To the Senators whining that they had to walk next to commoners and they did not have a clear evacuation plan… Guess what knuckle heads, who’s in charge??? YOU GUYS. If you want to whine about the evacuation procedure, blame yourself.
To the jackass reporter pestering Scott McClellan, YES all aircraft have radios. NO we don’t let planes just fly around with no radios. Do you have a brain?
To News Editors… Can you PLEASE make your reporters learn a little about aviation? Right now, airplanes are just a wee bit important to the national security. Do you think maybe your reporters (at least if they reach the national level) could learn a wing from a transponder? Is it too much to ask?
To the Whitehouse Press corps. I really don’t care if you had to evacuate and your toes hurt. I also don’t care if you were scared and felt your life was in danger. DUH you work at the Whitehouse during a war… (remember the war?) be lucky this is the biggest things that ever happened. If you don’t want the “danger” of the job go back to Iowa.
To FoxNews. please tell John Loftus that he has to stop taking 3 martini lunches then getting on the air and making a jackass out of himself. I know you guys were caught without a guest but having someone who advocates shooting down aircraft 75 miles from the Whitehouse is a moron. We would have shot down hundreds of lost aircraft in the last 3 years INCLUDING the Gov of Kentucky. I knew more about aviation when I was 12 then this guy. Please never let him talk about aircraft again. He’s a federal prosecutor… Let him talk about the Michael Jackson case, not aviation. He was an embarrassment to FoxNews.
To most everyone else on cable news, please learn the difference between mountains and molehills. Geeze people, it was a stray aircraft. Pilots get lost too.
Sorry, my stupidity tolerance level has been far exceeded by the stupidity coming from cable news networks… I had to vent.
OK cro-
>You cannot claim he’s just a stray if you don’t know for sure…and by your own admission you didn’t know.
OK, Clearly the pilot DID NOT file a flight plan that put them directly over the Whitehouse. So I DO KNOW he “strayed” into the restricted airspace. That is self-evident.
That does not tell us WHY he did.
YES they strayed into restricted airspace. What is “what” happened.
That they were probably lost would answer “WHY” it happened, not “what.” Don’t confuse the 2.
It is simple logic.
They just showed that Loftus segment again.
What a goof, looks like they found him under a bridge somewhere.
Apparently, we now know (though, at the time it was occurring, only those with E.S.P. ‘knew’) for sure it was an honest mistake.
The question is: was this plane allowed to get too close for safety? I’d say evacuating the WH and Congress means the answer is ‘yes’.
If so, terrorists now know that they can fly upwind close to, but not over, our Congress and White House, dropping whatever chem, bio or radiologicals they have. That is big news.
If planes do this ‘all the time’, then those planes should be shot down ‘all the time’. Soon, planes won’t do it at all.
Any pilot whether student, instructor, or PIC, whether lost or not that manages to fly into DC controlled airspace in this day and age without the proper radio and transponder contact should never ever fly an airplane again. They are a hazard to the public. These are the kind of jerks that cause midairs by having their heads completely up their asses. If the FAA doesn’t revoke their licenses, then they are not providing any credible oversight at all.
BILL: “Say Fred, does that look like an F-18 right off your wing?”
FRED: “Shadup idiot, that’s an F-16. Are you a pilot? You can’t be. You know nothing.”
BILL: “But”
FRED: “Shadup I said, I’m working on something.”
BILL: “Say, that looks like the White House, and there is the Washington Monument.”
FRED: Those are cloud formations idiot. You are not a pilot, you know nothing…shadup.”
BILL: “Fred, I think I know the White House if I see it. Look, those people are doing a Chinese fire drill down there!”
FRED: “Swamp gas only. Only real pilots can tell.”
BILL: “Do they really let small planes practice dive-bombing the White House?”
FRED: “Yeah, just put a ‘Student Driver’ sign in the back window and you can get away with anything. Besides we’ll be in Rome in a few minutes anyway.”
BILL: “Are you really a pilot Fred?”
FRED: “No not yet, but I’m working on my arrogance. Let’s go see what that Blackhawk is going to shoot.”
I used to like reading Paul’s posts, but lately he’s become a blowhard.
First it was the Evolution fiasco, then the Mormon baptism thing, and now this pilot issue.
It’s one thing to have a lively debate, but once you start throwing out “jackass”, “idiot”, and “f*ing moron”, then you’re no better than the DU crowd.
BTW Paul, just because you have some piloting skills, why do you presume to know more than somebody who was actually on the ground as it unfolded? Don’t you think this person could add a different perspective to the incident? Or perhaps it’s because when somebody challenges your world view, you automatically resort to insults. Isn’t this what we criticize the loony left of doing daily?
Kevin, I think you need to start reeling in Paul because lately he’s been taking a ‘wizz’ on the Wizbang readers.
Kiliman
Paul,
You can see the definition of “stray” here. The key part of the definition is to WANDER WITHOUT FIXED PURPOSE.
When you first heard this info, you did not know whether this aircraft was in restricted airspace on accident (a stray) or whether he was violating airspace restrictions on purpose in order to attack (maybe with bio weapons) the capitol.
Before you explain simple logic to people, you ought to have a firm grasp of vocabulary. Your statements are LOGICALLY contradictory because you do not understand the proper definition of “stray”. You take it (apparently) to mean being in the wrong place….when it more properly means being in the wrong place accidently.
All of this does not negate the accuracy of the rest of your remarks…. ie. there’s no need to shoot the guy down, there’s no need for the jabbering class to go nuts.
Oops. My bad, Jay Tea made the post about Mormons.
Paul, sorry for the mixup.
OK, a perfectly good discussion has been ruined by an argument over semantics.
The way I saw it, what Paul said wasn’t mutually exclusive. He said that: 1. Pilots sometimes get lost. This is true. He then said, 2. We don’t know what they were doing or thinking. That’s true too. He never said “I know for a fact they were lost, and I don’t know what they were doing up there.”
And that’s all I’ll say about that.
I’ve never seen John Loftus on TV – I’ve heard him on the radio. He’s good on the radio, at least.
I disagree…the discussion whether the aircraft should be shot down or not is ENTIRELY over the meaning of “stray”. Stray aircraft should not be gunned out of the air…. those venturing into restricted airspace with an apparent purpose should be.
The rest of the discussion is simply about the stupidity of the chattering classes. Since nobody disagrees with that characterization, it’s hardly a discussion, it’s preeching to the choir.
OK Cro….
What was his apparent purpose?
Unless you can read minds I’m not sure how you could have figured it out.
sorry to bust your rhetorical bubble.
>You can see the definition of “stray” here.
>I disagree…the discussion whether the aircraft should be shot down or not is ENTIRELY over the meaning of “stray”.
Well, Cro all I can tell you is that if you think the decision makers here should have been looking up word “stray” in the dictionary to decide wether or not to kill a few dozen people by knocking the plane out the air — well — you’re an idiot.
>Paul, just because you have some piloting skills, why do you presume to know more than somebody who was actually on the ground as it unfolded?
Well– If they don’t have any clue how an aircraft works, their geographic location won’t suddenly make them any more qualified to discuss aviation.
The fact he looked up and saw a plane hardly gives him the skill set to discuss the issue, now does it?
By your definition, the janitor in an ER is qualified to give medical advice because his “on the ground.”
>Don’t you think this person could add a different perspective to the incident?
Yes, one of ignorance.
Yes, he can “add a different perspective” but what is the value of another perspective if it is a perspective of ignorance? (see above)
Diversity of perspective is way over-rated in this country.
——-
Did you think thru anything you typed?
Here, come the “idiot” remarks from Paul again. Seriously, I have no idea why Kevin keeps you around. If it’s to bring this whole site down closer to DU standards then I guess it makes sense. So in that spirit, you are a fucking douche-bag Paul.
I’ll ignore your inability to argue without descending into childish name-calling and return to the matter at hand.
#1. The pilots of the intercepting aircraft would be the ones to determine what the difference between wandering and “apparent purpose” would be. For myself I would think an aircraft making a direct line for the Capitol Dome would be considered to have an “apparent” purpose. That’s a SUBJECTIVE decision…that’s what our AF officers get paid for. If you want a real live example of apparent purpose… look at the flight path of the first 9-11 aircraft… a bee-line for the WTC.
#2. You stated unequivocably that “We have no idea why he was there.” That sounds like you don’t know. In your original post you were implying that this was a lost pilot. So you were making an assumption unsupported by then any known fact. Assumptions like that were rampant for about 15 minutes on 9-11… then the 2nd airplane hit and removed all doubt.
#3. I sincerely doubt politicians were looking up the definition of the word “stray”. They probably knew what that means… as would the pilots of the intercepting F-16’s. But if that definition and the behaviour of the intruding aircraft did not coincide..you would have seen a shoot down.
#4. Frankly I would have rather seen a mistaken shoot down than a successful attack.
#5. If you reply, please try to remember that I have addressed you in a respectful manner. You may think that the “bite” to your commentary is witty, but it only serves to demonstrate the weakness of your arguments.
Paul you really are the true idiot here. When talking about being on the ground we were discussing the plane zig-zagging or not. I believe that a person on the ground WATCHING the plane would have much better input then you would no matter how much aviation knowledge you have. So according to your aviation knowledge Paul, what did YOU SEE happen? As far as your Janitor example, a Janitor who sees someone in an ER start having a seizure and fall over and break his head open is in a much better position to tell the doctors WHAT HAPPENED then a doctor two floors up. What a fucking stupid argument.
Paul, I’m just waiting for you to start yelling “Liar! Creepy Liar!”
I’m surprised that nobody is talking about the size of the plane.
The Cessna 150 is TINY. It’s the flying equivalent of a two-seat Yugo. Or maybe a Vespa.
In order to carry two people, the pilot has to take off with less than full fuel tanks, or the plane might not get off the ground.
So, it has all of the destructive power of a Yugo.
And yes – it could be carrying chemical, bio, or nuclear material. But so could that Yugo on the street. In fact, that (a car) was the scenario for the TOPOFF3 exercise in NJ last month.
Little planes are simply not that much of a threat.
(Since we’re talking about credentials – I hold a Private Pilot license – Airplane Single-Engine Land)
Paul,
Man, I could not agree with you more. Loftus’ comments on Fox News yesterday had me seeing red. Sensationalist comments like his just play into the terrorist’s hands by spreading fear and paranoia. I really enjoyed John and Martha King’s informative interview on CNN, and was glad to finally see some rational perspective from the media.
I will say that the pilots of the C-150 really screwed up. However, the Washington ADIZ isn’t working either. It’s too big, restrictive and complicated. I believe it really just provides a false sense of security for DC. There are easier and more effective delivery methods than a small GA plane. After all, wasn’t the second worst terrorist act in the US executed by using a bomb detonated in a truck?
> the Washington ADIZ isn’t working either. It’s too big, restrictive and complicated. I believe it really just provides a false sense of security for DC. There are easier and more effective delivery methods than a small GA plane. After all, wasn’t the second worst terrorist act in the US executed by using a bomb detonated in a truck?
YUP- You get it.
Unfortunately a whole bunch of jackasses who don’t know shit about what they are talking about think they should be taken seriously.
I don’t tell surgeons how to operate but people with no freaking clue how aviation works think they have all the answers. Then when someone points out that other people –you know– with a little knowledge about the topic disagree, they get all pissy.
From the Senators to the goofball reporters to the whiners on this thread. Jackasses one and all.
>Paul you really are the true idiot here. When talking about being on the ground we were discussing the plane zig-zagging or not. I believe that a person on the ground WATCHING the plane would have much better input then you would no matter how much aviation knowledge you have.
OH so now you are claiming YOU SAW it do that???? That’s funny…. The reports in the media now say that it never happened.
You proclaimed loudly that he was not lost now you seem to be claiming he was zigzagging when you have no freaking clue.
Again- you don’t know shit so you make stuff up.
You’re a liar, a creepy liar.
D-Hoggs versus reality
D-Hoggs: The pilot didn’t simply “get lost”.
Reality: Pilot, student pilot who approached Washington were “lost”
Jackass
Isn’t it interesting that the same people who dont have a clue about the U.S. airspace system, or the rule of operation within it, are the very same people who somehow manage to draw the conclustion that a cessna 150, or anything similar for that matter, has the same kind of destructive capabilility as something that operates at the weight or speed of something as large or larger than a 727?
I agree completely with the janitor analogy. Sure he may think he knows what is going on, but are you going to be treated on a janitors observation, or would you consider the doctors assesment a bit more valid.
Note to hoggs: If you want to be an argumentative ass fine, but at least try to base some of your opinions in fact next time. Let me guess you would be a janitor, right?
And for the record Me: private pilot, single engine land, 500+ hours , many of those logged in a 150.