5 ms·

> As a precaution, the German Air Force deployed its aircraft to ensure the safety of the flight and its guests. Does anyone still believe this bullshit? Clear

by tomp 10y ago

> As a precaution, the German Air Force deployed its aircraft to ensure the safety of the flight and its guests. Does anyone still believe this bullshit? Clearly there's nothing that the fighter jets could do to ensure the safety of the flight/passengers - the most they could do is to shoot the plane down in a safe area to avoid casualties on the ground, if it were e.g. controlled by terrorists. And the media/institutions wonder why people don't trust them...

Already__Taken 10y ago
You're right of course but they could also have an easier time guiding a plane down if the pilots watching the aircraft needed to get a passenger to do it. Perhaps hijackers seeing armed missiles out the window might rethink their negotiating position. You never used to hijack a plane to kill people that's fairly recent.
skarap 10y ago
You don't expect "Jet Airways" (or any other airline) to say that directly, do you?
Piskvorrr 10y ago
There are other possibilities beside "plane controlled by terrorists" - radio failure, for example (for all the redundancies, this still happens in the 21st century). In that case, rudimentary visual communication comes in handy. In other words, not all in-flight emergencies follow the Hollywood movie conventions ;)
- Piskvorrr 10y ago
  And voila. Pilots turned down radio volume and took a nap, it seems. Hardly a case for shootdown - or Hollywood ;)
iSnow 10y ago
It would be illegal in Germany to shoot down a hijacked airliner and ordering the pilot to do so would be an illegitimate order the pilot would be forbidden from following. The most anyone could do would be the Minister of Defence of the Chancellor talking directly to the pilot and telling her that they would take the fall if her conscience allowed them to shoot down the plane. The pilot would still face a trial with uncertain results. So, please stop with the alternative facts and the conspiracy stuff. Not every country works like the US of A, unbelievably.
- hubert123 10y ago
  > It would be illegal in Germany to shoot down a hijacked airliner and ordering the pilot to do so would be an illegitimate order the pilot would be forbidden from following Yeah we're going need a source on that. Don't even think of pulling up that vague Grundgesetz about human dignity, the legality of refusing an order would be established AFTER the fact. To call such an order illegal before any court judgement is the very thing that you are branding as an alternative fact.
  - iSnow 10y ago
    Decision 1 BvR 357/05 (https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/2006/02/rs20060215_1bvr035705.html https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheid...): >The armed forces’ authorisation pursuant to § 14.3 of the Aviation Security Act (Luftsicherheitsgesetz – LuftSiG) to shoot down by the direct use of armed force an aircraft that is intended to be used against human lives is incompatible with the right to life under Article 2.2 sentence 1 of the Basic Law in conjunction with the guarantee of human dignity under Article 1.1 of the Basic Law to the extent that it affects persons on board the aircraft who are not participants in the crime.
    - hubert123 10y ago
      It sounds incredibly dumb and the fact that nobody has challenged and changed this is testament to the pace of public official life. If somebody were to get a nuclear bomb on a civilian plane, the german government would be constitutionally obligated to let them fly to wherever they want. I imagine that in real life the german government would ask France or Great Britain to quickly fly over and do the job for them. Afterwards it's nobody's fault and we can all keep pretending that the Grundgesetz is perfect.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- tomp 10y ago
  Others say you might be wrong: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13686868 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13686868

by tomp 10y ago

Already__Taken 10y ago

You're right of course but they could also have an easier time guiding a plane down if the pilots watching the aircraft needed to get a passenger to do it. Perhaps hijackers seeing armed missiles out the window might rethink their negotiating position. You never used to hijack a plane to kill people that's fairly recent.

skarap 10y ago

You don't expect "Jet Airways" (or any other airline) to say that directly, do you?

Piskvorrr 10y ago

There are other possibilities beside "plane controlled by terrorists" - radio failure, for example (for all the redundancies, this still happens in the 21st century). In that case, rudimentary visual communication comes in handy. In other words, not all in-flight emergencies follow the Hollywood movie conventions ;)

Piskvorrr 10y ago
And voila. Pilots turned down radio volume and took a nap, it seems. Hardly a case for shootdown - or Hollywood ;)

iSnow 10y ago

It would be illegal in Germany to shoot down a hijacked airliner and ordering the pilot to do so would be an illegitimate order the pilot would be forbidden from following. The most anyone could do would be the Minister of Defence of the Chancellor talking directly to the pilot and telling her that they would take the fall if her conscience allowed them to shoot down the plane. The pilot would still face a trial with uncertain results. So, please stop with the alternative facts and the conspiracy stuff. Not every country works like the US of A, unbelievably.

hubert123 10y ago
> It would be illegal in Germany to shoot down a hijacked airliner and ordering the pilot to do so would be an illegitimate order the pilot would be forbidden from following Yeah we're going need a source on that. Don't even think of pulling up that vague Grundgesetz about human dignity, the legality of refusing an order would be established AFTER the fact. To call such an order illegal before any court judgement is the very thing that you are branding as an alternative fact.
- iSnow 10y ago
  Decision 1 BvR 357/05 (https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/2006/02/rs20060215_1bvr035705.html https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheid...): >The armed forces’ authorisation pursuant to § 14.3 of the Aviation Security Act (Luftsicherheitsgesetz – LuftSiG) to shoot down by the direct use of armed force an aircraft that is intended to be used against human lives is incompatible with the right to life under Article 2.2 sentence 1 of the Basic Law in conjunction with the guarantee of human dignity under Article 1.1 of the Basic Law to the extent that it affects persons on board the aircraft who are not participants in the crime.
  - hubert123 10y ago
    It sounds incredibly dumb and the fact that nobody has challenged and changed this is testament to the pace of public official life. If somebody were to get a nuclear bomb on a civilian plane, the german government would be constitutionally obligated to let them fly to wherever they want. I imagine that in real life the german government would ask France or Great Britain to quickly fly over and do the job for them. Afterwards it's nobody's fault and we can all keep pretending that the Grundgesetz is perfect.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
tomp 10y ago
Others say you might be wrong: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13686868 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13686868