It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Nope, I'm sorry to say there is no reason for this that excludes both negligence and conspiracy.
Soon thereafter, the Secret Service called back, asking whether the squadron could get fighters airborne. The unit's maintenance section was notified to get several F-16s armed and ready to fly. Anticipating such an order, Col. Don C. Mozley, the 113th Logistics Group commander, had already ordered his weapons officer to "break out the AIM-9s and start building them up." The missiles had to be transported from a bunker on the other side of the base, which would take a while. wtc7lies.googles.com
Your first source states that interceptions happen within 10 to 15 minutes, your second source debunks that.
NORAD, responsible for intercepting errant aircraft over the U.S., has a standard operating procedure for scrambling planes for interception which takes less than 15 minutes
No mention of intercepting aircraft within 15 minutes, only taking off. 0-1
Norad was instrumental in getting fighter jets -- normally on 15-minute alert -- airborne within eight minutes.
One of your links is broken, so I'll address the one that is not. "They did this successfully (on time) 129 times in 2000." How did you determine that they were on time? How long did the interceptors reach them before they impacted their intended targets?
They did this successfully (on time) 129 times in 2000 abcnews.go.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">and 67 times between September 2000 and June 2001.
Notice in the external quote above (your source) that it says scrambled, not intercepted. 0-2
Last year, there were 425 unknowns -- pilots who didn't file or diverted from flight plans or used the wrong frequency. Jets were scrambled 129 times.Your source.
Otis was the closest base that had NORAD fighters. 0-3
NORAD, once notified of the off-course aircraft failed to scramble jets from the nearest bases
Your source states that the top speed of an F-15 is 1875 mph. They are wrong. It's 900 mph at low altitude.
Once airborne,interceptors failed to reach their targets because they flew at small fractions of their top speeds
High altitude: Mach 2.5+ (1,650 mph, 2,660 km/h)
Low altitude: Mach 1.2 (900 mph, 1,450 km/h)
That is correct. NORAD was not informed of flight 77 until 9:34 a.m., three minutes before crashing. 0-4-1
Fighters that were airborne and within interception range of the deviating aircraft were not redeployed to pursue them
I addressed this in this thread. 0-5-1
You might think that the military couldn't find the hijacked planes because the hijackers turned off the transponders. However, a former air traffic controller, who knows the flight corridor which the two planes which hit the Twin Towers flew "like the back of my hand" and who handled two actual hijackings says that planes can be tracked on radar even when their transponders are turned off also, listen to this interview).
Originally posted by Zaphod58
Please tell us exactly how long it takes to get a fighter fully armed. Give us the times when you KNOW something is going to happen, and compare those to going from a cold start. I'm sure you know better than the wing commander and the NCOIC in charge of weapons and can tell us exactly how long it takes to get a fighter armed and in the air.
Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
Thirty minutes? I think that's darn fast - truly. I know squat about Air Force airframes (unless we are talking Blackhawks) but I would have imagined longer if not in what we called a FARP.
I have zero first hand knowledge but I would think it's a fairly complex set of tasks to fuel and arm something like a F-15 or 16.
9/11 Panel Suspected Deception by Pentagon
Allegations Brought to Inspectors General
By Dan Eggen
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, August 2, 2006; Page A03
Some staff members and commissioners of the Sept. 11 panel concluded that the Pentagon's initial story of how it reacted to the 2001 terrorist attacks may have been part of a deliberate effort to mislead the commission and the public rather than a reflection of the fog of events on that day, according to sources involved in the debate.
Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources. Staff members and some commissioners thought that e-mails and other evidence provided enough probable cause to believe that military and aviation officials violated the law by making false statements to Congress and to the commission, hoping to hide the bungled response to the hijackings, these sources said.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by jprophet420
Except there were no alert fighters in Washington. All that they could have launched were unarmed fighters that would have had to ram the plane, or sat and watched while it crashed anyway. There were 7 bases around the US that had alert fighters ready to go, and none of them were in Washington.