Norad?

[PhantomWolf]

You may have talked yourself into believing that they had no requirement to call the military, but common sense says they would have done so immediately.

Why would they have alerted the military for a crash?

 

[Reheat]

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/planes/analysis/norad/calgaryherald101301_scrables.html

When the second plane hit the other World Trade Center tower, Norad swiftly shifted its attention to help prevent possible further attacks.

Norad was instrumental in getting fighter jets -- normally on 15-minute alert -- airborne within eight minutes.

http://www.afa.org/magazine/feb2002/0202norad.asp

Like every government organization, NORAD was caught off guard on Sept. 11. The monitoring of threats went on as usual that day but NORAD operators were looking outward from US borders, seeking incoming danger. NORAD did not anticipate attacks in which civil airliners would be hijacked from domestic airports and turned into weapons against US targets.

At the time of the attacks, only seven locations-around the perimeter of the United States-were engaged in the air defense mission. Each was assigned a pair of Air National Guard fighter aircraft ready to scramble if US airspace were threatened.
These alert locations had F-15 or F-16 fighters on the runways, fueled, and ready to take off in fewer than 15 minutes.

A correction on the last quote. The aircraft are not on the runway during alert. They are either in a special alert facility or on the normal parking ramp.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/essay.jsp?article=essayairdefense

NORAD has claimed that on 9/11 fighters in bases within its system, including Otis and Langley, were guaranteed to get airborne within 15 minutes, not five.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/911timeline/2001/telegraph091601.html

On Friday, in a tacit admission that America must in future be better prepared, Donald Rumsfeld, the Defence Secretary, announced that fighters were being put on a 15-minute "strip" alert at 26 bases nationwide.

That's enough.....

 

[PhantomWolf]

Who is providing this to the enemy? It's not the Iranians. It's not the Russkies. Is it the same network that carried out 9/11?

Actually re-reading this he actually gets it right without meaning to. The enemy that is providing most of the help to the insurgents in Iraq is the same one that carried 9/11.... Al Qaeda.

 

[Reheat]

Actually re-reading this he actually gets it right without meaning to. The enemy that is providing most of the help to the insurgents in Iraq is the same one that carried 9/11.... Al Qaeda.

Right. Sorry, I was blind at that point!

 

[PhantomWolf]

Strangely enough it's the first thing I have seen him get right, and it wan't what he was meaning, lol.

 

[Reheat]

Strangely enough it's the first thing I have seen him get right, and it wan't what he was meaning, lol.

Isn't that the truth. I honestly don't believe he's read anything that was not from DRG or Hordon. Note that all of his references are from one of those two.

 

[Reheat]

I hope you're not going to say that Laura Brown is just a stupid theologian.

Of course not, but DRG is.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Isn't that the truth. I honestly don't believe he's read anything that was not from DRG or Hordon. Note that all of his references are from one of those two.

I did ask if he had other sources for his information, or if he was unable to think for himself and so let DRG do it all for him. he declined to answer the question directly, but posted two pasasages from DRG in response to the rest of the post, so I figured that answered the question.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Do you really believe the authorities at NORAD said to themselves, "there's a hijacked airplane out there heading for NYC, but no biggie. We can just hem and haw for 5-10 minutes, because the plane will probably just land at JFK or LGA or somewhere like that...."

No. The normal procedure would be more like launching and shadowing a plane until it lands (pre 9-11)

NEAR A LARGE METROPOLITAN AREA.

Why?

That's where the airport is.

As to the "on a whim" line, you don't launch the alert when you have very few alert sections available for the whole of CONUS unless you have good reason to. Funny old dog, the guys at NEADS decided they had good reason to, so they launched. They didn't launch on a whim, and I will repeat that you don't launch them on a whim, you launch them for sound reasons based on a critical requirement.

DR

 

[Darth Rotor]

Where is your source for a standing window for intercept of 15 minutes? I don't believe it.

Alert 15 is one of four standing alert conditions available to a commander.

Alert 5
Alert 15
Alert 30
Alert 60 (I don't think USAF uses that anymore for fighters, but for tankers I think they do.)

So, pick one. Alert 5 wears crews out rather quickly, as they are in the jet with systems powered up.

Much less stress for alert 15, where you are all prepped but are in the alert shack, not in the cockpit, and chillin.'

Alert 30 is even easier on ground crews and flight crews, but isn't so hot for the troops on the ground who need alert fighters now when a firefight erupts.

Shoot it down. Common sense here again. If the pilot clearly saw the plane about to be used as a missile against a building, he could have and would have shot it down.

How is he supposed to read the mind of the pilot in a plane he intercepts? His RoE does not typically include an engage order against civ airliners filled with CITIZENS. That takes extra special permission.

He could have gotten that authority while en route to the intercept, or, lacking that, he had the authority to make the decision himself.

He could have, if anyone at the NCA would give it to him. Problem is, getting them to give you a "weapons free" status.

I worked a number of situations, CAS in Iraq, where the fighters are in combat, and there is a firefight on the ground and the FAC calling for a bomb, and the order from on high is "weapons tight." (Great way to piss off an infantryman, that is, I promise you.) This isn't Hollywood, A Train, it's RL, and the disciplined use of force is the rule.

Besides, whether or not the fighters would have been able to shoot down the planes, the issue we are discussing is the possibity that they were intentionally delayed on the ground so the attacks could succeed.

And evidence of that is rather lacking, all of your foaming at the mouth considered.

If that is the case, that is a very grave matter and should be extremely disturbing to any American patriot.

What disturbs me, as an American patriot, an unapologetic one (just ask Eurotrash like Oliver and CF Larsen, and whinging American basher Brits like EJ Armstrong about me, if you like) is the mountain of stupid being built by you, and the Troofers like you.

It's bad for America to have so many stupid people who may drive and get good people killed.

Do not attack other forum members.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Lisa Simpson

If the network that did 9/11 can penetrate the air defense system so thoroughly as to have a mole in position to delay a scramble, we are all in big trouble.

They didn't penetrate it, they were already INSIDE of it within the civil air structure, the FAA's airway system. They got inside it by buying an airline ticket.

You can do the same thing tomorrow, if your mom gives you enough money for an airplane ticket.

Today in Iraq thousands of our soldiers are dying because the enemy seems to have very sophisticated explosive devices, and also seems to have insider knowledge of our movements.

Most of the IED's are fairly simple, though elegantly put together from simple parts, and some innovative use of simple tech available to anyone who finds a few spare 600 pound bombs lying around, or old artillery shells.

Who is providing this to the enemy? It's not the Iranians. It's not the Russkies. Is it the same network that carried out 9/11?

See BeAChooser about what the Iranians are supplying to whom, if you want an interesting conversation about IED's in Iraq.

Really. I am sure he'd love to have a chat with you on that one.

DR

 

[Cheap Shot]

I'm originally from upstate NY, meet officer (Lt Col) from NEADS through dive
buddy of mine. Heard lot of background stuff about 9/11 - when excrement
started to hit the fan NEADS (which is located in Rome NY at Griffiss
airbase) contacted some of the officers of the 174th Fighter Wing (FW)
at Hancock Field (Syracause NY airport) who in turn contacted other
members of unit. Prepped and launched several F16 fighters based there
to fly combat patrols and track suspected hijacked aircraft. On 9/11 was
lot of improvision by people trying to make sense of unexpected chaotic
situation.
the u

When I originally called NEADS I had asked for units that were to the south, and then when I heard about DAL1989, I asked NEADS to consider aircraft from Toledo, Selfridge, out west becsue DAL1989 was already approaching Cleveland. I was very familiar with Syracuse, and Burlington VT F-16's since they work my airspace. But I didn't think could directly help becasue the aircraft were already west or south of thier locations. I know they got up soon afterwards and ended up being a huge part in the Daily Military Caps.

 

[Spins]

So you're claiming that the pilot would have shot down the plane, without permission from the POUS, scattering the burning wreakage all over downtown Manhatten resulting it mass carnage, rather then having it hit a single building? Assuming he worked out what it was up too fast enough to line up the shot, fire and hit it before it hit the building, or was close enough to hit the building despite being hit. Is that about right?

Yes I agree, I tried to make this point earlier on in the thread with regards to Flight 77. Once the plane was over a built up area the only sensible thing to have done would have been to evacuate all the buildings that would likely have been a possible target (Pentagon, White House, US Capitol etc). So this in effect also reduces the amount of time NORAD had to bring a plane down with the minimum casualties possible, i.e. over an unpopulated area, in fact exactly the type of area where the passengers managed to force down Flight 93. Obviously if (and it's a big if) a fighter pilot felt there was an opportunity to bring the plane down without the wreckage falling into (heavily) populated areas (after the shoot down authorization was in effect) then that may have been an option, but that would have been his call and I'd hate to have made that decision if it backfired.

With regards to Flight 11 and 175 it's all moot anyways because there was no shoot down authorization in effect.

All in all I still see no evidence of a NORAD "stand down", in fact it seems to me that A-Train is trying to insinuate that there was an FAA "stand down" as well.

 

[sleahead]

So, lets hypothetically say that Boston Center broke standard protocol at 8:34 (after Mohammed Atta's last communication, which confirmed the plane had been hijacked) and contacted NEADS with all the information they needed to find the plane, that still only gave them less than 13 minutes to scramble the fighters (at that point they were not even at battle stations) and intercept. Also as everyone keeps telling you there was no shoot down authorization at this point anyway so to say there was a "stand down" order is ridiculous

I think A-Train has swerved this point and so I repeat it here. A-Train, do you have the honesty to admit that, even in the hypothetical best possible response described above, AA11 could not have been intercepted?