Andrews Air Force Base on 9/11

[lapman]

To say a plane became "invisible"because it turned its transponder off is fantasy.


Confirm this by visiting the Canadian Defense website again,
"Canada-United States Defense Regulations."

http://www.dnd.ca/menu/canada-us/bg00.010_e.htm
or
http://www.Public-Action.com/911/norad

"NORAD uses a network of ground-based radars, sensors and fighter
jets to detect, intercept and, if necessary, engage any threats to
the continent."

So what, where does it say that they can have planes up in the air and intercept in 2 minutes?

Transponders help to filter out all identifiable aircraft for NORAD
and allow them to focus on those craft that are unidentified. An
aircraft flying without a transponder gets special attention. NORAD
must have known when each of the transponders in the four "suicide"
jets was turned off, and must have known immediately. At all times,
NORAD must have known the location of each of the four planes.

You again post the "all transponders were turned off" lie. How many times do we need to tell you that flight 175 did not turn the transponder to standby?

The Christian
Science Monitor says of Flight 11:

"Shortly afterward, as aircraft (sic) was making its turn toward New
York City, the plane's transponder was turned off. With its
transponder off, its altitude became a matter of guesswork for the
controllers, although the plane was still visible on radar ..."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0912/p1s1-usju.html

That's flight 11, not flight 175. As one controller who was on duty that day posted on here, they can tag a radar return, but they cannot pass that tag onto NORAD. You also completely ignore the "its altitude became a matter of guesswork" part of your misquote. So a fighter pilot is somehow supposed to find an aircraft in 30+ thousand feet of airspace and discern which radar return in a sea or returns it's supposed to target. You obviously have never been in an airplane. Then again, you did lie about your Navy enlistment. And flight 77 disappeared from all radar for 38 minutes.

 

[pomeroo]

Then debunk Clarke and Mineta:

9:10 am. Cheney, Rice go from White House to the Presidental Emergency Operation Center (PEOC), the bunker
Clarke, 2004, pp. 3-4

9:15 am: Mineta arrives at White House is briefed by Clarke.
9/11 Commission, 5/23/2003

... and provide explanation, where Mister Cheney was until 10:00 (as he should have been arrived in the bunker)

You ignored the link to Mike W.'s site and you ignored my request that you check out the many Norman Mineta threads here.

Off you go!

 

[roundhead]

So what, where does it say that they can have planes up in the air and intercept in 2 minutes?
You again post the "all transponders were turned off" lie. How many times do we need to tell you that flight 175 did not turn the transponder to standby?

That's flight 11, not flight 175. As one controller who was on duty that day posted on here, they can tag a radar return, but they cannot pass that tag onto NORAD. You also completely ignore the "its altitude became a matter of guesswork" part of your misquote. So a fighter pilot is somehow supposed to find an aircraft in 30+ thousand feet of airspace and discern which radar return in a sea or returns it's supposed to target. You obviously have never been in an airplane. Then again, you did lie about your Navy enlistment. And flight 77 disappeared from all radar for 38 minutes.

Your right, only three of four turned off transponders, that doesnt support the seeming contention that they become invisible because they are off. Military radar can find and plot a plane without a transponder, easily. Its in fact a mission of Norad, obviously, or inbound enemy planes would never be tracked once they came over land in the continental US.

The official lie says it dissapeared from all radar for 38 minutes. I dont think it did for even one second.

I didnt say anything about "up in the air and intercept in two minutes"......my point was how long it took TO EVEN MAKE THE CALL....

Dont lie about my military service. If you care to make a wager, i would be glad to prove it. I dont appreciate the slander, its uncalled for. Say what you want about me, but i spent 8 years in the USN, dont bring that up again.

And to other posters, i never claimed to work on F14's...My rating was DS (data systems technician)i worked on the NTDS system and ships payroll computers. The UYK- 7, which i worked on aboard ship, i was told had been also used on the Tomcats. You have to remember how big computers were back then.The UYK-7 was the first "mini" the Navy used. I am sure its not been around forever.
The NTDS computers on the Kennedy circa 1980 were the size of a refrigator, used donut memory, and were chilled water cooled, and only 32k . They were Univac 642's. I cant imagine to many people would know that.

We used 256bps tape drives to load them.

 

[pomeroo]

Stinett didn't get anything right. He merely wasted his time finding a way to put out a bunch of endnotes that make it seem like his work is researched, but in fact his sources contradict him.

The only folks who support Stinett's work are fools, conspiracy-driven nutcases, and far-right neo-cons who want to thrash FDR's legacy.

Your last sentence contains an error. You mean "paleo-cons"--people like Pat Buchanan. Neocons strongly approve of FDR's war leadership and Harry Truman is one of their patron saints.

 

[pomeroo]

9:06 a.m.: Order to halt traffic is expanded to include the entire northeast from Washington to Cleveland. FAA's air traffic control center outside Washington D.C. notifies all air traffic facilities nationwide of the suspected hijacking of American Airlines Flight 11.


Why hasnt NORAD scrambled any fighters to protect Washington D.C. by 9:05? How could they not have? Two airliners have already hit the WTC. Nine minutes ago the transponder on American Airlines Flight 77 was shut off and it made a 180 degree turn and has been heading directly for Washington D.C. for 6 minutes. Perhaps now would be a good time to remember that New York City and Washington D.C. are far and away the top two cities in the United States that would be targeted by terrorists. Why hasnt NORAD scrambled any fighters to protect Washington D.C. by 9:05? Stand Down.


9:11 a.m.: The two F-15 Eagles from Otis Air National Guard station in Falmouth; Massachusetts finally make it to NYC and the WTC. So, it takes these two F-15s, which have a top speed of 1875+ MPH, 19 minutes to cover the 153 miles from Otis to the WTC. This means their average flight speed from Otis to the WTC was only 483.2 MPH or just 25.8% of their top speed. A little math exposes these window dressing fighters for what they are. Thank you NORAD for your September 18, 20001 Press Release. Stand Down.



9:24 a.m.: The FAA notifies NORAD that American Airlines Flight 77 has been hijacked. The FAA lost contact with American Airlines Flight 77 when the transponder signal stops at 8:56 a.m. -- Why does it take 33 minutes for the FAA to tell NORAD that American Airlines Flight 77 has been hijacked? Impossible. Stand Down.


Why wasnt Langley AFB scrambled at 8:20 or 8:40 or 8:46:26 or at the very least at 9:02:54? How could NORAD possibly have waited the 21 minutes from the time United Airlines Flight 175 hits the South Tower of the WTC at 9:02:54 before finally scrambling Langley at 9:24? Waiting these 21 extra minutes to finally scramble Langley is the real smoking gun Stand Down that no one can get around


9:30 a.m.: Two, possibly three F-16 Fighting Falcons code-named Huntress take off from Langley AFB headed at first toward at NYC. A couple of minutes into their mission, according to General Haugen "A person came on the radio and identified themselves as being with the Secret Service" and said, "I want you to protect the White House at all costs." The F-16s laid in a new course and vectored to Washington D.C. Since both Washington D.C. and New York City are both north of Langley, and this happened within a couple of minutes of take-off, this was not a factor in why these F-16 fighters were flying so slow.


Why were these fighters headed to NYC when American Airlines Flight 77 has been headed directly for Washington D.C. for the last 31 minutes, and with their communication and transponder turned off for 34 minutes? There are no airliners headed for NYC or anywhere else with their communication and transponders turned off. Also, at 9:25 air traffic controllers have already informed the United States Secret Service in Washington D.C. that American Airlines Flight 77 is approaching them very fast. So why are these F-16s first flying toward NYC? Stand Down.


9:33 a.m.: According to The New York Times, American Airlines Flight 77 was lost at 8:56 when it turned off its transponder, and stayed lost until now. Washington air traffic control sees a fast moving blip on their radar at this time and sends a warning to Dulles Airport in Washington. Is it conceivable that an airplane could be lost inside United States air space for 37 minutes? Stand Down


8:43 a.m.: The FAA notifies NORAD that United Airlines Flight 175 has been hijacked. NORAD has officially admitted that the FAA told them about the hijacking of United Airlines Flight 175 at 8:43. So, now NORAD knows about two hijackings and American Airlines Flight 11 has been barreling down on New York City since turning south at 8:26, and is just 3 minutes away from impacting the WTC. What does NORAD do with this new information? Do they immediately scramble the 102nd Fighter Wing of the Otis Air National Guard Base in Falmouth, Massachusetts? Again, no they dont, they sit on this most vital information of now two hijacked airliners. Stand Down.


8:46 a.m.: NORAD orders the 102nd Fighter Wing of the Otis Air National Guard Base in Falmouth, Massachusetts to scramble two of their F-15 fighters. This is from the 102nd Fighter Wing's mission statement of September 11, 2001. "Our aircraft and their crews are on continuous 24-hour, 365-day alert to guard our skies. The 102nd Fighter Wing's area of responsibility includes over 500,000 square miles, 90 million people, and the major industrial centers of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, and Washington, D.C."


NORAD, by their own account, held on to the most vital information of American Airlines Flight 11 hijacking for at least 6 minutes before ordering Otis to scramble. NORAD, by their own account, held on to the most vital information of United Airlines Flight 175 hijacking for at least 3 minutes before ordering Otis to scramble.

Gee, Child, you know as much about military procedures as you know about economics. You haven't understood a word that's been written here.

 

[roundhead]

Stinett didn't get anything right. He merely wasted his time finding a way to put out a bunch of endnotes that make it seem like his work is researched, but in fact his sources contradict him.

The only folks who support Stinett's work are fools, conspiracy-driven nutcases, and far-right neo-cons who want to thrash FDR's legacy.

I assume by your comments you have never read the book. BTW, Publishers weekly doesnt agree with you at all.


From Publishers Weekly
Historians have long debated whether President Roosevelt had advance knowledge of Japan's December 7, 1941, attack on Pearl Harbor. Using documents pried loose through the Freedom of Information Act during 17 years of research, Stinnett provides overwhelming evidence that FDR and his top advisers knew that Japanese warships were heading toward Hawaii. The heart of his argument is even more inflammatory: Stinnett argues that FDR, who desired to sway public opinion in support of U.S. entry into WWII, instigated a policy intended to provoke a Japanese attack. The plan was outlined in a U.S. Naval Intelligence secret strategy memo of October 1940; Roosevelt immediately began implementing its eight steps (which included deploying U.S. warships in Japanese territorial waters and imposing a total embargo intended to strangle Japan's economy), all of which, according to Stinnett, climaxed in the Japanese attack. Stinnett, a decorated naval veteran of WWII who served under then Lt. George Bush, substantiates his charges with a wealth of persuasive documents, including many government and military memos and transcripts. Demolishing the myth that the Japanese fleet maintained strict radio silence, he shows that several Japanese naval broadcasts, intercepted by American cryptographers in the 10 days before December 7, confirmed that Japan intended to start the war at Pearl Harbor. Stinnett convincingly demonstrates that the U.S. top brass in Hawaii--Pacific Fleet commander Adm. Husband Kimmel and Lt. Gen. Walter Short--were kept out of the intelligence loop on orders from Washington and were then scapegoated for allegedly failing to anticipate the Japanese attack (in May 1999, the U.S. Senate cleared their names). Kimmel moved his fleet into the North Pacific, actively searching for the suspected Japanese staging area, but naval headquarters ordered him to turn back. Stinnett's meticulously researched book raises deeply troubling ethical issues. While he believes the deceit built into FDR's strategy was heinous, he nevertheless writes: "I sympathize with the agonizing dilemma faced by President Roosevelt. He was forced to find circuitous means to persuade an isolationist America to join in a fight for freedom." This, however, is an expression of understanding, not of absolution. If Stinnett is right, FDR has a lot to answer for--namely, the lives of those Americans who perished at Pearl Harbor. Stinnett establishes almost beyond question that the U.S. Navy could have at least anticipated the attack. The evidence that FDR himself deliberately provoked the attack is circumstantial, but convincing enough to make Stinnett's bombshell of a book the subject of impassioned debate in the months to come. (Dec.)

 

[pomeroo]

To say a plane became "invisible"because it turned its transponder off is fantasy.


Confirm this by visiting the Canadian Defense website again,
"Canada-United States Defense Regulations."

http://www.dnd.ca/menu/canada-us/bg00.010_e.htm
or
http://www.Public-Action.com/911/norad

"NORAD uses a network of ground-based radars, sensors and fighter
jets to detect, intercept and, if necessary, engage any threats to
the continent."

Transponders help to filter out all identifiable aircraft for NORAD
and allow them to focus on those craft that are unidentified. An
aircraft flying without a transponder gets special attention. NORAD
must have known when each of the transponders in the four "suicide"
jets was turned off, and must have known immediately. At all times,
NORAD must have known the location of each of the four planes.



The Christian
Science Monitor says of Flight 11:

"Shortly afterward, as aircraft (sic) was making its turn toward New
York City, the plane's transponder was turned off. With its
transponder off, its altitude became a matter of guesswork for the
controllers, although the plane was still visible on radar ..."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0912/p1s1-usju.html

Uh, LastChild, why the scare quotes around the word "suicide"? Oh, that's right: you're very obtuse.

 

[Tbone]

Dont lie about my military service. If you care to make a wager, i would be glad to prove it. I dont appreciate the slander, its uncalled for. Say what you want about me, but i spent 8 years in the USN, dont bring that up again.

I have already asked you to prove it. If you do not wish to derail this thread, feel free to send it to me in a private message or start a new thread.

 

[Dave Rogers]

I assume by your comments you have never read the book. BTW, Publishers weekly doesnt agree with you at all.

Wow, a house rag making exaggerated claims to help sell a poorly researched book? What an unusual occurrence.

Would you like to start a PH thread in the parent forum some time?

Dave

 

[lapman]

Yes, they sure did. Better do your homework, that was the fire control CPU on Tomcats back in the late 70's.

Wrong again

I actually worked mostly on the NTDS system(Naval tactital data system) , which on the JFK had Univac Alpha's ganged together, and 1218's for payroll.

You are really bad at this. The Univac Alpha and 1218 never existed. The lies continue.

Btw, i was on the JFK when she made at that time a first(as far as i know)cruise for an East Coast carrier.

We sailed through the Red sea, made a port call at Perth, Australia, and shortly after i got out, via Diego Garcia. Where upon arrival, we were stripped searched by the Britts, who have half the Island. Then to Athens, then Rota, and finally Norfolk.
I have spent many nights tied up to pier 12.

Nice try, but your lie has been exposed.

 

[johnny karate]

roundhead and bio:

If what you are alleging is true (that there was a stand down order in effect the morning of 9/11, thus implicating elements of the military in a conspiracy to commit and cover-up up mass murder), then why hasn't this particular bombshell been discerned and/or revealed by a single MSM outlet, investigative body, or law enforcement agency on the planet?

Bump #2.

 

[kookbreaker]

I assume by your comments you have never read the book.

You would be wrong, as usual.

BTW, Publishers weekly doesnt agree with you at all.

Who cares? They are not in a position to know. They are trying to sell books.

Experts on Pearl Harbor have been studying the documents from the US as well as those available from Japan for years. They have almost universally conlcuded that Stinett is not only wrong, but outright deceptive. His 'outside' sources do not pass the sniff test.

Further experts included experts on the history of codebreaking. They also have concluded that Stinnett was outright lying about certain aspects of the codebreaking process.

Stinnett was called on this in his forum. The questions got so tough for him that he shut the board down to prevent tough questioning.

 

[kookbreaker]

Your last sentence contains an error. You mean "paleo-cons"--people like Pat Buchanan. Neocons strongly approve of FDR's war leadership and Harry Truman is one of their patron saints.

I can't keep you guys straight!

Anyway, Stinnet is now the tool of these folks who still can't let go of FDR's New Deal programs. The same group has been promoting a series of books trying to destroy FDR's legacy - some of them outright calling him a Communist trying to save the USSR.

 

[lapman]

Your right, only three of four turned off transponders, that doesnt support the seeming contention that they become invisible because they are off. Military radar can find and plot a plane without a transponder, easily. Its in fact a mission of Norad, obviously, or inbound enemy planes would never be tracked once they came over land in the continental US.

You have yet to provide any evidence that when a transponder return in lost on an aircraft over the continental US, NORAD tracks it at all on 9/11.

The official lie says it dissapeared from all radar for 38 minutes. I dont think it did for even one second.

Yet you cannot provide any shred of evidence to back your statement at all. So, none of us that know anything about radar agree with you.

I didnt say anything about "up in the air and intercept in two minutes"......my point was how long it took TO EVEN MAKE THE CALL....

That was the FAA, not NORAD. Again you think that the military and systems are this hyper-efficient thing that can pick out an unknown target, mind-read pilots and can shoot down in seconds a civilian aircraft. You also want us to believe that the military launches and intercepts aircraft without orders or even verification that the target is hostile.

Dont lie about my military service. If you care to make a wager, i would be glad to prove it. I dont appreciate the slander, its uncalled for. Say what you want about me, but i spent 8 years in the USN, dont bring that up again.

You have been asked to provide proof. You haven't.

And to other posters, i never claimed to work on F14's

Gee, then what does this in message 66 mean?

In fact, the UYK-7, the computer used then on the F14 was something i was trained on and troubleshot.

...My rating was DS (data systems technician)i worked on the NTDS system and ships payroll computers. The UYK- 7, which i worked on aboard ship, i was told had been also used on the Tomcats.

If you had worked on the ship as claimed, you would have known that the AN/UYK-7 was not used on aircraft.

You have to remember how big computers were back then.The UYK-7 was the first "mini" the Navy used. I am sure its not been around forever.
The NTDS computers on the Kennedy circa 1980 were the size of a refrigator, used donut memory, and were chilled water cooled, and only 32k . They were Univac 642's.

You better quit while you're way behind. The CP-642 computer use DRUM memory, not donut memory and it's circa 1958.

I cant imagine to many people would know that.

Why would anyone else besides you know of your lies?

We used 256bps tape drives to load them.

That's cute. Tape drives were never designated by their bit rate. But modems were.

 

[roundhead]

Wrong again
You are really bad at this. The Univac Alpha and 1218 never existed. The lies continue.
Nice try, but your lie has been exposed.

Your a bald faced liar...the Sperry Univac 642 "A" and revised 642"B" not only existed, but were THE computers of NTDS for at least 10 years(that i know of), if not longer.They were around from At LEAST early 70's to early 80's and maybe longer.

The 1218 was THE computer that EVERY DS in the Navy was trained on in troubleshooting techniques, and was used extensively in the fleet in at least the years i cited above. This training was at Mare Island, California.

If you can refute either of those assertions, i will never post here again. As i worked Daily on all three for 8 years, i KNOW you cant.

Why INTENTIONALLY LIE??


The somewhat older "A's" were still on the JFK when i got out in May 82, while stationed on her. The somewhat newer "B's" were on the USS California (CGN-36)When i was stationed on her in the fall of 75 after completing school. She was only a year old at that point, and was thus given the 642"B's, from day one.

 

[Reheat]

You seem to have missed the part of my post about aircraft carrying drop tanks having severely degraded supersonic performance due to drag. Unclassified hard data may not be available, but I've seen estimates that the best F-16-type aircraft can do with tanks is about Mach 1.2.

I've been reluctant to post in this thread again because it is filled with stupid. However, as part of the educational objective of this Forum it is worthwhile to point out a few facts.

An F-16, F-15, or any other fighter is restricted when "WARTS" are hanging on the wing. External fuel tanks, missiles, bombs, or anything else hanging on the wings not only degrades performance due to drag, but there are speed and G restrictions with those "WARTS" installed. Those external devices are not perfectly balanced nor are they perfectly aligned with the airstream. They can vibrate at high speed and with either aircraft they are likely to be "ripped" from the wings if the aircraft went "full blower" for any length of time while disregarding restrictions. So, in addition to significantly increased fuel consumption and degraded performance there are restrictions to speed when they are installed that are not casually disregarded.

For an emergency engagement the external fuel tanks would be jettisoned. They would be jettisoned in a safe area over the water and that takes time. Even with external fuel tanks jettisoned, there are still speed restriction for carriage and firing missiles. I will not post specifics as they are likely classified. Even if they are not classified specifics should not be discussed in an open public forum.

The top speeds these idiot troofers are parroting are for NEW, CLEAN, LIGHT FUEL LOADED aircraft under optimum conditions. In addition, supersonic flight over most of the US is prohibited. In fact, there is NO PLACE on the east coast (over land) where supersonic flight is allowed. No pilot is going to violate that without good reason. That is precisely why Nagaspany (once he knew the specific threat) indicated to the Langley fighters that "I don't care how many windows you break" in reaching Washington, DC. Prior to that they would not have gone supersonic simply because a specific threat was not known to exist.

 

[bio]

Yes, it 100% up to you to prove that they had a hard link. Just because the setup "phone bridges," does not mean that the could be sustained, especially with the HUGE amount of phone traffic. You also have to prove that the sustained the other bridges for the entire time. You then have to prove that the difficulty only happened on 9/11 and no other time in history. You are the one making the claim that the difficulties were manufactured. The onus is on you to back that up.

that is an excuse, which is furthermore wrong. You have not a single proof, that the hijack-net between NMCC and FAA failed due to the "huge amount of phone traffic." That is your claim, which you need to proof me.

The existence of the net is even confirmed by the NMCC from 9:20 am on.

According to the 9/11 Commission: “The NMCC [National Military Command Center inside the Pentagon] officer who participated told us that the call was monitored only periodically because the information was sporadic, it was of little value, and there were other important tasks. The FAA manager of the teleconference also remembered that the military participated only briefly before the Pentagon was hit.” 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004; 9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 36

 

[roundhead]

You have yet to provide any evidence that when a transponder return in lost on an aircraft over the continental US, NORAD tracks it at all on 9/11.
Yet you cannot provide any shred of evidence to back your statement at all. So, none of us that know anything about radar agree with you.
That was the FAA, not NORAD. Again you think that the military and systems are this hyper-efficient thing that can pick out an unknown target, mind-read pilots and can shoot down in seconds a civilian aircraft. You also want us to believe that the military launches and intercepts aircraft without orders or even verification that the target is hostile.
You have been asked to provide proof. You haven't.
Gee, then what does this in message 66 mean?

If you had worked on the ship as claimed, you would have known that the AN/UYK-7 was not used on aircraft.
You better quit while you're way behind. The CP-642 computer use DRUM memory, not donut memory and it's circa 1958. Why would anyone else besides you know of your lies?
That's cute. Tape drives were never designated by their bit rate. But modems were.

We used the yuk 7 toward the end of my enlistment in MY rating. I was told it was ALSO used on the F14.

The 642 used donut memory for it core memory. And thin film memory for what was called it "control" memory.

256 designated bytes per second back then. The tapes drives were mighty antique.

 

[lapman]

Your a bald faced liar...the Sperry Univac 642 "A" and revised 642"B" not only existed, but were THE computers of NTDS for at least 10 years(that i know of), if not longer.They were around from At LEAST early 70's to early 80's and maybe longer.

I never said the UNIVAC CP-642 did not exist. However, your description of it is way off base. This proves that you have never even looked at a CP-642A/B let alone worked on one.

The 1218 was THE computer that EVERY DS in the Navy was trained on in troubleshooting techniques, and was used extensively in the fleet in at least the years i cited above. This training was at Mare Island, California.

Ok, I sit corrected, the 1218 was the military version of the 418. Still proves nothing on your part.

If you can refute either of those assertions, i will never post here again. As i worked Daily on all three for 8 years, i KNOW you cant.

Yet you cannot even give a proper description of it.

Why INTENTIONALLY LIE??

Yes, why are you intentionally lying?

The somewhat older "A's" were still on the JFK when i got out in May 82, while stationed on her. The somewhat newer "B's" were on the USS California (CGN-36)When i was stationed on her in the fall of 75 after completing school. She was only a year old at that point, and was thus given the 642"B's, from day one.

Nice try to fabricate info. Still waiting for actual proof.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

People, please... Roundhead's military qualifications or lack of such is irrelevant to the fact that he's got the events of 9/11 wrong. It doesn't matter if he retired 0-11 with multiple Navy Crosses; his mistakes regarding the events that day are separate from any experience he may or may not have.

Can we concentrate on his misapprehensions regarding how the FAA and Military responded that day? That's the substance; anything about whether he served or not is merely fluff, and doesn't impact anything about what he misrepresents concerning the FAA and NORAD response that day.