The Jet Fighter Stand Down on 9/11 - THE 9/11, not the anniversary

The extent of defense system stand down required to achieve 3 out of 4 strikes by hijacked jet airliners on 9/11 is really quite amazing.

What William labelled as a long time for the 'president' on the day - 58 minutes from first WTC strike to Pentagon strike whil he sat in the classroom for a press opportunity - is an eternity for rapid deployment high speed precision fighter craft, which may or may not have given chase.

The following site lists the 7 air bases through which a simple instruction would have averted the greater tragedy, and 28 more in the network.

Sorry, but the site also raises more questions than it tries to answer.

It also has links to a few other 9/11 sites that were new to me.


www.standdown.net...

35 USAF Bases Within Range On 911

The 7 Air Stations On Full Alert Covering The Continental United States
And 28 More Air Stations That Were In Range Of The 4 Airliners On 911

The following list were the seven Air Stations that were armed and on full alert to protect the continental United States on Tuesday September 11, 2001.

The Air National Guard exclusively performs the air sovereignty mission in the continental United States, and those units fall under the control of the 1st Air Force based at Tyndall Air Force Base (AFB) in Panama City, Florida. The Air National Guard maintains seven alert sites with 14 fully armed fighters and pilots on call around the clock. Besides Tyndall AFB, alert birds also sit armed and ready at; Homestead Air Reserve Base (ARB), Homestead, Florida; Langley AFB, Hampton, Virginia; Otis Air National Guard (ANG), Falmouth, Massachusetts; Oregon ANG, Portland, Oregon; March ARB, Riverside, California; and Ellington ANG, Houston, Texas.

Lets see, 700m/s (Basic speed for fighter plane flying "high", trying to catch a "target")..

Time 58 minutes. of which we will count 50 minutes. cause in the first 8 minutes the the orders for scramble and intercept MUST have been given. And the interceptors are airborne in those 8 first minutes.

So we will translate those 50 minutes to seconds:

60x50=3000

So we have 3000 second.. and per every second high speed interceptor would move that 700m (almost half mile)


700x3000=2100000

2,1 million meters could have those interceptor moved in that time.. this is roughly 3-4 more than the captured planes could..

This means that fighter could have gone as far as 2100km away from the base. (almost 1313 miles.)

They had plenty time to catch any plane they wanted, and also as the "tranpodders" of the highjacked planes were turned of, it would have been easy task for any ground radar operator to find the right targets.

And interceptor could have done BVR kills with AIM-120 missiles 50 miles / 80km away..

8:13:31: American Airlines Flight 11 (AA11) last transmission with Boston Air Traffic Control (ATC).

8:13:32 to 8:20: AA11 goes off course and is hijacked.

8:20: AA 11 transponder signal stops.

8:36: NORAD spokesman, Major Mike Snyder, confirmed that the FAA notified NORAD of AA 11 hijacking.

8:38: Boston ATC notifies NORAD that AA11 has been hijacked.

8:39: AA11 flies directly over our # 1 terrorist target, Indian Point nuclear stations.

8:40: FAA notifies NORAD that AA11 has been hijacked.

8:43: FAA notifies NORAD that United Airlines Flight 175 (UA175) has been hijacked.

8:46:26: AA11 impacts the North Tower of the WTC between the 94th and 98th floors.

8:46: NORAD finally orders Otis to scramble two F-15's. NORAD has held on to this vital information for at least 6, 8 or 10 minutes, and probably up to 26 or 32 minutes.

8:52: Two F-15's from Otis are airborne.

9:02:54: UA175 impacts the South Tower of the WTC between the 78th and 84th floors. NORAD says the F-15's from Otis are still 71 miles away. This means their average flight speed was only 23.9% of their top speed in trying to intercept UA 175. Otis is 153 miles from WTC - F-15's have a top speed of 1875 MPH. Minus 71 miles from 153 miles = 82 miles covered in 11 minutes from 8:52 to 9:03 -
60 minutes divided by 11 minutes = 5.45 x 82 miles = 447.3 MPH divided by 1875 MPH = 23.9%.

9:30: Three F-16's from Langley are airborne.

9:37: American Airlines Flight 77 hits the Pentagon. NORAD says the F-16's from Langley were still 105 miles and 12 minutes away.

9:49: It takes the F-16's from Langley 19 minutes to reach Washington. This means their average flight speed was only 27.4% of their top speed in trying to protect our nations capital. Langley is 130 miles from the Pentagon - F-16's have a top speed of 1500 MPH - 60 minutes divided by 19 minutes = 3.16 x 130 miles = 410.5 MPH divided by 1500 MPH = 27.4%.

Andrews Air Force Base has two fighter wings that are 10 miles from the Pentagon, yet they inconceivably waited till after all of the attacks were over to finally get airborne.

The United States will spend more on the military in fiscal year 2003 (at least 396 billion) than the next 25 biggest countries combined. Also, the United States Air Force is by far and away the most technologically advanced and dominate military force ever known to man. So knowing all of these facts, what type of a preposterous wag the NORAD Reponse Times tale is this?

These "responce times" are bogus.

At the very moment the transponder signal disapears, but the radar still sees a target (which continues to fly..), they (NORAD) would know that the plane has been taken over, and the NORAD would scramble fighter to shadow the plane.. in 3 minutes time they would be airborne heading for the target..

And if they knew to expect plane hijackings, which they did.. this 3 minutes would be quite sluggish.. as there always is 1 to 3 ARMED FIGHTER PLANES in every AFB with PILOT in the COCKPIT even here in (this has nothing to do with 911 events, this has been always done here.) Finland, which is small nation with 5+ million people so why wouldnt the worlds super power have same kind of readiness?

Especially as they did get fore warning about possible hijack attemps..

Truly, it stinketh...

www.attackonamerica.net...

September 15, 2001, Saturday

AFTER THE ATTACKS: SKY RULES; Pentagon Tracked Deadly Jet But Found No Way to Stop It


[This is the first account (cover-up) by the FAA, published in the New York Times. There are a few lies in evidence in the whole article, but the obfuscation and vaguness is here]:


Despite provisions for close communication between civilian and military traffic officials, and extensive procedures for security control over air traffic during attacks on the United States, it does not appear that anyone had contemplated the kind of emergency that was unfolding.

The procedures, first devised in the 1950's, cover how to send fighter planes to shadow a hijacked plane on its way, perhaps, to Cuba. They tell how to intercept a plane entering the nation's airspace through the air defense zone along the Atlantic Coast, but not what to do with kamikazes.

''There is no category of 'enemy airliners,' '' a recently retired F.A.A. official said. He and others said they could not recall any instance in which a military plane fired on a civilian one in the United States, though in 1983 a F-4 Phantom fighter that scrambled to intercept an unidentified target off Cherry Point, N.C., accidentally rammed it. That plane was a private twin-engine propeller plane on the way home from the Bahamas, carrying seven people.

The United States is signatory to a treaty that appears to bar using force against civilian airplanes. Congress has voted against letting the military shoot down suspected drug planes trying to cross into the United States. Whether those restrictions would apply to a plane showing clearly hostile intent has never been spelled out. An F.A.A. spokeswoman said earlier this week that there was a policy for shooting down civilian airliners but would not divulge it.

Part of me still thinks the one that went down in PA went down because it was shot down, Todd Beamer was just part of the all to convenient cover-up. I vividly remember the news that morning saying that the plan was shot down. Recently, the government reported that terrorists probably crashed the plane, not Beamer. (and, at one point that plane was nearly over Bob's area ).

MA, that 'standown' link isn't all that sharp. They claim that there are just all these air bases that could have helped out - but, for instance, Rickenbacker ANGB is just a air refueling wing and the Youngstown base has C-130. Not very helpful aircraft.

I also think flight 93 was shot down. I was at work when it came across the radio, "a plane has been shot".........nothing. We listened all day and there was never another word said about it. We kept wondering what plane had been shot down.

There are many friends of the foursome said to be the ringleaders in the takeover of flight 93 from the hijackers, who really believe that they drove it into the ground heroically. I knew one of them.

I cannot put myself in the position of wrestling with guys at the back of the plane (armed with papercutters?) and busting into the cockpit to commandeer the flight, with little to no flying skills, and steering it into the wilderness.

There were three eyewitness accounts of low flying craft pursuing the jet in the minute before the crash, and seeing the plume of flames in the distance.

Many parts of the story of flight 93 don't stack up, but that's true for the whole 'official conspiracy theory'.

Bob, I accept that listing all bases without filtering the info on what their strategic purpose is, is going to lead to some exaggeration. But the overwhelming weight of evidence says that heads MUST be accountable for this bizarre and negligent lapse in security, that heads have not rolled, and that heads need to roll from the top down. The lack of accountability in this current admin is just one part of its criminality.

Actually masked,

I do believe the passengers really did try and take over that flight. Since they were the last on the list, and heard what happened to other other ill fated airliners, they probably figured they were gonna die anyway, why the # not take it down before it hits a target? if I was in that very same situation, id do the same. No heroism needed here, its a matter of hatred and revenge. The fact that the #ers flying the damn plane planned to use me to kill others, and regardless, im gonna #ing die, i would make sure no martyrdom for them, that id do everything in my final moments simply to prevent thier sucess, since im a gonner anyway. My last act of defiance.

According to witnesses on the ground, the plane rocked about, then steadied itself. This shows it was possible that perhaps the passengers suceeded in taking control of the plane from the four #s who hijacked it. And when you consider there was a pilot who was a passenger, as well as an air traffic controller, there was even the remote possibility of landing the thing intact. perhaps thats why it was shot down? An undamaged aircraft and living witnesses might screw up the planned spin the admin had ready for the whole day? Thats just my speculation, but its deserving a moments thought.

But thank you for the links, tho i have seen them before. The timeline is my main conspiracy point for 9/11. the timeline, lack of fighter response, fighters in the air not scrambled, or scrambled from distant bases, these are things that were in the NEWS. these are things people cant say you made this crap up. these are glaring FACTS that cannot be denied. Unliek many of my other surrounding points of the 9/11 conspiracy, these require no musings, no debate. Nothing hidden about them. They are in plain sight. And people still dont see them.

the response of our leaders before and during the attacks is also daming, and something that can be verified. This is the most important part of the 9/11 conspiracy, the one that REALLY needs to be pressed and publicized, because it is something not hidden, but something attention is distracted from. And the admin has govoen not ONE answer.

As to the flight 93 guys, yeah, they were heros in the classic sense, whether they wanted to be or not. When you consider the profiles of the rebels: one stewardess was an ex cop, one guy a matrial arts instructor, one guy a highschool footballs star, and one guy just a big #ing bruiser of a man, and pit them agains the supposedly scrawny little middle easterners with razor blades, they did have a shot.

The reason i think that no one on the other flights attacked the hijackers is that they probably did not know what there fate would be. they probably were told they were being taken back to the airport, where thier demands were being met. the passengers thought that if they stayed clam, they would arrive safely back at the airport, and be freed by the feds. if i was a hijacker, i sure as # wouldnt tell them they are all gonna die for allah, because id want them complacent and quiet so i wouldnt have to beat off a cabin full of paniced wild eyed passengers aware they were gonna die anyway.

The article says:

The following happened on September 11, 2001; At 10:01 a.m. the FAA ordered the 180th Fighter Wing out of Swanton, Ohio to scramble their F-16 fighters.

The FAA can not order any Militay Aircraft to scramble.
That order has to come from the commander on the base.

Of course the FAA can order it. The FAA calls the base commander. he tells them, we need a #ing jet YESTERDAY. Base commander complies, or base commander will soon be working at 7/11.

Walt

There are a few articles linked to in the above posts... sorry, but I haven't found which one talks about the FAA's "order" at 10.01am - I may be too sheepish the second time through this.

Which article was that?

Originally posted by MaskedAvatar
The extent of defense system stand down required to achieve 3 out of 4 strikes by hijacked jet airliners on 9/11 is really quite amazing.

Why is this false information continuing.

There was no stand-down. There have been several interviews with pilots who were in the air at the time (training mission) and diverted to try and intercept the second plane headed to NYC. They didn't make it.

Also several stories about a nation-wide scramble immediately after the second WTC hit.

The continuation of this story really confuses me.

Well, William,

Given that they were scrambled at the LAST minute WAAAAY after the FAA discovered the planes were hijacked..........and flew at HALF thier speed....

And several closer bases WERENT scrambled. And of course the pilots aint gonna say yeah boys we were told to stand down, duh........not to major media and such.

i hardly consider this misinformation. especially when much of the media coverage a few days after the attacks remains suspect, after the govornment got time to clean it up.

I too believe that the passengers put up a fight. They had nothing too lose.
I figure the main reason why the government covered it is because of money. There would have been lawsuits galore if they announced that they had just shot down an airplane full of people. I'm also not to sure how the American public would react to the government shooting a plane down. On the one hand it would make sense too shoot it down and keep the causulty and damage to a minimum. On the other hand, it was still a plane full of people. Damned if do,damned if you don't.

The American Public would have understood the dire need to shoot down the plane after what happened. A horrible situation to be put into, but one that people would have accepted.

The fact that the govornment is denying it shot down flight 93 is far more damning.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
The American Public would have understood the dire need to shoot down the plane after what happened. A horrible situation to be put into, but one that people would have accepted.
The fact that the govornment is denying it shot down flight 93 is far more damning.

Even if the Public were made aware of how those planes would've been *needed* to be shot down, there would still be the usual lawsuits...However, once the *need* for having shot the planes down was brought out in a courtroom (& as long as such evidence was not "manufactured" then those lawsuits would've gotten shot down just as surely as the planes would have been.

The main point is that those planes should have been shot down as soon as it was discovered that the hijackers had hostile intent...And any attempts to force the planes down (without explosive ordinance) had failed. Don't kid yourself...pilots are trained to know how to force another plane down by formation-flying near the target plane & gradually moving closer from above, making sure that the "target pilot" is aware that he must either go down or risk air-collision. Even a fundamentalist terrorist in the pilot's seat would begin to realize that he'd never reach his target if he risked air-collision...His most likely action would be to bring the plane down into whatever ground target is available at the time.

But for whatever reason, the government continues to use lies instead of honesty & a conviction for the benefit of the Nation instead of their own image & advancement. It's the lies I get sick of hearing...It's at a point wear the Public is beginning to realize that, no matter what a politician says, they automatically know it's a lie. It's the lies that must be stopped...And that's what many of us are here at ATS for; To discover the truth behind the constant lies. I think our biggest failing here at ATS is that we do so little to make sure that the truth that we find & confirm gets out to the general public at large...

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Well, William,

Given that they were scrambled at the LAST minute WAAAAY after the FAA discovered the planes were hijacked..........and flew at HALF thier speed....

Dunno... this "feels" like typical disinformation from the conspiracist camps.

I just recently watched a PBS special about this very topic... FAA officials really didn't know flight 11 was hijacked until it hit the towers... it was suspected, but even then no one (in the FAA control towers) considered they would strike buildings. Many of the air traffic controllers were interviewed... it was obvious these people were shaken by what they saw, and reluctant to make hasty decisions.

NORAD simply couldn't "see" much of the continental US air traffic until they reconfigured their systems. Their primary purpose is to watch outside the U.S.

There was also an interview with two pilots who were above West Virginia during the WTC attacks, they veered toward NYC at top speed as soon as the second plane was found to be a potential attack. They had no weapons, and planes on the ground were being armed (you do know that these aircraft are not fully armed by default... right?). The two training pilots were asked to consider ramming the airliner if they got there in time... they didn't.


In researching conspiracies over the past 20 years, I have always found much more disinformation and lies in the conspiracy theorist camp. This is one of them.

William,

Im stating things that can be found in thier own newsources, directly from that day. the disinformation is the govornment and media on this point. This is obvious when you consider:

1. Whether or not the planes were hijack confirmed, the FAA has specific emergency proceedures they are to follow in the event of eve a suspected emergency. The most commonly used example is Payne Stweart and his untimely end. Flight 11 did a hell of alot more then Stewarts plane did, it not only drastically deviated its course, it also turned off transponders, susopcious voices saying we have planes, blah blah blah, all these occur before they even hijack confirm, and they dont do squat? Nope.

Payne stewarts plane lost contact, transponder, and deviated off its course only 90 degrees. Flight 11 made a full 180. And it was in alot busier airspace that Stewarts plane was. yet for Stewart, they called nearby jets in flight training to go intercept his plane and find out what the hell went wrong. After the pilots figured out that the plane had been decompressed in the cabin and everyone was dead, they handed it off to another airspace of fighter jets, who followed the jet until it crashed into an isolated area.

Stw-ewarts Jet was a little lear jet in relatively low traffic airspace. SAnd it got intercepted.

Flight 11 was a big honker of a boeing, full of people, in BUSY BUSY airspace, in a very crowded densly populated region, with no transponders or contact, deviating off its course drastically, and somehow, this is less of an emergency, even if the FAA claimed not to know it was hijacked, then a little lear jet? Pull the other one please.

They scramble a jet too late from an Airbase 170 miles away, shortly before the first plane hit. Had that Jet been flying at even 1300 miles an hour like it COULD have, it would have arrived in new york in enough time to perhaps intercept the second jet on its way.

But lets forget about new York. Ill pretend you are right.

lets go a few hundred miles south to DC. Flight 77 was displaying odd behavior before the second jet hit, if you look at the flight path, it made a 90 degree turn north, then west, then south, then back on course for its flight plan. later on it had lost transponder, but was last seen starting to turn back around east.

The nation had already witnessed TWO planes deliberately flown into the WTC. A third plane was behaving suspiciously. And no one in DC was...concerned? The FAA? The pentagon? Then they claim flight 77 disappeared from thier radars. OK, two major terrorist attacks on US soil. A third plane disappears. And no one calls up the fighters in NC to get thier asses back to washington, we got some problems? No orders for alert, no one evacuated from buildings as a precaution?

And of course, the media disinformation that Andrews airforce base had no active fighter units when those fighters from andrews were out flying training missions in NC? Talk about DISINFORMATION!

I remeber when the OK city bombing occured. We were in saudi. When it happened, even our piddly little airfield went under alert, we immediately increased security a bit, because no one was sure if it was foreign terrorists. You can bet the same thing happened in DC.

Two obvious terror attacks, a third plane gone missing, and no alert sounded in DC, no warnings, ect? NO, i dont think so.

Youre gonna have to do better than that.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
The American Public would have understood the dire need to shoot down the plane after what happened. A horrible situation to be put into, but one that people would have accepted.

The fact that the govornment is denying it shot down flight 93 is far more damning.

The American public would have understood for about 48 hrs. After that the lawsuit nightmare would begin. There would have been enough second guessing and what ifs to make your head spin.