Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: MachFly on March 18, 2011, 11:41:32 PM
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHDZqUa0m1s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHDZqUa0m1s)
It took the guy 5 passes to shoot down a non maneuvering aircraft. Compare that to the pilots from WWII.
(http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu330/cthulhu19887/forum/facepalm/facepalm2.jpg)
-
Its columbia........Im pretty sure if it were to be invaded they would scramble their Dirgibles and Hot air balloons.
-
I know but how hard is it to shoot down a non maneuvering aircraft? Personally I never tried but looking at the thousands of pilots from WWII this should be very easy. I can understand you can miss on the first pass, but 5 passes?? :O :bhead
-
wow, talk about lame, where's my chuck Norris bomb when i need it :(
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHDZqUa0m1s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gHDZqUa0m1s)
It took the guy 5 passes to shoot down a non maneuvering aircraft. Compare that to the pilots from WWII.
(http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu330/cthulhu19887/forum/facepalm/facepalm2.jpg)
Yup, be sure, the drug a/c only flew straight and level the whole time, at tree top level
The Americans would send out 500 plus escorts and only claim a few German a/c even though the was several hundred German a/c that would attack the bombers.
-
I wonder what kind of guns that T-27 has...
Why did they shoot that twin down? Was it a threat to anyone?
-
Ga for Georgia? Man i feel ashamed to live where i do :cry
-
I wonder what kind of guns that T-27 has...
Why did they shoot that twin down? Was it a threat to anyone?
Seems like they were really worried about him leaving their airspace.
Don't think it justifies it though.
-
Ga for Georgia? Man i feel ashamed to live where i do :cry
Someone post a facepalm picture.
GA = General Aviation
-
I wonder what kind of guns that T-27 has...
Why did they shoot that twin down? Was it a threat to anyone?
Ever hear of Google Search?
The subject title says why the a/c was shot down > CARRYING DRUGS.
-
Ever hear of Google Search?
The subject title says why the a/c was shot down > CARRYING DRUGS.
Is carrying drugs really a good reason to kill someone? Especially if they are unarmed and not a threat to you.
-
Looked like the GA aircraft was maneuvering quite well and it sounded like the T-27 was having a hard time keeping up.
Pretty good E retention on the GA guys part. :lol
Anybody from AH gone missing lately?
I'm guessing whoever was in that plane was some sort of big wig in the cartels.
-
Is carrying drugs really a good reason to kill someone? Especially if they are unarmed and not a threat to you.
Yes
And it's also spelled Colombia for other posters.
I go there often for work. It's a really beautiful country with very nice people. Things are changing slowly but surely for the better in Colombia. Also been married to a beautiful Colombian lady for the last 23 years.
With regard to the the ease of shooting someone, whether in an airplane or on the ground. It's a lot different in real life than compared to a computer or console game. I hope none of you ever have to experience that...
-
Ever hear of Google Search?
The subject title says why the a/c was shot down > CARRYING DRUGS.
I know that... why do I need to google search that, it's in the title. :headscratch:
-
Is carrying drugs really a good reason to kill someone? Especially if they are unarmed and not a threat to you.
Do American cops shoot at fleeing cars?
-
I know that... why do I need to google search that, it's in the title. :headscratch:
Google Search for the weapons carried by the T-27. :eek:
-
Do American cops shoot at fleeing cars?
I hope not.
Even if they do they shoot the car so it would stop, not to kill the occupants.
-
These are not police activities.
-
Is carrying drugs really a good reason to kill someone? Especially if they are unarmed and not a threat to you.
Of course it is. How many lives are lost or ruined by the drugs that planes like that smuggle into our country.
-
I hope not.
Even if they do they shoot the car so it would stop, not to kill the occupants.
You watch too much TV. Police officers are trained to shoot center mass to kill, not to disable. Anytime a police officer fires his weapon he is shooting to kill the suspect because he believes that the target may kill him (the officer) or an innocent bystander.
-
Google Search for the weapons carried by the T-27. :eek:
Could you google search for me please? I will even post a link for you: http://lmgtfy.com/ (hint: not much info is available...)
PS Please don't base your replies on people's post count in the future...
-
I know but how hard is it to shoot down a non maneuvering aircraft? Personally I never tried but looking at the thousands of pilots from WWII this should be very easy. I can understand you can miss on the first pass, but 5 passes?? :O :bhead
The film was real life not a game. Both aircraft are manuvering low over a dense jungle. There was real danger real Gs and real fear. You can bet if the T-27 pilot hit the trees he wasn't going to up from another base and kill the guy before he could land. The guy has probably never fired a shot in anger his whole and possibly never even fired and a moving target before. If he heard computer flight sim hotshots were critical of his skills he'd be the one posting a face palm. :lol
-
The film was real life not a game. Both aircraft are manuvering low over a dense jungle. There was real danger real Gs and real fear. You can bet if the T-27 pilot hit the trees he wasn't going to up from another base and kill the guy before he could land. The guy has probably never fired a shot in anger his whole and possibly never even fired and a moving target before. If he heard computer flight sim hotshots were critical of his skills he'd be the one posting a face palm. :lol
I am not comparing it to a game but to WWII. The reason I compare it to WWII is because you have two propeller driven aircraft using guns.
I see no reasons to pull Gs as the aircraft was flying straight & level, fear is not an acceptable excuse. And why would you be afraid of an aircraft that is unarmed. You mentioned that he never fired a shot in anger, what would anger have anything to do with it? You are assigned a mission, why would you be angry?
If he heard computer flight sim hotshots were critical of his skills he'd be the one posting a face palm.
What makes you think I just fly sims? Certainly I never shot anyone down, but trust me I do a lot more than sims.
-
You watch too much TV. Police officers are trained to shoot center mass to kill, not to disable. Anytime a police officer fires his weapon he is shooting to kill the suspect because he believes that the target may kill him (the officer) or an innocent bystander.
Well I would not know, I'm not a cop and I don't spend much time with cops. But I assume shooting to kill an un-armed person would be a last resort.
-
Of course it is. How many lives are lost or ruined by the drugs that planes like that smuggle into our country.
This might be getting too much into politics, so I don't think I want to talk about this in details, but the counter point is that they are not killing anyone directly. All they are doing is transporting something illegal for the purpose (I guess) of making money (not to kill anyone.)
-
The ignorance demonstrated in the thread astounds me.
-
The ignorance demonstrated in the thread astounds me.
Finally
I'll drink to to that!
Have any of you considered that maybe he had a perked plane? now for the face palm.
I can only hope some of these comments are from young people. Spend some time in the bush with folks like hard working honest Colombians trying to help them take their country back and you would certainly see things differently.
-
I am not comparing it to a game but to WWII. The reason I compare it to WWII is because you have two propeller driven aircraft using guns.
I see no reasons to pull Gs as the aircraft was flying straight & level, fear is not an acceptable excuse. And why would you be afraid of an aircraft that is unarmed. You mentioned that he never fired a shot in anger, what would anger have anything to do with it? You are assigned a mission, why would you be angry?
What makes you think I just fly sims? Certainly I never shot anyone down, but trust me I do a lot more than sims.
First off, look at the video that aircraft was anything BUT straight and level. That country side is hilly and I bet you he was going up and down a couple of hundred feet while doing sharp s-turns.
Second these pilots probably do not have much training in close air combat, so this is their training on the job so to speak. MOST WWII pilots were terrible shots, have you seen combat video from WWII? Most shots are actually missing, and by a lot too. WWII pilots were good, but only a few were as good as your thinking.
Third, as being broadcast over frequency the T27 was having a hard time keeping up with the aircraft, which adds difficulty to the situation at hand.
From what I heard they got the aircraft down in ~7 miles from first engagement, which is quite ok.
-
First off, look at the video that aircraft was anything BUT straight and level. That country side is hilly and I bet you he was going up and down a couple of hundred feet while doing sharp s-turns.
Most of the flight was straight in level, he did a few 10° turn, but he could have been maneuvering a lot more.
Second these pilots probably do not have much training in close air combat, so this is their training on the job so to speak. MOST WWII pilots were terrible shots, have you seen combat video from WWII? Most shots are actually missing, and by a lot too. WWII pilots were good, but only a few were as good as your thinking.
I have to agree about the training (but that just my opinion, I don't know the facts).
Yes most shots fired in WWII did miss however I don't think 5 passes was a common thing.
Third, as being broadcast over frequency the T27 was having a hard time keeping up with the aircraft, which adds difficulty to the situation at hand.
From what I heard they got the aircraft down in ~7 miles from first engagement, which is quite ok.
I don't know what is considered good regarding distance. However I think it should be measured in time not distance, because distance varies with speed. Now I'm not saying that they took too long to shoot him down, I'm just surprised that it took him 5 passes.
-
Second these pilots probably do not have much training in close air combat, so this is their training on the job so to speak.
That's incorrect. Very well trained by a major western nation to high standards of performance.
-
Pod mounted fifties on that thing. That smuggler plane almost made it. I would not call it a failure you can see the t-27 get hits almost every pass he takes. That smuggler plane was robust.
-
yeah 2x.50s ... think TBM vs Goon at treetop level. I'd need at least 5 cartoon passes.
-
I am not comparing it to a game but to WWII. The reason I compare it to WWII is because you have two propeller driven aircraft using guns.
I see no reasons to pull Gs as the aircraft was flying straight & level, fear is not an acceptable excuse. And why would you be afraid of an aircraft that is unarmed. You mentioned that he never fired a shot in anger, what would anger have anything to do with it? You are assigned a mission, why would you be angry?
What makes you think I just fly sims? Certainly I never shot anyone down, but trust me I do a lot more than sims.
Now I need a face palm grapic. Okay Chuck Yeager. :lol
-
Straight and level...? u watching the same vid i did?
-
Straight and level...? u watching the same vid i did?
Considering the number of people who did not see this 'straight and level', be sure, must be another video.
-
Considering the number of people who did not see this 'straight and level', be sure, must be another video.
He is implying that another member of this board is blind and/or saw a different video.
-
Shooting it down is a great way to discourage other pilots from being willing to fly drug flights. I'm sure the aircraft was warned and instructed to maintain a certain flight profile. When it refused someone in the chain of command ordered the pilot to shoot it down. If that were an unidentified craft entering US airspace and refusing to follow instructions none of you would be whining that it was shot down instead of just letting it auger into a target of opportunity.
Lets not paint the Colombian authorities with the 'bad guy' brush. They've got a long way to go to get their country under control. Putting a dent in the drug trade is a good start.
Edit: the twin wasn't maneuvering? :headscratch: looked like it was doing everything it could to make it to the border without complying with the instructions he had been given at treetop level and off radar. Nicely done in my book.
-
Apparently that drug runner never downloaded Murdr's barrel roll defense zip file.
http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/files/murdr/evarevall.zip
I realize that was a real human being but, my twisted cartoon bubble imagines that drug plane using a good reversal to avoid the BnZ attempts. I would love to see THAT in a real video.
-
Apparently that drug runner never downloaded Murdr's barrel roll defense zip file.
http://trainers.hitechcreations.com/files/murdr/evarevall.zip
I realize that was a real human being but, my twisted cartoon bubble imagines that drug plane using a good reversal to avoid the BnZ attempts. I would love to see THAT in a real video.
Still he would have had the chances of a lone goon vs a c202.
-
Well I would not know, I'm not a cop and I don't spend much time with cops. But I assume shooting to kill an un-armed person would be a last resort.
They shoot to stop, not to kill. Yes the shots are taken for the center mass, but their not intended to kill. However, if it comes down to the Officer or the civilian, the Officer wont stop firing until they consider themselves safe and no long in danger.
-
He is implying that another member of this board is blind and/or saw a different video.
No kidding. :x
-
Is carrying drugs really a good reason to kill someone? Especially if they are unarmed and not a threat to you.
Do you not think that if the guy can afford/steal a plane that he isn't a threat?
Ignorance = Bliss.
-
I know but how hard is it to shoot down a non maneuvering aircraft? Personally I never tried but looking at the thousands of pilots from WWII this should be very easy. I can understand you can miss on the first pass, but 5 passes?? :O :bhead
Did you ever think that the SOP was to disable the aircraft and not destroy it? You are quick with your words and obviously short on thought in your analysis of the situation. I'd be willing to bet the Colombian pilots are quite professional and are able to hold their own in most situations. If they really wanted to destroy that aircraft that would have turned it into dust the first attack. The T-27 pilot simply hung out on the dead 6 of the target and fired a few short burst on multiple setups (I hesitate to call them "passes"). Perhaps they were first trying to force the target down to land, disable it from flying further, etc, etc.
Remember, if you capture the plane, pilot, passengers, and cargo you can do more damage to the cartel's operation than if you simply destroyed/killed them.
-
You watch too much TV. Police officers are trained to shoot center mass to kill, not to disable. Anytime a police officer fires his weapon he is shooting to kill the suspect because he believes that the target may kill him (the officer) or an innocent bystander.
False.
LEO's shoot to end the threat. We do not shoot to kill. Ever.
End of story.
-
another thing you have to think about probably the first time this guys really fired on someone under NODs pretty dam hard to judge distance normally, let alone at tree top level firing on some one.
-
I'm from Colombia and I can tell you that the air force we have is not really trained for air-to-air combat, its mostly ground support.
Training in the FAC is tiered by connections, rank and experience. If you have good connections the pilot can land a commission in the jet cadre (khafirs fighter jets) which automatically jumps his rank up. Its only those pilots that get Air to Air combat training and practice. There's not many jet fighters so not many pilots get to be part of this group.
The rest are prop driven aircraft used for recon, transport and ground support. The Tucano is a ground attack plane and because its prop engines are so reliable and easy to maintain plus it can loiter for a long time its an ideal anti-drug aircraft.
The video shows the drug plane flying low and fast over a hilly amazon jungle area. Chatter constantly mentions distance to border. Spanish chatter in the first pass indicates the first pass is a warning fly-by, the 2nd pass you see the drug plane start to jink and keep flying towards the border and so it was fired upon and hit its fuel. 3rd to 5th passes is the Tucano trying to hit the drug plane as it jinks constantly and tries to hug the terrain.
The tucano pilot I think was more worried about not hitting the ground than hitting the plane.. and his air to air training is likely to be at a basic level. There are some pilots that have been doing drug plane intercepts for years and they're good at it...this guy seems to not be one of them.
-
he may be new :P
-
I'd listen to rogwar he is a CIA operative. :noid :bolt:
-
The video was shot through a FLIR. Any idea of the time of day and if that was after dark there? If it was dark then it puts quite a bit more difficulty in tagging that plane.
-
The ignorance demonstrated in the thread astounds me.
I feel your pain brother.
-
The video was shot through a FLIR. Any idea of the time of day and if that was after dark there? If it was dark then it puts quite a bit more difficulty in tagging that plane.
there seems to be a timer in the top right... showing 20:52 - 56 or so and if that's local time, it would put it around 9pm... lighting conditions that time of year in colombia I wouldn't know.
-
I dont think you would need FLIR if it was daylight at the time of ops, white plane against forest pretty easy to see. I assumed because they were using FLIR it must be dark but Ive never used it so I dont know for certain.
-
Did you ever think that the SOP was to disable the aircraft and not destroy it? You are quick with your words and obviously short on thought in your analysis of the situation. I'd be willing to bet the Colombian pilots are quite professional and are able to hold their own in most situations. If they really wanted to destroy that aircraft that would have turned it into dust the first attack. The T-27 pilot simply hung out on the dead 6 of the target and fired a few short burst on multiple setups (I hesitate to call them "passes"). Perhaps they were first trying to force the target down to land, disable it from flying further, etc, etc.
Remember, if you capture the plane, pilot, passengers, and cargo you can do more damage to the cartel's operation than if you simply destroyed/killed them.
Yeah right. We will fire a couple of rounds at ya, so that you can safely land on treetops and surrender. ;-)
Firing a machine guns at a civilian aircraft with a wet wing (not necessarily a "wet wing" but definitely without much fuel tank fire protection) is not exactly the same as trying to blow out the tires on a fleeing car with a hand held weapon.
-
I know but how hard is it to shoot down a non maneuvering aircraft? Personally I never tried but looking at the thousands of pilots from WWII this should be very easy. I can understand you can miss on the first pass, but 5 passes?? :O :bhead
try it in game sometime. for me at least, it's a LOT easier to hit you when you're trying to not let me hit you, than it is for me to hit you flying straight n level.
i've seen this vid before.......
so now picking at it.....at 1.56, the tucano looks to be flying formation with him, probably trying to make contact...
at 2.09 looks like he throttles up, and peels up to the left...didn't see any shots fired. probably trying to intimidate the con...
at 2.20 he comes back in from the left rear, and fires.....and hits, as evidenced by the smoke trail as the tucano looks to be doing a high yoyo on the right of the con,.,.....
at 3.09 the tucano fires again.......goes off to the right of the con......
at 3.21 he looks to be doing a close pass again, but couldn't tell if he fired........
AT 3.48, you can see hits scoring on the con......
at 3.53 fire erupts, and at 3.54 he goes boom.
so......all in all, considering they were probably trying to NOT shoot him down, and ended up having to do just that.....pretty dam good job.
-
try it in game sometime. for me at least, it's a LOT easier to hit you when you're trying to not let me hit you, than it is for me to hit you flying straight n level.
i've seen this vid before.......
so now picking at it.....at 1.56, the tucano looks to be flying formation with him, probably trying to make contact...
That's a really bad formation, I don't think the pilot of the twin even saw him. T-27 was on his 5O'clock. 1st pass.
at 2.09 looks like he throttles up, and peels up to the left...didn't see any shots fired. probably trying to intimidate the con...
Don't know about Colombia but in the US an abrupt break away maneuver means that your free to go. Does not seem to be a good thing to do when you want to intimidate someone.
at 2.20 he comes back in from the left rear, and fires.....and hits, as evidenced by the smoke trail as the tucano looks to be doing a high yoyo on the right of the con,.,.....
Yes, he shot him. After that the twin continued flying with a fuel leak. 2nd pass
at 3.09 the tucano fires again.......goes off to the right of the con......
Yes, he fired. Don't know if he hit or not. 3rd pass
at 3.21 he looks to be doing a close pass again, but couldn't tell if he fired........
Don't know if he fired or not, but seemed that that's what he was trying to do. 4th pass
AT 3.48, you can see hits scoring on the con......
Yes. 5th pass
at 3.53 fire erupts, and at 3.54 he goes boom.
so......all in all, considering they were probably trying to NOT shoot him down, and ended up having to do just that.....pretty dam good job.
Seems like they were trying to shoot him down from the beginning. I did not see the T-27 do anything to attempt to intercept him.
-
Did you ever think that the SOP was to disable the aircraft and not destroy it? You are quick with your words and obviously short on thought in your analysis of the situation. I'd be willing to bet the Colombian pilots are quite professional and are able to hold their own in most situations. If they really wanted to destroy that aircraft that would have turned it into dust the first attack. The T-27 pilot simply hung out on the dead 6 of the target and fired a few short burst on multiple setups (I hesitate to call them "passes"). Perhaps they were first trying to force the target down to land, disable it from flying further, etc, etc.
Remember, if you capture the plane, pilot, passengers, and cargo you can do more damage to the cartel's operation than if you simply destroyed/killed them.
What else do you think will happen if you shoot a machine gun at an unarmored aircraft?
If you star burning you can't just stop moving and walk out, if you loose a part of the airplane you can't just stop moving and walk out. You said "Perhaps they were first trying to...disable it from flying further", that's called shooting it down.
-
False.
LEO's shoot to end the threat. We do not shoot to kill. Ever.
BS.
Police officers are not trained to shoot to wound. Not trained to shoot the weapon out of the bad guys hand. Police officers are trained to shoot center mass. They may not call it shooting to kill, but if it quacks like a duck...
-
Shooting it down is a great way to discourage other pilots from being willing to fly drug flights. I'm sure the aircraft was warned and instructed to maintain a certain flight profile. When it refused someone in the chain of command ordered the pilot to shoot it down. If that were an unidentified craft entering US airspace and refusing to follow instructions none of you would be whining that it was shot down instead of just letting it auger into a target of opportunity.
Lets not paint the Colombian authorities with the 'bad guy' brush. They've got a long way to go to get their country under control. Putting a dent in the drug trade is a good start.
Edit: the twin wasn't maneuvering? :headscratch: looked like it was doing everything it could to make it to the border without complying with the instructions he had been given at treetop level and off radar. Nicely done in my book.
You compare it to an unidentified aircraft entering US airspace, in this case the aircraft was leaving Colombian airspace therefore it was not an immediate threat.
You call a couple of turns maneuvering? I recommend you watch a few videos from WWII where you have aircraft doing real maneuvers (not just changing direction) in order not to get shot down.
Just for the record I don't think anyone is calling Columbian Air Force the bad guys. I just said that it seemed like a wrong thing to do.
-
Do you not think that if the guy can afford/steal a plane that he isn't a threat?
Ignorance = Bliss.
First, what makes you think he stole that aircraft?
Second, are you saying that anyone who can afford to buy an aircraft is a threat? :headscratch:
-
BS.
Police officers are not trained to shoot to wound. Not trained to shoot the weapon out of the bad guys hand. Police officers are trained to shoot center mass. They may not call it shooting to kill, but if it quacks like a duck...
What he is saying is that they never shoot for a purpose of "stopping suspect's life." (They do not shoot to wound either.) They shoot to stop an "immediate threat." The most effective way to accomplish this (in other words: the quickest way to stop the suspect from being a threat) is to fire a series of shots into the center of mass. Unfortunately, very often it causes fatal injuries (da...) but killing is NOT the purpose of shooting. Shooting to kill is an execution, and execution first requires trial.
-
Your saying it's easier to hit a manuevering aircraft than the one that's flying straight and level? :headscratch:
That's a really bad formation, I don't think the pilot of the twin even saw him. T-27 was on his 5O'clock. 1st pass.
Don't know about Colombia but in the US an abrupt break away maneuver means that your free to go. Does not seem to be a good thing to do when you want to intimidate someone.
Yes, he shot him. After that the twin continued flying with a fuel leak. 2nd pass
Yes, he fired. Don't know if he hit or not. 3rd pass
Don't know if he fired or not, but seemed that that's what he was trying to do. 4th pass
Yes. 5th pass
Seems like they were trying to shoot him down from the beginning. I did not see the T-27 do anything to attempt to intercept him.
the pilot knew he was there....unless he had no radio in that aircraft. he was warned multiple times. he was trying to evade, while keepint a small target profile.
he was in danger of escaping them. by the way they were counting down the distance to the border, i would imagine that at that point that they'd have had to break off, although i'm not sure about that.
and since they seemed to be trying to force him to rtb, rather than shoot him down, i'd also imagine that he only fired 2 or 3 times.
in one of your other replies, you asked what they thought would happen when they shoot at an un-armored aircraft? probably the same as if they shot at a 40's era fighter....something would break, and either end the flight, or force him to ditch...or he'd catch fire, and go boom.
the only thing wrong with what they did, was that they gave him too many chances.
-
the only thing wrong with what they did, was that they gave him too many chances.
That's what I'm trying to figure out. I would hope that all thous passes the T-27 did were to warn, scare, and/or force the aircraft into landing. However it seems weird that the T-27 was maneuvering behind the twin, because most aircraft of that class/shape have really bad rearwards visibility, that is why intercepting aircraft usually fly right next to you (not to the side and behind). Another thing that I find weird is that if the T-27 was indeed trying to intercept him why was he shooting? His shooting leads me to think that he was trying to shoot him down. But if he was trying to shoot him down why did it take him so many passes?
Perhaps they were trying to intercept him before the video started and failed?
-
That's what I'm trying to figure out. I would hope that all thous passes the T-27 did were to warn, scare, and/or force the aircraft into landing. However it seems weird that the T-27 was maneuvering behind the twin, because most aircraft of that class/shape have really bad rearwards visibility, that is why intercepting aircraft usually fly right next to you (not to the side and behind). Another thing that I find weird is that if the T-27 was indeed trying to intercept him why was he shooting? His shooting leads me to think that he was trying to shoot him down. But if he was trying to shoot him down why did it take him so many passes?
Perhaps they were trying to intercept him before the video started and failed?
I THOUGHt i heard them say in the beginning that the tucano was trying to catch up.........
i think when he first came up to the 5 oclock, he was hanging out so to speak, and probably trying to contact the con, along with the aircraft that was filming.
when that didn't work, it looks like he throttled back up, pass overhead, and let them know he's there.......i don't think it looked like he shot on every pass. maybe 3 times at most.........
i honestly hope you're wrong about them possibly having been trying to warn the con before the vid started.......too many chances.......
-
It's hard to see in the video but does not seem that he overflew the twin.
Couldn't they just contact him without catching up? I understand when your intercepting you want to get next to the intercepted aircraft and try to communicate from that position, but I don't know if the twin even knew that the T-27 was there until he started firing.
-
BS.
Police officers are not trained to shoot to wound. Not trained to shoot the weapon out of the bad guys hand. Police officers are trained to shoot center mass. They may not call it shooting to kill, but if it quacks like a duck...
No, not BS. What I said was fact. LEO's shoot to end the threat. We do not shoot to kill. We do not shoot to wound. We shoot to end the threat plain and simple. We do not practice the "2 to the chest 1 to the head", we shoot until the threat is no more and that does not mean "to kill". If the perp is knocked down and/or away from what they were able to harm/kill after 1 shot then guess what, we do not keep firing. After shooting and rendering them no longer a threat we start first aid (after we put them in cuffs).
If you'd ever had been to a LEO academy, or had any other type of formal LEO training you'd know such things. ;)
-
It's hard to see in the video but does not seem that he overflew the twin.
Couldn't they just contact him without catching up? I understand when your intercepting you want to get next to the intercepted aircraft and try to communicate from that position, but I don't know if the twin even knew that the T-27 was there until he started firing.
the aircraft that was filming was trying to contact the con....repeatedly.....repeate dly in english and in what sounded like spanish? it sounded as if they were talking to some sort of coordinator, or ground controller, who was also trying to contact the con.
i wish we could find a better version of that vid.
and you are right about intercept....i agree with you there.
we've(cap) had some of our crews fly as "bogies" for the airforce to intercept....to give em practices. and they do pull up alongside.
a few years ago, there was a cessna 150 that flew into the no-fly zone over dc......they pulled up alongside....when they could not contact, they had a heli(if i recall) come up alongside, with the radio frequency written on a piece of cardboard, so the pilot could tune them.
-
a few years ago, there was a cessna 150 that flew into the no-fly zone over dc......they pulled up alongside....when they could not contact, they had a heli(if i recall) come up alongside, with the radio frequency written on a piece of cardboard, so the pilot could tune them.
I don't want to go off topic, but was that the guy who plotted a direct course on his GPS and it took him over the white house?
I did not know they bring a banner with the frequency to you, I'd just use 121.5MHz, I bet the intercepting aircraft has that one tuned in.
-
You compare it to an unidentified aircraft entering US airspace, in this case the aircraft was leaving Colombian airspace therefore it was not an immediate threat.
You call a couple of turns maneuvering? I recommend you watch a few videos from WWII where you have aircraft doing real maneuvers (not just changing direction) in order not to get shot down.
Just for the record I don't think anyone is calling Columbian Air Force the bad guys. I just said that it seemed like a wrong thing to do.
All in all, considering the THOUSANDS of innocent people slaughtered by the Colombian cartels over the last decade or three, I'm sure they're not shedding any tears over this guy
-
I don't want to go off topic, but was that the guy who plotted a direct course on his GPS and it took him over the white house?
I did not know they bring a banner with the frequency to you, I'd just use 121.5MHz, I bet the intercepting aircraft has that one tuned in.
i think it was a student pilot. it was back when they first put the no-fly there. it wasn't so much a banner as it was pretty much one of the crewmen writing the frequency down on a piece of cardboard.
the interceptors do tune 121.5, and when i'm up, i keep the 2nd radio on that frequency. some 150's though, only have one radio. also, if i recall, there was something said in the article that the first interceptor supposedly could have had problems with his radio.
-
BS.
Police officers are not trained to shoot to wound. Not trained to shoot the weapon out of the bad guys hand. Police officers are trained to shoot center mass. They may not call it shooting to kill, but if it quacks like a duck...
So what you're saying is that you've never shot a handgun at a target in your life and you have no idea what adrenaline and max heart rate do to your fine motor skills.
-
I'd listen to rogwar he is a CIA operative. :noid :bolt:
Christians In Action? no way!
On my way tonight soon from Texas to Santiago, Chile for the week. Planning to go to the mercado central for lunch tomorrow. Will take some pics.
Still time for another beer in the Admirals Club.
Haver any of you considered that plane was warping on command?
-
So what you're saying is that you've never shot a handgun at a target in your life and you have no idea what adrenaline and max heart rate do to your fine motor skills.
I'm not sure what you are drivinhg at there FLS, nor do I have any idea how what you wrote applies at all to the conversation. I know very well what firing a weapon is like. While I have never had the misfortune to be forced to fire at another human being, I have been trained to do it. Ever scrap of training I have ever had has been to put hits directly into center mass. While I agree that they don't call it "shooting to kill" (likely for PC and lawyerly reasons), I find it astonishing that anyone would argue that shooting center mass is designed to do anything less then catastrophic lethal injury.
I will agree that max heart rate and adrenaline play a huge part in real life situations, but that does not change the fact that the training is to shoot center mass.
Honestly, this is a rather silly argument anyway.
-
You compare it to an unidentified aircraft entering US airspace, in this case the aircraft was leaving Colombian airspace therefore it was not an immediate threat.
You call a couple of turns maneuvering? I recommend you watch a few videos from WWII where you have aircraft doing real maneuvers (not just changing direction) in order not to get shot down.
Just for the record I don't think anyone is calling Columbian Air Force the bad guys. I just said that it seemed like a wrong thing to do.
Sorry Mach.. I saw a plane attempting to evade an intercept. When I go down to treetop level and break left and right it means I'm trying to get away. If the pilot was innocent of something why not just pop back up, fly straight and level, and follow the commands of the people who control the airspace I'm in? Now I'm not a real pilot but if the people in control of the airspace I was in told me to take a heading and land at 'x' if I wasn't doing something wrong I'd head there. Same as I do if I ever see red and blue lights in my rear view mirror. I pull over and let them do their thing. The alternative I brought on myself.
-
I'm not sure what you are drivinhg at there FLS, nor do I have any idea how what you wrote applies at all to the conversation. I know very well what firing a weapon is like. While I have never had the misfortune to be forced to fire at another human being, I have been trained to do it. Ever scrap of training I have ever had has been to put hits directly into center mass. While I agree that they don't call it "shooting to kill" (likely for PC and lawyerly reasons), I find it astonishing that anyone would argue that shooting center mass is designed to do anything less then catastrophic lethal injury.
I will agree that max heart rate and adrenaline play a huge part in real life situations, but that does not change the fact that the training is to shoot center mass.
Honestly, this is a rather silly argument anyway.
ya? well you're ugly and dress funny :P
-
Sorry Mach.. I saw a plane attempting to evade an intercept. When I go down to treetop level and break left and right it means I'm trying to get away. If the pilot was innocent of something why not just pop back up, fly straight and level, and follow the commands of the people who control the airspace I'm in? Now I'm not a real pilot but if the people in control of the airspace I was in told me to take a heading and land at 'x' if I wasn't doing something wrong I'd head there. Same as I do if I ever see red and blue lights in my rear view mirror. I pull over and let them do their thing. The alternative I brought on myself.
I'm not saying he did not do anything wrong. I'm saying what he did was not maneuvering, it was changing direction. Your right he was evading an intercept, by flying straight, he was not trying to not get shot down.
-
Sorry Mach.. I saw a plane attempting to evade an intercept. When I go down to treetop level and break left and right it means I'm trying to get away. If the pilot was innocent of something why not just pop back up, fly straight and level, and follow the commands of the people who control the airspace I'm in? Now I'm not a real pilot but if the people in control of the airspace I was in told me to take a heading and land at 'x' if I wasn't doing something wrong I'd head there. Same as I do if I ever see red and blue lights in my rear view mirror. I pull over and let them do their thing. The alternative I brought on myself.
There are many different reason why he did what he did. As odd as it sounds, he could have just gotten scared and started doing weird things. Perfectly normal people may start doing very weird things when they are scared. I don't agree that the fact that he is fleeing makes it justifiable to shoot him down. IMO, unless a suspect is an immediate threat, the suspect is nothing more than "a suspect." So shooting him down is kinda like killing him because you suspect that he may do harm in the future. Good enough reason?
BTW, flying level at a safe altitude doesn't seem to be of much help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHJOpHryjfE&feature=related
-
Sorry guys I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this point. Fair enough?
-
I'm not sure what you are drivinhg at there FLS, nor do I have any idea how what you wrote applies at all to the conversation. I know very well what firing a weapon is like. While I have never had the misfortune to be forced to fire at another human being, I have been trained to do it. Ever scrap of training I have ever had has been to put hits directly into center mass. While I agree that they don't call it "shooting to kill" (likely for PC and lawyerly reasons), I find it astonishing that anyone would argue that shooting center mass is designed to do anything less then catastrophic lethal injury.
I will agree that max heart rate and adrenaline play a huge part in real life situations, but that does not change the fact that the training is to shoot center mass.
Honestly, this is a rather silly argument anyway.
I was addressing your ludicrous suggestion, which followed your initial comment that LEOs shoot to kill, that they should shoot at someone's hand or to wound while they were being shot at or otherwise threatened with deadly force. I can't believe that anyone who has fired a handgun would suggest that. If you understand about fine motor control issues under stress than you should know that trained people often miss the center of mass shot but you suggest an even harder target.
If you know a better way to consistently stop someone immediately other than shooting center of mass I'd like to hear it. Stopping isn't a euphemism for killing, it's the actual rational for deadly force. Obviously it's called deadly force because it may result in death but death is not the object. Accusing people who must use deadly force of trying to kill people is intellectually dishonest and insulting to all law enforcement.
If you were trained to shoot center of mass and then follow it up with one to the head after they're down and no threat then you'd have a point.
-
There are many different reason why he did what he did. As odd as it sounds, he could have just gotten scared and started doing weird things. Perfectly normal people may start doing very weird things when they are scared. I don't agree that the fact that he is fleeing makes it justifiable to shoot him down. IMO, unless a suspect is an immediate threat, the suspect is nothing more than "a suspect." So shooting him down is kinda like killing him because you suspect that he may do harm in the future. Good enough reason?
BTW, flying level at a safe altitude doesn't seem to be of much help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHJOpHryjfE&feature=related
if the drugs he was transporting made it to your kids hands, and one of them died from them, would you feel differently?
the con knew the risk he was taking. everything that happened to him happened because of his choice, and his choice only.
-
Sorry guys I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this point. Fair enough?
i think possibly he was fishing shirly....and he caught a lot of us.
-
BTW, flying level at a safe altitude doesn't seem to be of much help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHJOpHryjfE&feature=related
damn :huh
-
Just found something interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdxgIxqhsgs (This is the same video posted in the first post. What's interesting is a commentary in the description of the video. I highly recommend anyone who has at least some interest in this topic read it. It's pretty long but well worth it. Just to clarify, I'm talking about the video description, not the comments of other people on youtube.)
A quote from that text: "report said that in most of the shootdowns, pilots fired on aircraft "without being properly identified, without being given the required warnings to land, and without being given time to respond to such warnings as were given to land."
Based on the video, I think I agree.
-
Just found something interesting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdxgIxqhsgs (This is the same video posted in the first post. What's interesting is a commentary in the description of the video. I highly recommend anyone who has at least some interest in this topic read it. It's pretty long but well worth it. Just to clarify, I'm talking about the video description, not the comments of other people on youtube.)
A quote from that text: "report said that in most of the shootdowns, pilots fired on aircraft "without being properly identified, without being given the required warnings to land, and without being given time to respond to such warnings as were given to land."
Based on the video, I think I agree.
:huh
Not sure how to comment
In case if the article on youtube gets deleted I'd like to post a copy on here:
Is Congress Approving these kind of Covert Operations or is the CIA at their old Iran-Contra tricks? Unfriendly Fire. With the help of CIA spotters, the Peruvian air force shot down 15 small civilian aircraft suspected of carrying drugs, in many cases without warning and within two to three minutes of being sighted, a U.S. lawmaker said Thursday.
It was the first public disclosure of the number of planes shot down between 1995 and 2001 as part of the Airbridge Denial Program, a CIA counternarcotics effort that killed an innocent American missionary, Veronica Bowers, and her infant daughter in 2001. A State Department investigation at the time said that Peruvian fighter jets forced another 23 planes to land.
Michigan Rep. Pete Hoekstra, senior Republican on the Intelligence Committee of the House of Representatives, told The Associated Press most of the 15 planes shot down with the help of the CIA crashed in the jungle. The wreckage has not been or could not be examined to ascertain whether narcotics were aboard the aircraft.
"The Bowers could have gone in the same category if they had crashed in the jungle," Hoekstra said, speaking of the missionary family from Hoekstra's state, Michigan.
The Bowers' plane made an emergency river landing after it was hit.
Excerpts from a CIA inspector general's report released in November raised questions about whether the missionaries' plane was the only craft mistakenly suspected of drug smuggling. The CIA report said that in most of the shootdowns, pilots fired on aircraft "without being properly identified, without being given the required warnings to land, and without being given time to respond to such warnings as were given to land."
Fast Fact
The report said the CIA withheld the results of investigations that documented continuous and significant violations of aircraft interception procedures created to prevent the shoot-down of planes unconnected with the drug trade.
The IG report said the CIA withheld from the National Security Council, Justice Department and Congress the results of multiple investigations that documented continuous and significant violations of aircraft interception procedures created to prevent the shoot-down of planes unconnected with the drug trade. The classified report was completed in August and sent to Congress in October.
The CIA report directly contradicted the State Department's findings in 2001. The State Department at the time said the other planes were shot down only after "exhausting international procedures for interception."
CIA Director Michael Hayden is appointing a six-person board, including two current CIA officers, to determine whether disciplinary action is warranted, according to spokesman Mark Mansfield. CIA accountability boards can look at both current and former employees.
Hayden also has directed CIA's Center for the Study of Intelligence to identify lessons learned that remain relevant to CIA's current operations, as was recommended by the classified IG report.
-
if the drugs he was transporting made it to your kids hands, and one of them died from them, would you feel differently?
the con knew the risk he was taking. everything that happened to him happened because of his choice, and his choice only.
If the con was indeed the con...
Regarding your first comment: I would be blaming myself first before anyone else, for not teaching/rasing the kid properly. IMO it's your responsibility to not use drugs and to make sure your kids do not do that. Government/law enforcement should do their job, but it is primarily a personal responsibility, IMO.
-
if the drugs he was transporting made it to your kids hands, and one of them died from them, would you feel differently?
the con knew the risk he was taking. everything that happened to him happened because of his choice, and his choice only.
I lost my brother and several great friends to drugs, Cap. Even had the misfortune of finding one and trying to revive him. I lost all these people despite our government's best efforts to blockade drug suppliers and assist in ruining the lives of drug users (if you want to throw a dealer in jail, fine, but an addict faces such slim chances of recovery that should they prove to have the strength to get clean, they should be welcomed back into society with open arms and no felony convictions hanging over their heads).
I pray that someday people in power will have the fortitude to admit that our current tactics do not work, and drastically adjust course. I submit that Portugal and the Netherlands are modern, western nations with proud histories and bright futures. It would be wise for us to at least consider if something similar to what works for them might work for us.
-
may i politley suggest you edit that before the skuzzster sees it?
-
may i politley suggest you edit that before the skuzzster sees it?
Done
-
BTW, flying level at a safe altitude doesn't seem to be of much help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHJOpHryjfE&feature=related
Watching that made me sick, dumbarse trigger happy peruvians
They should execute those people who shot that plane down.
-
I lost my brother and several great friends to drugs, Cap. Even had the misfortune of finding one and trying to revive him. I lost all these people despite our government's best efforts to blockade drug suppliers and assist in ruining the lives of drug users (if you want to throw a dealer in jail, fine, but an addict faces such slim chances of recovery that should they prove to have the strength to get clean, they should be welcomed back into society with open arms and no felony convictions hanging over their heads).
I pray that someday people in power will have the fortitude to admit that our current tactics do not work, and drastically adjust course. I submit that Portugal and the Netherlands are modern, western nations with proud histories and bright futures. It would be wise for us to at least consider if something similar to what works for them might work for us.
sorry man....really i am.
perhaps i should not have gone there...and i apologize to electric one too.....
i lost 4 friends to drugs,.,,,,one of them was probably the best mechanic i knew.....he drowned when he od'd on heroine, and passed out...fell in the bath tub face first.......
my only point was that things like that to me are pretty black and white. the aircraft in question was skimming treetops. when he realized there was another aircraft, he started jinking, all the while staying low. he did nothing to show that he intended to follow their orders, and continued to head for the border........so in my mind(as puny as it seems at times), he brought his own death on himself. he made that decision when he turned the starter over on the first engine.
and regarding your last statement.....i REALLY wish our so-called enforcement agencies would do what those guys did...
-
If the con was indeed the con...
Regarding your first comment: I would be blaming myself first before anyone else, for not teaching/rasing the kid properly. IMO it's your responsibility to not use drugs and to make sure your kids do not do that. Government/law enforcement should do their job, but it is primarily a personal responsibility, IMO.
my apologies sir....i shouldn't have gone there......
-
Done
i wasn't trying to be wise.....just didn't wanna see ya get the ole banstick. :aok
-
i wasn't trying to be wise.....just didn't wanna see ya get the ole banstick. :aok
Right, I just don't know what else I could possibly say about that video.
BTW I recommend you remove my quote from your post, as it is the same thing as you posting it. ;)
-
Right, I just don't know what else I could possibly say about that video.
You could say what I said, those turds just wanted to kill someone
-
Right, I just don't know what else I could possibly say about that video.
BTW I recommend you remove my quote from your post, as it is the same thing as you posting it. ;)
dam!!! that would've actually been a ban to laugh at........warn you about it, then get banned 'cause i left it there........ :noid :rofl
-
BTW, flying level at a safe altitude doesn't seem to be of much help: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHJOpHryjfE&feature=related
I have no confidence that the voices we hear are the original voices from that clip. Could quite easily be edited later to make the Peruvians look entirely responsible.
You will notice that some voices sound crackly like a normal aviation radio does, where as others sound very clear. It's not proof, just a thing to think about.
Ironic that it was christian missionaries though. Almost slighty funny. But, sorry, tragic more than anything, I know.