Pentagon Strike 9/11

[bee]

2 hours ago, Merc14 said:

We do now but no, we never had folks on alert for that threat.  It is expensive, it is man power intensive and it wasn't seen as a threat. 

 

I'm sorry - but I don't buy that -

I don't believe that no military exercises ever planned for a multiple hi jacking situation -
using international and/or domestic flights -

I think that the terrorists used that day because they had prior knowledge that military exercises were taking place
and intended to use the situation to create a window of opportunity - and in the confusion of transponders being turned on
and off they hoped to reach their targets.... I think they did successfully reach the first two targets (WTCs) but after that the military
weren't going to let any other hi jacked plane crash into a significant building -

 

[Merc14]

8 minutes ago, bee said:

 

I'm sorry - but I don't buy that -

I don't believe that no military exercises ever planned for a multiple hi jacking situation -
using international and/or domestic flights -

I think that the terrorists used that day because they had prior knowledge that military exercises were taking place
and intended to use the situation to create a window of opportunity - and in the confusion of transponders being turned on
and off they hoped to reach their targets.... I think they did successfully reach the first two targets (WTCs) but after that the military
weren't going to let any other hi jacked plane crash into a significant building -

 

Conducting an exercise is not the same as having an armed fighter sitting on the hot pad with an alert aircrew standing by to take off which is the case now.  If you had a clue what you are talking about you'd know that but you are too far gone to reason with so enjoy fantasy.  

[bee]

5 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Conducting an exercise is not the same as having an armed fighter sitting on the hot pad with an alert aircrew standing by to take off which is the case now.  If you had a clue what you are talking about you'd know that but you are too far gone to reason with so enjoy fantasy.  

 

It would be nice if you could converse on the subject without resorting to insults as a diversionary tactic -

 

 

[mrbusdriver]

"Flight safety is paramount"..

During virtually every exercise I've participated in, a slide stating this fact was posted during the briefing. "Knock it off" is SOP terminology that says stop the attack/furrball/intercept, and standby. When things got confused, with real world and exercise getting confused, they halted the exercise, or that portin thereof. The hijack scenarios were generally a hijack squawk, scramble, escort to landing.

The folks at the SOCCs/ROCCs and their "is this real world or exercise" queries...I can most certainly see that happening...and the "I've never seen so much real world stuff during an exercise"...I feel their pain there too. I never saw an exercise that involved multiple hijackings, and each scenario was coordinated with the FAA sectors involved, in offshore RAs or sterile CONUS RAs/Warning areas

...edit...the Warning Areas used for training were low altitude (below FL180) and were not sterile during training flights, so while the "bug smashers" were supposed to read the NOTAMs and avoid the area, there was nothing preventing them from entering the areas, and wreaking havoc on our training missions.

another edit...we NEVER involved civilian "non-players" in our training missions...they were "strangers" (aka non-participants) and we had to stay miles clear of them.

Edited October 27, 2017 by mrbusdriver

[mrbusdriver]

The Langley F15s always get a lot of grief from the CTs who wonder why they got sent east into the offshore RA...because that is where the scramble order sent them...simple as that. You can't scramble fighters into the heavy traffic of east coast jet routes.. the "canned" scramble order sends them east into the airspace off the coast, which is where any foreseen enemy threat would come from. 9/11 was not a scenario that was trained for back then.

[Merc14]

1 hour ago, bee said:

 

It would be nice if you could converse on the subject without resorting to insults as a diversionary tactic -

Diversionary tactic?  How so and why would I bother?  Isn't it true that there is absolutely no way I could change your mind about this subject?  I say that because it has been several years and everything that can be said about the subject has been said yet you remain steadfast in your beliefs.  

Edited October 27, 2017 by Merc14

[Abaddonire]

9 hours ago, bee said:

re bolded

course not ---  the world's number one super power could never have envisioned and planned for THAT....

perish the thought

 

 

Really? What makes you think the Russians would even care?

[Abaddonire]

Why not have a little read about the two F16 pilots who had to intercept Flight 93 while unarmed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/f-16-pilot-was-ready-to-give-her-life-on-sept-11/2015/09/06/7c8cddbc-d8ce-11e0-9dca-a4d231dfde50_story.html?utm_term=.65b10d388745

As it transpires, the passengers took action first.

[Merc14]

5 minutes ago, Abaddonire said:

Why not have a little read about the two F16 pilots who had to intercept Flight 93 while unarmed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/f-16-pilot-was-ready-to-give-her-life-on-sept-11/2015/09/06/7c8cddbc-d8ce-11e0-9dca-a4d231dfde50_story.html?utm_term=.65b10d388745

As it transpires, the passengers took action first.

She doesn't realize that at that time fighters weren't armed unless they were actually going out to shoot a missile in a missilex.  Other that at that time the missiles were locked away in isolate bunkers on the base (at least where I flew from).   In the navy we'd arm up when in a hostile area and so regularly carried ordnance but once home we rarely saw a missile.

[Abaddonire]

1 minute ago, Merc14 said:

She doesn't realize that at that time fighters weren't armed unless they were actually going out to shoot a missile in a missilex.  Other that at that time the missiles were locked away in isolate bunkers on the base (at least where I flew from).   In the navy we'd arm up when in a hostile area and so regularly carried ordnance but once home we rarely saw a missile.

Yup. Tooling up would have cost an extra 45 minutes minimum, so they had to take off unarmed. Or not bother at all because in that time 93 would have impacted anyway.

The other puzzling thing about all this CT nonsense is the whole notion that somehow, TPTB should have somehow known that these hijackers were going to do anything besides what all hijackers had done to that point, i.e. land somewhere, make demands, make threats, negotiate, etc.

[Merc14]

1 hour ago, Abaddonire said:

Yup. Tooling up would have cost an extra 45 minutes minimum, so they had to take off unarmed. Or not bother at all because in that time 93 would have impacted anyway.

The other puzzling thing about all this CT nonsense is the whole notion that somehow, TPTB should have somehow known that these hijackers were going to do anything besides what all hijackers had done to that point, i.e. land somewhere, make demands, make threats, negotiate, etc.

Exactly and no one, except Bee and her pals apparently, were expecting four airliners to crash themselves into buildings.  I remember watching and was completely shocked as was the world as was the military.   Hell, not even the majority of the hijackers were aware they were on a suicide run.   I saw an interview of that pilot and she was prepared to do what needed to be done, meaning crash her 16 into the airliner to stop them so I am pretty sure she would've armed her aircraft if at all possible,  

[bee]

2 hours ago, Abaddonire said:

Why not have a little read about the two F16 pilots who had to intercept Flight 93 while unarmed.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/f-16-pilot-was-ready-to-give-her-life-on-sept-11/2015/09/06/7c8cddbc-d8ce-11e0-9dca-a4d231dfde50_story.html?utm_term=.65b10d388745

As it transpires, the passengers took action first.

 

cute story --- ^^^

 

Because of the cover up the video below could possibly be the closest you will get to official confirmation that Flights 77 and 93 were shot down -?

maybe perhaps

  

 

[Abaddonire]

28 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

Exactly and no one, except Bee and her pals apparently, were expecting four airliners to crash themselves into buildings.  I remember watching and was completely shocked as was the world as was the military.   Hell, not even the majority of the hijackers were aware they were on a suicide run.   I saw an interview of that pilot and she was prepared to do what needed to be done, meaning crash her 16 into the airliner to stop them so I am pretty sure she would've armed her aircraft if at all possible,  

 

Yes. That was the point of the article I linked. She was planning to go for the tail, while her wing would go for the cockpit. They knew that a last minute ejection was unlikely, yet up they went regardless, ready and willing to do what had to be done.

And all the CT wingnuts delight in taking a massive **** on them.

[Abaddonire]

10 minutes ago, bee said:

 

cute story --- ^^^

 

Because of the cover up the video below could possibly be the closest you will get to official confirmation that Flights 77 and 93 were shot down -?

maybe perhaps

  

 

That is just a dumb idea. You can issue as many orders as you like to shoot down whatever you like. It's pretty useless if you have no assets in a position to do so.

And are you not complaining at the very same time about a lack of military response? What the hell do you think a military response is? Come on down for a cup of tea and a chat?

Edited October 27, 2017 by Abaddonire

[mrbusdriver]

3 hours ago, Merc14 said:

She doesn't realize that at that time fighters weren't armed unless they were actually going out to shoot a missile in a missilex.  Other that at that time the missiles were locked away in isolate bunkers on the base (at least where I flew from).   In the navy we'd arm up when in a hostile area and so regularly carried ordnance but once home we rarely saw a missile.

The alert fighters were armed...always have been. Sit alert on a guarded ramp. Alert facility directly adjacent to the jets. Practice scrambles normally have them airborne within 5 minutes of the horn. A lot of "not alert" aircraft were sent out until more planes could be armed up and on station.

[Merc14]

28 minutes ago, Abaddonire said:

That is just a dumb idea. You can issue as many orders as you like to shoot down whatever you like. It's pretty useless if you have no assets in a position to do so.

And are you not complaining at the very same time about a lack of military response? What the hell do you think a military response is? Come on down for a cup of tea and a chat?

I flew fighters in the Navy but I guess Bee knows far more about the subject than either  of us so we must bow t her CT wisdom (never mind the total lack of logic

[mrbusdriver]

3 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

I flew fighters in the Navy but I guess Bee knows far more about the subject than either  of us so we must bow t her CT wisdom (never mind the total lack of logic

I recollect a "carrier landing" or two at the O'Club at Nellis after a romp with the F14s...they had a way of ending the battle pretty quickly...awesome CAP bird.

[Merc14]

11 minutes ago, mrbusdriver said:

The alert fighters were armed...always have been. Sit alert on a guarded ramp. Alert facility directly adjacent to the jets. Practice scrambles normally have them airborne within 5 minutes of the horn. A lot of "not alert" aircraft were sent out until more planes could be armed up and on station.

The USAF had armed fighters on alert 5 on 911?  Why?  The Navy didn't.

 

Edited October 27, 2017 by Merc14

[mrbusdriver]

ok, I might have misspoke...when I retired in 94, we had hot birds around the perimeter, I'm thinking 6-7 bases, usually 5 min alert unless a swapout/wx/ect happened. Understand a lot can change in the ensuing 7 years. (Edit...they were NORAD OPCON birds)

 

Edited October 27, 2017 by mrbusdriver

[Merc14]

47 minutes ago, mrbusdriver said:

ok, I might have misspoke...when I retired in 94, we had hot birds around the perimeter, I'm thinking 6-7 bases, usually 5 min alert unless a swapout/wx/ect happened. Understand a lot can change in the ensuing 7 years. (Edit...they were NORAD OPCON birds)

 

You were USAF and I was Navy so much difference well on shore

[mrbusdriver]

I loved working with the Tomcats and their big radars...E-3/F-14 combo was killer...

[Merc14]

26 minutes ago, mrbusdriver said:

I loved working with the Tomcats and their big radars...E-3/F-14 combo was killer...

E-2C's were good but you guys were amazing.  Radar wasn't very friendly over land, more art than science but she saw everything, for her day, at sea.  I loved the pure pulse mode, actually caught an Oscar class (I think, I obviously didn't know but the booger eaters figured it out) very close to the boat  and locked the TCS to it and recorded while reporting it to mother and all hell broke loose.   Got called into the Admiral''s spaces after we landed and the tape was awesome, periscope feathering through the Med close to mother, except my pilot and I were cursing like sailors on a binge, very embarrassing but the Admiral was an old F-8/F-4 guy and said forget about it.   I need to send  that story to avgeekery

Edited October 28, 2017 by Merc14

[mrbusdriver]

On ‎10‎/‎27‎/‎2017 at 4:23 PM, bee said:

 

cute story --- ^^^

 

Because of the cover up the video below could possibly be the closest you will get to official confirmation that Flights 77 and 93 were shot down -?

maybe perhaps

  

 

I suppose the real question is where were any fighters airbone near flight 93, and were they armed, and were they in a position (based on any weapons/capability onboard) to actually shoot them down?

[bee]

4 minutes ago, mrbusdriver said:

I suppose the real question is where were any fighters airbone near flight 93, and were they armed, and were they in a position (based on any weapons/capability onboard) to actually shoot them down?

 

Yes that is the question - and I think they would have been - when the US mainland was under attack and on the highest
level of alert it's just not possible that they weren't --- IMO

 

[Obviousman]

6 minutes ago, bee said:

 

Yes that is the question - and I think they would have been - when the US mainland was under attack and on the highest
level of alert it's just not possible that they weren't --- IMO

 

(Bolding mine)

IMO... and that is the point. Could I ask what background you have in air operations management?