Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 2 votes

911


  • Please log in to reply
990 replies to this topic

#811    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,313 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 06 October 2012 - 01:27 PM

You know Frenat, it is POSSIBLE that humans typing up the NTSB reports can make small errors, and it is POSSIBLE that those errors will make it to the final report.

I did not say plural A-10s sir, I said a single A-10.  Though you are willing to say the WaPo article is in error, and it might be, the story WAS out back when the incident occurred, and that general recognition was what my earlier posts were based upon.

I have no problem admitting I was wrong.  Maybe it was not an A-10.

That there was an aircraft out of Tyndall is corroborated by WaPo.  Maybe they were wrong.  In the end it doesn't matter, except for generating glee on the part of those who want to make this all about me.  No problem, I can handle it.

The major point in this particular discussion is THE RESPONSE OF THE SYSTEM to an off course or NORDO aircraft, as it compares to the response of the system on 11 September.

No matter what kind of aircraft they were, or where they were out of, the point is that FAA & NORAD communication was working fine that day.

We know that the flight was cleared from Cross City to Dallas, which would have taken it through the Tyndall/Eglin complex of airspace in the Gulf and over the Panhandle of Florida, generally south of I-10.  It seems the flight never made the turn at CTY, and of course it had not communicated in more than 10 minutes.

And the FAA called the military at about that time.  And the military responded, it appears before the aircraft even left Florida airspace.  So the system worked as designed, and as it had numerous other times before.

But that day the controllers did not have injects lighting up their screens.  They were not in the mindset of being pawns in some kind of training exercise, at least that we know of.

And THOSE are the differences in the comparison with the events of 11 September.  On that day, Boston called NEADS at 0840 and the military responded 6 minutes later, which is consistent with what happened in the Stewart incident.

The problem was that the FAA was confused about what was happening with the 2 Boston flights, and by the time they notified NEADS of the problem, the first aircraft was in the process of striking the first tower.

Confusion and delay by the FAA, as they were sorting out injects and other problems within the system.


#812    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,915 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Wayne, IN

Posted 06 October 2012 - 01:38 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 06 October 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:

You know Frenat, it is POSSIBLE that humans typing up the NTSB reports can make small errors, and it is POSSIBLE that those errors will make it to the final report.

I did not say plural A-10s sir, I said a single A-10.  Though you are willing to say the WaPo article is in error, and it might be, the story WAS out back when the incident occurred, and that general recognition was what my earlier posts were based upon.

I have no problem admitting I was wrong.  Maybe it was not an A-10.

That there was an aircraft out of Tyndall is corroborated by WaPo.  Maybe they were wrong.  In the end it doesn't matter, except for generating glee on the part of those who want to make this all about me.  No problem, I can handle it.

The major point in this particular discussion is THE RESPONSE OF THE SYSTEM to an off course or NORDO aircraft, as it compares to the response of the system on 11 September.

No matter what kind of aircraft they were, or where they were out of, the point is that FAA & NORAD communication was working fine that day.

We know that the flight was cleared from Cross City to Dallas, which would have taken it through the Tyndall/Eglin complex of airspace in the Gulf and over the Panhandle of Florida, generally south of I-10.  It seems the flight never made the turn at CTY, and of course it had not communicated in more than 10 minutes.

And the FAA called the military at about that time.  And the military responded, it appears before the aircraft even left Florida airspace.  So the system worked as designed, and as it had numerous other times before.

But that day the controllers did not have injects lighting up their screens.  They were not in the mindset of being pawns in some kind of training exercise, at least that we know of.

And THOSE are the differences in the comparison with the events of 11 September.  On that day, Boston called NEADS at 0840 and the military responded 6 minutes later, which is consistent with what happened in the Stewart incident.

The problem was that the FAA was confused about what was happening with the 2 Boston flights, and by the time they notified NEADS of the problem, the first aircraft was in the process of striking the first tower.

Confusion and delay by the FAA, as they were sorting out injects and other problems within the system.

All that and you STILL haven't proven that the times are quicker than what is in the NTSB report.  The truth is it took over an hour after communication was lost for an aircraft already airborne to intercept a non-maneuvering plane.  You still haven't proven otherwise.

Edited by frenat, 06 October 2012 - 01:44 PM.

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law

#813    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,179 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 06 October 2012 - 01:43 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 06 October 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:


I did not say plural A-10s sir, I said a single A-10.

Even if it was in a report, I would have known that an A-10 is not the aircraft of choice to intercept a Learjet above 46,000 feet.

Quote

I have no problem admitting I was wrong.  Maybe it was not an A-10.

An A-10?.  What is the service ceiling of an A-10? At what altitude was the Learjet when intercepted by the F-16?

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#814    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,313 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 06 October 2012 - 02:10 PM

Sky

I'm bored.  You as a military man know what TDY is, but maybe you don't know that Eglin is home to weapons testing for USAF.  Because of that, Eglin gets alot of aircraft in there TDY to conduct tests, and that INCLUDES A-10.  Anti tank weapons, ya know?

Tyndall not so much, but they are only about 70 miles apart.

The point is that whether an A-10 or F-15, the Eglin-Tyndall complex has a bunch of trafffic, and in the Stewart case, there were already aircraft airborne doing their test missions, and one or several of those ALREADY AIRBORNE aircraft were dispatched to investigate the errant Lear.

That airplane was climbing, so we can assume that IAS was 250-300 knots, not an impossible mission for an A-10, but you're right--certainly not its ideal mission.  On several occasions I've seen A-10 flights in the high 20's.

As Frenat's links show, the Tyndall flight got close, but went bingo fuel.

You guys want to make this all about me and what I said, rather than about the issue--FAA & NORAD response to off course civilian aircraft.


#815    Czero 101

Czero 101

    Earthshattering Kaboom

  • Member
  • 5,139 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, BC

  • We are all made of thermonuclear waste material

Posted 06 October 2012 - 02:58 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 06 October 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:

You know Frenat, it is POSSIBLE that humans typing up the NTSB reports can make small errors, and it is POSSIBLE that those errors will make it to the final report.

I did not say plural A-10s sir, I said a single A-10.  Though you are willing to say the WaPo article is in error, and it might be, the story WAS out back when the incident occurred, and that general recognition was what my earlier posts were based upon.

I have no problem admitting I was wrong.  Maybe it was not an A-10.

That there was an aircraft out of Tyndall is corroborated by WaPo.  Maybe they were wrong.  In the end it doesn't matter, except for generating glee on the part of those who want to make this all about me.  No problem, I can handle it.

The major point in this particular discussion is THE RESPONSE OF THE SYSTEM to an off course or NORDO aircraft, as it compares to the response of the system on 11 September.

No matter what kind of aircraft they were, or where they were out of, the point is that FAA & NORAD communication was working fine that day.

We know that the flight was cleared from Cross City to Dallas, which would have taken it through the Tyndall/Eglin complex of airspace in the Gulf and over the Panhandle of Florida, generally south of I-10.  It seems the flight never made the turn at CTY, and of course it had not communicated in more than 10 minutes.

And the FAA called the military at about that time.  And the military responded, it appears before the aircraft even left Florida airspace.  So the system worked as designed, and as it had numerous other times before.

But that day the controllers did not have injects lighting up their screens.  They were not in the mindset of being pawns in some kind of training exercise, at least that we know of.

And THOSE are the differences in the comparison with the events of 11 September.  On that day, Boston called NEADS at 0840 and the military responded 6 minutes later, which is consistent with what happened in the Stewart incident.

The problem was that the FAA was confused about what was happening with the 2 Boston flights, and by the time they notified NEADS of the problem, the first aircraft was in the process of striking the first tower.

Confusion and delay by the FAA, as they were sorting out injects and other problems within the system.

Posted Image

:rolleyes:




Cz

"Thinking is critical, because sense is not common..." - GreaterSapien

"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." – H. L. Mencken

#816    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,915 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Wayne, IN

Posted 06 October 2012 - 03:10 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 06 October 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:

You know Frenat, it is POSSIBLE that humans typing up the NTSB reports can make small errors, and it is POSSIBLE that those errors will make it to the final report.

I did not say plural A-10s sir, I said a single A-10.  Though you are willing to say the WaPo article is in error, and it might be, the story WAS out back when the incident occurred, and that general recognition was what my earlier posts were based upon.

I have no problem admitting I was wrong.  Maybe it was not an A-10.

That there was an aircraft out of Tyndall is corroborated by WaPo.  Maybe they were wrong.  In the end it doesn't matter, except for generating glee on the part of those who want to make this all about me.  No problem, I can handle it.

The major point in this particular discussion is THE RESPONSE OF THE SYSTEM to an off course or NORDO aircraft, as it compares to the response of the system on 11 September.

No matter what kind of aircraft they were, or where they were out of, the point is that FAA & NORAD communication was working fine that day.

We know that the flight was cleared from Cross City to Dallas, which would have taken it through the Tyndall/Eglin complex of airspace in the Gulf and over the Panhandle of Florida, generally south of I-10.  It seems the flight never made the turn at CTY, and of course it had not communicated in more than 10 minutes.

And the FAA called the military at about that time.  And the military responded, it appears before the aircraft even left Florida airspace.  So the system worked as designed, and as it had numerous other times before.

But that day the controllers did not have injects lighting up their screens.  They were not in the mindset of being pawns in some kind of training exercise, at least that we know of.

And THOSE are the differences in the comparison with the events of 11 September.  On that day, Boston called NEADS at 0840 and the military responded 6 minutes later, which is consistent with what happened in the Stewart incident.

The problem was that the FAA was confused about what was happening with the 2 Boston flights, and by the time they notified NEADS of the problem, the first aircraft was in the process of striking the first tower.

Confusion and delay by the FAA, as they were sorting out injects and other problems within the system.

Just noticed yet another thing that shows you are not a pilot.  Whether the airspace over the gulf is active or not, commercial traffic is most often routed AROUND the warning areas off the coast and generally stays North of I-10.  At the time of the incident the airspace would have been active so it would definitely have been routed around.  It is typically only changed in emergency situations.  This is why there are so few contrails in the area and so many days with completely clear skies.

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law

#817    booNyzarC

booNyzarC

    Forum Divinity

  • Closed
  • 13,536 posts
  • Joined:18 Aug 2010
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 06 October 2012 - 03:20 PM

BR flight experience perhaps?


Posted Image



Looking more and more like it to me...  :hmm:


#818    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,179 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 06 October 2012 - 10:35 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 06 October 2012 - 02:10 PM, said:

Sky

I'm bored.  You as a military man know what TDY is, but maybe you don't know that Eglin is home to weapons testing for USAF.

What is that suppose to mean? On another note, I have been on many TDYs around the world and within CONUS.

Quote

Because of that, Eglin gets alot of aircraft in there TDY to conduct tests, and that INCLUDES A-10.  Anti tank weapons, ya know?

What is that suppose to mean?  A Learjet is not a tank and an A-10 is not an interceptor.

Quote

The point is that whether an A-10 or F-15, the Eglin-Tyndall complex has a bunch of trafffic, and in the Stewart case, there were already aircraft airborne doing their test missions, and one or several of those ALREADY AIRBORNE aircraft were dispatched to investigate the errant Lear.

Tell me, what is the max speed of an A-10? What is the cruising speed of a Learjet? At what altitude did the F-16 intercept the Learjet? What is the service ceiling of an A-10?

Why don't you just admit that you not familiar with aircraft?

Edited by skyeagle409, 06 October 2012 - 10:40 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#819    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,313 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 07 October 2012 - 06:59 PM

Trivial pursuit is your game Sky, not mine.  I prefer the Big Picture. :gun:


#820    Lilly

Lilly

    Forum Divinity

  • 15,737 posts
  • Joined:16 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Female

  • "To thine own self be true" William Shakespeare

Posted 07 October 2012 - 08:13 PM

Let's all try to remember that nothing's really trivial. The devil is in the details...and science is what strips back the BS uncovering those details. I'm sticking with what the engineers and physics guys have to say.

"Ignorance is ignorance. It is a state of mind, not an opinion." ~MID~

"All that live must die, passing through nature into eternity" ~Shakespeare~ Posted Image

#821    Czero 101

Czero 101

    Earthshattering Kaboom

  • Member
  • 5,139 posts
  • Joined:24 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, BC

  • We are all made of thermonuclear waste material

Posted 07 October 2012 - 08:20 PM

View PostLilly, on 07 October 2012 - 08:13 PM, said:

Let's all try to remember that nothing's really trivial. The devil is in the details...and science is what strips back the BS uncovering those details. I'm sticking with what the engineers and physics guys have to say.

... and the people who have real experience with military aircraft and / or are actual real pilots (not just someone who thinks he can come here and pretend to be one) and knows which aircraft are used for specific roles / missions.... :yes:




Cz

"Thinking is critical, because sense is not common..." - GreaterSapien

"For it is the natural tendency of the ignorant to believe what is not true. In order to overcome that tendency it is not sufficient to exhibit the true; it is also necessary to expose and denounce the false." – H. L. Mencken

#822    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,179 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 07 October 2012 - 08:45 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 07 October 2012 - 06:59 PM, said:

Trivial pursuit is your game Sky, not mine.  I prefer the Big Picture. :gun:

A "Big Picture" from whom? From websites that are notorious for spreading disinformation and misinformation?

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#823    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Member
  • 8,313 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 08 October 2012 - 02:41 PM

View PostLilly, on 07 October 2012 - 08:13 PM, said:

Let's all try to remember that nothing's really trivial. The devil is in the details...and science is what strips back the BS uncovering those details. I'm sticking with what the engineers and physics guys have to say.

Right you are!  The Devil IS in the details.

And certain details are ignored by those defending the official narrative, and in discussion are swept under the rug and dismissed.

And it is those details that have caused many thousands of people to come together to discuss those details and attempt to interpret what those details mean.  But one group is Architects & Engineers for 911 Truth.

For example, how can the detail that the FDR provided by the government was not assigned to ANY aircraft be dismissed as meaningless?


#824    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,179 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 08 October 2012 - 02:56 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 08 October 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

For example, how can the detail that the FDR provided by the government was not assigned to ANY aircraft be dismissed as meaningless?

Question for you. What other means are used by the FAA and the NTSB to verify FDR data?

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#825    RaptorBites

RaptorBites

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,965 posts
  • Joined:12 Jan 2012

Posted 08 October 2012 - 07:41 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 08 October 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

For example, how can the detail that the FDR provided by the government was not assigned to ANY aircraft be dismissed as meaningless?

Or like when the initial analysis of the FOIA release of the FDR data was found to be incorrect because of a mis-managed datamine of the information.

Especially the hilarious "cabin door was never opened" incident.

Those CT's that ran off with that must have felt sheepish when it was later found out that the aircraft the FDR was assigned to was not updated to include that information at all.

Or the "missing flight time" incident

Those CT's must have felt sheepish after running off with that information and later finding out that the software used to datamine was not updated.

Yes, when it comes to crap being spouted off from those conspiracy websites, most of the time it needs to be disregarded because of its foolish intent.

No, you surround yourself with a whole different kettle of crazy. - Sir Wearer of Hats




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users