2 ms·
The problem isn't remotely controlling the plane. The problem is all the problems not actually doing it introduces. You now have more, many more, people that
by jlgreco 13y ago
The problem isn't remotely controlling the plane. The problem is all the problems not actually doing it introduces. You now have more, many more, people that need to be involved because you now need to fake grieving families for 246 different dead people who never died (or never existed, depending on who you ask). You also need to ensure that nobody notices missing drone'd 757s (or worse, make sure that nobody notices the planes weren't 757s...), you need to ensure that nobody notices the planes are empty, and need to somehow get those empty planes into the airlines systems without anyone becoming suspicious of that, or trying to sell tickets for them. On top of all of that, you then still have a few live pilots who are witnesses you wouldn't have to otherwise worry about.
It is simpler to just find a few lackies to actually do it.
- dllthomas 13y agoOh, right, missed the "empty plane" in your original. I agree that would be far more difficult. "Spooks crashing plane by suicide" vs. "spooks crashing plane by remote" don't seem too radically different in likelihood. "There weren't actually planes full of people" is unlikely even compared to these. None of these, I should note, seem terribly likely.
- jlgreco 13y agoAye, rigging a real plane with a real schedule to be remote controlled would make a great deal more sense.