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

An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years later (2013)

rd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 178 posts

Re: An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years later (2013)

#71

Post by tharkun__ »

ip26 wrote: post #51
JoeyBananas wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What exactly does this incident have to do with counterintelligence? I think you are using that word incorrectly. I also don't understand what those linked incidents have in common. Sure, the US military isn't invulnerable and there is always risk associated with combat.

I think they are saying the US systematically underestimates the enemy's capability so it probably wasn't actually that surprising an F117 was downed.

If the US military and government are anything like American companies, then they're good at marketing. Wait, I think with the military it's called propaganda.

I also grew up thinking a Stealth Fighter could never be shot down. It's invisible. No way.

Re: An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years later (2013)

#72

Post by jasonwatkinspdx »

KMag wrote: post #59
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How else do you release bombs? I believe that even modern stealth aircraft are more vulnerable when releasing missiles or bombs. The thing is if the aircraft gets to the point of releasing bombs or missiles it has pretty much done its job. You won't get that far without being stealthy.

The GP is suggesting the doors should have had zig-zag edges. However, from what I've read, it sounds like radar reflectons from the doors themselves are dwarfed by radar signals bouncing off the upper bulkhead of the bomb bay. If they made the side bulkheads of the bomb bay at 90 degrees to the upper bulkhead, then an incoming radio wave bouncing off both the upper and side bulkheads will leave anti-parallel to its…

The GP is asserting, without any evidence at all, that the designers simply did not think about the radar return from the bomb bay opening. That's a rather absurd position to take, vs the more banal explanation that engineering always involves tradeoffs.

Re: An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years later (2013)

#73

Post by neogodless »

I didn't see it covered in this article and the documentary is unavailable through normal streaming at this time. (Anyone in the U.S. find otherwise?)

But what I was hoping to find out was how the identifies of each party was discovered, presumably by the documentary maker?

Re: An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years later (2013)

#74

Post by sneak »

cheschire wrote: post #25
aerosmile wrote: post #17

There is so much gold in here. The human race would do well to explore how it's possible to turn hatred into love. It clearly happened here, and I've witnessed it on a smaller scale as a 16 year old in Vienna. As an immigrant, it was easy to find yourself in the wrong place at a wrong time. That finally happened one night, and the only thing that saved me was seeing a sign on one of the guys' jackets that belonged to…

I don’t believe war requires hatred, no more than sport. Some people wind up in war through machinations that have nothing to do with even the acknowledgment of the enemy’s existence. Go here, wait there, if your life is in danger, return the danger back at them.

I think the world would be better off if people simply refused the initial "Go here" order from someone who cares nothing for their own life, or the lives of those "there".

War cannot be waged without soldiers, and no one is born a soldier.

This requires the cultural de-glorification of soldering-as-profession. Millions of tax dollars are spent on advertising to ensuring it remains, and many companies are complicit in furthering it (priority boarding, discounts, et c). I shop elsewhere whenever possible.

Re: An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years later (2013)

#75

Post by effie »

kipchak wrote: post #47
effie wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah I get that point of view, "I'm here just following orders, no hard feelings". And that is part of what is weird to me in these stories from wars, that people are so malleable and empty and later talk big about respecting the other side. Well respect them and don't bomb/shoot missiles at them then. Also, the article sounds very artistic and fake, I'm not totally buying it.

Without getting into the politics of it, the purpose of the air strikes according to NATO to "to halt and reverse the humanitarian catastrophe that was then unfolding."[1] - specifically a "ethnic cleansing campaign"[2]. I think it's possible the pilot or others to feel they're there for reasonable reasons, even if they don't hold any particular ill will towards the guy on the other side. [1] https://www.nato.int/cps…

> I think it's possible the pilot or others to feel they're there for reasonable reasons, even if they don't hold any particular ill will towards the guy on the other side.

I agree, it is possible that the man in the article thought that. But I think it more probable that once you choose to work for military as a profession, you are either very misinformed or do not really care about the actual purpose of the bombing.

Re: An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years later (2013)

#76

Post by 7952 »

u678u wrote: post #67
x32n23nr wrote: post #36

Another famous example of how in the darkest hours there's longing for peace and friendship is the Christmas Truce during the first world war [1]. British soldiers heard German troops in the trenches singing carols and patriotic songs. They started shouting messages to each other. The next day, soldiers from both sides met, exchanged gifts, took photographs and played football. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris…

And the next day started shooting at each other again. Humans are truly weird.

Unofficial live and let live systems carried on...

https://www.ias.edu/ideas/2014/chiu-war

Unwillingness to die is really common in war

Re: An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years later (2013)

#77

Post by tobmlt »

aerosmile wrote: post #17

There is so much gold in here. The human race would do well to explore how it's possible to turn hatred into love. It clearly happened here, and I've witnessed it on a smaller scale as a 16 year old in Vienna. As an immigrant, it was easy to find yourself in the wrong place at a wrong time. That finally happened one night, and the only thing that saved me was seeing a sign on one of the guys' jackets that belonged to…

I think we’d have this already/automatically as our interconnectivity has grown.

It’s media and government propaganda stoking fear of the other for their gain which actively thwarts it. — up to the point which it can live organically once again in the greater populace.

But that’s just like, my opinion, man.

Re: An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years later (2013)

#78

Post by TimTheTinker »

aerosmile wrote: post #17

There is so much gold in here. The human race would do well to explore how it's possible to turn hatred into love. It clearly happened here, and I've witnessed it on a smaller scale as a 16 year old in Vienna. As an immigrant, it was easy to find yourself in the wrong place at a wrong time. That finally happened one night, and the only thing that saved me was seeing a sign on one of the guys' jackets that belonged to…

> Rule #1: teams should not be divided on a country by country basis.

I don't think I agree. It's great for individuals and countries to be friendly, but I see two problems with a one-world-government system:

1. It concentrates an extreme quantity of power in the hands of a few people. Power has a potential of corrupting those who hold it, and I believe that potential increases on an exponential (or at least an algebraic) scale, not a linear scale.

2. If an evil personage gains power (think 20th century dictators), a single world country would suffer significantly. But having countries separated provides a limit and a check on the potential fallout of that dictator's actions.

Re: An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years later (2013)

#79

Post by AnimalMuppet »

sneak wrote: post #74
cheschire wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t believe war requires hatred, no more than sport. Some people wind up in war through machinations that have nothing to do with even the acknowledgment of the enemy’s existence. Go here, wait there, if your life is in danger, return the danger back at them.

I think the world would be better off if people simply refused the initial "Go here" order from someone who cares nothing for their own life, or the lives of those "there". War cannot be waged without soldiers, and no one is born a soldier. This requires the cultural de-glorification of soldering-as-profession. Millions of tax dollars are spent on advertising to ensuring it remains, and many companies are complicit i…

First, good commanding officers do care for the lives of their soldiers.

Second, those who don't have soldiers can still die by someone else's soldiers.

Re: An F-117 pilot and the officer who shot him down meet, 15 years later (2013)

#80

Post by effie »

pluto9 wrote: post #55
lostlogin wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are attributing a lot of what goes on to choice - war has a poor track record in this regard and soldiers are often recruited very young and/or conscripted. Even the US recruits soldiers defined by the Convention on the protection of children (below 18). Schools are used for recruiting in many places. This aspect of war is really sad - giving kids and young adults guns and sending them off to shoot people…

I'm talking about the men in this article. Both of them were career military officers. It's fair to say that that was their choice. Certainly there's propaganda that goes into recruiting naive young people in the US, but it's quite a stretch to equate that with child soldiers. I chose to enlist and so did everyone I served with. The vast majority of us do not regret it or feel that we were conned.

Why did you enlist, at what age? In retrospective, do you think it made you stronger/more mature? Or was it a money thing?
Post reply on HN