F-18 crashes in San Diego
Discussion
JonRB said:
The pilot banged out and let the plane go down in a residential area?
I hope he can live with himself.
Edit: But at least nobody died. So that's probably easier to live with.
Whoa according to the FAA he/she was coming in to land so maybe he/she had no choice but to "let the plane go down in a residential area". Maybe you should go ask the pilot once he/she's unstrapped the parachute and remembered what year we're all in.I hope he can live with himself.
Edit: But at least nobody died. So that's probably easier to live with.
Edited by JonRB on Monday 8th December 21:16
JonRB said:
The pilot banged out and let the plane go down in a residential area?
I hope he can live with himself.
I don't think that would have been intentional...I hope he can live with himself.
No idea on the circumstances, but first thoughts would be the pilot has put the aircraft into a situation it shouldn't have been in...
Very interested to see what the FAA's findings are.
RDE said:
Fly jets long enough, something like this happens.

How did I know I was going to read that when I opened the thread!

I'll drop you a text later mate (just about to crash) you about tomorrow?
john_p said:
Famous Graham said:
Anyone know which neighbourhood?
From another forum -"the 4500 block of Higgins Ave in University City"
\/\/\/ also who knows how much control he had over the aircraft, it may have been totally uncontrollable
Edited by john_p on Monday 8th December 21:21
SamHH said:
If the plane you are flying is going to crash, why allow yourself to be killed when it's so easy to avoid?
To save the lives of the people you're paid to protect in the event of a war, perhaps? There are plenty of reports of pilots deliberately and nobly staying with the plane to minimise loss of life below, by aiming for open ground, even if it be only a park or playing field, at the cost of their own life.
I'm just saying that if a pilot is willing to sacrifice their life for their country in a theatre of war, the same applies in peacetime too, especially when your own citizens are below you and you are looking likely to kill a number of them.
But, no, you're right. Obviously banging out is the right thing to do and let your plane potentially crash into a packed school.

Edited by JonRB on Monday 8th December 21:35
JonRB said:
To save the lives of the people you're paid to protect in the event of a war, perhaps?
There are plenty of reports of pilots deliberately and nobly staying with the plane to minimise loss of life below, by aiming for open ground, even if it be only a park or playing field, at the cost of their own life.
I'm just saying that if a pilot is willing to sacrifice their life for their country in a theatre of war, the same applies in peacetime too, especially when your own citizens are below you and you are looking likely to kill a number of them.
But, no, you're right. Obviously banging out is the right thing to and let your plane potentially crash into a packed school.
It seems that you are assuming that if the pilot had stayed in the plane he would have been able to cause it to crash in a safer place. How do you know that is the case? How do you know that he didn't stay in the plane until the last possible moment and that he didn't direct plane to the safest possible place? BTW, there is no need for the sarcasm; I am not being impolite to you.There are plenty of reports of pilots deliberately and nobly staying with the plane to minimise loss of life below, by aiming for open ground, even if it be only a park or playing field, at the cost of their own life.
I'm just saying that if a pilot is willing to sacrifice their life for their country in a theatre of war, the same applies in peacetime too, especially when your own citizens are below you and you are looking likely to kill a number of them.
But, no, you're right. Obviously banging out is the right thing to and let your plane potentially crash into a packed school.

Edited by SamHH on Monday 8th December 21:38
JonRB said:
There are plenty of reports of pilots deliberately and nobly staying with the plane to minimise loss of life below, by aiming for open ground, even if it be only a park or playing field, at the cost of their own life.
...and most of them are bulls
JonRB said:
SamHH said:
If the plane you are flying is going to crash, why allow yourself to be killed when it's so easy to avoid?
To save the lives of the people you're paid to protect in the event of a war, perhaps? There are plenty of reports of pilots deliberately and nobly staying with the plane to minimise loss of life below, by aiming for open ground, even if it be only a park or playing field, at the cost of their own life.
I'm just saying that if a pilot is willing to sacrifice their life for their country in a theatre of war, the same applies in peacetime too, especially when your own citizens are below you and you are looking likely to kill a number of them.
But, no, you're right. Obviously banging out is the right thing to and let your plane potentially crash into a packed school.

Edited by JonRB on Monday 8th December 21:29
Do you not think that perhaps the plane was going to crash where it was going to crash and there wasn't a thing the pilot could have done about it?
SamHH said:
It seems that you are assuming that if the pilot had stayed in the plane he would have been able to cause it to crash in a safer place. How do you know that is the case? How do you know that he didn't stay in the plane until the last possible moment and that he didn't direct plane to the safest possible place? BTW, there is no need for the sarcasm.
No, you're quite right of course. And that's a fair point to make. I'm sure he did do the best job he could. JonRB said:
SamHH said:
If the plane you are flying is going to crash, why allow yourself to be killed when it's so easy to avoid?
To save the lives of the people you're paid to protect in the event of a war, perhaps? There are plenty of reports of pilots deliberately and nobly staying with the plane to minimise loss of life below, by aiming for open ground, even if it be only a park or playing field, at the cost of their own life.
I'm just saying that if a pilot is willing to sacrifice their life for their country in a theatre of war, the same applies in peacetime too, especially when your own citizens are below you and you are looking likely to kill a number of them.
But, no, you're right. Obviously banging out is the right thing to do and let your plane potentially crash into a packed school.

All very noble going down with the plane, but why bother if its just an unguided missile? As for the taxpayer - doesn't make sense to lose a highly trained (read expensive) pilot for no reason.
youngsyr said:
JonRB said:
SamHH said:
If the plane you are flying is going to crash, why allow yourself to be killed when it's so easy to avoid?
To save the lives of the people you're paid to protect in the event of a war, perhaps? There are plenty of reports of pilots deliberately and nobly staying with the plane to minimise loss of life below, by aiming for open ground, even if it be only a park or playing field, at the cost of their own life.
I'm just saying that if a pilot is willing to sacrifice their life for their country in a theatre of war, the same applies in peacetime too, especially when your own citizens are below you and you are looking likely to kill a number of them.
But, no, you're right. Obviously banging out is the right thing to and let your plane potentially crash into a packed school.

Edited by JonRB on Monday 8th December 21:29
Do you not think that perhaps the plane was going to crash where it was going to crash and there wasn't a thing the pilot could have done about it?
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff