It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why was there no rescue helicopters?

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 06:59 AM
link   
I seen the footage. minutes pass, yet I never saw any helicopters throw a rope to the people coming out of windows. You would think they would send helicopters up there with rope ladders to at least save someone..but I never saw any of that. there was plenty of time to send down a rope to someone and save their life..why did no one send an air rescue team?




posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 07:05 AM
link   
Answer.. Smoke and heat rises - helicopter is flying blind and not coping with the heat - outcome...pilot crashes - conclusion... dont fly a helicopter in thick acrid smoke beause you will die and probably kill more people in the process.

[edit on 3-9-2007 by fiftyfifty]



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 07:07 AM
link   
I understand that. but there was no smoke and heat on the roof of the towers. they could have landed there and thrown down a line. I'm not saying they should be next to the windows..but at least try to rescue someone..rather than just look.



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 07:07 AM
link   
Have to agree with fiftyfifty there, otherwise they would use helicopters a lot more with other fires. Too much smoke too, visibility would have been extremely poor and any wind gusts may have pushed the helicopter into the building



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 07:08 AM
link   
Excellent point.
The choppers could've rescued people and put them on the roofs of the surrounding buildings.
I guess though that it all happened so quickly that a rescue plan couldn't be organised in time.



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 07:40 AM
link   
but they knew people were stuck on the top floors. and they had about an hour or so to come up with a rescue plan from the roof access. and I see nothing of this.



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 07:49 AM
link   
they actually did try to get up there with helicopters. a quick google search came up with this

Like I said, the smoke would have made it too dangerous to land. Was there even a helipad on the roof or was it ful of ventilation outlets, antenna and lift machinery? That would also make landing difficult.



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 07:53 AM
link   
I just felt really sorry for those people asking for help out the window. and then many of them falling down with no help at all.



A rope would have helped..why don't tall buildings like that have ropes so people can use them to get down? it's a very simple way to get down some floors..even if it's dangerous it could save your life.



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 08:29 AM
link   
Well, where to start. I understand it was a tragedy to watch in horror the events of that day. But helicopter flight dynamics would have made it near impossible to get to people on the floors they were on. The roof, maybe, big maybe if not completely impossible with all the smoke and heat. Take a look at some sites on their dynamics and you will see what im talking about.

Now, the hit was on the 70 something floor right? At 10+ feet per floor, you are talking 700+ foot of rope. Doubtful anyone would be able to lift, throw, extend, climb down that kinda length of rope. Highly trained climbers and repelers, maybe, another big maybe. But everyday joes such as you and I working in a highrise. Very very doubtful.


Thanx

Silver

(edited since it got fixed)


[edit on 3-9-2007 by S1LV3R4D0]



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 08:56 AM
link   
Me-sa likes the way you thinks, jedi-knight. The force is strong in you. You’re on the right track with your question. You can find various thought on this by clicking on my name and checking out a previous thread.

The synopsis answer is that someone ‘wouldn’t allow’ any rescue attempts. There is no other explanation. You can bet the family farm that there were many a chopper pilot just itching to help. But they were being held back.

Why? Based on what we know now, the only reasonable reason is that someone was trying to ‘hide’ something. Something that rescuers and rescued alike would have identified and later talked about.
That ‘something’ had to have been something BIG and monumental. As in perhaps that there were no plane crashes at the WTC’s. That the twin towers were rigged with explosives, fire bombs and smoke machines to only simulate an event that never happened.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 09:43 AM
link   
there were according to an eyewitness that watched from across the river with binoculars and videotaped the tragedy.



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 12:15 PM
link   


NYPD aviation units arrived at the WTC by 8:52 a.m. They checked to see if roof rescue was possible and reported back that they are unable to land as a result of heavy smoke conditions. First person interviews with aviation unit personnel also indicates that heat from the building’s fires was causing the helicopter engine temperature to increase. An aviation unit called again at 9:38 a.m. for permission to land on the roof of WTC 1. A first person interview indicated that the aviation units were desperate to assist the people trapped and jumping from the upper floors. There was no indication that landing conditions had improved. Five minutes after the request to land, a senior NYPD officer ordered that no one was to rappel onto the buildings


The roofs of the WTC were covered by machinery, antennas and all sort
of other obstructions including fences to keep daredevils and suicides
from jumping off buildings.

As can see NYPD aviation units tried to land on the roof but smoke and
heat prevented them from approaching.

As for dropping ropes, as someone trained in High Angle Rescue (by
members of Port Authority police), unless have proper equipment
(harness, carabiners, descenders) would have only resulted dropping
them to the street.



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 06:12 PM
link   
How about getting water dropping helicopters to put the fires out, because it was those fire that caused the collapse, so if the fires were out the death toll would be way less.



posted on Sep, 3 2007 @ 06:54 PM
link   
Problem is that the fires were not like a forest fire burning on the
surface, but deep in the building. Even if the helicopters could be
rigged with dip buckets, water tanks and suction hoses - such equipment
is not used in NYC for simple reason there are not forests in NYC -
all would have happened would be to wet down top of buildings and
cascade down to streets.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Well they obviously didn't try to rescue anyone, I think the only choppers there were from the media.
Just a way for it to seem more tragic with loss of life rather than just a
couple of buildings falling over.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 01:45 PM
link   
Do you guys not read what other people write?

thedman, silverado and fiftyfifty stated several times that chopper rescues were attempted and that a roof rescue was not possible yet people still claim that "they dident try and rescue anyone" or "the only choppers were media".




posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Well, I think there was already an ATS discussion thread considering rooftop helicopter rescue. Here it is:

Would a helicopter rescue have been impossible?



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by jedimiller
I seen the footage. minutes pass, yet I never saw any helicopters throw a rope to the people coming out of windows. You would think they would send helicopters up there with rope ladders to at least save someone..but I never saw any of that. there was plenty of time to send down a rope to someone and save their life..why did no one send an air rescue team?


I remember seeing a Air Guard UH-1F.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChrisF231
Do you guys not read what other people write?

thedman, silverado and fiftyfifty stated several times that chopper rescues were attempted and that a roof rescue was not possible yet people still claim that "they dident try and rescue anyone" or "the only choppers were media".


i even posted a video of an eyewitness who says they did. we was watching with binoculars from across the river, and videotaping.

of course he is not an eyewitness that supports the official story, so he is obviously lieing and unamerican.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:06 PM
link   
The ancient adage of ‘judge people by what they do and not what they say’ applies here to this thread topic. New York City just happens to be on the northeastern seaboard where most of our military hardware is stationed. On 9-11 there were plenty of military helicopters nearby — land and sea-based — which could have helped. Sikorsky seadragons for example can carry a hundred civilians or so at a time.

From the very beginning (after the first tower was smoking) a national crisis was proclaimed. Which means if true, if this had been a ‘real’ terrorist attack, our military would have gotten involved immediately. But, obviously, the ‘stand-down’ orders were not only applied to fighter jets but also to rescue missions. The buildings smoldered for an hour and a half and no personnel at the federal level was activated to help out. This makes no sense whatsoever, unless, it was prevented on purpose.

If we use our national guard for attempting to save three thrill-crazy climbers of mountains, then how can we be expected to believe we wouldn’t do at least as much for three thousand blameless bystanders freakishly caught up in a skyscraper fire? Please no more excuses. Did we try? Were there dozens of choppers — big ones —lined up in holding patterns?

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join