aviationbuff08 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 346 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 11 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 18574 times:
Quoting Hagic (Reply 1): What do the U.S. Air Force fighter jets have to do with this?
That is a really good question that I am interested in. The Flight departed YVR en-route ICN and returned to a Canadian Military air field. However we know the media over states stuff with aviation too.
My guess is just to make sure it doesn't become a hijacking with YVR extremely close to US airspace. Not to mention that a 777 with fuel for a TPAC flight would have the range for any city on the Western Coast of the US. I doubt the US fighters ever got near the Korean Air plane but were airborne off the coast of Washington State as a precaution. Unless of course the Canadian authorities requested the US to have fighter jets escort the airplane but I would think they would have their own fighters capable of doing such a task.
Air77 From Canada, joined Dec 2010, 17 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 11 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 17727 times:
[quote=HorizonGirl,reply=8]I don't believe any are based there at this time, they just have the SAR base, as well as the Auroras. I do see them there frequently, though.[/quote
That's correct. 442 Squadron SAR and the Auroras. It is setup to be a forward operating base of the CF-18 and they do visit on occasion, however they do not have a permanent presence. The Snowbirds also do their spring training there. If they are not there already they should be in the next week.
777 From Italy, joined Sep 2005, 514 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 11 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 17116 times:
Quoting Hagic (Reply 1):
What do the U.S. Air Force fighter jets have to do with this?
Here in Europe after the 9/11 almost every Country has an agreement with its neighbours that allows a fighter jet escorting a flight under terrorists treats or a sospicious one to continue the escort, no matter if doing this it will get out from its air space.
Obviously as soon as the fighters of the second Country are ready to take the baton in this duty, the fighters coming from the previous Country will come back to their home base.
This to minimize the risk that a suspicious a/c may flight without escort while overflying from a Country to another one.
It is quite realistic to imagine that a similar agreement has been set also between US and Canada.
softrally From Canada, joined Mar 2012, 81 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 11 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 14558 times:
Does anyone know the registration number? I've been on KE 777s several times recently (flight #KE073, KE074)....It could possibly the one! It would be quite interesting if it was the bird I've flown on just a few weeks ago.
RWA380 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2744 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (1 year 11 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 14264 times:
This is not the first KE jet enroute to the US had been escorted down by military jets. IIRC, there was a KE 747 that was not communicating with the best English, and was forced down at Whitehorse, I think, don't remember if that was something to do with 9/11 when flights to the US were grounded, or not, but I am almost 100% sure it was KE before.
Rule number One, NEVER underestimate the other guys greed
NorthStarDC4M From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2928 posts, RR: 38
Reply 15, posted (1 year 11 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 13868 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW CHAT OPERATOR
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 13): This is not the first KE jet enroute to the US had been escorted down by military jets. IIRC, there was a KE 747 that was not communicating with the best English, and was forced down at Whitehorse, I think, don't remember if that was something to do with 9/11 when flights to the US were grounded, or not, but I am almost 100% sure it was KE before.
It was on 9/11, and it sqwaked for hijacking as i recall as well.
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
tempest1944 From Canada, joined Jun 2007, 13 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 11 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 12597 times:
The KE 777 is still here, though is ready to leave. It should be off the ground fairly soon. Its a pretty big event, here...not very often that anything bigger than a 737-8 or C-17 lands here.
I have often wondered why we don't have a couple CF-18s permanently based here...this shows why we should. Having USAF F-15s escort the plane here is amusing; seeing as if we did have CF-18s here, they could've done it.
Proud to be an AVN Flight tech with 407 (LRP) Sqn, RCAF. I looove the Aurora/Orion.
SonomaFlyer From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1516 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 11 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 11964 times:
Quoting aviationbuff08 (Reply 5): Not to mention that a 777 with fuel for a TPAC flight would have the range for any city on the Western Coast of the US.
It would've had fuel for at least 10 hours of flying which would put all of North America, Western Europe and parts of S. America within its range. Ofc NORAD would've shot it down if the pilot didn't do exactly as instructed given the threat posed.
boeingfixer From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 522 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 11 months 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 11944 times:
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 13): This is not the first KE jet enroute to the US had been escorted down by military jets.
This flight was not enroute to the US. It departed YVR to ICN. The only reason that the USAF intercepted the flight was that NORAD controls the airspace and the Alert F-15's at PDX were the closest asset available for the mission.
This speaks volumes about the lack of our own assets to protect our airspace. Back in the days of the CF-101 we at least had an interceptor asset available on both coasts. This won't get any better when the CF-18 is replaced by the meager number of F-35's we're buying.