flak vests they would normally wear overseas. I have also talked to many of them and not one airport has a reaction detail set aside and ready to react. They all have a few walkers and the rest at fixed positions. This is the greatest waste of time and military training I have ever seen. I can see the reason to have airplanes up for the population and political leadership to feel safe but at the airports the national guard really offers nothing that hiring a few more retired/off duty cops would not do as well or better. Atleast cops have some experience dealing with criminals and the necessary body language.

For what its worth.

------------------
Robert
robvberg is offline  
Old Jan 1, 2002 | 8:43 am
  #4  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Kingston, Ont, the limestone city
Posts: 975
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by eastwest:
I certainly hope they would!

[This message has been edited by eastwest (edited 12-31-2001).]
</font>
Imagine your wife is on that plane... do you rather want a safe return or flag on coffin?

There will never be any way to prove a shoot-down is necessary after it happens. Given the current paranoid situation, pilots tend to over-react and can easily have innocent people killed.

Look at the headlines: Governement agent evicted from plane by pilot, various airports evacuated numerous times by false alarms, etc.

Except this time, any false alarm leads to innocent deaths. Sure, you can pretend to be patriotic and die "for the country". But is it really what the government what's you to think?

I will avoid flying altogether if that operation is in effect. Imagine having "auto self-destruct feature" in your car as a safety mechanism like airbag / seatbelt. In the event of an emergency, the car blows up before it impacts other vehicules. Will you still want to drive that car?

MoreMiles is offline  
Old Jan 1, 2002 | 8:51 am
  #5  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Conifer, Co, USA
Posts: 108
I take some comfort in an article I read shortly after this operation began. I believe the article was in USA today but don't have the reference. The author talked with some of the reservists flying these missions. At least those reservists were airline pilots in their civilian occupations. I hope that this is true more often than not. I hope that they would be the most reluctant to shoot down a fellow pilot and his plane full of passengers and shouldn't be quick on the trigger.

I guess I witnessed a training run around 3:45 PM on 12/27 at CVG. We were taking off on 18L and were only a couple of hundred feet off the ground when my wife and I saw two fighters pull off a low level flight on 18R. Having heard of no escorted flights into CVG on the 27th I assume this was a training run.
DGWhite is offline  
Old Jan 1, 2002 | 11:10 am
  #6  
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Manhattan, NY
Programs: USAir AA Hilton
Posts: 3,567
From those I've seen interviewed, and from my own military background, I would expect that any pilot asked to shoot down an aircraft will certainly be reluctant. But they will trust that the Generals making this call have the better insight into the situation and the pilots will do what is asked of them. Sadly for sure - but they will follow orders as they are trained to do.
svpii is offline  
Old Jan 1, 2002 | 1:32 pm
  #7  
50 Countries Visited
5M
All eyes on you!
25 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dallas
Programs: AA EXP/5MM; DL DM; HHonors DIAM; Marriott GLD
Posts: 4,132
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by robvberg:
The one area that I still think is most stupid is calling up nat guard troops at the airport. They are nearly completely wasted at airports and since many are civilian police officers, they would be much better used in their civilian capacity... This is the greatest waste of time and military training I have ever seen.
</font>
I agree. Immediately after Sept. 11, this may have served to reassure the general public, but it's time for the gov't to be honest and terminate this deployment. This needless diversion of resources actually reduces security significantly while ultimately increasing our tax burden.

HKG_Flyer1 is offline  
Old Jan 1, 2002 | 5:50 pm
  #8  
Moderator: Avianca, Travel Photography, Travel Technology & USA
40 Nights
50 Countries Visited
3M
20 Years on Site
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Far western edge of the La-La Land City limits
Programs: Emeritus VIP Fromins Deli Encino grandfathered successor program - UA MM & HH Diamond
Posts: 3,810
Interesting subject, but a bit off topic for MilesBuzz. Please continue following it in "Omni".

------------------
Craig6z
Buzz & United Moderator
[email protected]
Moderator2 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.