Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

thenational.scot

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 244 posts

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#211

Post by slr555 »

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #193
slr555 wrote: post #184

The range of a Gulfstream V is about 6500 miles. Given that fact the jet could have easily flown without entering UK airspace at all. The Gulfstream V also has an initial cruising altitude of 41,000 feet with a max of 51,000 feet. 45,000 feet may be high for a commercial jet but the G5 cruises comfortably at that altitude. Given these facts I am not sure why the CIA would create the exposure flying over the UK would…

There's safety restrictions for flight paths - in case of sudden engine failure, you want the plane to be able to glide to an airfield or other inhabited areas that you can get rescued from. I'm also not familiar enough with air-traffic control rules in the area to be sure, but it looks like you'd have to either pass through Icelandic or Scottish airspace to get to Scandinavia.

That makes sense but there are so many transpacific routes that spend huge stretches of time over open water that I am not sure it is even feasible for all commercial flights. CIA SAD/SOG operations likely have a much broader risk envelope.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#212

Post by gech »

tptacek wrote: post #140
jonlucc wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly positive though? I wondered if you meant that you were being bashed for being related.

No, it was a warm retweet. I do a lot of crypto work.

On which side? I think I can guess

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#213

Post by caskance »

mcculley wrote: post #33
vlunkr wrote: post #10

I really hope they pardon him eventually. I could be wrong, but don't most americans support what he did? EDIT: you are probably all correct, plenty of people don't understand/care who he is or what he stands for. I still wish the government would recognize that the NSA is acting unconstitutionally and he called them out on it.

Most Americans don't understand what he did, in my experience. That is, I'm an American and I work with technology and from conversations with fellow Americans who don't work with technology, they have formed an impression based on media sound bites.

In my experience, the people who work with technology do the same, just with different sound bites.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#214

Post by bobinator606 »

niccaluim wrote: post #114
raverbashing wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are right However I'm also 100% sure this is not a VFR flight.

I wouldn't be so sure. Not a lot of weather at FL450, and in the UK that's Class C airspace, not Class A like it is in the States.

Even in Class C in UK airspace, you need a clearance.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#215

Post by caskance »

ceejayoz wrote: post #134
strictnein wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Russia wouldn't dare go after the materials if they weren't physically in Russia, right? The SVR operates outside of Russia, which is why I mentioned them. You really believe they weren't on him right away in Hong Kong, and they haven't gone after whatever materials he passed on to journalists? Come on.

Let's take that a step further, though. The scaremongering over Snowden somehow giving Russia/China these documents is absurd for precisely the reason you cite - their intelligence agencies operate all over the world. Does anyone genuinely believe that with security so lax at NSA etc. to allow a Snowden-style leak that Russia/China haven't had spies with similar access levels in place for years now?

Even if they had similar access, a leak is still dangerous because it allows them to behave as if they have the information without divulging as much about their own capabilities.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#216

Post by bobinator606 »

wavefunction wrote: post #28
doe88 wrote: post #5

Not going to be scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker. -- Obama 6/27/13 http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/27/19166043-obama... He's true though, it wasn't jets.

Well, it's likely it was a jet airplane as the altitude of the flight was 45,000. I suppose in this usage it was implied to be fighter-jets.

the jet in question is a Gulfstream G-V. Its a very fancy passenger, long-range passenger jet

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#217

Post by bobinator606 »

ThrustVectoring wrote: post #193
slr555 wrote: post #184

The range of a Gulfstream V is about 6500 miles. Given that fact the jet could have easily flown without entering UK airspace at all. The Gulfstream V also has an initial cruising altitude of 41,000 feet with a max of 51,000 feet. 45,000 feet may be high for a commercial jet but the G5 cruises comfortably at that altitude. Given these facts I am not sure why the CIA would create the exposure flying over the UK would…

There's safety restrictions for flight paths - in case of sudden engine failure, you want the plane to be able to glide to an airfield or other inhabited areas that you can get rescued from. I'm also not familiar enough with air-traffic control rules in the area to be sure, but it looks like you'd have to either pass through Icelandic or Scottish airspace to get to Scandinavia.

the G-V is certified for ETOPS -- extended twin-engine overwater operations. Second, there's no "gliding" involved. ETOPS flight plans are designed for single engine operation. That floating seat cushion is for when both engines fail.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#218

Post by ThrustVectoring »

slr555 wrote: post #211
ThrustVectoring wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's safety restrictions for flight paths - in case of sudden engine failure, you want the plane to be able to glide to an airfield or other inhabited areas that you can get rescued from. I'm also not familiar enough with air-traffic control rules in the area to be sure, but it looks like you'd have to either pass through Icelandic or Scottish airspace to get to Scandinavia.

That makes sense but there are so many transpacific routes that spend huge stretches of time over open water that I am not sure it is even feasible for all commercial flights. CIA SAD/SOG operations likely have a much broader risk envelope.

Further brief research suggests it's "flight time with one failed engine" that's a constraint, somewhere between 60 and 180 minutes, depending on how the plane is certified. The Gulfstream 5 is a twin-engine aircraft, which makes it more awkward for crossing large bodies of water. For long-distance flights, you're more likely to be on a four-engine plane, which has more lenient safety margins in case of engine failure.

That said, the Pacific has a good chunk of diversion airports available as well.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#219

Post by woah »

oceanstone wrote: post #154
grandalf wrote: post #120

If it weren't for the mistreatment of Bradley Manning, I'd consider US Government attempts to capture Snowden somewhat reasonable. If (in hindsight) there had been any high level response acknowledging the inappropriateness of any of the revealed programs, and attempting to fix or impose accountability measures on covert programs, I'd feel reassured that the bad behavior evidenced by the leaked information was an ano…

> A principled president would have owned up to the misconduct and taken steps to regain the public trust. A principled president would be ashamed of the chilling effect on journalists. There were only two Senators who voted against the "Freedom" Act [1] and also supported defensible net neutrality [2]. One of them is now a presidential candidate. Last May, they wrote: "I voted against the Patriot Act every time, and…

Regardless of your feelings on net neutrality, it is a completely different topic and the fact that you bring it up is strange.

Re: Secret US flight flew over Scottish airspace to capture Snowden

#220

Post by rconti »

oceanstone wrote: post #154
grandalf wrote: post #120

If it weren't for the mistreatment of Bradley Manning, I'd consider US Government attempts to capture Snowden somewhat reasonable. If (in hindsight) there had been any high level response acknowledging the inappropriateness of any of the revealed programs, and attempting to fix or impose accountability measures on covert programs, I'd feel reassured that the bad behavior evidenced by the leaked information was an ano…

> A principled president would have owned up to the misconduct and taken steps to regain the public trust. A principled president would be ashamed of the chilling effect on journalists. There were only two Senators who voted against the "Freedom" Act [1] and also supported defensible net neutrality [2]. One of them is now a presidential candidate. Last May, they wrote: "I voted against the Patriot Act every time, and…

I assume you mean Rand Paul; he has suspended his campaign for President.
Post reply on HN