Timeline for What's the point in escorting a threatened flight with two fighter jets?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
23 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 10, 2015 at 13:30 | vote | accept | Meysam | ||
| Jan 28, 2015 at 17:28 | comment | added | Rhino Driver | @Relaxed The only other thing I would add is that the political fallout from shooting down a passenger aircraft, without first getting a visual ID, no matter how justified, would be disastrous. Not only would civilians protest, but foreign governments with citizens on board would be in uproar (think Ukraine). Nobody wants to hit a passenger plane with a SAM. | |
| Jan 28, 2015 at 17:18 | comment | added | Rhino Driver | @Relaxed Ah, I understand what you're saying now. I'll simply delete my previous comments to declutter the comments | |
| Jan 28, 2015 at 17:17 | comment | added | Relaxed | @SHAF Sure, I agree and I think that it's what I wrote in my answer, which is why I don't see the point of jwenting's remarks and of the whole discussion that ensued. Hopefully my recent edit can put this to rest. | |
| Jan 28, 2015 at 15:51 | comment | added | Rhino Driver | @Relaxed for smaller states having an air force is more of a political tool. Being able to intercept foreign aircraft that beach their borders gives their state legitimacy on the global stage. Even if they never fire a shot they can save face and claim to have escorted the threat away from their borders. | |
| Jan 28, 2015 at 15:47 | history | edited | Relaxed | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 37 characters in body
|
| Jan 28, 2015 at 15:46 | comment | added | Relaxed | @SHAF Yes, I understand that, but that's completely beside the point. As I explained earlier, what I meant is that it might not make sense for countries like Switzerland or Austria to have an air force at all (or at least fighter jets). | |
| Jan 28, 2015 at 15:33 | history | edited | Relaxed | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 61 characters in body
|
| Jan 28, 2015 at 12:47 | comment | added | Relaxed | @SHAF Note that jwenting is not in the US (and also frequently makes stuff up) so it's entirely possible that he is talking about another country or just spreading a rumor. In any case, I still don't see how this has anything to do with my answer so I invite both of you to move to the chat if you must continue the discussion. | |
| Jan 28, 2015 at 5:26 | comment | added | jwenting | @SHAF explain that to the military pilots who do just that, rent aircraft to get more hours in because they feel they're not able to stay proficient on the 20 or so they get each year to fly in their F-16s... | |
| Jan 27, 2015 at 9:19 | comment | added | Relaxed | @ManuH I don't think it does. If you look past the title and read the question itself and in particular the two sub-questions at the end, it's about two fighter jets as opposed to none at all, and not about two vs. one. Generally it does happen to be two, which is probably why the title mentions “two fighter jets” but that's it. | |
| Jan 27, 2015 at 9:00 | comment | added | Manu H | @Relaxed I think the question actually ask it ("with two figther jets") | |
| Jan 27, 2015 at 7:26 | comment | added | jwenting | @SHAF yes, there are. But hours are important. So important in fact that many fighter pilots are now resorting to renting light aircraft to keep their hours up or they lose their license, the air forces no longer providing them enough stick time to stay current even on PPL level. | |
| Jan 26, 2015 at 12:52 | comment | added | Relaxed | @ManuH Good question, possibly worth asking separately. Personally, I have no idea. | |
| Jan 26, 2015 at 9:42 | comment | added | Manu H | OK, but why 2 fighters? One should be enough to escort/destroy/help/guide an aircraft, even if having at least 2 available is understandable. | |
| Jul 31, 2014 at 14:28 | comment | added | Relaxed | @jwenting I obviously know that so I am not sure why you would think it's relevant. The point is that it only saves money if you assume you need to have these planes and pilots (or even an airforce at all), which is the real question. | |
| Jul 31, 2014 at 13:20 | comment | added | gsnedders | In the British case, a hijacked aircraft falls into the category of aircraft in (or near) British airspace without authority, and the same procedure is followed as for (e.g.) a Russian bomber approaching British airspace (this happens once or twice a month, in general). This is the only useful write-up of the British situation I'm aware of. | |
| Jul 29, 2014 at 7:04 | comment | added | jwenting | @Relaxed pilots need a certain minimum amount of flying time to stay proficient (including a set number of night hours), combining those hours with operational missions saves on having them fly around in otherwise pointless circles. It also saves on airframe hours, ever more important with our fighter fleets aging to the point most of them are nearing their fatigue lives with no replacements budgeted for. | |
| Jul 28, 2014 at 23:19 | comment | added | Relaxed | @JanHudec That may be but none of this require 24/7 availability, which has a cost in itself. And if you give up on this mission, having fighter jets and training pilots on them might itself be seen as a waste of money for many countries. | |
| Jul 28, 2014 at 15:32 | comment | added | Jan Hudec | In fact it is quite reasonable to count such mission towards training of the fighter pilots. They have to follow often quite complicated instructions from their controller (to avoid all other traffic), locate and identify the target and manoeuvre in vicinity of the target for some time, all things they would need on combat mission too. | |
| Jul 28, 2014 at 15:24 | comment | added | Jan Hudec | It may not be waste of money. It may be simply paid from the training budget and counted towards the hours the pilots would have to fly to maintain proficiency anyway. I don't know which countries do or don't do that. | |
| Jul 28, 2014 at 12:32 | history | migrated | from travel.stackexchange.com (revisions) | ||
| Jul 28, 2014 at 9:23 | history | answered | Relaxed | CC BY-SA 3.0 |