SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: stockman_scott who wrote (137205)6/21/2004 7:03:15 AM
From: Sig  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Hmmm. Maybe I'll just write something -whatever comes to mind .

So the Airforce could have shot down one of the hijacked airplanes with just a bit more warning.Consider the various consequences and ask who makes the decision.

Hit it with a small missile and it could crash into a building below in the city, killing not only the 200 plus people on board but perhaps another 1000 on the ground.
Just because a preceding airplane hit the WTC does not mean the next airliner is trying the same technique.

But that would have to be assumed. Could you divert the airliner to a rural area by flying in formation or force it to land.?

You could disable the airplane by shooting off the vertical stabilizer with guns. Or you could shoot into a few engines to disable them or shoot them off the aircraft or drop chaff into the intakes to stop them.

An experienced pilot whould then have chance to save the airplane.Is the pilot experienced- we dont know. Would he try the save himself or is he a dedicated Allah seeker?

Let us rerun a 911-like event...
An aircraft loses communication and strays off course.
Cannot tell if it is standard hijacking or a stealing of the airplane or what plans the pilot has.

And here is where a sky-marshall with a cellphone and in direct contact with with Homeland Security can be very useful.

Homeland Security should also be previously informed of all the plans from interception of terrorists threats and must be able to instantly coordinate those threats with
what may actually be occurring.

What if the airliner that goes off course is a British airplane about to land - and we shoot it down?

I have just tossed all these ideas out here to indicate what the responsible people have to consider and the amount of thinking involved to get a proper solution.

And to indicate that instant real time communications and direct chain of command must exist 24/7 because there are only a few minutes to make decisions.

Its going to be a hairy decision because it is most likely that all 200 plus passengers are going to die.

I think we owe a debt to those who have worked hard behind the scenes to prevent another 911 event.

Sig



To: stockman_scott who wrote (137205)6/21/2004 8:03:16 AM
From: exdaytrader76  Respond to of 281500
 
the terrorists will almost certainly try something before the presidential election

yathink? What would be the political impact? Would it end up helping Bush? What if an attack happened close to the election? Bush could declare martial law and postpone the election or cancel it altogether.

democraticunderground.com

These all have only very slim chances of occurring, of course.

And who does al Qaeda prefer to win? Are they voting for Kerry?



To: stockman_scott who wrote (137205)6/21/2004 8:49:06 AM
From: Noel de Leon  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
"Critical Questions about the Air Force and planes on 11 Sep 2001
[This arrived as an email, supposedly from DP, an American military person. Judge for yourself:]
Why Were So Few People on the Flights?

Flight 11 was a Boeing 757/200. This plane holds 239 passengers. There were 81 passengers and 11 crew. The 11 crew members included 2 pilots and 9 flight attendants. Is it normal that this flight would not be at capacity, based on other Flight 11's that leave Boston to LA, at the same time every day. Flights within the Airline industry operate on standardized schedule. They don't make the schedules after the passengers book the flights. The only days that they schedule deviate are Saturdays and Sundays and holidays. So, is it customary that this flight is so underbooked? (About 30% capacity) I flew out west from Florida about three months ago, and every flight I got on was either full or overbooked.

Same question of all the flights. 175 had 54 passengers. The pentagon plane ( 77) had 56 passengers, and the PA flight 38. All less than 25% of capacity. Why? I don't have access to the files of AA or United, but some reporter should be able to find out this information. [Fewer people, easier to control the situation. And the less likely that something could go wrong, maybe? I'm just speculating, of course. I don't know, and I don't have access to AA or United archives and files.]
The Air Force Could Have Averted the Tragedy But Didn't.
Four planes at once with no transponder info on the FAA screens and Air Force screens. All of them just showing up as blips on radar. One plane is in a "NO FLY ZONE";.. within constantly monitored, restricted airspace. A pilot has already remarked that when a plane deviates just a little, that the FAA oversight will call and/or allow for course corrections. But, we are talking about planes that were miles off course. In these instances, the FAA reports it to the Air Force. But also, in these instances, the Air Force has already locked onto these planes, because they monitor the commercial system as well as their own. That's 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, every day of the year. They have to, so that we don't have military and commercial aircraft flying into one another, constantly. In a circumstance like Flight 11, this plane is so far of course it is ridiculous and they are not responding normally to communications. They did a hard bank (90 degrees to the south) somewhere north of Albany, NY. The Air Force is to scramble at least a recon aircraft to monitor. Why no recon, on any of the first three flights?

Let's look at the second plane. It was 18 minutes until it hit the second building. This plane flew over NYC, past the city and went to somewhere around Newark, NJ. At that point it did a 360 degree bank to fly back to NYC. By this time "they" know that this is no accident happening. They know that they have hijacked planes in the air.

An F-15 strike eagle flies at 1850+ nmps. That is Mach 2.5+ A sidewinder with heat seeking infrared guidance, has a range of 18 miles. This aircraft, according to the USAF's own website, goes from "scramble order" to 29000 feet in 2.5 minutes. New York City is 71 miles from McGuire AFB in NJ and 147 from Westover AFB in MA. At Mach 2, this plane could travel from the ground in NJ to NYC, in under 7 minutes.

I am being generous. Mach 2 is 20+ miles per minute and Mach 2.5 is 30+ miles per minute. This is 150 to 210 seconds to cover the 71 miles. If we factor in the time for the scramble order, to being in the air; we are at 5 to 6 minutes for an F-15 to bypass flight 175, turn, and sit at the WTC to wait for the plane (175) to arrive. This is far less than 18 minutes, and this plane (175) had to fly back over the Hudson Bay to reach its target. (Remember the range of the sidewinder is over 10 miles. Is it even necessary to mention the speed of this missile?)

The Plane Hitting the Pentagon Could Have Been Stopped But Wasn't---Why?

Let's apply these same standards to the Pentagon plane #77. This plane is over restricted airspace. It is 40 minutes after the second attack in NYC. At some point, here, Barbara Olsen calls her husband to let him know the plane is hijacked. Mr. Olsen calls "officials" who claim that they don't know about Flight 77 being hijacked. Barbara Olsen makes a second phone call to her husband. Other passengers were FORCED TO CALL their families to tell them that they were going to die. Why would the hijackers put out this warning? The article definitely says "forced to call". See: Flight 77: 'Our Plane Is Being Hijacked' (washingtonpost.com)
See: washingtonpost.com

This plane flies over the White House, which has automatic turret style anti-defense weaponry on top of the building. NO shots are reported to be fired, no anti-aircraft missiles were fired. This plane, still in restricted airspace, does a 270 degree bank to turn around and fly toward to Pentagon. Andrews AFB is 13 miles away. This is already within the range of a sidewinder. All that is required is to put the plane in the air (maybe up to 3000 ft.), lock and fire. Remember it is 40 minutes and they already know that these planes are being used as weapons. They have been reporting it on ABC, CBS, and NBC for 30+ minutes. They have received phone calls from passengers, telling them that the plane is hijacked. (By the way, what time were these cell-calls made? Before or after they entered the "no fly zone"?)
These planes could have been knocked out of the sky EASILY, but weren't. Why?
DP

P.S. It's not that I want to believe that something stinks, here. It's just that I would like credible answers as to what was/is going on. I was in the military. As a Navy Nuclear Reactor Operator, we had to stand duty 24/7, to monitor operations. An Air Force base is constantly manned, in case of an unforeseen event or attack. They fly recon missions, every single day. Some of these recon flights may be armed, and some may not. But, there are a certain number of planes are armed at all times and the pilots do 24-hour rotating shifts so that the Air Force can respond quickly. The Air Force and Nuclear Aircraft Carriers constitute America's first line of defensive readiness. They were 13 miles from the Pentagon, with planes that can fly circles around a commercial jet. Were they on vacation or what?"

cam.net.uk