Oh, I'm sorry. I wasn't aware that trying to show that "Do the orders still stand" didn't AUTOMATICALLY MEAN THAT THEY STOOD THE FIGHTERS DOWN. I forgot that if it goes against your beliefs then it's completely irrelevant and stupid to post it.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Oh, I'm sorry. I wasn't aware that trying to show that "Do the orders still stand" didn't AUTOMATICALLY MEAN THAT THEY STOOD THE FIGHTERS DOWN. I forgot that if it goes against your beliefs then it's completely irrelevant and stupid to post it.

Do you need any help with finding out about interceptors and ready flighters, If you do not beleive me ?

Damnit, I lost that entire post.

The weapons supervisor and the wing commander disagree with you, but you're telling me that you know better than them? And I spent many years living around AF bases where I never saw more than a couple of fighters sitting with A missile on the rail, IF THAT. We had 2-4 alert fighters at Hickam that were armed, but NONE of the other kept a single missile on a rail.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Damnit, I lost that entire post.

The weapons supervisor and the wing commander disagree with you, but you're telling me that you know better than them? And I spent many years living around AF bases where I never saw more than a couple of fighters sitting with A missile on the rail, IF THAT. We had 2-4 alert fighters at Hickam that were armed, but NONE of the other kept a single missile on a rail.

Well i was stationed at Seymour-Johnson AFB in NC for training that had an interceptor flight to protect the East Coast. They had 4 planes that were kept armed with 4 missiles and about 600 rounds of ammo. This was back when the cold war was still going on though.

But even if a base does not have an interceptor unit the planes are kept fueled and weapons are kept nearby for emergencies. I don't know where they came up with the story of having to transport missiles that were an like an hour away, thats BS. A military base would never keep weapons that far away, don't you think ?



[edit on 24-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Oh, I'm sorry. I wasn't aware that trying to show that "Do the orders still stand" didn't AUTOMATICALLY MEAN THAT THEY STOOD THE FIGHTERS DOWN. I forgot that if it goes against your beliefs then it's completely irrelevant and stupid to post it.

I was talking about how you went from "Do the orders still stand?" to, "there were only a few jets available" and "this is how many hours it takes for our emergeny jets to get up in the air when they're needed".

I still agree with that quoted part of your earlier post, though.

Because before he edited his post and removed it, the question was asked as to how the USAF which had fighters at Andrews couldn't possibly have launched them and shot the plane down at the Pentagon, unless they were stood down. I didn't bother quoting it though because it was the post right above mine. Then after I posted it, I saw where he edited and removed that portion of the post. At the time of posting it WAS relevant.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Because before he edited his post and removed it, the question was asked as to how the USAF which had fighters at Andrews couldn't possibly have launched them and shot the plane down at the Pentagon, unless they were stood down. I didn't bother quoting it though because it was the post right above mine. Then after I posted it, I saw where he edited and removed that portion of the post. At the time of posting it WAS relevant.

Thier should not have been a problem with them getting fighters in the air in time. As i ahve stated the planes are kept fueled and wepaons are nearby. It does not take that long to hang a couple missiles or put a few hundred rounds of ammo in the gun. A few hundred rounds of ammo would have been all the needed to bring down a commerical jet.



[edit on 24-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]

The fighters at Ellington field near Houston, Tx were said to be able to take-off and be at some alltitude of 1000s of feet in 5 minutes. Not sure whats goes on now a days, but with 911 behind us, and the WOT, one would think having planes ready again is back in fashion.

From the external ref:
"At 5:16, NORAD‘s southeast air defense sector branch alerted fighters at Homestead Air Reserve Base ... They took off at 5:21"

5 minutes there.

I tend to trust what military person says over the news or speculation. At least they have experience to base thoughts on.

Just throwing in my .02, which is not worth much.

If you have fighters already armed and ready to launch then yes, you can have them airborne in 5 minutes. The problem on 9/11 was that most bases DIDN'T have them armed and ready to launch.

Originally posted by roadgravel
The fighters at Ellington field near Houston, Tx were said to be able to take-off and be at some alltitude of 1000s of feet in 5 minutes. Not sure whats goes on now a days, but with 911 behind us, and the WOT, one would think having planes ready again is back in fashion.

From the external ref:
"At 5:16, NORAD‘s southeast air defense sector branch alerted fighters at Homestead Air Reserve Base ... They took off at 5:21"

5 minutes there.

I tend to trust what military person says over the news or speculation. At least they have experience to base thoughts on.

Just throwing in my .02, which is not worth much.

Doesn't matter if the aircraft has the ability to get in the air quickly, what matters is the slow response between the civilians and the military in coordination.

I am aware of the questions of late or stalled notifications. I was just commenting on the ready plane point.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
If you have fighters already armed and ready to launch then yes, you can have them airborne in 5 minutes. The problem on 9/11 was that most bases DIDN'T have them armed and ready to launch.

Even if they are not armed and ready to launch it would not take that long to arm them and get them launched.

[edit on 26-3-2007 by ULTIMA1]