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.
The Pentagon not only has “five extremely sophisticated anti-missile batteries” (link #9), but also has a Phalanx Close-In Weapons System (link #12) installed to protect the Pentagon from this kind of aerial attack. My brother served in the Navy (ours is a Navy family) on the USS Iwo Jima Helicopter Carrier in the late 1970’s and he recalls the Phalanx System being installed in his ship that was “just like the system protecting the Pentagon.” This is where Cheney’s ‘stand down order’ comes into play, because these systems are ‘automatic’ and became ‘live’ when the transponder was supposedly turned off at 8:56 AM; after the local airports were closed.
Next problem: There are five extremely sophisticated anti-missile batteries in place to protect the Pentagon from an airborne attack. These anti-missile batteries operate automatically.
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by ipsedixit
No I don't, and that's exactly why I brought it here and asked the questions I asked, to get more opinions. In fact, with all the pictures I have seen of the Pentagon, I can't recall ever seeing defense batteries like that setup on top or even close to it. For all I know they could be hidden somewhere. If anyone has any pictures of that, it would be great to see.
And yeah that's a massive letter he wrote. I think people over at letsroll are still trying to digest it all, as not even one person has replied. It's a heck of a lot to think about and track down. Some of links were a bit questionable, but not as much as the official story. That much I do know.
Here's what was going on a year after the attack:
english.people.com.cn...
As part of a nation-wide effort to step up security before the one-year anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, the Pentagon on Tuesday deployed anti-aircraft missiles around Washington D.C..
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld ordered the move after upgrading a four-day air defense exercise beginning Tuesday to an active "Noble Eagle" deployment to protect the capital against potential attack from the air.
Surface-to-air missile launchers were deployed around Washington on Monday as part of the exercise, in which officials said no functional missiles had been originally planned. A mobile missile launcher was parked several hundred meters from the Pentagon on Tuesday.
This makes me wonder if in fact they have even yet installed anti-aircraft batteries at the Pentagon.
Originally posted by adam_zapple
Turning off a plane's transponder doesn't automatically trigger ground to air missile systems. Whoever wrote this is making a lot of un-supported assumptions.
The basis of the system is a 20 mm M61 Vulcan Gatling gun autocannon linked to a radar system for acquiring and tracking targets. The gun fires at rate of 3,000/4,500 rounds per minute depending on the Block, or version of the system. It is mounted in a self-contained turret along with an automated fire control system. The system automatically searches, detects, tracks, engages and confirms kills using its computer-controlled radar system. Because it is self-contained, Phalanx is ideal for support ships which lack integrated targeting systems and generally have limited sensors. The entire unit has a mass between 5,500 and 6,100 kg (12,400 to 13,500 lb).
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by ipsedixit
No I don't, and that's exactly why I brought it here and asked the questions I asked, to get more opinions. In fact, with all the pictures I have seen of the Pentagon, I can't recall ever seeing defense batteries like that setup on top or even close to it. For all I know they could be hidden somewhere. If anyone has any pictures of that, it would be great to see.
And yeah that's a massive letter he wrote. I think people over at letsroll are still trying to digest it all, as not even one person has replied. It's a heck of a lot to think about and track down. Some of links were a bit questionable, but not as much as the official story. That much I do know.
April Gallop, an enlisted member and survivor who worked at the Pentagon and brought her infant child to work that day, told me that when she was assigned there she got a classified tour of the building introducing her to its defenses, and she was told it was the best defended and safest building in the world. To this day she cannot comprehend why those defenses would have failed on 9/11.
And finally, the Pentagon sits inside the P-56-A restricted air space section that extends 17 miles in all directions from the Washington Monument, and that activated air defenses from a joint FAA/Secret Service radar and air traffic control at Langley, VA for many years prior to 9/11. Interceptor fighter jets in that area, which is separate from and more restricted than FAA commercial air space, as well as much better defended, were regularly scrambled when small or commercial planes went off course or were not on scheduled routes within a larger Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) that extends 50 miles out to give time for the response. Andrews Air Force base, within 10 miles of the city as well as the 113th Air Wing of the National Guard at Anacostia NAS have provided consistent scramble-ready defenses for the P-56 sector, which protects the most important government buildings. Having grown up and lived in the area for most of my life, I saw such defensive responses many times, guiding planes away from the restricted area. Commercial pilots have also long complained about the difficult curving maneuvers necessary to land or take off at Washington National Airport (now Reagan) to avoid entering P-56-B, the three-mile inner restricted zone above the White House, Capitol and Pentagon.
These multiple layers of defense also inexplicably failed on 9/11 in the midst of a national crisis. Flight 77 was picked up by Langley entering the ADIZ according to the testimony of Mr. Mineta to the 9/11 Commission concerning a plane that was "50 miles out". That could only have been Flight 77, no others got that close, and the timing at 9:24-9:26 AM that he gives for the comment is also consistent with the timing of the impact. Neither was FAA/NORAD out of radar contact with the flight for more than a few minutes, since it was picked up by Indianapolis long before being seen by FAA ATC controllers in the DC area.
Andrews Air Force base, within 10 miles of the city as well as the 113th Air Wing of the National Guard at Anacostia NAS have provided consistent scramble-ready defenses for the P-56 sector, which protects the most important government buildings.
Originally posted by adam_zapple
At the time of 9/11, Andrews AFB was "combat-ready", not "scramble-ready". I don't know if the same was true for Anacostia.
Originally posted by ipsedixit
The question of SAM's at the Pentagon has come up many times. The last time I tried to come to a conclusion about that here's what I came up with:
Originally posted by pinch
As someone who has worked in the Pentagon, still has business in the building (not only the 5-sided one, but the Navy Annex as well) periodically, had a M-61 gatling gun (the same weapon that is in a CIWS (close-in-weapons-system), or Phalanx) on the left side of his aircraft and watched CIWS weapon mounts track and shoot targets on multiple occasions on multiple ships and was read into programs that planned to use CIWS as counter-mortar battery capabilities in Iraq and Afghanistan, reading the speculation and hilarious to-do's on this thread ought to be good fun!
Answer this evening when I get home.
Originally posted by adam_zapple
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by ipsedixit
No I don't, and that's exactly why I brought it here and asked the questions I asked, to get more opinions. In fact, with all the pictures I have seen of the Pentagon, I can't recall ever seeing defense batteries like that setup on top or even close to it. For all I know they could be hidden somewhere. If anyone has any pictures of that, it would be great to see.
And yeah that's a massive letter he wrote. I think people over at letsroll are still trying to digest it all, as not even one person has replied. It's a heck of a lot to think about and track down. Some of links were a bit questionable, but not as much as the official story. That much I do know.
Equally questionable is this statement: ""If shutting off the transponders tripped the defense systems automatically, then why wasn't the plane that hit the pentagon shot down way before it hit by these defense batteries? Maybe because it wasn't a plane that hit? "
Turning off a plane's transponder doesn't automatically trigger ground to air missile systems. Whoever wrote this is making a lot of un-supported assumptions.
Originally posted by adam_zapple
Andrews Air Force base, within 10 miles of the city as well as the 113th Air Wing of the National Guard at Anacostia NAS have provided consistent scramble-ready defenses for the P-56 sector, which protects the most important government buildings.
At the time of 9/11, Andrews AFB was "combat-ready", not "scramble-ready". I don't know if the same was true for Anacostia.
John Judge really needs to get his facts straight.
[edit on 29-1-2009 by adam_zapple]
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Also, if the military knew that plane was 50 miles out when Cheney issued the stand down order, it should be rather obvious that the military was tracking the plane, and never lost radar sight of it. Otherwise, how could they know the plane was 50 miles out? The shutting off of the transponders simply blinded many civil authorities to what was about to happen.
Originally posted by Komodo
Originally posted by TrueAmerican
Also, if the military knew that plane was 50 miles out when Cheney issued the stand down order, it should be rather obvious that the military was tracking the plane, and never lost radar sight of it. Otherwise, how could they know the plane was 50 miles out? The shutting off of the transponders simply blinded many civil authorities to what was about to happen.
yes...my thought exactally!
keep digging.
Originally posted by Stillresearchn911
Anyways TA I'd have to say IMO from what I have gathered the Pentagon has never had the Phalanx(M61) neither on 9/11 or to date.
As far as the supposed missile batteries I have seen nothing to support this either.