Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Better check in...

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Styles

Guinness means Genius
Joined
Dec 18, 2001
Posts
156
Two RAF fighters last Friday intercepted a Manchester-bound Boeing 747 after it failed to respond to air traffic controllers, the BBC reports. Pakistan Airlines flight PK 709 - carrying 81 passengers plus crew - should have made contact with controllers as it entered UK airspace. Air traffic controllers in Maastricht lost touch with the aircraft as it left Northern Europe.

The fighters escorted the plane from the Lincolnshire coast until it got to within 40 miles of Manchester, at which point the pilot checked in and subsequently landed 20 minutes later. The crew were reportedly unaware of the security alert they had sparked, and claimed that they were unable to contact Manchester and therefore spoke to London controllers instead. National Air Traffic Services (NATS) denies this, adding that the RAF flyboys would not have been put in the air had this been the case.

Pakistan Airlines is investigating the matter, and NATS has reported the incident to the Civil Aviation Authority.

A spokesman for the RAF declined to go into specifics of the case, but noted that the RAF responded with "well practised defence measures" designed to deal with any airborne threat "believed to be about to launch an attack such as those seen on September 11 2001". There seems little doubt, therefore, that had the pilot not contacted air traffic control when he did, his aircraft would shortly thereafter have been shot down. The final call on whether or not to destroy an airliner rests with unnamed senior officials. The spokesman told The Register that such "assessments and decisions would be made at the highest level".
 
I heard the pilots were arrested for being in possession of an "assault airplane", as the aircraft they were flying was not "generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes". But I could be wrong though.
 
Gadzooks, only 81 pax on a 747!!?? Either that is one high ticket price on that puppy or they took a bath on that flight! (No pun intended on the bath thing :) )
 
KeroseneSnorter said:
Gadzooks, only 81 pax on a 747!!?? Either that is one high ticket price on that puppy or they took a bath on that flight! (No pun intended on the bath thing :) )
Pun...Jab? Pun...Jab? Pun...Jab? Punjab?

Ok...now I get it.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top