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.

 

Phantom Air Farce Pictures

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2009 @ 09:28 AM
link   
Consider this...

There were only two planes visible in the video footage: "AF1" and a fighter jet.

1- Did planes actually fly past any photo op locations? Ground Zero? Is that a fitting photo op? Showcase AF1 as it proudly flies over the worst humiliation and defeat USA has ever seen?

2- Did the flight path appear choreographed as would be required to obtain the best photos or did it look haphazard.

3- Is it feasible for a fighter jet to protect the plane AND take photos at the same time?

4- Was the fighter jet ever in a in a position advantageous to photo ops? I only recall seeing the fighter trailing behind.

5- Aren't there special camera mounted planes for taking mid air photos?

6- How many people fit in the fighter cockpit? If only one, can you fly and take photos at the same time? Did the fighter have a mounted camera? Or did they take the photos through the glass of the cockpit?


Anybody else want to add to this list?






[edit on 6-5-2009 by GuyverUnit I]




posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777

Originally posted by m4ng4n
anytime.tv4.se...

Snippet from swedish news TV4


I cannot access that, what is it?


It´s an actual video showing the event that occured in high resolution.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   
The text of my FOIA:

White House
Attn: Freedom of Information Act Official
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Washington DC 20050

Re: FOIA Request

Dear Sir or Madam,

In accordance with the FOIA and President's directives to the Justice Department to ensure all FOIA request are responded to and his election campaign promise of transparency in government, I cordially request a copy of the photos (all) taken of Air Force One and its fighter escorts that were taken over the Statue of Liberty in what was identified by the White House as a photo op update.

In addition, since the aircraft was identified as Air Force One, I want a detailed listing of the passengers, to include all crew members and the actual cost to the taxpayers for the flight, photo crew and fighter escort. This is to include all fuel costs, Air Force One maintenance crew cost at Andrews AFB and aircrew cost and if meals were served, I want a copy of the menu, plus the cost of the meals served. Upon arrival back at Andrews, AFB, I also want to know the cost associated with prepping this aircraft, i.e., cleaning, maintenance check-up by Andrews AFB personnel who support Air Force One.

In addition, to the above, I want a detailed listing of the cost of any and all security personnel, both military and Secret Service agents involved in Air Force movements.

All of the above, per the Freedom of Information Act are mandatory request by me and per the FOIA, the President's Transparency of Government policy, not to mention, his own personal televised directives to the Justice Department to ensure all FOIA requests are acted upon immediately



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 02:42 PM
link   
In case y'all didn't see this (I posted it in another thread), this is the audio clip of the conversation between SAM 29000 ( the aircraft used as a backup for Air force 1), using the callsign "VENUS01), and New York approach......VENUS is cancelling IFR (using own navigation and traffic clearance) and proceeding to the Verrazano Bridge....

NY TRACON



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   
White House to release one photo,
News at 11.

The $328,835 snapshot.

ty Jesus

[edit on 083131p://bThursday2009 by Stormdancer777]

[edit on 083131p://bThursday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by habu71
In case y'all didn't see this (I posted it in another thread), this is the audio clip of the conversation between SAM 29000 ( the aircraft used as a backup for Air force 1), using the callsign "VENUS01), and New York approach......VENUS is cancelling IFR (using own navigation and traffic clearance) and proceeding to the Verrazano Bridge....

NY TRACON


OH thank you, I don't understand.

What does it all mean?



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 09:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Realize this is my interpretation, not necessarily fact....

I am judging intent by two things:
1> tone of voice of the VENUS01 pilot
2> The fact that VENUS proceeded VFR (visual flight rules). A precise military mission would probably have involved a set of more specific points to traverse than the radio indication of "proceeding to the Verrazano Bridge".

The tone of voice of the VENUS pilot (remember, these are the "best of the best") was not a normal, flat intonation of someone on a precision military mission.

If you have specific questions about any of this, I'd be happy to render opinions (my gf says I have more opinions than the world wants



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 09:33 AM
link   


The tone of voice of the VENUS pilot (remember, these are the "best of the best") was not a normal, flat intonation of someone on a precision military mission.


Ok tell me more.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Again, my opinion....

The intonation I hear is a simple, "hey, we're having a good time doing this, it's not our normal high security mission with VIP's"....From experience, when it is a tightly controlled, high security mission, my voice (as most military pilots) is/was very controlled, with little ups and downs in tones......

I still cannot believe:

This was done with authorization
Someone authorized it....




posted on May, 7 2009 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by habu71
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Again, my opinion....

The intonation I hear is a simple, "hey, we're having a good time doing this, it's not our normal high security mission with VIP's"....From experience, when it is a tightly controlled, high security mission, my voice (as most military pilots) is/was very controlled, with little ups and downs in tones......

I still cannot believe:

This was done with authorization
Someone authorized it....



You are very astute, I remember when the news first surfaced about the flight, the first news said the flight had authorization from the White House.

I my gut reaction was it was VIP's



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Why does that matter? The distance from Dannelly Field in Montgomery (where the F-16s are based) is roughly 750 miles from New York City. According to the Pentagon, the fighters logged just under four hours of flight time during their mission. During that time, they burned as much as 20,000 pounds of fuel, based on an optimal cruise speed and a configuration that included two external tanks.

With "two bags of gas," an F-16 has a maximum fuel capacity of 11,900 pounds. Subtract the "divert minimum" that pilots must maintain for safety (typically 1,500 pounds), and the amount of on-board fuel drops to just over 10,000 pounds. So, the F-16s had to take on extra gas somewhere between Montgomery and the Big Apple.

In other words, there was at least one in-flight refueling as a part of the mission--and possibly two--requiring at least one tanker aircraft. So, factor in the added expense of a KC-135 or KC-10 and its crew. At the beginning of this decade, the cost of each Stratotanker flying hour was pegged at more than $10,000. Operating a KC-10 is even more expensive, just over $13,000 an hour. Multiply that cost by three to five hours, the typical length of a tanker sortie.

That may not seem like much, considering the total bill for the photo-op was at least $300,000. But it also shows a level of planning (and support) that the White House hasn't discussed. Obviously, in-flight refueling is a routine part of USAF operations. But adding tankers to the equation expands the coordination process, and increases the overall cost of the photo op.

How much was actually spent on the New York fly-by? We still don't know--just as we don't know why it was suddenly necessary to update public relations photographs for Air Force One. Will the forthcoming White House report discuss those issues? Don't bet on it.


formerspook.blogspot.com...

But it also shows a level of planning (and support) that the White House hasn't discussed.

Oh well, we will get the typical snow job.

and most will believe it, why?

Because it suits them.

[edit on 103131p://bThursday2009 by Stormdancer777]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Fascinating, I enjoy that blog, just hadn't read it lately GOOD FIND!!!......AL guard aircraft being involved "could" support the training mission excuse, BUT.......the audio has VENUS telling approach control that when "they" have done their work, the F16 will become Capitol92 (call sign is being changed)...

Capitol is the unit call sign assigned to the DC Air National Guard!!!!

different aircraft??



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by habu71
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Fascinating, I enjoy that blog, just hadn't read it lately GOOD FIND!!!......AL guard aircraft being involved "could" support the training mission excuse, BUT.......the audio has VENUS telling approach control that when "they" have done their work, the F16 will become Capitol92 (call sign is being changed)...

Capitol is the unit call sign assigned to the DC Air National Guard!!!!

different aircraft??


I see, good to have someone like you who knows these things.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Thanks..I had almost left ATS because of all of the high school trolls that were destroying it....



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join