Like I said, the mechanics of the radar don't matter when the question asks why there was a lack of response.

It doesn't matter how hard the task is if nobody even tries.

Also, my "theories" are from fist hand knowledge sitting in a control tower.

Remember they had contact, then the transponder was shut off. At no time would that cause a loss of contact. The transponder is NOT a secondary radar system. It is a radio becon and does not impact radar performance what so ever. The transponder signal is attached to the radar signal through an automated system. When the transponder is shut off the radar would show the contact but without the transponder number, that's all. It would not dissapear, or anything like that. The controller monitoring that traffic would still have the contact and could coninue to track it until it left his or her region. A such time the contact would be handed to the next logical controller.

NONE OF THIS MATTERS REALLY. WE WANT TO KNOW WHY NO EFFORT WAS MADE ON THE PART OF THE AIRFORCE.

See.;. All this talk of radar and tracking does nothing to explain the lack of action.

The lack of action is the concern. How much simpler could it be put?

Jack, like I said, I have first hand knowledge personally, I have a very good friend who is a certified controller and I have pilot frinds. These are not theories. I have trained on simulated ATC and have used the TACAS alert system and trained on SATCOM. These are not theories.. Ummm, not theories.. Do you need to hear it again? Not theories, actual experience on actual systems, that don't matter in this case anyway.

Care to stop distracting and simply answer the question if you think it's so simple. Why was there no response from the airforce until 45 minutes after the last impact?

PAX

Haha the term 'secondary radar' may not be a civilian term, but is widely used in the military. The primary radar is the raw video return from the aircraft. The secondary is from the transponder. I have witnessed a transponder go out and the raw return was so small that it was next to impossible to track. This was in an uncongested area. I do see your point about the controller responsible for tracking the plane, but they don't just handle one aircraft at a time. You should know this. Something might have been happening with another aircraft at the same time. All factors must be taken into consideration before ya start throwing out 'wild conspiracies'.



98 Z24

RIP Specks

Well, OK. But if you read my posts you'll see there are no conspiracy theories being thrown out there. Just a simple question.

Why was there no response from The US air force nor from NORAD?

That's it, that's all. No conspiracy theories, nothing wild at all, and certainly no aliens

Depending on the controller, no one controller handles more than about 20 aircraft at a time. Center contollers would have a few m,ore, and ground as well as approach controllers may have more, but regional controllers (the ones that should have been tracking the flights at the time the transponders were turned off, should not have any kind of heavy load at all.

Like I said ealier, none of that matters when you look at the question.

Nobody is asking why the interceptors didn't find their target, we are asking why they didn't even try.

PAX

Alright, I'm sure some of you are going WTF! The Air Force has 35 bases near by and no-one scrambled anything! Well here's a breakdown of what aircraft those bases have (to my knowledge and Google). Of all of them, 9 have the capability to scramble and shoot down (if necessesary) an aircraft. If no one was prepared, you're looking at quite a bit of time to arm and scramble an F/A-18, F-16, or an A-10. More than 45 minutes IMO.

Andrews AFB 11 miles SE of Washington D.C.- Naval air facility has F/A-18's. No AF fighters.

Bolling AFB 3 miles south of US Capitol- No Aircraft assigned

Dover AFB Dover, DE- C-5

Hanscom AFB 17 miles northwest of Boston, MA- No aircraft

McGuire AFB 18 miles southeast of Trenton, NJ- C-17, KC-135 & KC-10

Wright-Patterson AFB Dayton, OH- No aircraft

Cape Cod, MA AFS- No Aircraft

New Boston, NH AFS- No Aircraft

Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Bases

Atlantic City Airport, NJ 10 miles west of Atlantic City- F-16

Barnes Municipal Airport, MA 3 miles northwest of Westfield- A-10A

Bradley International Airport, CN Windsor Locks- A-10A

Byrd Field, VA 4 miles southeast of Richmond- F-16

Eastern West Virginia Regional Airport 4 miles south of Martinsburg- Unknown

Frances S. Gabreski Airport, NY Westhampton Beach- HC-130 & MH-60

Greater Pittsburgh International Airport, PA 15 miles nw of Pittsburgh- KC-135

Harrisburg International Airport, PA 10 miles east of Harrisburg- EC-130J

Martin State Airport, MD 8 miles east of Baltimore- A-10A & C-130

New Castle County Airport, DE 5 miles south of Wilmington- C-130

Pease ANGS, NH Portsmouth- KC-135

Quonset State Airport, RI Providence- C-130J

Rickenbacker ANGB, OH Columbus, Oh- KC-135 (possibly Closed)

Stewart International Airport, NY Newburgh, NY- C-5

Toledo Express Airport, Swanton, Ohio- F-16

Westover ARB, MA 5 miles northeast of Chicopee- C-5 & A-10A

Willow Grove Naval Air Station, PA 14 miles north of Philadelphia- A-10A

Yeager Airport, WVA 4 miles northeast of Charleston- C-130

Youngstown-Warren Regional Airport ARS, OH 16 miles north of Youngstown- C-130H

Answer your question Haha? The capability was/is there. But it wasn't optimized, so it took a lot of time. Not all bases keep aircraft loaded up on the off chance something like that is going to happen. At least pre-9/11 they didn't.

with taking all that into consideration, how many fighter jets are in the air at a point in time? I remember someone mentioning Jet's flying along the coast as a patrol or something...could planes in the air not at least do something to help identify the high jacked planes? Might be some stupid questions, but I'm just curious


03z24

I take that back. 10 Bases that have fighters and 2 that are Active. I forgot Langley and it's F-15's.

OK, now what about the fighters that are on standby (no, that is not a post 9/11 policy) and the CAP missions?

PAX

CAP as in Civil Air Patrol? I know the Noble Eagle flights started immediately after 9/11. The Civil Air Patrol usually flys Cessna or similar aircraft.

Standby fighters? I have friends that worked F-16's and none of them were on standby pre-9/11. We left our jets inspected, & fueled, but they never sat wih live munitions on them.

Combat Air Patrol, formerly called MIG CAP missions (during the cold war).

I believe Homestead has two fighters on standby at all times, as well as other bases.

PAX

Ok so you scramble your fighters to shoot down civialian air liners over highly populated areas and you tell them to go after which plane? Which direction do you send them in?
Pre 9/11 the polices for hostage takeings was wait and see not go attack. Why would they have dispatched them? And like I said where do you tell them to go once they are in the air? What do you say " Ok guys now that we got you in the air and your ready to kick some ass please stand by while we try and figure out which one of these planes to send you after."

You can't see them on radar cause of all the other traffic and you have no transponder to track so where do you send your scrambled fighters?




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

You send them to the radar contacts that have no transponder frequency associated with them.

Remember each controller is looking at a limited space. Not all traffic shows up on one screen.

PAX

I can sum it all up in a word ..... Whitewash !
somebody hand me the laundry soap !

IGNORAD is on alert ... rest easy America

Ok if it were that easy HAHA then why is Gary so insistant that its not? Is he in on it too?
Even if your an air traffic controler and your only watching say 10% of the 500 planes or so in the air thats still 50 planes. Well 49 that you would have to rule out. And as Gary said its not exactly how TV shows radar to be that its actualy easy to loose a plane if its transponder is off due to all sorts of reasons. So your back to not being able to just point at a screen and say "Oh there it is, there it is!" So you have to figure that out and times working agaisnt you as the planes are going........ Oh wait you have no idea because you can't track constant on them. So Hmm, where do we tell those fighters on standby to go? Who do we tell them to shoot at? And God help the air traffic controlers because they B E T T E R be 150% corect or some F-15 pilot is gonna send a sidewinder up the tailpipe of the wrong air plane! So were any of the planes over the east coast haveing ANY transponder or radio problems at the time? Well lets think back and remember that fighters were in deed scrambled to intercept 2 airliners one over the great lakes area and one over the mid west who WERE haveing radio issues and couldn't hear the forced grounding. Now if those fighter pilots had done what you wanted them to do to any or all 4 of the hi-jacked planes they'd have shot them down.
Luckily they were able to get them to land without the need of missles.
So your still back to fighters weren't able to get them because they didn't know WHO to get. And even if they did pre 9/11 there was no way in hell a fighter pilot was gonna shoot down an airliner and besides they never had clearence to. So even if the fighters knew which planes and where they were going they wouldn't have been able to shhot them down. Remember the pesky little phrase that says "The govt shall not use its military forces on it own people." or something to that effect. So when the fighters did catch them what would you have had them do?




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Settle down ya trigger happy freak.. The fighters are just gonna check it out at first, try to figure out why the transponder is out.

You have last known position, altitude, and velocity. An airliner at cruise altitude has a fairly large radar profile. WWII radar could pick one up.

PAX

sometimes the old radar works better, if you recall, it was an old 1950's era radar that picked up and locked onto an F-117 over bosnia and shot it down.

but anyways to the topic at hand, i really doubt, that even if they could have briefed the pilots, loaded the planes and had them in the air, i really doubt they would have had time to get to the target zone, locate the target, get an angle to minimize collateral damage, get clearance to fire, and fire, before the planes hit their tagets buildings

oh and for the wild theory that it was bombs inside the buildings.... I talked to people who were there, they saw a civilian plane hit a building. I have never seen a bomb or missile that looks like a jumbo jet

now heres my opinion, the goverment knew SOMETHING was going to happen sometime in late 2001, they didn't know where, when or how. pretty hard to defend against the unknown.

but mabey im wrong, mabey our goverment would/could murder over 3000 civilians just to rally support for a war, yeah, i really see that one happening


You'll never touch God's hand
You'll never taste God's breath
Because you'll never see the second coming
Life's too short to be focused on insanity
I've seen the ways of God
I'll take the devil any day
Hail Satan

(slayer, skeleton christ, 2006)

I'm not sure about the so called "Coast Patrol" or the CAP flights everyone is mentioning. It's possible the Coastal flights were made by P-3 Orions or S-2 naval aircraft (sub-hunters) and that is what people are referencing.

The Combat Air Patrol's were not being flown pre-9/11 to my knowledge. The base I was assigned to had a facility for the Noble Eagle flights and it was empty until after 9/11.

Hahaha, how do you have such a vast knowledge of the American military if you live in London, Ontario? The closest military base to you would be Slefridge ANGB in MI. Which was not flying any CAP missions pre-9/11. I know this for a fact because I worked there.

Here's a question for those that watched the Loose Change video:
The 2 planes over D.C. after the attacks. Whose were they? If they weren't the USAF's then who would have the authority to overfly the White House?! Bush was in Florida and was flown to Barksdale AFB, LA. Then on to an undisclosed location (not to undisclosed but I'm not going to say). "Angel" would not have been over D.C. at the time and the "C-130" wouldn't be needed either (C-17's & C-5's are used to carry the motorcade vehicles.) So who owned those two aircraft?

I don't find it hard to belive the government would be behind something like this. I mean, they thought something similar up in the 1960's? Why not 2001? Why not 2006? Why not???

why not...because WHEN not if WHEN the truth got uncoverd, there would be a revolution in the U.S. (not that that would be a bad thing)


You'll never touch God's hand
You'll never taste God's breath
Because you'll never see the second coming
Life's too short to be focused on insanity
I've seen the ways of God
I'll take the devil any day
Hail Satan

(slayer, skeleton christ, 2006)

mikec2003 wrote:but anyways to the topic at hand, i really doubt, that even if they could have briefed the pilots, loaded the planes and had them in the air, i really doubt they would have had time to get to the target zone, locate the target, get an angle to minimize collateral damage, get clearance to fire, and fire, before the planes hit their tagets buildings

Well even if you think they couldn't have stopped anything(I think at LEAST the second WTC collision and the one hitting the pentagon could have EASILY been stopped - if not the first one as well) - even then - do you think that no ATTEMPT would have been made?! Not like it(planes going off course followed by prompt intercept) never happens. It just doesn't add up.

mikec2003 wrote:oh and for the wild theory that it was bombs inside the buildings.... I talked to people who were there, they saw a civilian plane hit a building. I have never seen a bomb or missile that looks like a jumbo jet

Not saying that the bomb thing is true, but just because planes did hit the building, doesn't mean that the planes are responsible for taking it down. If our leaders knew about the attacks ahead of time(we know they did at some levels of gov. - they didn't know due to bad information sharing my ass - they knew), they could have made sure that the attacks where successful - REAL successful.

Remember the WTC terrorist attack that happened in the Clinton era? It didn't do much of any damage or kill much of anyone. Result - NO PUBLIC OUTRAGE. Terrorism DID happen on American soil pre-9/11, but the damage wasn't bad enough to rally for war. Maybe someone had vested interest in seeing those towers fall.

Plus look at the evidence, the fuel isn't hot enough to melt or significantly weaken the structure(not the kind of steel used in the WTC), plus how would the bottom floors be heated given elevator shafts that do NOT go down nearly the whole way. Hmm.

Not saying that the bomb theory is true, but it could be even if real planes did hit(which obviously they did). The whole official story is VERY fishy. Even if ALL the current conspiracy theory's are just fantasies, that doesn't validate the official story.




I've never heard of this "part throttle" before. Does it just bolt on?

Bingo! Buy that man a beer


PAX

The aliens did it. They came down from outer space and used their death rays and blew the place up. The planes were just a cover, had it not been for Col. Jack O'neil and the rest of SG-1 destorying the mother ship in orbit we'd all be intersteler slaves right now. They hit the towers blowing them up from the top floors down ( death ray ) thats why the fell like they did. The Pentagon was hit more then once but the alien defence
system that included giant mirrors to bounce the death rays back into space weren't yet installed on the part of the building thats why they were able to blow it up. But as you all could see the timeing was a little off hence the plane hitting and THEN the collapse. It all had to do the the time change from Saturn to Earth and the aliens forgot to carry the one ( easy mistake to make )

So you all should quick start sending letters to the Air Force thanking them for saveing us from certain death and destruction at the hands of the intersteler bad guys with glowing eyes.


And yes this ALLLLLL really happened. How can I be so sure? Well you can't proove it didn't so it must have......Right?




Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

I think it was Mark Twain who once said:

"It is better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are a fool than to open it and prove them right."

PAX

mikec2003 wrote:why not...because WHEN not if WHEN the truth got uncoverd, there would be a revolution in the U.S. (not that that would be a bad thing)

Did you know that part of the training people get in the military discusses when it is appropritae to withold information from the people of the U.S.? Only when it is in the best interest of the people, but some officials could have opted that this is one of those pieces of info that the people don't need to fully know about. Just like the development of the B-2, F-117, U-2, & SR-71.

Hahahaha wrote:I think it was Mark Twain who once said:

"It is better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are a fool than to open it and prove them right."

PAX

How very true HAHA now follow your own advice and shut your mouth before we think you any bigger a fool. Oh no wait I doubt that could happen.

I challenged you to PM me when you had proof a PM I never got and I doubt you ever sent because you have none. With out proof you are just a another conspiracy theroist nut job that likes to hear himself talking. And then ( this is GREAT! ) when someone comes along who IS an expert you say he doesn't know what hes talking about but that YOU in your infinite wisdom do. Please tell me HAHA why shoud I or anyone else believe anything you say over what is a complete contridiction to what Gary said ?

If a fool you seek look no further then your own reflection as your looking one square in the eye.

Again I challenge you HAHA to provide proof of your claims. Hard evidence. PM me when you find it so I may read it and become as enlightened as you.



Semper Fi SAINT. May you rest in peace.

Jack: before you get too far ahead of yourself the Underwriter's Laboratory (UL) certified the structural steel grade used in the WTC's core (which is the main structure of the building, not the exterior) to not deform (not melt) when heated for a period of 6 hours to over 2000 degrees.

Quote:


We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F (2). Why Dr. Brown would imply that 2000F would melt the high-grade steel used in those buildings makes no sense at all.

The email was signed:

Quote:


From Kevin R. Ryan
Site Manager of the Environmental Health Laboratories
South Bend, Indiana
(Company site - www.ehl.cc)

A division of Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.
(Company site - www.ul.com)

http://www.rense.com/general59/ul.htm

At the time of the certification of the WTC steel to the ASTM E119 standard, Ryan was working directly for UL, that is not directly noted in the link, but it has been verified otherwise.

There is a Eutectic reaction that might have weakened the steel, but, this wouldn't have happened in so short a time as in the WTC. After the removal of much of the structural steel, FEMA and the SEA of NY conducted a building performance analysis, and found a pseudo-eutectic reaction under micro-inspection (http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtc-report/WTC_apndxC.pdf <-- see fig. C-7). Now, I'm not an expert, but the item I referred to is indicative of an explosive used... a eutectic reaction has a light and chipped fracturing look at a distance of 50 μm, and this looks molten.

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html
^^^ Might also tend to agree with what I've been saying for a while.

On top of this evidence, why is it that the ATF was called in initially, to investigate the Firefighter's and Police reports of multiple "explosions" within 5-7 minutes pre-collapse of the North and South Towers? Also, why would a building that was deformed on one side not go off kilter during rapid failure? If you want the visual, build a small stack of blocks and put one off center, and then push the block out, and watch what happens, I'll cut to the chase, it doesn't fall straight down.

Why is it that the FBI has closed access to the FEMA final building performance report for WTC 7? Let's just forget that the WTC buildings defied physics for a moment, and assume that they could indeed fall flat within their own footprint... Why would WTC 7, a building that was about 30 meters away, collapse? It was not built the same way WTC N/S was built, its internal core was the sole gravity and wind bearing member, and there was a minimum of debris from the other 2 towers that actually fell on the building (FEMA's preliminary Building Performance report shows that there was little building debris overlap because there were 2 different kinds of concrete used, and WTC 7's concrete was found overtop of WTC N/S debris). How is it that a building that was not damaged by debris, nor by an aircraft was demolished? I can't think of any real reason that it would have been demolished other than something other than the WTC buildings coming down doing the deed.

I've IM'ed you a few times, and yes, I know completely too well that things do NOT always add up, and things get missed.

I also know that there is no way known to physics or science at large that things could have happened the way they are told to have happened. There are numerous inconsistencies in the 9/11 Commission's report to Congress that were not addressed. The report cites FEMA's preliminary findings, even though FEMA itself ends up contradicting (and explaining) it's preliminary findings in later updates.

I find it highly suspect that there was a salvage deal for the WTC structural steel within 4 hours of the buildings coming down, and the abbreviated SEA of NY and FEMA investigations taking place at great haste which compromised the integrity and breadth of evidence collected.

Frankly, I have no problem at all thinking that there is something else far more malignant than a simple terrorist attack afoot here. Things don't always add up, but a bad or hasty investigation always shows through.

(I've placed out, and pointed out evidence, please do me the credit of at least reading the posted information)



Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.

Jackalope wrote:

Hahahaha wrote:I think it was Mark Twain who once said:

"It is better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are a fool than to open it and prove them right."

PAX

How very true HAHA now follow your own advice and shut your mouth before we think you any bigger a fool. Oh no wait I doubt that could happen.

I challenged you to PM me when you had proof a PM I never got and I doubt you ever sent because you have none. With out proof you are just a another conspiracy theroist nut job that likes to hear himself talking. And then ( this is GREAT! ) when someone comes along who IS an expert you say he doesn't know what hes talking about but that YOU in your infinite wisdom do. Please tell me HAHA why shoud I or anyone else believe anything you say over what is a complete contridiction to what Gary said ?

If a fool you seek look no further then your own reflection as your looking one square in the eye.

Again I challenge you HAHA to provide proof of your claims. Hard evidence. PM me when you find it so I may read it and become as enlightened as you.

I provided what GAM has just cited to you in a public forum. I will not PM you for anything. If I can't say it in public then I shouldn't say it at all.

You are the one (the only one) going on wild tangents and repeatedly bringing aliens into the picture.

I may not be the smartest guy on the planet, but I'm no fool. It's as clear as day to me that there's something funny going on here. What the oddity is, I don't know, but I know it exists.

It just doesn't add up. That's all I have ever stated enfaticly and I'll stick to it.

Why does an investigation of say, an airline crash often get investigated for years with a full reconstruction but a crime scene where over 3000 people perished is cleaned up BEFORE investigators even get to see it? Why were investigators kept out? Why were the materials shipped overseas and recycled so quickly? Why was the airforce 90 minutes late? Why did Bush Jr. lie about when he was informed? How is it possible that a 110 story building collapsed in 8.5 seconds without being demolished / Why would a building of this type collapse due to fire(keeping in mind that it's the only time in world history)? Twice? Why did tower 7 fall? How did it do so in 4.5 seconds? Why did the firefighters say that the fires were small and controllable? Why did the firefighters say they heard bombs? Why did the mable cladding blow off the lobby walls (don't give me the elevator shaft BS either, as those shafts only run 40 floors each and they're sealed)?

Why why why.. How did an aircraft clip off 5 light standards and still manage to hit it's target? Why were the engines not found? Why did military personelle say the smelled cordite?

Why was that baby Bush's last day as head of security at the WTC? Why were the security systems disabled for two weeks before the disaster? Why were the bomb dogs removed a few days before?

The questions go on, and on, and on. Few have satisfactory (or even plausible) answers.

How about GAM's question about bodies being ID'd by DNA that somehow survived a fire that vapourized an aircraft?

I cannot be a conspiracy theorist when I have offered no conspiracy, just questions.

On the other hand, you cannot seem to be objective what-so-ever and even consider the actual questions, you just come back with silly things like aliens and death rays. I said it before, and I'll say it again. You must be on someone's payroll to act as a re-bunker and to distract and defame the actual debate. Your tactics will not work here, perhaps you should attack some of the other thousands of people who are asking the same questions. I see Charlie Sheen has taking up the fight, maybe harass him for a while will ya?

PAX