4 ms·

An emergency landing does not need a fighter jet. The fighter jet was there to scare the pilot

• varispeed 5y ago
  That depends - they wouldn't want a plane with a bomb to explode over a city for example, so the jets could be used to "neutralise" the threat. Obviously in this case the bomb was fake and so the threat...
  • ilyaeck 5y ago
    P-lease! the case is crystal clear: the MIG was used to threaten the plane into landing!
    • iso1210 5y ago
      The MIG was no doubt there to ensure the plane obeyed air traffic control It's not unheard of for military jets to escort civilian planes to an airport, for example https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/ryanair-flight-escorted-by-two-raf-fighter-jets-into-stansted-airport-a3650106.html https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/ryanair-flight-escort... (Of course the situation of how the bomb threat came to be is different in this case, and IMO airlines now need to avoid Belarus overflights)
    • varispeed 5y ago
      Have you read this? https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/05/911-oral-history-flight-93-book-excerpt-228001/ https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/09/05/911-oral-... https://twitter.com/PavelLatushka/status/1396519000830582784 https://twitter.com/PavelLatushka/status/1396519000830582784 Belarusian Air Force fighter-interceptor manoeuvred to signal to the pilots of a Ryanair airliner:follow me”. The captain of the civilian aircraft was obliged to obey. The captain may have disobeyed the dispatcher's command, but the threat from a military aircraft was obligatory.
• bellyfullofbac 5y ago
  Huh, surely the Belarusian government wouldn't dare shoot it down? But I guess if I were the Ryanair captain responsible for all souls onboard, landing it is the safest choice.
  • csomar 5y ago
    > Huh, surely the Belarusian government wouldn't dare shoot it down? No sane or insane pilot is going to risk it, however. Unless the pilot was certain that his and all of passengers fate were in danger, they are going to follow that fighter jet.
    • dzhiurgis 5y ago
      I think that just changed hours ago. Flying over Russian/Belarus is now considered harmful.
  • cortesoft 5y ago
    Iran shot a commercial passenger plane down last year, so it isn't exactly outside the realm of possibility.
    • elliekelly 5y ago
      Not intentionally.
      • tremon 5y ago
        No need to go looking for examples from halfway across the world, Russia was complicit in the downing of MH-17 over Ukraine: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MH-17#Cause_of_the_crash https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MH-17#Cause_of_the_crash
        • V-2 5y ago
          And directly responsible back in the Soviet era: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007
• t0mas88 5y ago
  The fighter jet was there to intercept. All commercial pilots are trained to follow standard procedures when intercepted. Which comes down to: 1. Let ATC know, 2. Establish radio communication or use standard signals if unable, 3. Follow directions by the intercepting plane instead of ATC. The radio words to use are standardised so they even work in case one side doesn't speak English. The signals are also very simple (rock wings, certain turns, gear up/down). No need to think about being shot down or not, no need to scare, any commercial flight being intercepted would follow directions.
  • nemetroid 5y ago
    This does not refute the parent commenter's point.