Air Force 1 scares the cr*p out of New Yorkers in low flying publicity stunt..

Run_to_da_hills

A Presidential 747 and two military planes circled the Statue of Liberty and flew close to the World Trade Centre site, causing panic among residents.

Residents and office workers evacuated buildings and ran on to the streets, fearing a repeat of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, in which two hijacked airliners smashed into the Twin Towers, killing almost 3,000 people.

The flight turned out to be a photo opportunity involving one of Barack Obama’s official presidential airplanes, one of a series organised to get pictures of the aircraft in front of national landmarks.

The flight – carried out with little warning by the US Defence Department – was branded insensitive by Michael Bloomberg, the Mayor of New York. President Obama, who was not on the plane at the time, was reportedly furious when told of the flight by White House staff.

Very insensitive and should have been publicly announced well ahead of time.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6182950.ece

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/28/nyregion/28plane.html?em

enda1

Its not Air Force 1 unless the presedent is onboard.

Fratton Fred

Photoshop FTW:rolleyes:

Not only was it insensitive, it must have cost the US tax payer a firtune.

Nforce

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KugYMO0A2f0

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/8022881.stm


Look at em run.

lynchie

enda1 wrote: »

Its not Air Force 1 unless the presedent is onboard.

Yup, they are usually sam 28000 or sam 29000 when the prez is not onboard

Tenger

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Very insensitive and should have been publicly announced well ahead of time. [/url]

Absolutely shocking that no one thought this may have a negative impact. Mediawise it could have been touted as a opportunity for the US public to see a symbol of their prez around the country.

enda1 wrote: »

Its not Air Force 1 unless the presedent is onboard.

Indeed. It is usually SAM 28000/29000 (Special Air Mission) But most people would still use the term Air Force 1. And the OP used the term 'Presidential 747'

Interesting article in this months Combat Aircraft, its about the proposal for an AirForce1 replacement. The article asks why a replacement is needed,is there a problem that hasn't been made public? Why do they need 3 new ones to replace 2 older VC-25As? It also makes the point that as they are modified B747-200s they are relatively old fashioned by modern standards. The cost of upgrading the entire IT infrastructure may be more than just replacing with a modified B777, B744 or B748. It also mentioned the 3 war readiness aircraft (C20C Gulfstream III) originally designed to be used in the event of an EMP effect following a nuclear detonation. These are fitted with analogue insruments but the USAF officially denys their existence.

Run_to_da_hills

enda1 wrote: »

Its not Air Force 1 unless the presedent is onboard.

Not acccording to theDaily Mail.:p
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1173946/Obamas-fury-Air-Force-One-photocall-sparks-mass-panic-Manhattan.html

lostexpectation

apparetnly bloomberg wasn't told, strange, when do we get to see the pics.

jhegarty

He was told , but not allowed alert the press.

Kevster

...Can't believe they did that. That is - yeh - insensitive. <Mod Snip>

pclancy

Kevster wrote: »

...Can't believe they did that. That is - yeh - insensitive. <Mod Snip>

and so is labelling an entire continent of people as stupid. Thanks for a worthless post.

BrianD

I suppose if they had given advance notice a very opportunistic and ready terrorist may have used the occasion to cover another 9/11 attack. In reality, what is the probability of this happening?

Even if they had of given three hours notice via the media it would have helped.