Another Mineta thread

[BCR]

Pssst, that should be 10:28 EDT.

Oh my, another senior moment ... thx CurtC

 

[Senenmut]

Hence, that is why GMT is used in aviation. The plane (UAL93) crashed at 14:03. The destination was changed at 13:56. The flight plan projected an arrival time at DCA at 14:28. If you watch the local news coverage (around 9:28 EDT) you will see that the Pentagon area is evacuated again in response to this "arrival time". In other words, the flight plan was generating a "target" on the TSD's used by FAA HQ (and perhaps by the Secret Service) which had people responding although the plane it represented had crashed at 14:03.

what do u mean by "projected an arrival time at DCA"? they knew that flight had been hijacked. did they just draw a line from the point where the plane was at 1356 to DCA? the plane was still about 180 miles out from tracing back 7 mins and adding a few miles back from shaksville.

im guessing your trying to push mineta testimony back. his testimony follows a timeline. first the pentagon gets hit then he finds out about 93 being down.

if the designation changed at 0956, thats well after 77 crashed into the pentagon form an offical time of 0937. if your trying to push minetas testimony back that far, then right when he goes into the PEOC, im sure everyone there would be well aware of the pentagon hit. im confused!

since this is another mineta thread, im guessing we are just arguing over what time he was "really" there??

 

[BCR]

what do u mean by "projected an arrival time at DCA"? they knew that flight had been hijacked. did they just draw a line from the point where the plane was at 1356 to DCA? the plane was still about 180 miles out from tracing back 7 mins and adding a few miles back from shaksville.

When the flight plan was changed for UAL93 to DCA at 13:56, an arrival time for that destination was generated. I am not qualified to address exactly what was used to determine this arrival time, but it was generated and went into the FAA system, just like for any other plane in the system with a flight plan. They also knew that AAL11 had been hijacked and turned, but its flight plan continued westward on TSD's to LAX.

I think you are making this more complicated than it is Senenmut. When the hijackers changed course for DCA, the ATC's changed the flight plan to accommodate this change so that they could track it better.

 

[Senenmut]

When the flight plan was changed for UAL93 to DCA at 13:56, an arrival time for that destination was generated. I am not qualified to address exactly what was used to determine this arrival time, but it was generated and went into the FAA system, just like for any other plane in the system with a flight plan. They also knew that AAL11 had been hijacked and turned, but its flight plan continued westward on TSD's to LAX.

I think you are making this more complicated than it is Senenmut. When the hijackers changed course for DCA, the ATC's changed the flight plan to accommodate this change so that they could track it better.

i know your anal about your math and im alittle anal about stuff as well!!
check out this interesting pic i found regarding some of the hijacking. some think AQ did it while others think it was a precise milirary strike. looks like it was made in 2005.

 

[Senenmut]

click on the picture and it will blow up. give it a sec and the animation will start.

 

[Bell]

click on the picture and it will blow up. give it a sec and the animation will start.

 

[beachnut]

i know your anal about your math and im alittle anal about stuff as well!!
check out this interesting pic i found regarding some of the hijacking. some think AQ did it while others think it was a precise milirary strike. looks like it was made in 2005.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=14821

That was dumb. They make up dumb ideas on flights that are all going to the west and all took off around the same time. They are close to each other. Was there a stupid point to that effort?

I see you have no comment. But it means nothing. BTW, the terrorist did plan to be hitting targets close to the same time so it would remain a surprise.

Surprise! 93 terrorists were late, and the passengers figure out 9/11 in minutes, something 9/11 truth has messed up for over 7 years as they try to apologize for the terrorists.

 

[A W Smith]

if you have a point. make it.

click on the picture and it will blow up. give it a sec and the animation will start.

Wow you mean to imply that two hijacked planes that left from the same airport and hit the same target came close to each other during their route? Whoda thunkit?

 

[BCR]

It was a precise military strike

i know your anal about your math and im alittle anal about stuff as well!!
check out this interesting pic i found regarding some of the hijacking. some think AQ did it while others think it was a precise milirary strike. looks like it was made in 2005.
[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_285444967e2ae47f07.gif[/qimg]

You are correct, I am anal about math and reason and I don't see what this has to do with the subject at hand. And of course it was a precise military strike, by AQ. I hope it did not take you this long to figure that one out.

 

[BCR]

Having a discussion on this subject over at ATS. Thought I should add this to the thread as well.



This is the warning Andrews AFB started issuing at around 10:16. Not much doubt which order was being discussed.

 

[cjnewson88]

Did they know flight 93 had crashed by this stage?

 

[BCR]

Did they know flight 93 had crashed by this stage?

Yes and no. Some people did, and some people did not. It went down at 10:03 and ZOB was reporting that it had gone down. People at FAA HQ were still trying to figure it out and of course the military was dependent upon the FAA for information. Keep in mind, there were two "air forces" in play and neither was communicating with one another at this point. One was being run by the Secret Service out of Andrews AFB, the other by NEADS.

I'll have to refer to Reheat for more info in that regards. He is the "expert" on the air defense response.

 

[cjnewson88]

I wasn't aware Andrews AFB even scrambled anything on the morning of 9/11. What information do we have about the second air force you refer to?

 

[BCR]

I wasn't aware Andrews AFB even scrambled anything on the morning of 9/11. What information do we have about the second air force you refer to?

Reheat would know more about it than I would. But a good start would be Lynn Spencer's book, Touching History. Andrews had 3 fighters training in NC. They were recalled about the time of the Pentagon attack. They were the BULLY fighters you hear discussed from time-to-time. One of them, although low on fuel, did a touch-and-go immediately upon return to make an interception. Did not last but for a few minutes, when he returned to Andrews (it was a helicopter or something like that). The BULLY fighters were refueled and armed, pretty much under the control of the Secret Service for a time.

But again, Reheat or Boone870 would be your best sources for more information on that here.

 

[Reheat]

Did they know flight 93 had crashed by this stage?

Yes and no. Some people did, and some people did not. It went down at 10:03 and ZOB was reporting that it had gone down. People at FAA HQ were still trying to figure it out and of course the military was dependent upon the FAA for information. Keep in mind, there were two "air forces" in play and neither was communicating with one another at this point. One was being run by the Secret Service out of Andrews AFB, the other by NEADS.

The key to the precise answer here is at what time the Andrews F-16 (that had returned from NC to Andrews) piloted by Maj Billy Hutchinson was launched and sent on the excursion over the Pentagon and up the Potomac? He was specifically launched with very little fuel to intercept UA 93. At that time the Andrews SOF certainly DID NOT know UA 93 had crashed. The SOF directed Hutchinson to take-off with no afterburner (highly unusual) in order to conserve fuel.

I recall the time was somewhere between 10:15-10:30, but the best most accurate answer is in Miles Kara's material. He has perhaps the best info on the launch of all of the Andrew's fighters. If someone can find that, you've found the answer, but I don't have time at the moment. I'll be back later this evening and can search for it if that info is not found by then...

 

[cjnewson88]

Thanks BCR and Reheat, I'll be sure to look that up after work.

 

[BCR]

I recall the time was somewhere between 10:15-10:30, but the best most accurate answer is in Miles Kara's material. He has perhaps the best info on the launch of all of the Andrew's fighters. If someone can find that, you've found the answer, but I don't have time at the moment. I'll be back later this evening and can search for it if that info is not found by then...

I should know this since I actually helped Miles with that analysis after Spencer's book came out. Seems so long ago. I'll pull the data since Reheat does not have it on hand.

Wait a minute, I found Miles summary post on this.

The Andrews flight strips show that Bully 2, who came back alone and well ahead of Bully 1 and 3, landed at 10:14 out of fuel. Bully 1, a flight of two F-16s landed at 10:35, low on gas; however, Bully 1 had sufficient fuel to take off again in response to an unknown coming down the river. By then, the notional UA 93 had “landed” at National at 10:28. There was nothing to intercept. Here is a ground trace of the flight of Bully 1 based on data from 84th RADES.

 

[Reheat]

I wasn't aware Andrews AFB even scrambled anything on the morning of 9/11. What information do we have about the second air force you refer to?

IIRC, Andrews launched a total of 5 fighters that morning. One was Bully 1 (Maj Billy Hutchinson) who had been recalled from a mission to an NC training range. Two other F-16's were launched shortly afterward and flown by Sasserville and Penny. In addition, two others were launched a short time later..

All of these early fighters from Andrews were launched in response to a request by the Secret Service. By the time the last 2 were launched NEADS was back in control as the NEADS radio frequencies were passed to all of them after they were airborne.

The Andrew's fighter's were in a low CAP while the Langley fighters were in a high CAP. Essentially, by 10:45 or thereabouts there were 4 F-16s in a CAP over the Capitol. Two more were launched sometime later.. Of course, all were too late as the attack was over by then, but they tried...

Lynn Spencer's timeline is not accurate, so again the best information is in Miles Kara's material on the oredigger site.

 

[Boone 870]

While 911files has this old thread bumped, I'm going to add a couple more items that I feel are relevant to the discussion.

More proof that some in the FAA thought that United 93 was near Washington, DC. From an interview in 2001, a National Park Police Service pilot's recollection of the events that day:

But upon return with the Secret Service agent on board, thinking we were doing more MEDEVACS we knew we had more patients, the underground operation of National Airport and the tower were reporting to us locations on this number four aircraft. That it had in fact turned back from Cleveland, was coming back towards DC, had passed Pittsburgh.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/75285513/LarsonFOIA-USNPSNCR-Interviews-NPS-2011-00689

page 20

The Park Police helicopters later landed to avoid the TSD Flight 93 as it appeared to be approaching Washington DC.



Actual recording of Linda Justice informing Washington Center that she updated Flight 93's flightplan to reflect Hagerstown-Reagan National:

 

[tfk]

Having a discussion on this subject over at ATS. Thought I should add this to the thread as well.



This is the warning Andrews AFB started issuing at around 10:16. Not much doubt which order was being discussed.

This video does not sound authentic to me.

I notice that it was just posted (1 day ago). Anyone know its source, background, vetting, etc?