• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Norad?

FYI, you can find some interesting info on what FACSFAC / Giant Killer does at the above link.

Shame on you! You have now "spilled the beans" to allow A-Train to solve the mystery of how the NAVY was complicit in the conspiracy of 9/11. ;)

If you haven't read this entire thread of the charade, he's trying to tie the Navy ATC involvement with the NORAD fighters with this:

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/wilson01.htm
 
Good post DR.

As an ex-ATC (both military and FAA) I can say that your phraseology is spot on! Right out of the FAA 7110.65...
If you teach enough flight students the who (you, this is me) where, what format, it starts to get ingrained into your brain. Teaching your kids, on the other hand, is another story. Teaching your wife is an undertaking best left for those with an appetite for frying pans to the head. :D

We also used to teach the PTAPTP voice report for non radar contact in IFR at mandatory voice reporting points, but that seems to have gone the way of the plains buffalo.

DR
 
This side issue of the Otis fighters being "delayed" has to end. Otis was not delayed.

NORAD cannot scramble fighters without a scramble order from NORAD CONR, which in turn gets its scramble orders from NORAD HQ, which in turn gets its orders from the NMCC at the Pentagon.

On 9/11 no such order was issued. The request for scramble came from the OPPOSITE direction. In the end NEADS, just like Cheap Shot at Boston ARTCC, broke protocol by issuing a scramble authenticate code without scramble authorisation.

NEADS cannot just scramble fighters willy nilly. They must receive orders to do so.

Normally their targets are coming from outside the USA, and between the FAA detecting the problem (when the target first enters the ADIZ) and the critical time for intercept (when the target leaves the ADIZ and enters US airspace) NORAD and the FAA have up to HOURS to sort out what to do.

THERE WAS NO DELAY ON 9/11 IN STANDARD PROCEDURE. THE ATTACK HAPPENED TOO FAST FOR THE SYSTEM TO RESPOND TO. SOME CLEVER PEOPLE TRIED TO IMPROVISE A DIFFERENT PROCEDURE, BUT IT WAS STILL NOT FAST ENOUGH.

Got it? Please stop this Conspiracy Theory garbage.

-Gumboot
 
Shame on you! You have now "spilled the beans" to allow A-Train to solve the mystery of how the NAVY was complicit in the conspiracy of 9/11. ;)

If you haven't read this entire thread of the charade, he's trying to tie the Navy ATC involvement with the NORAD fighters with this:

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/wilson01.htm
Just tryin' to put the E into JREF for A-Truant.

By the way, were you in the USAF when McPeak tried to change the Class A to look like a cross between the Navy and an airline pilot's uniform?

DR
 
This side issue of the Otis fighters being "delayed" has to end. Otis was not delayed.

But, but, but he wants it to be like in the movies. :D

Funny thing is his times from Official Notification to launch were under the required 15 minutes anyway. Some stand down! :boggled:
 
Have any of you guys attempted to talk sense into Balsamo and his minions at the pft forum?

I know Gumboot and a few others (and I) have but for some mysterious reason we get banned after a few posts.
 
Last edited:
Sustained periods of time? The flight from Otis to Manhattan is less than six minutes.
And how much fuel would an F-15 or F-16 consume in those six minutes when using full afterburners? How much would it have left afterwards? If I recall correctly, six or seven minutes on full afterburners is pretty much enough time to consume all the fuel onboard (afterburners are extremely fuel hungry) — if somebody has solid numbers, please post them!

There is also the question of them slowing down from supersonic speeds to combat speeds, acquiring the target, setting up the proper attack angle on the target, locking onto the target, getting permission to fire, then actually firing. All of which take time. There's a reason why AWACS aircraft are so important...

Unfortunately that figure of 1600mph you plucked out of the air is still over Mach 2, you still need to loose over 800mph to get below Mach 1 and into subsonic territory.
Do the speed brakes even work at supersonic speeds?
 
Last edited:
Hang on....

NORAD technicians, he [Robin Hordon] explains, do not need “exact coordinates,” meaning the plane’s latitude and longitude, in order to locate an aircraft. For decades, military and civilian controllers helped each other locate aircraft, with and without transponders, by referring to “well-known navaids, airway intersections, military special use areas, major airports, military bases, and other common points of reference.”.........

Hordon, who was fired from the FAA for going on strike in 1981.

About 8 years prior to 9-11 the military had begun dropping some of the common reference points so there were not as many. By 9-11 they were not using common reference points any longer but they were using Latitude/Longitudes. We didn’t know this on 9-11.

So reading through these, A-Train is more accepting of a what a guy that got fired 12 years before the so called change, than the guy that had to deal with the situation on 9/11. If the FAA still didn't know about NORAD's change of system 8 years after they did it, how would a guy that got fired from the FAA 12 years before that know what systems were in place by NORAD in 2001? His information is 20 years out of date and in those 20 years, NORAD changed their systems, 8 years before 2001, 12 after Hordon got fired.

Yeah like he's really the expert to ask about anything 2001 related. I mean what are the chances that absolutely nothing would have changed in Air Traffic Control and NORAD in the past 20 years?
 
(afterburners are extremely fuel hungry)

It would be like a thirsty King Kong drinking the Atlantic Ocean dry! :jaw-dropp

BTW, the F-15's could not fly from Otis ANGB to Manhattan in 6 minutes. Double that and you'd be close. Also, they wouldn't need full afterburner the entire distance.

There's a reason why AWACS aircraft are so important...

Do the speed brakes even work at supersonic speeds?

Who would want to pull the - G's for that kind of maneuver?

If vectored for the intercept by either NEADS or AWACS Weapons Controllers they wouldn't need speed brakes. It's called planning ahead.

Edit to add: There are many other and better ways for fighters to reduce speed rapidly. Anything from a high G barrel roll to a high speed yoyo would be less troublesome and more comfortable.
 
Last edited:
It There are many other and better ways for fighters to reduce speed rapidly. Anything from a high G barrel roll to a high speed yoyo would be less troublesome and more comfortable.
Granted, but wouldn't performing any of those at supersonic speeds also be fairly demanding on the pilot?

In terms of the speed brakes, I was just thinking of the sheer technical capabilities in regards to whether or not they can even be deployed at supersonic speeds.
 
Granted, but wouldn't performing any of those at supersonic speeds also be fairly demanding on the pilot?

Not any more than at subsonic speeds. Think G forces, not speed. The demanding part is more mental than physical as maneuvering does have to be planned and executed well in advance of where you want to be in the end.

In terms of the speed brakes, I was just thinking of the sheer technical capabilities in regards to whether or not they can even be deployed at supersonic speeds.

Yes, there is a lot of force, but they are built to withstand that. I wouldn't dare use them at Mach 2+, just because. Again, I don't know many who would actually use them to slow from supersonic to subsonic. They would be used for fairly minor adjustments at final closure to match speed with the target in case of an ID, tail number intercept. For a Hot Intercept (missile or gun) there would be no need to match speed with the target.
 
First I don't know the reason why they won't launch without a target or what I have heard is a "Z Point", I assume it is an AFI (Air Force Instruction). Prior to 9-11 this was there requirement, I assume one of the resons is due fuel on board. They can't afford to waste fule chasing something tha hasn't been found. When they launch fighters they don't launch associated Tankers as well.

Something that hasn't been found? The flights we are talking about were never lost. AAL11's target was watched all the way down by your fellow controllers at ZBW. And you know that, because you were there. There was no need for NEADS technicians to find any targets; civilian ATC had them the whole time and could have provided that information to the fighters.

You should already know this, Cheap Shot.

Second I wish it was that simple, prior to 9-11 it was an inherent function of NEADS which is also an MRU (Military Radar Unit) to vector aircraft at each other. Even though MRU controllers are similar to air traffic controllers they are not the same. In ATC it is our job to keep aircraft a part, not put them together.

It is also your job to provide fighters whatever assistance they need to find and intercept a suspect aircraft. If I could find a pre-2001 7110.65 I could prove that to you.

Third ATC has never been trained to vector fighters for intercept, it is not in any training manual, can we vector aircraft behind other aircraft we do it everyday, but to this day we have never had training in what you suggest. We work together in Military exercises today and in some exercise we are asked to participate, but in our training records you will never see a trainng objective checked about vectoring fighters for intercepts. Not a bad idea though and I beleive it should be one of the FAA objectives, but it doesn't exist yet.

There's no need for any training. It's extremely simple. If you have a fighter that is due east of a suspect craft, you say "fly heading two seven zero..." The idea that fighters have to sit on the ground until the military finds the target is preposterous. There's no reason they can't scramble immediately, check on to Center freq, and be assisted by a Center controller to the general location of the craft.

Personally I have stated before that the fighters were delayed, I beleive becasue they wanted approval for Generla Arnold before they launched, I don't beleive they needed that, but waiting for that approval probably was enough to delay the launch. (maybe this was due to the exercise Vigilant Guardian, and they were not sure to commit assets, I don't know).

I'm glad to see you admitting it's your opinion that they were waiting for General Arnold's approval; and you're absolutely right they didn't need it-- so why would they even ask for it? And why would it take so long?

Didn't want to commit assets to a known hijacking, because of an exercise going on? Seriously? I don't blame you for hedging your bets on that one.

But understand that the military wasn't treating AAL11 as a hostile threat, and nor was the FAA. We all thought he would land at JFK or somewhere in New York. So the stand down that DRG thinks exist can be explained in many ways. My opinion above is one of them, I honestly don't beleive one was in effect. If other FAA facilities would have called at the first sign of trouble I beleive the military would have responded. So to put the blame of a stand down on them is quite a claim. If New York, Washington, Indy, and Cleveland Center had called earlier then I could see the charge of a miltiary stand down as a possible calim. Now whether the FAA had some type of stand down, I seriously doubt it, but remember there was no real requirement for the Center's to call NEADS directly so I can't fault them for not calling right away. Was there a breakdown at FAA HQ, your guess is as good as mine. What ever there was I beleive it is fixed now and won't happen again.

New York, Washington, Indy, Cleveland-- they did call the military in plenty of time. I don't think we'll ever see your equivalents-- the military liaisons-- from those center checking on to JREF.

There was no breakdown at FAA headquarters. They're just a bunch of dummies who'll take the blame for anything because they don't know any better.

The breakdown was somewhere between NEADS and the fighter pilots in their cockpits. The suspicion is that breakdown was intentional.
 
Something that hasn't been found? The flights we are talking about were never lost. AAL11's target was watched all the way down by your fellow controllers at ZBW. And you know that, because you were there. There was no need for NEADS technicians to find any targets; civilian ATC had them the whole time and could have provided that information to the fighters.

You should already know this, Cheap Shot.

And you obviously weren't listening because Cheap Shot has already pointed out that 8 years before 9/11 (12 after your source got fired from the FAA) NORAD changed from the system Hordon knew to a Long/Lat system, and it took Cheap Shot and his team time to figure out how to convert the data on their system to the data that NORAD required to direct the fighters. What part of that do you not understand?

It is also your job to provide fighters whatever assistance they need to find and intercept a suspect aircraft. If I could find a pre-2001 7110.65 I could prove that to you.

And how was he supposed to do that without speaking the same "language" for those directions? Or are you now claiming that Cheap Shot was part of the conspiracy as well?

There's no need for any training. It's extremely simple. If you have a fighter that is due east of a suspect craft, you say "fly heading two seven zero..." The idea that fighters have to sit on the ground until the military finds the target is preposterous. There's no reason they can't scramble immediately, check on to Center freq, and be assisted by a Center controller to the general location of the craft.

No, you've been told this repeatedly, how many more times will it take to get it inside your skull? NORAD had the fighters working on going to a specified Latitude and Longitude, NOT A VECTOR!!!!! it took time to convert the FAA system from a vector from a common reference point (FAA System) to Lat and Long (NORAD System as of 1993).

The breakdown was somewhere between NEADS and the fighter pilots in their cockpits. The suspicion is that breakdown was intentional.

No, the break down was the FAA and NORAD using different directing systems and having to figure out how to convert one to the other so that NORAD knew where the plane was. If you speak English and I speak French it's no good my giving you directions in French because you're not going to understand them. I have to translate them into English for you. The FAA had to go from a vector system they were using to a Long/Lat system NORAD needed, and it sounds like Cheap Shot solved it with a overlay of the Lat/Long co-ordinates, probably a pretty quick fix to come up with in a handful of minutes.
 
Last edited:
This side issue of the Otis fighters being "delayed" has to end. Otis was not delayed.

NORAD cannot scramble fighters without a scramble order from NORAD CONR, which in turn gets its scramble orders from NORAD HQ, which in turn gets its orders from the NMCC at the Pentagon.

On 9/11 no such order was issued. The request for scramble came from the OPPOSITE direction. In the end NEADS, just like Cheap Shot at Boston ARTCC, broke protocol by issuing a scramble authenticate code without scramble authorisation.

NEADS cannot just scramble fighters willy nilly. They must receive orders to do so.

Normally their targets are coming from outside the USA, and between the FAA detecting the problem (when the target first enters the ADIZ) and the critical time for intercept (when the target leaves the ADIZ and enters US airspace) NORAD and the FAA have up to HOURS to sort out what to do.

Got it? Please stop this Conspiracy Theory garbage.

You're running scared.

NEADS did indeed have the authority to scramble jets in this situation:

Did Marr really need to get authorization from Arnold? The 9/11 Commission, arguing that authorization was needed from the top, cited a memo issued June 1, 2001 (about 3 months before 9/11), by the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, entitled “Aircraft Piracy (Hijacking) and Destruction of Derelict Airborne Objects.” The crucial statement in this document says:

[T]he NMCC is the focal point within Department of Defense for providing assistance. In the event of a hijacking, the NMCC will be notified by the most expeditious means by the FAA. The NMCC will, with the exception of immediate responses as authorized by reference d, forward requests for DOD assistance to the Secretary of Defense for approval. (Emphasis added.)

As the italicized words show, this document does not say, as some interpreters have argued, that all requests to scramble fighters in response to a hijacking had to be approved by the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Such approval is not necessary, these italicized words show, when “immediate responses” are needed. When we look at “reference d,” moreover, we find that the requests do not even need to go to the NMCC (a fact illustrated by Arnold’s statement, “we’ll get the authorities later”). Reference d points back to a 1997 document, Directive 3025.15, which says:

The DoD Components that receive verbal requests from civil authorities for support in an exigent emergency may initiate informal planning and, if required, immediately respond.

NEADS, being a “DoD component” that received a request from a civil authority (the FAA) for what was clearly an “exigent emergency,” had the authority to “immediately respond.” Marr did not even need to get approval from Arnold.
Having made this argument in my critique of The 9/11 Commission Report, I was interested to learn that Scoggins agrees. He says:

According to FAA Order 7610.4, NEADS has the authority issued by NORAD to launch fighters; they do not have to wait for authority from NORAD. On 9/11, I believe Col. Marr at NEADS would not launch without authority from General Arnold at NORAD; that caused a delay.

Moreover, even General Arnold himself evidently agreed that Marr had the authority. In Air War Over America, which was published in 2003 as the U.S. Air Force’s account of 9/11, for which Arnold wrote the foreword, there is an account of the response at Otis to Boston Center’s call about a hijacked airliner. Reporting that the commander of the fighter squadron at Otis called NEADS to report the FAA’s request for help, the book says: “The sector commander would have authority to scramble the airplanes.” Debunking 9/11 Debunking pp. 50
But if you choose to stick your head in the sand and refuse Griffin's solid research, all you have to do is appeal to common sense. Why would NEADS need NORAD's approval just to get the fighters in the air during a potential emergency? Obviously a decision to shoot down a civilian airliner would require approval from a high authority, probably the Commander-in-Chief. But that approval could have been requested while the fighters were en route to the hijacked plane.

And another question, even if we assume NEADS needed Arnold's approval for a scramble, is why was that approval not given immediately? Are we supposed to believe that with with a hijacked plane heading toward Manhattan, General Arnold could not be bothered to make the call on a scramble?

Gumboot, you hate this debate because you have been exposed. Your "expertise" on the subject of NORAD amounts to little more than an ability to recite the official story, mixed with a jumble of expert-sounding jargon. For a long time everyone here cheered you on, because they had an emtional desire to agree with you, while not having a clue what you were talking about.

Now someone is here who know the facts and the arguments, and you can't hack it.
 
Shame on you! You have now "spilled the beans" to allow A-Train to solve the mystery of how the NAVY was complicit in the conspiracy of 9/11.

If you haven't read this entire thread of the charade, he's trying to tie the Navy ATC involvement with the NORAD fighters with this:

I ought to report this post to the moderator, as it is basically slander. I've never suggested the Navy was complicit in anything.

Reheat, you do a lot of talking, but you basically have nothing to say. You comb other people writings for trivial errors, then heap childish insults and abuse on them, while never confronting their overall argument. Then you spend the rest of your time off topic bragging about your days as a flyboy.

I suggest you change your name to Overheat.
 
Last edited:
I've never suggested the Navy was complicit in anything.

Yeah, he just hints that they were all involved, except those that weren't, and they were too, unless they were dupted in which case they were just stupid.
 
I ought to report this post to the moderator, as it is basically slander. I've never suggested the Navy was complicit in anything.

You go right ahead and do that and we'll compare with this:

The breakdown was somewhere between NEADS and the fighter pilots in their cockpits. The suspicion is that breakdown was intentional.

You comb other people writings for trivial errors,

What is the time for an F-15 from scramble to 29,000' again?

Speaking of trivial, the fighters met their required launch time from Official Notification to their actual launch time ACCORDING TO YOUR TIMELINE.

What was that you said about trivia again?
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom