I am REALLY curious about that Canuck of ours that flew that Cessna for 5 hours in USA air space

[ConcernedCanuk]

.
.
.

And I'll betcha there's a few terrorists(maybe he was one of them?) that are contemplating that whole scenario . . .

I mean really,

to be able to enter USA airspace illegally, and then fly around for another 5 hours?

something is really strange about this whole event . .

discuss . .

[peace13]

1. I thought we had that shoot to kill thing down.

Turns out it doesn't apply to crazy Canadians or pirates. Go figure.

[elleng]

2. Little plane?

.

[peace13]

7. Should have had my little sarcasm thingy on. Sorry. n/t

[Tangerine LaBamba]

3. See, now, if we had that Ronnie Raygun

missile shield, well, we could have bombed him before ............

No.

Wait.

OK, what we need here is a REALLY BIG organization designed solely to keep us safe. We could call it "The Department Of Homeland Security," or something like that, so that the terrorists know we mean business.

Or, you know, we could make sure people wearing shoes are thoroughly searched before they can even get near a plane.

I'll bet that Canuck of yours was wearing shoes.

See?

Mostly, this is all Canada's fault for not having a Department of Homeland Security like ours. You just wait until you get hit with a hurricane.

Wait.

That's FEMA.

Oh, what the hell, it's all Canada's fault, you filthy foreigners. No wonder George W. Bush went there to make his speech. You give safe haven to terrorists, so it was only a matter of time before the guy took that plane.

I'm done now.

http://www.chapelroadartstamps.com/RubberStampImages/Canadiana/Oh,Canada-Candiana-new-.jpg

[Canuckistanian]

6. Nice post, Imelda n/t

[Tangerine LaBamba]

8. Imelda?

What? Were the shoes a giveaway?

[Canuckistanian]

16. LOL

:hi:

[ConcernedCanuk]

9. LOL - I luv that collage re us Canadians

.
.
.

http://www.chapelroadartstamps.com/RubberStampImages/Canadiana/Oh,Canada-Candiana-new-.jpg

Regarding "making love in a canoe"

If you roll "off" after ur done,

you're going swimming!

:silly:

ps - I miss Pierre Burton

[Tangerine LaBamba]

10. The beaver .............

The beaver giving that canoe couple the eye just broke me up.

Thank you for having a sense of humor - some things just invite silliness.

:toast:

[ddeclue]

4. Totally inaccurate characterization of the situation.

The airplane travels at a maximum of 120mph and weighs all of 2300lb at Gross Take Off Weight.

It wasn't a threat to ANYONE.

The Air Force intercepted (not hard) and tracked the plane until it landed because it would have done far more damage to actually shoot at it than to merely let it land. It posed no threat - stop feeding the stupid paranoia.

:argh:

Doug D.
Licensed Private Pilot.

[ConcernedCanuk]

11. Nobody had a clue what was in that airplane

.
.
.

and he coulda dive bombed it anywhere;

kamikaze, suicide bomber comes to mind.

It was indeed a potential threat;

that's why there were 2 - TWO F-16's following it.

If you cross reference a dozen or so reports,

the Cessna was in USA airspace for almost an hour before it was intercepted.

Now that should be a wake-up call for someone down there!

One Cessna,

4 jetliners;

just flyin' around wherever they wanna . . .

sumthing to ponder . .

[ddeclue]

12. Sorry but you don't have the first clue...

I'm an aerospace engineer and a licensed pilot who actually has flown Cessna 172's like the one involved in this incident.

The Air Force did NOT see this plane as a legitimate threat - the reason I know this is that they didn't shoot it down. It would have done more damage to shoot it down than let it continue on which is what they did.

They are very small and have a very small payload - 2300lb max takeoff weight and a payload of only a few hundred pounds - NOT a threat. You renting a Ryder truck or even owning a 3/4 ton pickup is more of a threat.

The airliners on 9/11 flew 500 mph and up to 40,000 feet and weighed 100x what that little Cessna weighs and carried over 100x the fuel that a Cessna carries.

Small engine engine planes are NOT a threat and your paranoia only shows your ignorance of the subject. I wish to God that people in this country (and YOURS) would be forced to take much more science than they do today because so many people are just damned ignorant about science and engineering and make ridiculous comparisons like you just did.

:eyes:

[ConcernedCanuk]

13. I have been a passenger in Cessnas and Beavers in our north country.

.
.
.

We traveled where there were no roads to prospect in the bush.

We carried many firearms, and lots of ammunition.

So I have a "first" clue - as to payload,

We were three people, with supplies and as aforementioned, weapons and ammunition.

He was ONE.

I can't get my 3/4 ton in the air, and probably not illegally 2000 clicks inside the US either.

I do NOT mind discussion, but your insults are really not effective, and not impressive.

I actually did quite well in science BTW

[ddeclue]

14. You really are being ridiculous...

A few guns.. big deal.. your SUV is much more of a threat. It could haul six times as much. You probably weren't ever in a C172 based on your description of the passengers and load or it was vastly vastly overloaded at takeoff.

According to my 172R POH (pilots handbook) the basic empty weight is 1600 lb, the maximum takeoff weight is 2450 lb - that's 850 lb - subtract out 48 gallons of avgas at 6lb/gallon =562 lb useful load - 180lb for an average grown male leaves 382 lb useful cargo load. An average 4 door sedan can haul 3 times as much, an SUV or large pickup can haul 6 or more times as much.

If you have 3 full grown men in a C172 you are pushing the outside of the weight balance envelope - it may have four seats in it but it's really a two person airplane if you have any baggage at all.

You are without using any facts whatsoever conflating a 150 ton airliner traveling 500 mph carrying 30,000 lb or more of fuel with a 1 ton Cessna flying 120 mph (at best)

And you have the range of the Cessna wrong too. If it took off at the border, it wouldn't even get 1000 km inside our border before running out of gas. I'd LOVE to own a Cessna that could fly 2000 km at a hop.


Doug D.
Orlando, FL

[ddeclue]

15. Oh and to confuse a Cessna with a Dehavilland Beaver is pretty funny too.

That's like confusing a MD82 with a 747.

The DeHavilland Beaver is several times the airplane that a little Cessna 172 is.

I think you've flown in a Beaver once or twice and are just making assumptions about Cessnas based on your Beaver ride(s).

DHC2 "Beaver" General characteristics

Crew: 1
Capacity: 6 passengers, 2,100 lb (953 kg) useful payload
Length: 30 ft 3 in (9.22 m)
Wingspan: 48 ft 0 in (14.63 m)
Height: 9 ft 0 in (2.74 m)
Wing area: 250 ft² (23.2 m²)
Empty weight: 3,000 lb (1,361 kg)
Gross weight: 5,100 lb (2,313 kg)
Powerplant: 1 × Pratt & Whitney R-985 Wasp Jr. radial engine, 450 hp (336 kW) each
Performance

Maximum speed: 158 mph (255 km/h)
Cruise speed: 143 mph (230 km/h)
Range: 455 miles (732 km)
Service ceiling: 18,000 ft (4,586 m)
Rate of climb: 1,020 ft/min (5.2 m/s)

[damonm]

19. As a private pilot w/ over 300 hrs in C172's

I can tell you that you're so far off base you're not even in the stadium...

[havocmom]

17. speaking of ignorant... the Air Force was scrambling over our little berg in MT that night

Seems likely places where the sound of military jets going low and slow is not so unusual also got treated to special attention along the Northern Tier that night. SOMEBODY with lots of military jets was certainly concerned.

:eyes: It isn't just science. Sometimes geography and people can be a concern to the military. Judging from what several hundred of my neighbors heard and saw that night, the military WAS concerned.

[ddeclue]

21. No it really wasn't... they were just following procedure.

:eyes:

The military jets really had no choice but to go low and slow because that was all the Cessna could really do. Top of the white arc is 129 KIAS about 140 mph for the 172R model. We have military helicopters that fly considerably faster than this much less fighter aircraft. This plane was never a significant threat or they would have fired on it.

[havocmom]

22. Ignorant. I am NO WHERE NEAR the Cessna's flight path.

Long way from it, but not far from that long old border with Canada. Lots of folks (who only hear low military flights on July 4th when the throttle jockeys get permission to thrill the little bergs in the heartland) reported hearing military flying low and slow around communities with a runway.

SOMEBODY seemed to be making damned sure there weren't any other unauthorized entries. That would seem to mean they took something seriously. Nice to know they can get a remote place like where I live covered. Speaking to folks in other communitites, seems they had a lot of rural Montana covered. Sorry, but you do not understand what was going on everywhere. :eyes: your own self.

[stevedeshazer]

5. Four highjacked airliners flew over the most populated section of the US on 9-11-01

I still haven't figured all that out.

:crazy:

[uppityperson]

18. sometimes I have no clue what posters are talking about

discuss...

[ConcernedCanuk]

20. LOL - that's ok - lots of us posters don't know either

.
.
.

Ya got lots of company there!