Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Airplane 'Photo Op' Angers 9/11 Witnesses

  1. Apr 27, 2009 #1

    LowlyPion

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090427-714247.html [Broken]

    OK, I get that they might have some recollection of 9/11, but I didn't hear any of this about the US Air flight that landed unplanned in the Hudson.

    They issued a notice. What's the big deal? Yet Bloomberg was furious? Schumer was irate?
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 27, 2009 #2

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The plane that landed in the Hudson probably DID scare a number of people, but there was nothing else that could have been done. The pilot saved many lives by doing what he did.

    The 747 photo-op was planned in advance, was not done to save anyone's life, and was entirely unnecessary. Do you really not see the difference?

    - Warren
     
  4. Apr 27, 2009 #3
    I have to agree with chroot here. I am not sure how you can't see the difference.

    In any case, what was the purpose of this flight? I cannot seem to obtain full access to the article. Why was it hovering around Manhattan now?
     
  5. Apr 27, 2009 #4

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Here's a better link:

    http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=7439287&page=1

    It shouldn't have been done in the first place, IMO. Besides being a waste of money, the planners just *had* to have realized that even if their notifications had made it out to many people (which apparently did not happen), the low fly-around stuff would bother people a lot. And anybody who did not get notified would be scared to see it happening. Dumb.

    It's just lucky that nobody got hurt on the ground in the evacuations that occurred.
     
  6. Apr 27, 2009 #5

    Chi Meson

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    What was the intended point of the flyby? Who could hve possibly thought it was a good idea?
     
  7. Apr 27, 2009 #6

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Chi Meson,

    They wanted to take a picture of the presidential 747 in front of the Statue of Liberty (or some other NYC landmark).

    - Warren
     
  8. Apr 27, 2009 #7

    berkeman

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Photoshop would have been cheaper, eh? :tongue2:
     
  9. Apr 27, 2009 #8
    I think people who get worked up over an airplane that looks like Air Force One and even has in big block letters: "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" need to grow up.

    Give me a break. People are paranoid out of their minds.

    It's Barack Obama, RUN FOR YOUR LIVES!! He's dropping bail out money from the back!! AHH!!
     
  10. Apr 27, 2009 #9
    Right. As opposed to those planes that hit the towers that said

    "OSAMA BIN TERRORISTS...WE ARE GOING TO CRASH INTO YOU AIRLINES"

    You are sooo right. New Yorkers are TOTALLLLYYYY immature.
     
  11. Apr 27, 2009 #10
    The people who saw chunks of flesh littering the sidewalks of Manhattan, are paranoid out of their minds. The rest of NYC is just in the normal state paranoid that follows the aftermath of a terrorist attack on there city. Which we can guess will last many more years to come.
     
  12. Apr 27, 2009 #11
    You do understand that 747s that say "United States of America" either have the VP or President, right............and that a hijacked 747 with an F-16 escort would have been shot down long, long before it got that close to NYC. A little bit of thought goes a long way.

    I was in Washington DC when the pentagon got hit. I don't run around ducking and covering when low flying airplanes on the approach path to National Airport fly over constantly. Neither does anyone else. :rolleyes:

    PS: "We are going to crash into you airlines" doesnt make any sense.....
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2009
  13. Apr 27, 2009 #12
    Sorry, I did not realize that they were in an approach path. Nor did I realize that we shoot down hijacked 747s these days. I must have missed that memo.

    And you are right, it's too bad that the millions of people in NY don't think just like you.
     
  14. Apr 27, 2009 #13
    The problem seems to be that people were not adequately warned the flyby was going to be taking place. For example some people at the police department knew but Bloomberg himself was apparently totally unaware. Buildings were evacuated as a "precaution" without the nature of the plane flyby being explained to the people actually in the buildings (possibly because the people ordering the evacuations didn't know either). Someone somewhere seems to have messed up pretty bad in getting out the word to the entire NYC government as to exactly what was happening and why.
     
  15. Apr 27, 2009 #14
    12-dc-alert-inside.jpg

    1797439.jpg

    You did miss that memo. The DC area is full of missile installations on rooftops exactly for that reason. A little bit of education would curb irrational fears. If you don't think they would shoot it down....I have bad news for you.

    O....kay........?
     
    Last edited: Apr 27, 2009
  16. Apr 27, 2009 #15
    Actually, it does. Think about it for awhile and if it still doesn't come to you, http://www.hookedonphonics.com/" [Broken].

    Did not realize that Manhattan was in D.C. Missed that memo too.

    O....kay.......? :smile:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
  17. Apr 27, 2009 #16

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    There's another important difference: the ditching in the Hudson didn't last long enough for people to evacuate any buildings, even if they did panic.
     
  18. Apr 27, 2009 #17

    chroot

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Cyrus,

    People see a 747 flying extremely low and doing weird things, essentially right over the site of the worst terrorist attack to have ever occurred on American soil, and...

    ...you demean them for not having such cold, hard reasoning skills to connect a few circumstantial pieces of evidence together to determine that it was not actually a threat.

    Shut the hell up, dude. Really.

    If you worked in the Nymex building and had your head buried in your workstation when someone yelled "Oh my god there's a 747 flying 100 feet off the ground outside, and there's an F-16 chasing it!" you would have panicked like a little schoolgirl, just like everyone else.

    You sit there in your armchair, reading an ex post facto report that includes all kinds of details that were not available to the people who panicked, and then declare that yourself better than them, because you would not have panicked. Your arrogance is astounding.

    The fear of an airliner striking a building in NYC is not "irrational," for God's sake -- it happened just a few years ago. Your rooftop missile installations did nothing then, did they?

    - Warren
     
  19. Apr 27, 2009 #18

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Those fighter planes that were scrambled on 911 weren't there to take photos, Salad.
     
  20. Apr 27, 2009 #19

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Not from their storage garages, no...

    Don't get me wrong, I'm ok with people panicking over this and I'd prefer the photoshop suggestion, but it doesn't take all that much reasoning to figure out that it isn't a terrorist attack. If it were, what I said a few posts up applies again: people wouldn't have had time to spread their panick, as the terrorists wouldn't be flying in circles.

    Postmortem analysis or not, people are dumb when it comes to such things that are so far outside their everyday experiences.
     
  21. Apr 27, 2009 #20
    Do you really think a hijacked 747 would be allowed to fly over NYC with an F-16 flying next to it? I can understand some people being uneasy about it, sure. But if one takes the time to stop and think, you'd probably realize it wasn't a big deal.

    That's a fair enough statement if you are in an office building.

    I never said I was better than anyone else....?


    ......right, because they were put there after the fact. Please tone down. All I'm saying is when you see a big airplane painted in the livery of "Air Force One", probably one of the most famous aircraft in the world, escourted by an F-16 your first inclination shouldn't be "its hijacked".

    I'm not going to post anymore, because it's really not worth the argument this will turn into.


    FYI:

    http://www.bakersfield.net/photography/wallpapers/air_force_one/airForceOne_800x600.jpg [Broken]

    is not a terrorist airplane.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 4, 2017
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Airplane 'Photo Op' Angers 9/11 Witnesses
  1. More 9/11 conspiracy! (Replies: 68)

  2. 9/11 conspiracy stuff (Replies: 35)

  3. 9/11 Conspiracies (Replies: 1)

Loading...