4 ms·

This article and others report that the plane was instructed to land in Minsk, even though Vilnius was closer. That doesn’t sound like following safety protocol

by tbenst 5y ago

This article and others report that the plane was instructed to land in Minsk, even though Vilnius was closer. That doesn’t sound like following safety protocols to me

croutonwagon 5y ago
There could be less nefarious reasons for that...such has what ATC was in contact at the time, headwind/tailwind can make a difference in speed/time even if the distance as the crow flies is shorter, or if there was more landing windows in Minsk. It should be considered and questioned, but it may not be nefarious.
- ruined 5y ago
  you don't need to exercise reserved skepticism here. there was no bomb and we know what happened when the plane landed. you're playing devil's advocate when they've already won
  - tclancy 5y ago
    I’m stealing that line. It feels like the Internet has inspired a subset of people to play for that team and it’s so confusing as to why. I am trying to always “assume good intentions” as a rule now; I think it’s just deep denial about the world we live in and how free we really are.
    - wiml 5y ago
      It's a form of attempting to disconfirm your beliefs. If it's easy to put together an argument against yourself that you can't rebut, then it's a sign you need to think more. And you can't do that well unless you're in the habit of testing the weaknesses of every appealing new belief.
      - tclancy 5y ago
        Oh ... Kay? The thing with that wonderfully high minded approach that seems to get missed: you can do that at home by yourself without involving me by musing out loud in a forum like just maybe you’re smarter than everyone else. You want to check yourself? Do it by yourself.
      - ruined 5y ago
        that works both directions. speculating about the potential legitimacy of every detail of an extraordinary rendition is not intellectual vigilance, it's simping for state terror and it disconfirms nothing.
- JshWright 5y ago
  "Landing windows"? Why are you straining so hard to give this criminal act plausible deniability? You can easily look up the track of the aircraft. There is no "tailwind" that would have made Minsk the shorter flight.
  - croutonwagon 5y ago
    Im just not outraged...Nor do I have any illusions to Europe, much less eastern europe being all that "free". And finally the plausible deniability was made by the bomb threat, i dont have to manufacture that or convince anyone of its veracity (and I have no illusions about how bogus it was or wasnt). Im not a pilot, much less a pilot in that part of the world. But I do know that planes are generally only talking to 1 ATC at a time and it takes time to get in touch with another. And that pilots have very specific checklists and procedures when needing to call emergency landings. Listen to the Sully recordings when he ditched in an emergency. NJ was closer but he was still in contact and it would have taken too long. So if they get called for an emergency and are forced to make a landing, there are protocols in place to swiftly determine the when, where etc of setting down. Unless you are going to make the accusation that the pilots are political agents/operatives...
    - jorvi 5y ago
      > Nor do I have any illusions to Europe, much less eastern europe being all that "free Europe consistenly gets the highest ranking in things that test for different aspects of freedom (democracy, press, police violence, etc.) To be clear: it's not that Europe can't do better, but if you care about 'freedom' it's a better place to be than pretty much any other region on the planet.
    - JshWright 5y ago
      > Listen to the Sully recordings when he ditched in an emergency. NJ was closer but he was still in contact and it would have taken too long. He was _talking_ to NY TRACON. That doesn't mean he was somehow required to land in NY, not NJ. His first request to ATC was whether he could land at Teterboro (in NJ). They got on the phone and got permission for him, in order to avoid having to switch frequencies. > So if they get called for an emergency and are forced to make a landing, there are protocols in place to swiftly determine the when, where etc of setting down. Indeed there are, and literally none of them have to do with which ATC center the pilot happens to be communicating with at that point. > Unless you are going to make the accusation that the pilots are political agents/operatives... The pilots were looking at a MiG-29 out their window. They did not have a choice in the matter.
- deepserket 5y ago
  if you check the flight path the plane took a really long path to minsk, getting as far away as possible from the border https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/fr4978#27cce9a2 https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/fr4978#27cce9a2
- grogenaut 5y ago
  Was on a flight from Frankfurt to SEA about 2 years back, someone thought they were having a heart attack. Plane was about even between SEA and YVR, we took the most direct route to the runway and terminal I've ever taken coming into SEA over 200 flights. Especially since they kicked a plane coming in before us to the international terminal. Other interesting tidbit, the person claimed to be fine about 30 minutes later after talking to 2 doctors. But the ground crew said they required people to go to the hospital now for a full eval.
  - jefftk 5y ago
    > the ground crew said they required people to go to the hospital now for a full eval. I see, so if you want an expedited landing you need to convince one of the other passengers on the plane to fake a heart attack.
    - grogenaut 5y ago
      About right. I almost did this once by watching the pilot of Lost near landing on a flight to Hawaii in economy.
- scottLobster 5y ago
  You realize plausible deniability is part of tradecraft right? When conducted with any intelligence there will always appear to be a chance nefarious actions "might not have been nefarious". Your odds of a correct judgment are better if you take into account the motives of the parties involved and how directly the inputs/outputs of the system align with said motives. Or do you think it's just a happy coincidence when a politician votes no on a bill the day after a lobbyist opposed to the bill makes a donation? Or one of President Xi's political opponents just goes on an extended and very silent vacation? Or a used car salesman being super friendly to you is just because he's a really friendly guy?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - croutonwagon 5y ago
    Of course I do. I never said the bomb threat wasn't planned as a false flag, or that the timing wasnt done in a specific manner to ensure the flight was redirected to Minsk. Only that I have doubts that the pilots did NOT follow the proper protocols or were somehow involved in a conspiracy here. Commercial aviation is one of the few jobs where theres little tolerance for deviation of established protocols and checklists, especially in declared emergencies. And a lot of the routing decisions arent necessarily made by them. I understand some may find that offensive.. But it doesn't change my view on the matter. Nonetheless, i dont really see what is so controversial about stating it. It doesn't really excuse anything here....
    - JshWright 5y ago
      I think you're overlooking the fact that the pilots were not the ones who chose to land at Minsk. The fighter jets "escorting" them make that decision for them.
robbick 5y ago
Indeed - I don't think the President is normally personally involved in safety protocols...
bombcar 5y ago
NATO scrambled fighters from four countries to just watch a plane a few weeks ago. https://onemileatatime.com/bomb-threat-el-al-787-fighter-jet/ https://onemileatatime.com/bomb-threat-el-al-787-fighter-jet...
- girvo 5y ago
  Yes. It wasn't forced to land though, as far as your article asserts, unless I'm missing something in it?

by tbenst 5y ago

This article and others report that the plane was instructed to land in Minsk, even though Vilnius was closer. That doesn’t sound like following safety protocols to me

croutonwagon 5y ago

There could be less nefarious reasons for that...such has what ATC was in contact at the time, headwind/tailwind can make a difference in speed/time even if the distance as the crow flies is shorter, or if there was more landing windows in Minsk. It should be considered and questioned, but it may not be nefarious.

ruined 5y ago
you don't need to exercise reserved skepticism here. there was no bomb and we know what happened when the plane landed. you're playing devil's advocate when they've already won
- tclancy 5y ago
  I’m stealing that line. It feels like the Internet has inspired a subset of people to play for that team and it’s so confusing as to why. I am trying to always “assume good intentions” as a rule now; I think it’s just deep denial about the world we live in and how free we really are.
  - wiml 5y ago
    It's a form of attempting to disconfirm your beliefs. If it's easy to put together an argument against yourself that you can't rebut, then it's a sign you need to think more. And you can't do that well unless you're in the habit of testing the weaknesses of every appealing new belief.
    - tclancy 5y ago
      Oh ... Kay? The thing with that wonderfully high minded approach that seems to get missed: you can do that at home by yourself without involving me by musing out loud in a forum like just maybe you’re smarter than everyone else. You want to check yourself? Do it by yourself.
    - ruined 5y ago
      that works both directions. speculating about the potential legitimacy of every detail of an extraordinary rendition is not intellectual vigilance, it's simping for state terror and it disconfirms nothing.
JshWright 5y ago
"Landing windows"? Why are you straining so hard to give this criminal act plausible deniability? You can easily look up the track of the aircraft. There is no "tailwind" that would have made Minsk the shorter flight.
- croutonwagon 5y ago
  Im just not outraged...Nor do I have any illusions to Europe, much less eastern europe being all that "free". And finally the plausible deniability was made by the bomb threat, i dont have to manufacture that or convince anyone of its veracity (and I have no illusions about how bogus it was or wasnt). Im not a pilot, much less a pilot in that part of the world. But I do know that planes are generally only talking to 1 ATC at a time and it takes time to get in touch with another. And that pilots have very specific checklists and procedures when needing to call emergency landings. Listen to the Sully recordings when he ditched in an emergency. NJ was closer but he was still in contact and it would have taken too long. So if they get called for an emergency and are forced to make a landing, there are protocols in place to swiftly determine the when, where etc of setting down. Unless you are going to make the accusation that the pilots are political agents/operatives...
  - jorvi 5y ago
    > Nor do I have any illusions to Europe, much less eastern europe being all that "free Europe consistenly gets the highest ranking in things that test for different aspects of freedom (democracy, press, police violence, etc.) To be clear: it's not that Europe can't do better, but if you care about 'freedom' it's a better place to be than pretty much any other region on the planet.
  - JshWright 5y ago
    > Listen to the Sully recordings when he ditched in an emergency. NJ was closer but he was still in contact and it would have taken too long. He was _talking_ to NY TRACON. That doesn't mean he was somehow required to land in NY, not NJ. His first request to ATC was whether he could land at Teterboro (in NJ). They got on the phone and got permission for him, in order to avoid having to switch frequencies. > So if they get called for an emergency and are forced to make a landing, there are protocols in place to swiftly determine the when, where etc of setting down. Indeed there are, and literally none of them have to do with which ATC center the pilot happens to be communicating with at that point. > Unless you are going to make the accusation that the pilots are political agents/operatives... The pilots were looking at a MiG-29 out their window. They did not have a choice in the matter.
deepserket 5y ago
if you check the flight path the plane took a really long path to minsk, getting as far away as possible from the border https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/fr4978#27cce9a2 https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/fr4978#27cce9a2
grogenaut 5y ago
Was on a flight from Frankfurt to SEA about 2 years back, someone thought they were having a heart attack. Plane was about even between SEA and YVR, we took the most direct route to the runway and terminal I've ever taken coming into SEA over 200 flights. Especially since they kicked a plane coming in before us to the international terminal. Other interesting tidbit, the person claimed to be fine about 30 minutes later after talking to 2 doctors. But the ground crew said they required people to go to the hospital now for a full eval.
- jefftk 5y ago
  > the ground crew said they required people to go to the hospital now for a full eval. I see, so if you want an expedited landing you need to convince one of the other passengers on the plane to fake a heart attack.
  - grogenaut 5y ago
    About right. I almost did this once by watching the pilot of Lost near landing on a flight to Hawaii in economy.
scottLobster 5y ago
You realize plausible deniability is part of tradecraft right? When conducted with any intelligence there will always appear to be a chance nefarious actions "might not have been nefarious". Your odds of a correct judgment are better if you take into account the motives of the parties involved and how directly the inputs/outputs of the system align with said motives. Or do you think it's just a happy coincidence when a politician votes no on a bill the day after a lobbyist opposed to the bill makes a donation? Or one of President Xi's political opponents just goes on an extended and very silent vacation? Or a used car salesman being super friendly to you is just because he's a really friendly guy?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- croutonwagon 5y ago
  Of course I do. I never said the bomb threat wasn't planned as a false flag, or that the timing wasnt done in a specific manner to ensure the flight was redirected to Minsk. Only that I have doubts that the pilots did NOT follow the proper protocols or were somehow involved in a conspiracy here. Commercial aviation is one of the few jobs where theres little tolerance for deviation of established protocols and checklists, especially in declared emergencies. And a lot of the routing decisions arent necessarily made by them. I understand some may find that offensive.. But it doesn't change my view on the matter. Nonetheless, i dont really see what is so controversial about stating it. It doesn't really excuse anything here....
  - JshWright 5y ago
    I think you're overlooking the fact that the pilots were not the ones who chose to land at Minsk. The fighter jets "escorting" them make that decision for them.

robbick 5y ago

Indeed - I don't think the President is normally personally involved in safety protocols...

bombcar 5y ago

NATO scrambled fighters from four countries to just watch a plane a few weeks ago. https://onemileatatime.com/bomb-threat-el-al-787-fighter-jet/ https://onemileatatime.com/bomb-threat-el-al-787-fighter-jet...

girvo 5y ago
Yes. It wasn't forced to land though, as far as your article asserts, unless I'm missing something in it?