shenxing

The way bureaucracy works, you have a set budget each year. If you don't spend it all, say on fighter jet theater, you might get less money next year. So the incentive is still there.

relangford

What is "formally"? President Reagan called it a "tragedy" and said the U.S. was sorry it happened. A President saying "sorry" sounds close to having an "formally aplogized" statement.

Also, I have it on good authority, that on 9-11, alternatives were debated that, if the situation warranted, a shoot-down might be undertaken.

Fighter escorts are common in most countries just to ensure the plane goes where it is supposed to go.

catocony

By the time any fighters were armed and on alert, the FAA had already shut down US airspace and the vast majority of planes had already landed or, if coming in internationally, diverted to another country or turned around to their departure city.

As a practical matter, the Air Force will not shoot down a commercial airliner. Unless there was 100% certainty that there were hijackers on board, that they had taken over the cockpit, that they knew how to fly the plane, and had firm intent on using the plane on a kamikaze run. I don't think there are any real-life scenarios where all of that could be confirmed.

The chances of another 9/11 style attack in the US basically dropped to zero around by the end of the day on 9/11. Passengers know to fight back. The flight attendants know to fight back. Pilots know to not open the doors to the flight deck under an circumstances, and to take actions that would neutralize any attempt to do so.

So, fighters following airliners is just theater, to keep the sheep feeling nice and safe.

seawolf

Agree on first paragraph but there is no guarantee passenger and crew will be able to successfully prevent a takeover as it depends on a number of variables that is unknown to decision makers from number of hijackers vs crew/passengers, training of groups, weapons/who has control of choke points etc.

Disagree that fighter escort is theater.

Fighter escort being reported in the news being standard operating procedure serves as both deterrent and ultimately "fail-safe" under the control of authorities for preventing a 9-11 style attack.

roberino

How? Nudging the plane? [sarcasm] This was my point in starting the thread. The fighters have two options - watch, or shoot.

FliesWay2Much

What's interesting to note about 9/11 is that the Command Director on shift in Cheyenne Mountain was a Canadian O-6 and the two pilots who took off in F-16s to try to intercept the fourth airliner (the one that crashed in PA) were Australians on an exchange program. They just happened to have pulled ramp alert duty at Langley AFB that day.

Cheney was ready to blast every commercial airliner out of the sky that day, but, that was before he got a new heart.

Badenoch

The U.S. Navy shot down a civilian airliner with a lot less information than presented in your scenario. I wouldn't trust the U.S. government not to approve the killing of hundreds of foreign nationals on a percentage well below 100.

GUWonder

The fighter jets are there to monitor the plane and force the plane to stay on an approved path or be taken out of the sky by violent force -- at the call of governmental actors.

The US Navy has shot down a civilian passenger plane before and the involved crew on the ship even happened to get promoted after their involvement in the incident. But that didn't involve a fighter jet shooting it down.

Fighter escorts are not deterrence against 9/11-type terrorists. I have zero doubt that OBL wanted the USG to deliberately use US military assets to kill innocent US persons as "collateral damage" too.

catocony

The RAAF does not use and has never used F-16s. F-16s were not based at Langley AFB in 2001, and never have been.

The Virginia ANG did have F-16s back then, but they did not sortie that day. They were based at RIC, not at Langley.

The two unarmed F-16s that did launch were DC National Guard planes out of Andrews AFB. They were piloted by Americans, one being a female pilot. About the only plan they had was for senior officer- I think a colonel - to ram into UA93 and then hopefully eject. If that didn't bring the plane down, the junior officer (female) would ram the 767 again.

Edit: Here's a link to an article on the subject

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...ODK_story.html

"Late in the morning of the Tuesday that changed everything, Lt. Heather “Lucky” Penney was on a runway at Andrews Air Force Base and ready to fly. She had her hand on the throttle of an F-16 and she had her orders: Bring down United Airlines Flight 93. The day’s fourth hijacked airliner seemed to be hurtling toward Washington. Penney, one of the first two combat pilots in the air that morning, was told to stop it.

The one thing she didn’t have as she roared into the crystalline sky was live ammunition. Or missiles. Or anything at all to throw at a hostile aircraft.

Except her own plane. So that was the plan."

GUWonder

NORAD's had F-16s at Langley before 9/11 and after 9/11.

http://www.afhso.af.mil/shared/media...120905-022.pdf

The RAAF has fighter pilots who have trained on and are capable of fighting in F-16s.

catocony

They rotate ANG units through Langley from time to time, but it's half Keystone Cops with those guys. They send 2-4 planes, maybe 5-6 pilots and a skeleton ground and support crew. Since all F-22 pilots now have to train on F-16s before transitioning to the F-22 - I wonder if that was calculated in the ol' F-22 Total Cost of Ownership budget - there may be a few more F-16s there now than in the past.

The Virginia ANG gave up their F-16s years ago and just fly the Air Force F-22s as an associate wing.

But, on 9/11, the Idaho or North Dakota or whatever Guard unit that had deployed to Langley, they weren't in the game that day. I remember reading that they actually launched - late - and headed out to sea instead of heading north. They were armed at least, but didn't know where to go.

FliesWay2Much

At the risk of sounding like a hoard of pundits in the news lately concerning an obscure health care law, in a blatant senior moment, I made a TYPO! "6" should have been the "5" right next to it on the keyboard. Or course, the 1st Fighter Wing at Langley flew F-15s back then. The Aussies flew F-15Es back then as well and continued to fly them. In 2006, there was a big debate about buying F-15Es to replace the RAAF F-111's. They eventually bought newer F/A-18s (smart choice!)

I knew that Aussies were on ramp alert that day because I talk to one of the exchange officer pilots several years later in the Pentagon. They did, in fact, launch that day and went out to sea because the only airborne threat we ever considered was one originating from outside the CONUS. For that matter, absolutely zero air defense radars looked inward.

I do remember the story about the Andrews ANG, now that you mention it. Interestingly, the commander of the ANG security police squadron was Major Charles Moose, who also happened to be the Montgomery County police chief and the guy who worked like crazy to hunt down the DC snipers just a year later.

FlyingHoustonian

Lots of Canadians involved that day; I was flying command and control for NORAD with several of them that day.

AAir_head

Precisely.

Cute, but neither accurate nor helpful.

cheers!

FliesWay2Much

Yeah -- I would jump into a foxhole with a Canadian any day...