Part of the opsec(operational security) would be 100% radio silence.
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Capricorn One
ringfire211 — 15 years ago(January 23, 2011 02:47 PM)
Part of the opsec(operational security) would be 100% radio silence.
Then how do you explain Hal Holbrook making direct calls to the helicopter pilots? Isn't that a bit risky? I mean if we're going by the logic that there is to be 100% radio silence. And it's not like Holbrook and the copter pilots were talking in code or something.
Connery, Moore, and Brosnan! Accept NO substitutes! -
DKNYluvr — 14 years ago(September 03, 2011 09:05 PM)
If I remember those scenes it was unclear that he was communicating directly with the pilots. He was probably communicating with their superior. Even with radio silence they could arrange some sort of signal to acknowledge the neutralization of the targets.
-
bauereileen01 — 13 years ago(July 13, 2012 01:50 PM)
Evil government helicopters flying in formation need to turn and face each other in order to communicate. <
If they're on a top secret or beyond mission. see my earlier post intangible103
A frequency can be chosen and a transmitter power level can be set such that there's a miniscule chance of being heard.
I don't know if that era's radios could be encrypted, but if so that'd be another thing to do to hide the purpose of the helicopters.
besides, helicopter pilots need both hands to fly - using the pitch and collective.
If all attempts to hide radio transmissions fail, it could be said that the helicopters were engaged in a jet pilot rescue simulation. -
sanookdee — 14 years ago(September 30, 2011 12:31 AM)
it takes less than 5 minutes to make a Mustang constantly accelerate, disable the transmission linkage (so it fails only after being put into D), disable the ignition (after it's turned on), disable the brakes and the emergency brakes.
after crashing a plane, hiking through the desert and flying while holding on to the wing of a biplane, before going to your own funeral, you have time to stop and wash and blow dry your hair. but not enough time to change clothes. -
subcarrier — 13 years ago(April 29, 2012 05:21 PM)
"bosley from charlie's angels has a secret life running a newspaper, and is a bit of a prick"
I agree that he was a prick (and I know I'm nitpicking here, BOOCAKE4U) but he was a television newsroom assignment editor. Caulfield was a TV reporter.
And you wanna know the worst part? You're from outta state! -
mcgill-646-33556 — 11 years ago(April 13, 2014 04:29 AM)
"bosley from charlie's angels has a secret life running a newspaper, and is a bit of a prick"
I think he had just the right amount of cynicism for a reporter/television newsroom guy. You gotta keep your reporter/television guys on a tight leash.
Oh, somebody give me a number. If you're a reporter (of any kind) you need to be able to quote old movie references. -
ProudTraitor — 14 years ago(February 12, 2012 05:03 AM)
"22. An escaped astronaut who is being hunted by killers will have an operator call his home instead of the police or the media"
If you were the police or New York Times, would you believe an anonymous voice on the phone telling you he is a dead astronaut and the government faked the Mars landings?
"19. When uncovering a conspiracy, don't bother to take pictures of the scene. Just take something from the site that may or may not have any significance."
Yeah, especially since he had a mini digital camera in his pocket in 1977 -
avortac — 14 years ago(February 14, 2012 12:37 PM)
"Yeah, especially since he had a mini digital camera in his pocket in 1977 "
Because reporters don't ever have cameras or any contact with people with cameras in 1977 whatsoever, so he would HAVE to have his own "mini DIGITAL camera" (don't you mean "digital mini-camera"?) to be able to take any pictures of anything, ever. It always has to be mini, and it always has to be digital. -
cormac_zoso — 12 years ago(July 08, 2013 08:14 AM)
*** "Yeah, especially since he had a mini digital camera in his pocket in 1977 "
Because reporters don't ever have cameras or any contact with people with cameras in 1977 whatsoever, so he would HAVE to have his own "mini DIGITAL camera" (don't you mean "digital mini-camera"?) to be able to take any pictures of anything, ever. It always has to be mini, and it always has to be digital. ***
Exactly, good point avortac i worked in newspapers as a reporter for 15 years thru the 80s and 90s and even then you didn't have contact with the photgraphers really at all unless you sent down a request for some type of particular photo (such as a gov't building or perhaps a more 'formal' sitting photo of a person for a profile, etc) but it was only on paper if you wanted to see the photos you had to go to the backshop where they laid out the physical newspaper pages (before computers) tho you would more than likely be there (in the case of a morning newspaper) late at night since the layout and printing was done for the daily paper sections after normal office hours (but with a midnight deadline or whatever, you might be there writing the story anyway)
sorry that got a little long and involved lol
but one more point is that a newspaper reporter COULDN'T take a photo to be used in the newspaper because he wasn't in the photographers guild, he would have been in the reporters guild (a union) especially back in the mid-70s it was a violation of union rules so there was absolutely no reason to carry a camera, any kind of camera, because any photos a reporter took would never be used in the published paper and if I'm not mistaken, a reporter couldn't even belong to the photo guild; it was one or the other (this all certainly has changed as evidenced in the Chicago Sun Times recent "release" of their entire photography staff)
and one final point, you'd have to get the film developed if you could do that yourself, you'd still have to get to a darkroom to do it (and if you had a darkroom in your home you couldn't go there with bad guys chasing you) it's not like you could show it to people in the LCD screen and if you can't develop photos, which is more likely esp at this time, you'd have to find someone else do it which is going to involve finding someone you can trust and a good amount of time and again, a TV reporter certainly wouldn't bother having a photo camera; he'd get a camera crew for anything like that -
mikekrit62 — 10 years ago(May 16, 2015 01:09 PM)
and one final point, you'd have to get the film developed if you could do that yourself, you'd still have to get to a darkroom to do it (and if you had a darkroom in your home you couldn't go there with bad guys chasing you) it's not like you could show it to people in the LCD screen
Inexpensive, instant-film Polaroid cameras were widely available and owned by millions of Americans since the 1960's.
And if you were a lone-wolf reporter trying to gather evidence of a massive conspiracy, would you deliberately NOT take along a camera because you're concerned about union rules?
Just saying -
avortac — 14 years ago(February 14, 2012 12:52 PM)
=== The same people who can easily..
- arrange a 70's car to work perfectly at first, and then suddenly, after some driving is done with it, stop ignition from working, stop gears from working, stop breaks and handbreak from working and accelerate constantly (and accomplish this in just a few minutes)
- afterwards fake a police report about the car (or fix the car underwater before anyone from the police sees it)
- make a man in a crowded bar disappear in 10 seconds, in such a way that it doesn't arouse ANY suspicion, without ANYONE seeing him (or what happened to him)- (IMMEDIATELY after he has spilled his guts about his suspicions) while also 'erasing' him from all records, putting some actor-woman into his apartment with different furniture, a LARGE bunch of magazines with her name and address on each and every one, and with no one ever wondering at his workplace or friend circles, "what happened to him?", or no neighbourgs ever wondering "who the heck is that woman, and where is the man who used to live here"
=== ..cannot arrange any kind of security around the three most valuable key people in the multi-billion dollar scam, except an easy-to-take-off-its-hinges type door and slightly low fuel amount in a jet airplane, that's conveniently located right outside where the key people are held prisoner, or hire a competent hitman to kill a nosy reporter, let alone being able to make the reporter disappear even when he's alone
(sorry for making it a tad long, but I haven't learned yet how to write something in a conscise manner - I also didn't use numbers, because I don't like numbering things - it's too limiting, it's more fun to let things be free - and also, I wouldn't have an clue on how to number my post properly)