Bush Criticised For Duping Air Traffic Control

Independent (UK) ^ | 12-13-2003 | Andrew Buncombe

[blam]

Bush criticised for duping air traffic control

By Andrew Buncombe in Washington
13 December 2003

President Bush's secret Thanksgiving Day trip to Baghdad has been criticised by the British air traffic controllers' union for threatening the safety of other travellers and exposing a weakness in the system that could be exploited by terrorists.

David Luxton, the national secretary of Prospect, said that Mr Bush's surprise holiday flight to visit American troops serving in Iraq, during which his Boeing 747 was falsely identified to air traffic control as a Gulfstream 5 jet for security reasons, broke international regulations.

"The overriding concern is if the President's men could dupe the air traffic control, what's to stop a highly organised terrorist group from duping air traffic control?" he told The Washington Post.

Mr Bush's trip, designed to boost the morale of troops as well as his own ratings, has been a source of controversy ever since a White House spokesman claimed that the President's pilot identified himself to a passing British Airways pilot as flying a Gulfstream not a 747. British Airways has since denied there was any such conversation.

Mr Luxton said the journey was in breach of regulations against filing false flight plans set by the International Civil Aviation Organisation, which apply to military plans using civilian airspace. He said that by identifying itself as a Gulfstream it endangered itself and other air traffic.

A Gulfstream is much nimbler than a 747 and can climb and manoeuvre away from a potential collision - something the air traffic controllers would have assumed of the President's plane even though it was not capable of such moves.

In addition, the "wake vortex" of a 747 is much larger than that of a Gulfstream and could have endangered smaller planes that might have been told by unsuspecting controllers to fly behind it.

[reformedliberal]

Trust me: to this very minute that has neither been forgotten nor forgiven nor limited in blame to Reagan by the unionized left.

[bosshog]

Whhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

[tsmith130]

SOMEBODY CALL THE WHAAAAAAAAMMMBULANCE!!!!

[Billthedrill]

Wow - two clunkers from Buncombe in as many days. He's shooting for the Jason Blair medal here...

[Gritty]

If I am not mistaken, AF-1 and other military traffic fly at assigned altitudes totally separated from commercial and charter traffic.

They fly at the same altitudes as commercials and charters.

A 747 would be considered a "Heavy", and given increased lateral separation. However, at high altitudes the risk is very slight as traffic separation is usually more than adequate. Where the problem comes in is when the aircraft descends to a lower altitude and is in the traffic pattern. However, AF1 was only in the Baghdad pattern and so that was not problem, especially to the Brits.

On the other hand, Air Traffic Control communication is in the "clear" and easily monitored by whoever wants to. As this was a highly classified mission, it was imperative the Call Signs be changed - and probably cruising airspeeds and altitudes as well - to simulate a Gulfstream. This sort of thing is planned and done all the time in the "real world" of military deception.

The Brits are in a snit because they weren't let in on the secret. It was better to leave them in the dark rather than compromise the Mission. If "AF1" had been enroute to Iraq, word would have gotten out many hours before it got there and the mission aborted, or the mission possibly threatened. These days, AF1 may be the most lucrative terroist target in the world. It is quite possible for this information to get to the likes of Al Qaeda in real time and they could have passed the word to the Iraqis. It is also probably unknown who are Al Qaeda agents within the various world Air Traffic Control systems. But rest assured, they get some intelligence from them.

Scr*w these whiners.

[the Real fifi]

Ley's give the authors a free ride into Baghdad airport on a clear day in a plan marked Air Force One--Please.

[gatorbait]

been criticised by the British air traffic controllers' union for threatening the safety of other travellers and exposing a weakness in the system that could be exploited by terrorists.

Brit controllers must be rank amateurs. We handle this kind of thing daily.

[the Real fifi]

plan should be plane...

[HoustonCurmudgeon]

"The overriding concern is if the President's men could dupe the air traffic control, what's to stop a highly organised terrorist group from duping air traffic control?" he told The Washington Post.

So if he hadn't done it the terrorist couldn't?

[okie01]

Thanks for the clarification.

Real knowledge is always appreciated. And it is more in supply at FR than at any newspaper.

[M Kehoe]

...and exposing a weakness in the system that could be exploited by terrorists.

If any of this is true, then the union should be happy. Why? Now the British aviation authority can fix the weakness. Make it safer for everyone.

5.56mm

[Damagro]

"n addition, the "wake vortex" of a 747 is much larger than that of a Gulfstream and could have endangered smaller planes that might have been told by unsuspecting controllers to fly behind it."

---

It's not like they were lying to a Cessna landing behind them. This is pretty much what you'd expect from union drones anywhere

[bootless]

Aviation ping!

[Not A Snowbird]

Did they ever identify their plane as a Gulfstream to ATC personnel? Or just the allegedly inquisitive British pilot?

[lawdude]

Bush is being criticized for everything he does. Problem is, only about 1 of 1000 is substantive or relevant. He should issus a big "FO" to his detractors since he will never placate them.

[Jeff Gordon]

Did they ever identify their plane as a Gulfstream to ATC personnel?

The late ChiefKujo claims that Bush landed at BIAP in a Gulf 5.

[Tree of Liberty]

President Bush's secret Thanksgiving Day trip to Baghdad has been criticised by the British air traffic controllers' union for threatening the safety of other travellers and exposing a weakness in the system that could be exploited by terrorists.

Security through obscurity DOES NOT WORK. If you find a problem, solve it. Don't cover it up hoping no one will find it, because someone always will.

[Verginius Rufus]

It was his father, the first President Bush, who announced that he didn't like broccoli. I don't know if the present President Bush's attitude towards broccoli has ever been reported. Inquiring minds want to know!

[Looking for Diogenes]

Bush is the President of the most powerful country in the history of the planet. He can do what he damn well pleases,

Yeah, that's what Clinton thought too. Presidents are not above the law.

(That said, I don't know that any real law was broken here.)

[JETDRVR]

"A Gulfstream is much nimbler than a 747 and can climb and manoeuvre away from a potential collision - something the air traffic controllers would have assumed of the President's plane even though it was not capable of such moves".

"In addition, the "wake vortex" of a 747 is much larger than that of a Gulfstream and could have endangered smaller planes that might have been told by unsuspecting controllers to fly behind it".


Puuuuuuuuuuulllllleeeezeeeeeee now Ive seen it all! First, when the BA crew passed AF1 they were (presumably) feet wet in the OTS North Atlantic track system. Any aircraft ( even AF1)Flying in the OTS is issued a clearence that is very specific as to A. Routing B. Altitiude C. Mach number to be flown. The controlling ATC is Gander NFLD , with a changeover mid point to Shanwick IRLND. There was absolutly not even a remote chance of "wake turbulance" or "potential collision" That is HorseS%*t.Secondly if AF1 was indeed the Boeing they would have been cruising at an altitude of mid to high 30K's. Gulfstreams (GVs) initial cruise is well above FL400.Those Limey wheaners should stfu about the fact they filed a different callsign WHO CARES:) Trust me on a good day over the tracks, HF radio reception is so bad you cant even get a position report in irregardless of type.
About the only thing the mediots got right was the Gulfstream being nimbler then a 747.





Heres to ya Limey whiiners STFU :)