I am only a casual military buff, and my interest is largely in military aircraft. When it comes to dropping serious military science, my neighbour Chris Taylor is the the go-to guy, and his blog, Taylor & Company, is chock full of good bits about the topic. His most recent blog post may have the best title about the recent Air Force One incident: A 380,000 pound, 4-engine airliner will be zipping around the Statue of Liberty at 1500 feet, but you have to keep it a secret.
Damn, that’s funny.
Chris also left a great comment to my earlier post about the incident. I thought it was worthy of elevating to a full-on article, so I’ve included it below:
The White House, FAA and Air Force need to be a little more forthcoming.
First of all the FAA didn’t issue a NOTAM for ZNY ARTCC, which would have told any interested civil pilots., whose route might take them nearby, that a 747 variant would be zooming around the Statue of Liberty at 1500 feet. Sometimes presidential flights have their NOTAMs released at the last minute (or in secret cases, not at all). A picture shoot should not rate the same level of secrecy as an actual president-is-aboard flight.
Second, F-16s as a still camera platform? It’s doable, but not when you are trying to maintain formation with a manoeuvring flight lead. The F-16 is a single-seater, after all. They would have to have specifically sent up a two-seat trainer, which would put the combat cameraman in the back.
Which leads to the third problem. Most of the footage we have seen involves the F-16 flying echelon right (or in trail), with the VC-25 as lead. That means most of your pics are going to be from three-quarters behind, which don’t make for the best airplane glamour shots. Especially when your camera guy is in the back and most of his forward perspective is obscured by the guy flying the fighter. Typically you would want a side profile or oblique view from the front (compare existing VC-25 shots here). The F-16 should have been out in front (leading the VC-25) most of the time, or his shots are going to suck.
When civilians do this stuff, say for airline commercials (where you see the 747 roll into a hard turn, and peel off to the left like a fighter jet) they hire a larger, more stable—but still very nimble—camera platform, like a Gulfstream business jet, have it fly in formation with the airliner—typically ahead of it—run through it a half-dozen times, taking the shots they need, and then go home. A NOTAM would be published, that part of the airspace would get closed for a specified period of time, ATC would keep other air traffic well away from it.
Now, since the Statue of Liberty is already part of an existing TFR area, the airspace is already closed. But publishing an additional NOTAM, plus allowing the local authorities (who did know, but were instructed not to publicise it) to get the word out, could have avoided this whole mess.
As for the other points… there’s no doubt good and entirely ordinary explanations for them, but keeping it all under wraps makes the whole thing look much worse than it actually was.
After reading it, I began to wonder why they didn’t do the opposite of keeping it a secret: why not make a big announcement about it and treat it as a mini-air show?
If the response to the air show we have at the Canadian National Exhibition here in Toronto is any indication, it would be a big hit. People, especially in the States, love air shows. If it were me, I’d see if I could get a team like the Blue Angels (they’re Navy – who’s the Air Force equivalent?) to fly in formation behind the big bird.
In fact, a pre-announced Air Force One air show might even garner an extra PR boost from the additional “viral marketing” that would come from people posting their Air Force One photos taken from New York’s many good vantage points on their Facebooks and on Flickr. It’s the sort of social media thing for which the Air Force has shown a considerable amount of savvy.
Here’s a collection of interesting memes, pictures, an cartoons floating around the internet that I…
Tap to see the source. This is yesterday’s daily New Yorker cartoon, created by Brendan…
C’mon, let it not be Asians this time. Last time was pretty bad. Here’s the…
Jon Stewart’s right, and we’ve been here before. Where we are now, I’ve been before…
Poppies thrive in overturned soil, which is why they bloom in battlefields. I’m in the…
In times of high dudgeon, there’s a tendency to throw integrity out the window. One…
View Comments
Thanks for the link, and the reprint.
There was a similar photo op in Washington a few years ago, involving much smaller craft (I believe it was a VC-20), but it was also flying inside the Washington TFR with a couple escorts. The difference is that it was well-publicised in the press beforehand and no one freaked out.
If I were a conspiracy theorist, I would say that it sounds like somebody (not Obama, maybe a junior relative of a Cabinet secretary) were aboard, necessitating the elevated security. They just took the "photo opportunity" as a chance for to ride-along on a regular VC-25 + escort training mission. A convenient sightseeing trip.
But the simplest explanation is that no one in the White House, FAA and Air Force realised that New York City would lose its mind over something like that. There are probably a lot of NYC dwellers who are walking wounded, having a sort of PTSD where planes being in unusual places at unusual times = TERROR FROM THE SKIES! And I kind of understand that.
About eleven years ago my former house got broken into (while I was asleep upstairs), and lemme tell you, nothing makes an impression on you like waking up to find burly guys tearing your room apart, not realising that you are still there. For a long time afterward, every little sound in the wee hours of the night was a harbinger of burglary. I don't worry about it now, but I know it can take a while to come off that level of anxiety.
I understand they have cancelled a similar VC-25 flight around Washington, which is too bad. It's not the plane which is the scary factor, it's not having any prior information about what it's doing and why.
The Air Force equivalent of the Blue Angels are the Thunderbirds. They fly F-16s.
(they’re Navy – who’s the Air Force equivalent?)
That would be the Thunderbirds.
The Air Force acrobatic flying team is the "Thunderbirds".
And if you were to announce that President would not be on board, as he apparently wasn't for the recent flyby, you'd have a whole lot fewer worries about security, wouldn't you? What idiot is going to try and shoot down that plane when the President's not on board?
I keep finding new reasons to slap my forehead over this idiocy. Forget "Planegate", let's call this "Air Farce One".
Hollywood Payback?
"Just One Minute" blog commentator "Mustang0302" connects some dots:
(1) an Alabama Air National Guard "Red Tail" F-16 was an escort
(2) the Tuskegee Airmen were known as the "Red Tail Angels"
(3) the "Red Tails" Hollywood film about the Tuskegee Airmen is due out this summer
"Mustang0302" speculates this was a Hollywood inspired photo-shoot, with living descendants of the Tuskegee Airmen onboard AF1, escorted by the Air Force's organizational descendants of the Tuskegee Airmen, flying over NYC (where that yicky inconvenient 9/11 Islamo-Fascist homophobic thingy happened) to gather powerful, beautiful imagery of these aircraft to be played during closing credits, accompanied by a stirring soundtrack.
"I’d see if I could get a team like the Blue Angels (they’re Navy – who’s the Air Force equivalent?)"
I believe you're thinking of the Thunderbirds.
The current descendant organization of the Tuskegee Airmen is in Iraq (it's the Expeditionary Wing with responsibility for most of the Air Force personnel stationed there). They have a variety of aircraft types and are not painted up as "Red Tails".
From what I could tell of the LiveATC audio, the VC-25 (Venus 1 Heavy) identified that its F-16 escort would remain with it in the Liberty TFR and then revert to its own flight plan and callsign (Capital 92). Capital is the "house" callsign of 113th Fighter Wing (DC ANG), out of Andrews AFB. They do fly the F-16, but don't typically sport an all-red tail. My guess is that that particular bird was their air demo bird, kitted up to look pretty for the summer air show circuit.
There are 2-seat F16 variants: The F-16B and -D.
The USAF Aerial Demonstration Team (The Thunderbirds) flies the 2 seat models, so they can give rides to the media. The 2-seat model is also used for flight training. It doesn't surprise me that the Capital ANG wing has the 2-seat models (at least in part), so that they can give rides to the hill people.