4 ms·

Apart from this jarring omission, they repeat the propaganda claim that Minsk was the closest airport at the time, which is blatantly untrue.

by V-2 5y ago

AceyMan 5y ago
aviation nit to pick here— I haven't tried to find the actual flight path, but for a transport aircraft at cruise the "closest airport" would not be underneath the flight's position, but rather at some distance away corresponding to the computed distance to reach the surface in an idle power descent.¹ From 30,000+ feet I'd expect that value to lie around 60–80 miles, iirc. /Acey ¹–ignoring in-flight fires, medical emergencies, etc., that might dictate an unusually steep descent profile.
- 22c 5y ago
  Approximate flight data from ADS-B has been plotted and is visible in the article. Even with the benefit of the doubt, it looks very shady. You could probably argue that it's the closest airport within the airspace they're currently occupying (which was Belarus airspace at the time) but the whole Belarus narrative stinks. What particularly stinks is the Ryanair response/reaction. I can only assume that Ryanair is being coy about the whole situation because they want to continue using Belarus airspace, but there might be more to it.
  - bombcar 5y ago
    It’s likely the pilots were fed a relatively standard line and asked to divert to Minsk. Unless it’s an inflight emergency pilots will normally follow the recommendations of ATC. “There is a report you have a bomb onboard and divert to Minsk where we have a bomb squad” would likely work.
- AceyMan 5y ago
  And then there is obstacle clearance. Over any terrain with appreciable elevation differences, topographic features can easily rule out otherwise eligible airfields because you'll have to cross granite on the glide down. /Acey I left that off before but it begged mentioning since it's a question that asks for a real answer/confirmation if starting from jet cruise altitudes. If you are starting at FL410, you could easily head down a box canyon accidentally when the Alps, Pyrenees, Rockies, etc. are nearby.
  - ric2b 5y ago
    It was the destination airport, can we stop making up possible reasons about why they couldn't land there? They couldn't because the fighter jets forced them to land at Minsk.
- wwtrv 5y ago
  How is this relevant considering that according to FlightRadar the closest airport was the destination airport, where they were supposed to land anyway?
- reshlo 5y ago
  The flight was travelling due north from Lutsk and had already passed over Lida, approaching the Lithuanian border, before it was diverted. It was significantly closer to Vilnius (its destination) than to Minsk.

Apart from this jarring omission, they repeat the propaganda claim that Minsk was the closest airport at the time, which is blatantly untrue.

by V-2 5y ago

Apart from this jarring omission, they repeat the propaganda claim that Minsk was the closest airport at the time, which is blatantly untrue.

AceyMan 5y ago

aviation nit to pick here— I haven't tried to find the actual flight path, but for a transport aircraft at cruise the "closest airport" would not be underneath the flight's position, but rather at some distance away corresponding to the computed distance to reach the surface in an idle power descent.¹ From 30,000+ feet I'd expect that value to lie around 60–80 miles, iirc. /Acey ¹–ignoring in-flight fires, medical emergencies, etc., that might dictate an unusually steep descent profile.

22c 5y ago
Approximate flight data from ADS-B has been plotted and is visible in the article. Even with the benefit of the doubt, it looks very shady. You could probably argue that it's the closest airport within the airspace they're currently occupying (which was Belarus airspace at the time) but the whole Belarus narrative stinks. What particularly stinks is the Ryanair response/reaction. I can only assume that Ryanair is being coy about the whole situation because they want to continue using Belarus airspace, but there might be more to it.
- bombcar 5y ago
  It’s likely the pilots were fed a relatively standard line and asked to divert to Minsk. Unless it’s an inflight emergency pilots will normally follow the recommendations of ATC. “There is a report you have a bomb onboard and divert to Minsk where we have a bomb squad” would likely work.
AceyMan 5y ago
And then there is obstacle clearance. Over any terrain with appreciable elevation differences, topographic features can easily rule out otherwise eligible airfields because you'll have to cross granite on the glide down. /Acey I left that off before but it begged mentioning since it's a question that asks for a real answer/confirmation if starting from jet cruise altitudes. If you are starting at FL410, you could easily head down a box canyon accidentally when the Alps, Pyrenees, Rockies, etc. are nearby.
- ric2b 5y ago
  It was the destination airport, can we stop making up possible reasons about why they couldn't land there? They couldn't because the fighter jets forced them to land at Minsk.
wwtrv 5y ago
How is this relevant considering that according to FlightRadar the closest airport was the destination airport, where they were supposed to land anyway?
reshlo 5y ago
The flight was travelling due north from Lutsk and had already passed over Lida, approaching the Lithuanian border, before it was diverted. It was significantly closer to Vilnius (its destination) than to Minsk.