Were The OTIS Fighters Diverted?

[fess]

From the NYT in 2006:

"When an F-16 lights up its afterburners, it consumes nearly 28 gallons of fuel per minute... "

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/14/us/14fuel.html?_r=0

Does that sound about right? From what others have said that would also depend on if it had external fuel tanks and/or missiles and I assume just how fast it was going. Is the fuel consumption for F-15s similar?

Without knowing the flight configuration of the aircraft, that is a hard question to answer. However, 180lbs/min is not far off the mark.

I will say, at full military power, a J-79 will burn almost 2 times the fuel than it does in its normal flight envelope.

I also think I just showed my age.

 

[Reheat]

From the NYT in 2006:

"When an F-16 lights up its afterburners, it consumes nearly 28 gallons of fuel per minute... "

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/14/us/14fuel.html?_r=0

Does that sound about right? From what others have said that would also depend on if it had external fuel tanks and/or missiles and I assume just how fast it was going. Is the fuel consumption for F-15s similar?

No, that's not even close.. It's going to be variable depending on several factors to include weight, drag index. altitude, etc., etc...

On take-off in full AB on a standard day it would consume about 150 gpm of fuel.. Since the F-15 has two PW F-100 engines and is heavier you can more than double that....

 

[FrankHT]

No one had any idea what AA11 was doing. That means the range of possibilities was virtually endless.

Exactly,they had NO IDEA what AA11 was doing (it speed,direction of travel,altitude etc.) once they lost the signal. That was true at 9:09 when Nasypany's request to scramble Langley was denied and it was true as long as the had NO signal! Which means it was true at 9:21 ! There was NO radar on the Phantom 11 report. Even if AA11 really had still been in the air,they'd have had NO IDEA where it was or its target.
So,how could Col. Marr possibly have tried to position the fighters between Washington,DC, & AA11 (what he told the Commission) ? He'd have to have KNOWN where AA11 was to do that!
How could Scoggins have known where it was? "but I would assume he’s somewhere over, uh, either New Jersey or somewhere further south.”

Well,what made him assume that? He had NO MORE radar data than they had at 9:09. If he could have 'assumed' based on that data then so too could they at NEADS at 9:09.
It's all too pat. Too convenient. Just as AA77 approaches Washington,DC, from the SW along comes this report casting all eyes to the NE & giving Marr the excuse he needed to sent those fighters away from AA77. And ,of course,we're left taking the word of a single man with no hard supporting evidence what so ever. You call yourself sceptics but nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[twinstead]

You call yourself sceptics but nothing could be further from the truth.

Why do your posts remind me of the Black Knight scene in Monty Python's Holy Grail?

 

[gumboot]

From the NYT in 2006:

"When an F-16 lights up its afterburners, it consumes nearly 28 gallons of fuel per minute... "

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/14/us/14fuel.html?_r=0

Does that sound about right? From what others have said that would also depend on if it had external fuel tanks and/or missiles and I assume just how fast it was going. Is the fuel consumption for F-15s similar?

Not really, fuel consumption isn't actually dependent on the aircraft's flight profile or it's speed, you've got it somewhat backward.

The aircraft's fuel consumption rate is tied to the amount of thrust the engine generates. The weight and flight profile (any additional loading causing drag, such as tanks) affects the way in which that thrust translates into airspeed.

Afterburner, however, is a specific thrust setting (known as "wet thrust") that has a fixed fuel consumption rate. For the F100-PW-220 engine in an F-16 (an F-15 has the same engines, but two of them), the wet thrust fuel consumption rate is 2.5lb/hr per pound of generated thrust. At wet thrust the thrust output of the engine is 23,830lb, so from this we can calculate that an F-16 on afterburner uses about 992lb of fuel per minute. That's approximately 147gal/min.

Where the NYT got their figure from I don't know. At maximum "dry" thrust (i.e. full thrust but no afterburner) the engine consumes about 26gal/min, so perhaps they used the figures for dry thrust instead.

 

[gumboot]

Exactly,they had NO IDEA what AA11 was doing (it speed,direction of travel,altitude etc.) once they lost the signal. That was true at 9:09 when Nasypany's request to scramble Langley was denied and it was true as long as the had NO signal! Which means it was true at 9:21 ! There was NO radar on the Phantom 11 report. Even if AA11 really had still been in the air,they'd have had NO IDEA where it was or its target.
So,how could Col. Marr possibly have tried to position the fighters between Washington,DC, & AA11 (what he told the Commission) ? He'd have to have KNOWN where AA11 was to do that!
How could Scoggins have known where it was? "but I would assume he’s somewhere over, uh, either New Jersey or somewhere further south.”

Well,what made him assume that? He had NO MORE radar data than they had at 9:09. If he could have 'assumed' based on that data then so too could they at NEADS at 9:09.
It's all too pat. Too convenient. Just as AA77 approaches Washington,DC, from the SW along comes this report casting all eyes to the NE & giving Marr the excuse he needed to sent those fighters away from AA77. And ,of course,we're left taking the word of a single man with no hard supporting evidence what so ever. You call yourself sceptics but nothing could be further from the truth.

Scoggins was tracking AA11 on the TSD, which NEADS does not have access to. That's how the entire phantom AA11 thing started in the first place.

Your argument is fundamentally retarded because the fighters were sent towards AA77 (which NEADS didn't even know was missing). Or are you going to suggest that the conspirators deliberately scrambled fighters towards a target they didn't want shot down, and just relied on the pilots and ATC getting confused about their destination to prevent an intercept?

Where's that laughing dog got to?

 

[beachnut]

... Where's that laughing dog got to?

The SOF flying inside job could be, an original fantasy. Basing claims on ignorance, not new.

 

[Reheat]

Afterburner, however, is a specific thrust setting (known as "wet thrust") that has a fixed fuel consumption rate.

This is correct. I was thinking of using AB to achieve supersonic flight, which would be influenced by profile and other factors as AB would need to be used longer to achieve a specific mach #.

Gumboot, you're not a pilot dammit, so quit correcting me.. No one else knows the difference anyway...

 

[Justin39640]

Huh? You do realize that frivolous use of the debunking dog results in the death of a kitten somewhere in the world, don't you?

 

[gumboot]

This is correct. I was thinking of using AB to achieve supersonic flight, which would be influenced by profile and other factors as AB would need to be used longer to achieve a specific mach #.

Gumboot, you're not a pilot dammit, so quit correcting me.. No one else knows the difference anyway...

 

[Cheap Shot]

Scoggins was tracking AA11 on the TSD, which NEADS does not have access to. That's how the entire phantom AA11 thing started in the first place./QUOTE]

No I had Joe Cooper tracking AA11 using the Radar Scope, I did use the TSD as well, but all of my reports on AA11 location was from a radar display, that Joe Cooper was using.

You are correct that the phantom AA11 was probably propogated by the TSD that someone in ZNY or Eastern Region was using.

 

[gumboot]

Scoggins was tracking AA11 on the TSD, which NEADS does not have access to. That's how the entire phantom AA11 thing started in the first place.

No I had Joe Cooper tracking AA11 using the Radar Scope, I did use the TSD as well, but all of my reports on AA11 location was from a radar display, that Joe Cooper was using.

You are correct that the phantom AA11 was probably propogated by the TSD that someone in ZNY or Eastern Region was using.

Apologies, I muddled myself. It's all coming back. You just overheard the "AA11 still airborne, heading to DC" report and passed it to NEADS as an FYI, if I recall correctly?

 

[FrankHT]

Your argument is fundamentally retarded because the fighters were sent towards AA77

Not until AFTER it had hit the Pentagon & and the pilot's of Langley's F16 had confirmed that to NEADS.

 

[twinstead]

Is there a word we can use for those who debate like FrankHT? Blackknightism? Merelyaflshwouldosis? or is it Tisbutafleshwoulndosis?

 

[fess]

Not until AFTER it had hit the Pentagon & and the pilot's of Langley's F16 had confirmed that to NEADS.

Would you mind telling us how the Langley pilots confirmed this to NEADS? Were they flying overhead?

 

[Cheap Shot]

Actually,I'm far more right than I am wrong. I said The call telling SOF Borgstrum to go up with the others came before 9:21 (phantom 11 report) and it did. 9:14. That means he was ordered up at a time when they knew of NO REASON to put up a third fighter. They had no target,knew of NO hijacked aircraft,why put the SOF up? If not to get him out of the way?
It really doesn't matter if the spare F16 had it's guns loaded or not BUT if it did explain this:
"MALE SPEAKER 7: Only two hot birds. You understand that, correct?
MALE SPEAKER 6: Understand that."[Quote-from NORAD tapes above]
or the account in Lynn Spencer's book 'Touching History' based on interviews with the "key" players. In it (page 119) Borgstrum orders his guns loaded as he's heading out the door to suit up. One thing is for sure though,I didn't just make this stuff up!

For a military unit that has been accused of standing down seems to me they were trying to get ahead of the game a little preparing for something worse. At this point even though they had not heard about the ghost AA11 yet or AA77. They had probably started to hear about some of the false hijackings. At Boston Center I had heard of two COA aircraft and one Iberian aircraft as a potential hijacks comming in from Europe. Getting these aircraft in position would be considered a good move.

 

[gumboot]

Not until AFTER it had hit the Pentagon & and the pilot's of Langley's F16 had confirmed that to NEADS.

QUIT-25 confirmed to NORAD that AA77 had hit the Pentagon before QUIT-25 was scrambled to Washington DC?

That's... remarkable.

 

[FrankHT]

QUIT-25 confirmed to NORAD that AA77 had hit the Pentagon before QUIT-25 was scrambled to Washington DC?

That's... remarkable.

After their little sojourn 60 miles East over the ocean,they were NOT sent directly to Washington,DC, :"The F-16 pilot codenamed Honey (who is apparently Captain Craig Borgstrom) offers a different explanation. As previously mentioned, he says they are flying toward NEW YORK, when they see a black column of smoke coming from Washington, about 30 or 40 miles to the west. He is then asked over the radio by NEADS if he can confirm the Pentagon is burning. He confirms it. He says that the mission of the Langley pilots at this time is clear: to keep all airplanes away from Washington. The F-16s ARE THEN ordered to set up a defensive perimeter above Washington. [Longman, 2002, pp. 76; Filson, 2003, pp. 66; New York Observer, 2/15/2004]" [Quote-History Commons].
But even so,they weren't sent "towards Flight 77" they were sent East over the Atlantic. The Commission gives several different reasons for this. But at least one was within NEADS control "incomplete mission order" Too bad there was no SOF to review them for accuracy.

 

[FrankHT]

For a military unit that has been accused of standing down seems to me they were trying to get ahead of the game a little preparing for something worse. At this point even though they had not heard about the ghost AA11 yet or AA77. They had probably started to hear about some of the false hijackings. At Boston Center I had heard of two COA aircraft and one Iberian aircraft as a potential hijacks comming in from Europe. Getting these aircraft in position would be considered a good move.

Yes, according to the FAA's original time line (revised 2004) they reported as many as 11 possibly hijacked aircraft at 9:09. Something prompted Nasypany to request Langley be scrambled at 9:09. Was that it? If that's the case then keeping those aircraft on the ground waiting for a target makes even less sense. Just as a precaution (Phantom 11 or not) those fighters should have been flying CAP over Washington,DC.

 

[Reheat]

Just as a precaution (Phantom 11 or not) those fighters should have been flying CAP over Washington,DC.

Sure, Mr. Hindsight smart azz... There should also have been a CAP over Chicago, Atlanta, and all nuclear power sites, Also, CAPS were needed over LA and all nuclear power sites in the West. All of them needed tanker support. Now, hop to it and tell all of us how you would do this... Tell all of us sheep how you would manage to do this in a fair amount of detail... Hop to it and get cracking, the night is young.