Merged Plane off course / Where were the fighters?

[TJM]

It really surprises me that no fighter jet intercepted in 78 minutes. I really thought that in a post-9/11 world, the military would be all over that.

News reports say fighter jets were put on "alert". Why not just put them in the air just in case?

Just a casual glance at the flight path shows that 188 gets pretty close to some pretty hardcore military assets, well within range of ground based defenses, if present. They may not have even had to put a fighter in the air.

 

[McHrozni]

Just a casual glance at the flight path shows that 188 gets pretty close to some pretty hardcore military assets, well within range of ground based defenses, if present. They may not have even had to put a fighter in the air.

Then why put fighters on alert in the first place?

They aren't there just to shoot down the aircraft, but to guide it to an airfield if necessary. It is entirely possible that such an aircraft to have genuine problems with it's equipment and needs assistance, not that it's hijacked and needs to be shot down before it crashes into something we hold dear.

Furthermore, I'd be rather surprised if the military didn't value it's hard core assets more than the fuel for two fighter sorties.

McHrozni

 

[TJM]

Then why put fighters on alert in the first place?

They aren't there just to shoot down the aircraft, but to guide it to an airfield if necessary. It is entirely possible that such an aircraft to have genuine problems with it's equipment and needs assistance, not that it's hijacked and needs to be shot down before it crashes into something we hold dear.

Furthermore, I'd be rather surprised if the military didn't value it's hard core assets more than the fuel for two fighter sorties.

McHrozni

The scenario I was alluding to was if 188 was determined to be hostile. SAMS in the area could be deployed faster than a fighter.

 

[tfk]

The scenario I was alluding to was if 188 was determined to be hostile. SAMS in the area could be deployed faster than a fighter.

What SAMs?

The plane left its transponder on, so it's course was known. If it turned that off, the things would have been different. It's highly probable that the ground controllers strongly suspected what was happening. It's not the first time.

The only purpose of a scrambled jet is to shoot it down. The fact that it stayed on its preassigned heading told them that it wasn't headed towards any target.

If it changed course, then I bet that they would have scrambled armed jets.

I am pretty surprised that they didn't use it as a training exercise, tho.

Tom

 

[R.Mackey]

The scenario I was alluding to was if 188 was determined to be hostile. SAMS in the area could be deployed faster than a fighter.

I would be absolutely astonished if there are any SAMs, anywhere, that were at any state of readiness. I'd be equally astonished if even today there was anything in the ROE that permitted a launch against an airliner in a simple loss-of-contact scenario.

The exceptions, i.e. fortification around the Pentagon and MANPADS at the White House, have been in extremely unusual circumstances.

 

[SezMe]

I would be absolutely astonished if there are any SAMs, anywhere, that were at any state of readiness. I'd be equally astonished if even today there was anything in the ROE that permitted a launch against an airliner in a simple loss-of-contact scenario.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[McHrozni]

The scenario I was alluding to was if 188 was determined to be hostile. SAMS in the area could be deployed faster than a fighter.

If they were ready to launch, then maybe.

The trick is, however, that the fighters weren't launched at all, even though they could be and were ready to do so. This has little to do with determining what else could feasibly be done.

McHrozni

 

[Pinch]

I would be absolutely astonished if there are any SAMs, anywhere, that were at any state of readiness. I'd be equally astonished if even today there was anything in the ROE that permitted a launch against an airliner in a simple loss-of-contact scenario.

The exceptions, i.e. fortification around the Pentagon and MANPADS at the White House, have been in extremely unusual circumstances.

I would submit that surface to air missiles (SAMS), especially in the north central part of the country (i.e. Minneapolis), have never been present in any form, anywhere in that region.

There *might* have been some somewhere in that region at some time in the 50's or 60's when the Soviet bomber threat was at its highest, but a long time ago, for basic point defense purposes of assets such as capital cities or strategic locations (which in the Minnesota/Wisconsin/UP Michigan region would have been little to none over the years), it was decided, quite correctly in my view, that the defense of such areas lay in their location rather than from some surface-to-air missile defense. It would have been incredibly cost prohibitive to erect, man, maintain and justify any set of missile defense systems for a non-existent threat - especially one that has not been around for decades.

The A320, as well, flying at a typical flight level for a transit from KSAN to KMSP (probably FL33 or FL35), would have been out of an MANPAD (man-portable air defense, aka Stinger or SA-7 grail-type) or portable air defense weapon envelope by several thousands of feet.

As far as the Pentagon goes, prior to 9/11 there have never been any fortifications in or near or around the building - ever. The closest they ever came was the old NIKE/Hercules system that had 4 fixed sites, each between 15 to 25 miles away from the Pentagon area. These were de-commed in the early 70's. There is an old site in Lorton about 5 miles away where I live. These air defenses were designed to do what they could against Soviet incoming ICBMs. On the afternoon of 9/12, driving through the Pentagon parking lot, they had Avenger HUMVEE-mounted Stinger systems there. Since then, there are fixed Patriot (I believe) sites at 4 locations around DC. I've seen two of these - there may be more than 4, though.

The whole idea of fixed/planned air defense is to shoot something down way before it gets to a defended asset, hence these Patriot sites locates a few to 5 or more miles away from the strategic locations being defended. Point-defense systems like the Phalanx CIWS are true last-ditch defenses, where you might very well destroy the incoming threat but run the risk of having high-subsonic, supersonic or hypersonic missile debris still impacting your asset.

The myth of Pentagon SAM "standdown" is a key element of April Gallop's hilarious lawsuit (proudly supported by Cap't Bob and his merry minions from PfT) that renders, above all else in that POS suit, its certifiable death in the legal system.

Again, the location of our CONUS bases and facilities are the best defense - or *were*, prior to 9/11, against external air-breathing threats. Still, however, surface to air missiles should be and are used in extreme circumstances and are still extremely rare in our world.

 

[BenBurch]

The scenario I was alluding to was if 188 was determined to be hostile. SAMS in the area could be deployed faster than a fighter.

The US SAM program was shut down 30 years ago. All gone.

 

[Reheat]

Fighters were not launched because the aircraft was not a threat to anything significant. Well, unless you consider a cheese processing plant in Eau Claire or a dairy farm to be a significant target!

If the aircraft had changed course toward Chicago or other significant target you can bet your last $ they would have launched.

It's a simple issue with a simple explanation.

 

[George 152]

As a matter of interest how long would it take to actually launch a fighter to intercept an internal commercial flight in the US.
And what would the chain of command be?
Just so the kooks have some idea of how things work in the real world

 

[Dave Rogers]

Seems the leading theory right now is that both pilots fell asleep. They're lucky that someone was able to wake them up before the fighters got scrambled.

Hard to convince anyone you died a hero's death when your last words are "zzzzz....*snort* wha?" *BOOOOOOOM*

"I hope I die peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather, not screaming in terror like his passengers."

Dave

 

[Dave Rogers]

Yeah where were they? We've learned so much since 9/11 haven't we? Thank God for the 9/11 commission and their recommendations. That was all on the up and up right?

Seems like they've listened to the truthers, who've been telling them their recommendations aren't important.

Really, are you too dense to uderstand that if fighters weren't scrambled to intercept a NORDO post-9/11, it didn't take a stand-down order to prevent them being scrambled on 9/11?

Dave

 

[TheBigKahuna]

Well, I could have landed that thing in the Mall of America in the time it took the military to respond. That the military didn't shoot it down within 10 minutes is VERY suspicious.

 

[Lenbrazil]

This incident also serves to undermine another loony CT, the one that Sen. Paul Wellstone was murdered by the Bush cabal. The chief backer of this theory is James Fetzer, one of the central pillars of his thesis is that it is impossible that two such "highly qualified" pilots as the one flying the senator could both have lost track of their airspeed to the extent that the plane stalled.

In the real world both pilots were incompetent and far more qualified ones “****[ed] up” on various occasions in the words of a veteran JAL pilot who landed in San Francisco Bay 2 1/2 miles short of the runway!

I debated the crash with Fetzer on two forums and made posts about the relevance of the incident.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=4542&view=findpost&p=173736

For some background info the Wikipedia entry (mostly written by me) is probably the best place to start.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Wellstone#Death

 

[Lenbrazil]

Originally Posted by AJM8125 View Post
The scenario I was alluding to was if 188 was determined to be hostile. SAMS in the area could be deployed faster than a fighter.

The US SAM program was shut down 30 years ago. All gone.

Even if they were operational I doubt a shoot down order would have been given before visual contact could be made unless it was closing in on major target.

 

[shawmutt]

I heard the pilots were snorting nanothermite.

 

[McHrozni]

Seems like they've listened to the truthers, who've been telling them their recommendations aren't important.

Really, are you too dense to uderstand that if fighters weren't scrambled to intercept a NORDO post-9/11, it didn't take a stand-down order to prevent them being scrambled on 9/11?

Dave

I've had a twoofer tell me that the fact fighters were prepared to launch on this flight is actually proof that they should've intercepted the planes on 9/11.

It didn't make much sense to me either. The subject was dropped when it was pressed to explain how that might be the case.

McHrozni

 

[Lenbrazil]

This incident also serves to undermine another loony CT, the one that Sen. Paul Wellstone was murdered by the Bush cabal. The chief backer of this theory is James Fetzer, one of the central pillars of his thesis is that it is impossible that two such "highly qualified" pilots as the one flying the senator could both have lost track of their airspeed to the extent that the plane stalled.

Fetzer replied to me and said:

"Len Brazil is distorting my position in order to make it easier to attack. I have not said that ignoring their speed, altitude and azmuth were impossible, only that they were highly improbable," he then when on to calculate that the odds were 1 in a trillion! Which based on the current 87,000 flights a day in the US would happen once every 31,000 years. Seriously this is how the minds of CTs' "work".

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FETZERclaimsDEBUNK/message/3730

 

[jaydeehess]

as for the 30 minutes of audio.

IIRC the pilots fought against voice recorders and recording 30 minutes was a compromise.

they did not want their conversations remaining for all to access later but agreed that in the event of a crash it would be useful to know the sounds in the cockpit. since events leading to a crash would be most relevent closer to the time of impact, 30 minutes it was.

Now that they are more used to the fact that they are being recorded this time is being increased.

IIRC that is.