Hunt the F - 15!

 Is this article out of time? - now, one year later, the USAF forgot about OTIS Hayden doesn`t even mention it anymore.
No. It is not outdated. The 9/11 panel and so the public heard: "Two NORAD generals, testifying May 23,(2003) said there were significant delays in NORAD learning about the hijackings from the Federal Aviation Administration and in mobilizing fighter jets to escort or shoot down the airliners.
    They said fighters took off about the time the first plane crashed into the North Tower and were eight minutes from New York City when the second airliner struck the South Tower. "
 # NORAD Response Times still available in January 2004

ergänzt um einen email-Briefverkehr (s.u.)
background -information
the funny legend in aviationweek/ with comments
and AA11 timeline
and comments
(supplements, see bottom)

OTIS Airfield (google earth):

Since October 2001 you can read on
the following simple facts and questions without recourse to any conspiracy theories. Use your search engines, use the archives in the newspapers, use the video footage that is often provided online - and don`t rely only on the links you find here:

1. On September 11th,  not even one interceptor tried to hinder the aircraft from turning into bombs, until about allegedly 09:30 (three F-16, Langley).
Try finding evidence that this is untrue and that the U.S. airforce did all it could to take down AA11, UA175 or AA77 with all available measures. 

2. There were a lot of explanations that we should neither ignore nor believe. Only 3 days after 911 the government decided to "invent" two F-15 interceptors that scrambled from Otis ANG base.

Try to find evidence of this revelation  days earlier - maybe Rumsfeld or Myers had forgotten to mention these F-15s on the 11th, 12th or 13th, and it was not only public opinion which compelled them to invent these F-15s but the undeniable truth.  Not only on Cape Cod did nobody know anything about these 2 F-15s on September 12th.
(First mentioning of OTIS was -as much as we know- in "Aboard the Hi-jacked Planes" by Mark Easton Channel 4 News [British TV station] September 13, 2001 ("At 8.39 two F16s or possibly F15s took off from Otis Airforce Base to try and intercept one of the hijacked aircraft. Further mobile calls were being received from AA11 - at about 8.43 one passenger said "we're going down". At 8.45, with 92 people on board, American Airways flight eleven crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Centre. 

Now the authorities had a terrifying dilemma. The F16's were in the air with the capability to shoot the second hijacked plane out of the sky. At 9.00 UA175 changed direction again - heading straight for Manhattan from the South over a very built up area. I understand it would have required sanction from the President to shoot down a civilian airliner and he was touring a school in Florida.")

3. These F-15s were allegdly
- alarmed at 8:38
- scrambled at 8:52, so they were
- too late for AA11 (8:45), but also
- too late for UA175 (09:03) because they were still many miles away
Try doing this count: if it takes 10-12 minutes to reach Manhattan from Otis ANG base, they would have been only one minute too late, not just half along the way there. You can also count using speed (maximum 1.875mph) and distance (153 miles). Or you can also take into account that their missiles are a lot faster than their planes and that there would have been no need to intercept over Manhattan, because UA175 approached from the sea and was clearly visisble by groundradar and would have been from the radar aboard  the F-15s and even visible by eye... 

4. Don`t store your map away. Look how far Washington is from New York City. Without using maximum speed the two F-15 jets could have easily reached the AA77 to prevent it from crashing into the Pentagon. Because the F-15-pilots would have seen the two WTC-towers burning and would have had time enough to intercept the radar- controlled flight path of AA77, the only missing or "hijacked" aircraft at the time (09:03 - 09:37). There was no need to "safeguard" NY City anymore. Allegedly (this is complete nonsense) Cape Cod was responsible for the Washington area. For sure Andrews AFB was responsible, being only 10 miles away from Washington DC. map
 new powerfull evidence by Jared Israel


Nach Angaben des Pentagon sei das Verteidigungskommando für den amerikanischen Luftraum (NORAD) am Dienstag um 8.38 Uhr alarmiert worden, dass ein Flugzeug entführt worden war. Zwei F-15-Abfangjäger seien um 8.52 Uhr vom Air Force-Stützpunkt Otis in Cape Cod vor der Küste von Boston aufgestiegen. Die gekaperte Maschine der American Airlines raste jedoch bereits um 8.45 Uhr in das World Trade Center. Als der zweite Turm des World Trade Centers um 9.03 Uhr von einer Maschine der United Airlines getroffen wurde, seien die Abfangjäger noch rund 100 Kilometer von New York entfernt gewesen. 
Ja und dann? Ging ihnen dann der Sprit aus?
Als die Nachricht einer weiteren gekaperten Maschine mit Kurs auf Washington kam, stiegen um 9.35 Uhr zwei F-16-Abfangjäger vom Stützpunkt Langley in Virginia auf. American Airlines-Flug 77 stürzte jedoch bereits zwei Minuten später auf das Pentagon. Warum erst 9.35h ?  Denn schon mindestens 45 Minuten zuvor war diese Maschine "vom Bildschirm verschwunden" und das NORAD war informiert. Warum wird nicht weiter über die ersten Abfangjäger berichtet? Diese waren angeblich technisch um 9.02h zwar noch 100 km von New York (warum eigentlich, wenn der Flug der fighter nur höchstens 12 Minuten dauert und sie um 08.44h aufstiegen?) , aber dann auch nur 400 km von Washington entfernt - eine halbe Stunde für 400 km! Ist es glaubhaft, daß die Sicherung des Luftraums über Washington von Cape Cod bzw. Langley/Virginia aus erfolgt?
"Today, the 102nd Fighter Wing's area of responsibility includes over 500,000 square miles, 90 million people, and the major industrial centers of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Detroit and all national command centers in Washington, D.C.," the wing stated  #e in a two-page statement published on 9-11.
#e Warum weiß man in Cape Cod am 12.09. nichts von den zwei F-15?
normales procedere:
 2 F-16 fingen -innerhalb von Minuten- eine Boeing ab, auch in Deutschland

vgl. auch:

"The F-15 flown by the 102th Fighter Wing can fly up to 1,875 mph, according to the Air Force. It would take an F-15 about 10 to 12 minutes to fly from Otis to New York City."
If they ever scrambled ....!
Funny though, that no one knew about these two fighters in the first days. But what about the evidence? If you can`t trust the Bush government any more you are not going to take their word as truth on this issue. And flight schedules, written orders and testimonies can now get faked as well. So let us look for independent witnesses. Logically, it can only be witnesses from New York City, where the fighters should have  arrived, or from Cape Cod where they allegedly scrambled from.
Who is independent enough, who is trustworthy?

# In New York City there are millions of people whom you could ask "Did you see
those two lonely late-coming fighters patrolling after 09:03 - but long time before 10-10:30, when the skies were crowded with AWACS and fighter jets?"

# You may ask them too: did you hear the two "BOOMS" after the two booms when the planes crashed into the towers? There must have been sonic booms ("we were supersonic ... flying over
Central Park ....") and it is impossible that the spectators in Manhattan would NOT have noticed them.

# You can look at the Videos: Thousands of cameras were pointed at the WTC towers
until they collapsed. Did you see any F-15 fighters? If F-15s were widely reported by  9:05 or 09.10 or 09:20 am, it would at least provide some (weak) level of corroberation that F-15s might have been scrambled from OTIS.

# And you can look for non-biased people in Cape Cod who are not part of the
military system and whose testimonies are fresh and non-political on Sept. 11th,
printed on Sept 12th:

"Wibel was preparing for a meeting with military commanders when he first heard about the first World Trade Center crash. That meeting was abruptly canceled.
"As I drove away, and was listening to the news on the radio, the 102nd was scrambling into duty," said Wibel, who could hear four more jets launching as he spoke later in the day."
"Another neighborhood resident, Bill Thompson, said he noticed increased activity around 10 or 10:30 a.m. yesterday, with the fighters taking off in pairs." 
Mr. Wibel did not notice any scrambling at 08.38 08.44, 08.52 or so - although personally being present on the AFB....
 When did the first TV-shows start to change programs?
As you can see yourself - and it is logical - first at 8:52,seven minutes after the first impact.  First notice of the crash was at 08.48 So Wibel can not have been informed about what was going on in NY before 08:52. (08:48)That is the time when the F-15 jets should have been in the air (or at least scrambling). But there was no alarm, no launching, scrambling, no nothing when Wibel was at Otis AFB. Otherwise, he would have said: "there was an alarm going off and I did not know why, but later I saw it on TV", or something like that. But he describes clearly an order of events in time.

So what can we learn?

1. The Bush government is telling another lie about the morning of 9/11, after so many other lies. They cannot prove that the U.S. airforce was actively guarding the skies over NY and DC. Regarding the normal standard operational procedures this only leads to one conclusion: the fighters were held down by orders.

2. We do not need photographs or conspiracy theories to prove our findings. We don`t even need to uncover secret material. All we need is logic, a map, a calculator (for those who need it) and the overwhelming evidence of newspapers or videos from the first hours or first days, which we can find online.

The following email exchange concerns the undeniable fact that the F-15s cannot speed their way
to New York City, at full throttle, while using their afterburner, all along the way - so the maximum
speed cannot have been gained - if so, this would have reduced the maximum radius significantly.
Thats correct. But it was never part of our calculations. The information about 10-12 minutes
between OTIS and Manhattan already included an average speed of about mach 1.2. So nothing
changes: these hypothetic F-15s, if they had scrambled, would have reached at least the UA175 in
time. And then they could have reached AA77. If they would have scrambled ...

Email-Briefwechsel dazu:
(Aspekte Nachbrenner, Geschwindigkeit, Reichweite, Bewaffnung ...)

Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren!
Ich weiss nicht, ob Sie es wissen, aber eine F15 ohne Zusatztanks hat wirklich nur Sprit für wenige Minuten bei Mach 2,4. Das mag albern klingen, ist aber so, denn es ist sehr ineffektiv sich bei diesen Geschwindigkeiten zu bewegen. Zum einen ist der Luftwiderstand irrsinnig hoch, zum anderen arbeiten die Turbinen mit Nachverbrennung, was dem Triebwerk eine sehr hohe
Leistungsdichte (Leistung / Gewicht des Triebwerks) aber eben auch auf Deutsch gesagt beschissenen Wirkungsgrad verleiht. Eine andere Lösung ist nicht möglich, denn ohne Nachverbrennung in den Triebwerken würden diese ein
mehrfach höheres Gewicht benötigen, um die für diese Geschwindigkeiten notwendige Leistung zu erbringen. Das ist aber bei einem Kampfflugzeug nicht tolerabel, denn das muss schliesslich nicht nur schnell, sondern auch wendig sein.

Neuere Entwürfe wie die F22 oder der Eurofighter sind übrigens mittlerweile in der Lage, auch ohne Nachbrenner _niedrige_ Überschallgeschwindigkeit zu erreichen, also Mach 1,2 bis 1,5. Fortschritte in der Aerodynamik und dem Triebwerksbau haben dies in den 90er Jahren ermöglicht. In den 70ern, als die F15 entworfen wurde, war das selbstverständlich noch nicht möglich.

Soweit mein Fachwissen, ich studiere Turbomaschinenbau an der RWTH Aachen.
Was jetzt kommt, ist mein Wissen, wie man Kampfflugzeuge einsetzt, bzw. wie Kampfpiloten ihre Nachbrenner benutzen. Das ist nicht ganz so verlässlich, aber ich denke, ich weiß immer noch wovon ich rede.

Da Fliegen mit Nachbrenner sehr viel Sprit verbraucht, setzen Piloten ihn nur im Notfall bzw. sehr kurzzeitig ein. Nachbrenner werde jedenfalls nicht eingesetzt, um Strecken von einigen 100 km zurückzulegen, denn dann ist wie gesagt wirklich der Sprit alle. Kampfflugzeuge wie die F15 marschieren grundsätzlich nur im Unterschallbereich (Hausnummer Mach 0,9) und ohne
Nachbrenner, auch in einem Krisenfall wie am 9.11. Das heißt, die F15 hätten nicht 12 Minuten gebraucht, sondern ungefähr zweieinhalbmal solange, also fast eine halbe Stunde. Würden die Kampfflugzeuge trotzdem mit Überschallgeschwindigkeit über Land marschieren, hinterließen sie auch eine Spur der Zerstörung infolge des Überschallknalls.

Warum baut man dann überhaupt Nachbrenner in Kampfflugzeuge ein?

Der Grund dafür ist, das Nachbrenner so gut wie nichts wiegen und auch wenig kosten, jedenfalls im Verhältnis zum Preis eines Kampfflugzeugs. Sie sind allerdings manchmal durchaus sehr nützlich, z.B. wenn man sich sehr schnell aus dem Gefahrenbereich einer Luftabwehreinheit entfernen möchte, oder wenn der eigene Flugplatz angegriffen wird und man sehr schnell starten muss.
Dann muss man in kurzer Zeit Entfernungen von einigen dutzend Kilometern zurücklegen und Sprit spielt eine untergeordnete Rolle. Aber sie eignen sich keinesfalls zum Zurücklegen größerer Entfernungen.

Zusammenfassend bleibt zu sagen, dass man in solchen Fällen keinesfalls mit der angegebenen Höchstgeschwindigkeit eines Kampfflugzeuges als Reisegeschwindigkeit rechnen darf. Ich stehe für Rückfragen selbstverständlich zur Verfügung.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Adam Pawlowski

Sehr geehrter Herr Pawlowski,

zunächst einmal dankeschön für Ihre sachliche und freundliche Zuschrift. Wenn Sie es mir erlauben, würde ich sie auch gerne auf die "hunt.html"-Seite setzen (falls Sie möchten ohne Namensnennung), jedoch nicht als GEGENargument, sondern um zu zeigen, dass ihre Aspekte berücksichtigt sind.

Denn das sind sie.

Nehmen wir Ihren letzten Satz:
"Zusammenfassend bleibt zu sagen, dass man in solchen Fällen keinesfalls mit der angegebenen Höchstgeschwindigkeit eines Kampfflugzeuges als Reisegeschwindigkeit rechnen darf."

Genau. Nur handelte es sich nicht um eine "Reise" - sondern um einen Einsatz, wenn nicht gar Kampfeinsatz. 
Seit 0815 wurden die Entführungen sukzessive bekannt, 
seit 0838 hatte das Norad angeblich Alarm (Alarm! Nicht Befehl zum Übungsflug) gegeben, 
seit 0852 war auf den Bildschirmen das getroffene WTC zu sehen (nach Aussage von Mr. Wibel auch auf Cape Cod, wo ja schon seit 0838 angeblich Alarm geherrscht haben musste) und der Anflug der UA175 mit Kapitän Saracini war bekannt. Der Otis- Kommandant Quenneville schätzte selber die Anflugzeit auf 10-12 Minuten, und auf /hunt.html stehen die ungünstigsten Zeiten (Start 0852, es gab frühere Angaben*, und 12 Minuten). Doch selbst wenn per "Reisegeschwindigkeit" ein spätes Eintreffen in Manhatten erfolgt wäre, wäre

a) den Piloten die Folge des Zuspätkommens bewußt durch eigenen Augenschein, was in allen folgenden Entscheidungen aller Beteiligten berücksichtigung hätte finden müssen und

b) dann ja auch noch Sprit vorhanden und

c) somit genug Zeit gewesen, Washington vor der anfliegenden AA77 zu schützen und

d) mußte dies möglich sein, denn Otis sollte ja angeblich auch für Washington zuständig sein (wie wäre das möglich bei einer prinzipiellen Unerreichbarkeit? (F-15: Reichweite über 3000 Meilen)) und

e) konnte das "Abfangen" auf der kürzeren (Dreieck) Strecke erfolgen und

f) gab es keine Notwendigkeit, zurück nach Otis zu fliegen, denn AFBs zum Landen gibts dort wie Sand am Meer, von Andrews bis Langley, um die bekanntesten zu nennen und

g) konnten diese Piloten bzw. Otis bzw. Norad bei absehbarer Nichterfüllbarkeit der Aufgabe "AA77-abfangen" eben diese AFBs informieren, damit diese halt eben selbst ihre Jäger hochschickten, was auf Langley (angeblich) erst um 0930 
geschah, und auf Andrews nicht, wie J.Israel seit Monaten nachweist. In diesem Fall (also etwa 0905 die Meldungen: a) "wir kamen zu spät" und b) "wir haben nicht genug Sprit für AA77") blieb z.B. für Langley eine Alarmvorlaufzeit von 6 oder auch 14 Minuten (Dauer auf Otis 0838-0852 zum Vergleich), also etwa um 0920 hätten die F-16 dort in der Luft sein müssen, selbst im ungünstigsten Fall eines Abwartens der Rückmeldung der Otis-Piloten - was angesichts der RADAR- und Informationlage völlig unsinnig und unnötig und unwahrscheinlich war. (Zu dieser Zeit wurde ja schon der Zivilluftverkehr regional zum Boden beordert und Startverbot erteilt, vgl. /timetable.html).

h) Als Geschädigter des Jabo-Geschwaders 36 (Hopsten) weiß ich zur Genüge, wie laut ein Überschallknall zumindest der Starfighter ist - ich habe diese, in der Einflugschneise lebend, ein Jahrzehnt lang ohne Schäden überstanden, und in den 60ern gab es die Restriktionen noch nicht. Ihr Argument zieht aber insbesondere
deshalb nicht, weil der Anflugweg von Otis nach Manhatten über dem Meer liegt.

Sehr geehrter Herr Pawlowski -
Sie sehen, dass das technische "Problem" keins ist. Technik ist kein wesentlicher, nur ein zu berücksichtigender Aspekt. Und das nur dann, wenn die F-15 ÜBERHAUPT gestartet wären. Wir "spielen" hier nur Überlegungen durch, die durch die Aussage der Zeitung von Cape Cod obsolet sind: da wurde nichts 
gescrambled vor 0900. Selbst beim Durchdenken der Fiktion ergeben sich die logischen Brüche - was nahezu immer bei Lügen der Fall ist. (Täglich nachlesbar in den Transscripten der Kreuzverhöre Milosevics gegenüber seinen Belastungszeugen ...)
*lt Telegraph:  "Norad, the command headquarters in
                Colorado responsible for defending all of
                North America from air attack, was notified of
                the first hijack at 8.38am and six minutes later
                two F-15 fighter jets were ordered into the air
                from Otis airforce base on Cape Cod. "

Mit freundlichen Grüßen
A. Hauß

Sehr geehrter Herr Hauß!

zunächst einmal dankeschön für Ihre sachliche und freundliche Zuschrift. Wenn Sie es mir erlauben, würde ich sie auch gerne auf die "hunt.html"-Seite setzen (falls Sie möchten ohne Namensnennung), jedoch nicht als GEGENargument, sondern um zu zeigen, dass ihre Aspekte berücksichtigt sind.

Können Sie gerne, auch gerne mit Namen, nur bitte ohne meine Email-Adresse. Sollte es Rückfragen dazu geben, können Sie die Leute allerdings auch an mich verweisen, falls Sie das wünschen.

Denn das sind sie.
Nehmen wir Ihren letzten Satz: "Zusammenfassend bleibt zu dagen, dass man in solchen Fällen keinesfalls mit der angegebenen Höchstgeschwindigkeit eines Kampfflugzeuges als
Reisegeschwindigkeit rechnen darf."  Genau. Nur handelte es sich nicht um eine "Reise" - sondern um einen Einsatz, wenn nicht gar Kampfeinsatz.

Ich habe mich hier wohl etwas unklar ausgedrückt. Mit Reisegeschwindigkeit meine ich bei einem Kampfflugzeug natürlich die während eines (Kampf-)Einsatzes dauerhaft mögliche Geschwindigkeit. Um es noch einmal klar zu sagen: Ich kann mir einfach nicht vorstellen, dass selbst unter Bedinungen wie am 11. September die Piloten angewiesen werden, 150 Meilen mit Höchstgeschwindigkeit zurückzulegen, einfach weil dann wirklich der Sprit alle wäre. Die Schätzung von Kommandant Quenneville kommt mir in diesem Zusammenhang sehr spanisch vor. Allerdings bin ich sicher kein Experte für taktischen Luftkampf.

Auch habe ich in meiner ersten Mail auch vergessen zu erwähnen, das ich lediglich mit diesem Detail Ihrer Schilderung nicht einverstanden bin, und das dieses kein wirklich wesentlicher Bestandteil ihrer Folgerungen ist. Und die Punkte a) bis g), die Sie anführen, bleiben davon unberührt. Ich möchte auch nicht behaupten, dass die F15 damals so eingesetzt wurden, wie es von
offizieller Seite behauptet wird. Lediglich die Tatsache, dass sie bei Start um 8:52 nicht um kurz nach 9 Uhr  in New York waren, erstaunt mich nicht besonders.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Adam Pawlowski

d´accord, Herr Pawlowski,

in den nächsten Tagen und ohne Ihre email und etwas editiert.

Ein letzter Hinweis noch:
Haben Sie wirklich einmal die Höchstgeschwindigkeit 1.875 m/h durch 6 dividiert, um zu sehen, wie weit die in 10 Minuten gekommen wären? 
312 Meilen wären drin gewesen. Die Strecke Otis-Manhatten beträgt nicht einmal die Hälfte (nur 153 Meilen).
Ihre Überlegungen stimmen: der Kommandant ging NICHT von 
Höchstgeschwindigkeit aus, sondern von deren Hälfte.
Deswegen finde ich Ihren Beitrag ja so interessant: weil er dazu zwingt, auch noch die letzten Aspekte zu bedenken.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen
A. Hauß
späterer Einschub. Nimmt man die von der airforce und dem OTIS -Kommandanten gelieferten Daten zusammen (1.875 mph, 153 Meilen Distanz, 10-12 Minuten, am 11.9. um 09:03 noch 70 Meilen entfernt, 8:52 gestartet), ergibt sich
- 1.875 Höchstgeschwindigkeit, hier irreal
- 10-12 Minuten (halbe Höchstgeschwindigkeit, real und passend zu 153 Meilen)
- 70 Meilen entfernt (von 153): Noch einmal halbierte Geschwindigkeit !!

Die Angaben der airforce besagen also, dass die F-15 im Alarm des 11.9. NACH dem Wissen über den Einschlag im ersten WTC - Gebäude mit einem Viertel der Höchstgeschwindigkeit geflogen wären.

Noch etwas langsamer entspräche dann etwa der Hektik einer Cessna ... Man hatte offenbar Mühe, realistische Zeiten und realistische Geschwindigkeiten mit dem Nichterscheinen bei dennoch vorgetäuschter Aktivität zusammenzulügen.

Sehr geehrter Herr Hauß!
... Ihre Überlegungen stimmen: der Kommandant ging NICHT von Höchstgeschwindigkeit aus, sondern von deren Hälfte.

OK, so macht das Sinn.

Ein weiterer Hinweis noch, der von Interesse sein könnte: Im
Mittelstreckenbereich zählen heutzutage zur Standartbewaffnung der F15 AIM-120 AMRAAM. Vielleicht waren besagte F15 auch noch mit dem Vorgänger, der AIM-7 Sparrow ausgerüstet; eine von beiden Waffen werden sie aber mit nahezu Sicherheit mitgeführt haben. Die genaue Reichweite der beiden Raketen ist geheim, Schätzungen auf diversen Websites (ich hab mal nachgesehen) belaufen sich auf etwa 30 Meilen. Das deckt sich mit dem, was
ich von irgendwoher noch im Kopf hatte. Insbesondere gegen grosse, langsam fliegende, quasi manövrierunfähige Ziele wie Verkehrsflugzeuge kann man derartige Luft-Luft-Raketen auch auf diese Entfernung einsetzen, da bin ich mir recht sicher. Es stellt sich allerdings die Frage, ob die F15-Piloten in der Lage waren, die Boeing auf diese Entfernung zu orten.
Im Anflug auf Manhatten über dem Meer wäre dies sicherlich möglich gewesen, in den Straßenschluchten wahrscheinlich nicht.

Worauf ich hinauswill: Die F15 (wenn sie denn dagewesen wären) hätten gar nicht 150 Meilen zurücklegen müssen, um in das Geschehen eingreifen zu können, sondern unter Umständen lediglich 120 Meilen. Und das ist eine Strecke, die sie in 12 Minuten durchaus auch bei Mach 0,9 (ihrer "Reisegeschwindigkeit", so wie ich das verstehe ;-) ) schaffen können.
Denn: Die Schallgeschwindigkeit entspricht etwa 1000 - 1200 km/h, je nach Flughöhe. Das ergibt eine "Reisegeschwingkeit" von über den dicken Ingenieursdaumen 600 Meilen pro Stunde.

Wobei ich eventuell auch noch eine niedrige Überschallgeschwindigkeit von so um Mach 1,2 für die F15 glauben würde, also 800 bis 900 Meilen pro Stunde. In diesem Bereich ist der Luftwiderstand noch einigermassen gering, wenn auch schon deutlich höher als bei Mach 0,9. Ich kann nicht beurteilen, ob es sinnvoll ist, die F15 bei diesen Geschwindigkeiten 150 Meilen weit zu fliegen, oder nicht. Die Taktik der Amerikaner in diesem Punkt ist mir (selbstverständlich) unbekannt. Das dürften übrigens auch die Geschwindigkeiten sein, mit denen sie damals von den Starfightern belästigt wurden. Überschallknall ist halt nicht gleich Überschallknall, sondern seine Intensität hängt von der Geschwindigkeit ab. Bei der
Höchstgeschwindigkeit der F15, also Mach 2,5, ist dieser ungleich stärker als bei Mach 1,2. (Deswegen braucht man ja auch soviel Sprit bei Mach 2,5.)

Aber wie bereits gesagt: Das sind alles nur Details eines Aspekts. Vieles deutet darauf hin, dass diese Flugzeuge nicht so eingesetzt wurden, wie behauptet wird.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen

Adam Pawlowski

unkorrekte Daten, da auf NORAD- Angaben basierend, aber dennoch gehaltvoll:
Scott Shuger
January 16, 2002
 #e die offizielle NORAD timeline, die sich übrigens laufend ändert...
NORAD lies.
 KPFK 90.7 FM 

By Michael Guillaume

 #e tales and miracles/ excerpts
for fair use only-  broken
20020603/avi_stor.htm, June 3, 2002

Exercise Jump-Starts Response to Attacks

>>>Sept. 11, 2001: "American 11 heavy, Boston Center. Your transponder appears to be inoperative. Please recycle. ... American 11 heavy, how do you read Boston Center? Over. <<<
>>>"Watch supervisor, I have a possible hijack of American 11 heavy. Recommend notifying Norad."<<< 

At 8:40 a.m. EDT, Tech. Sgt. Jeremy W. Powell of North American Aerospace Defense Command's (Norad) Northeast
Air Defense Sector (NEADS) in Rome, N.Y., took the first call from Boston Center.
Marr ordered two F-15 fighters sitting alert at Otis Air National Guard (ANG) Base, Mass., to "battle stations." "The fighters were cocked and loaded, and even had extra gas on board," he recalled. 

SCOTT GWILT/ROME SENTINEL  Relying on "skin-paint" radar returns, Air  National Guard troops at Norad's Northeast Air Defense Sector tried to locate hijacked aircraft after terrorists silenced the transponders.
"I told him to scramble; we'll get clearances later," Arnold said. His instincts to act first and get permission later were typical of U.S. and Canadian commanders that day.
                On Sept. 11, the normal scramble-approval procedure was for an FAA official to contact the National Military Command Center (NMCC) and request Pentagon air support. Someone in the NMCC would call Norad's command center and ask about availability of aircraft, then seek approval from the Defense Secretary--Donald H.
Rumsfeld--to launch fighters. 

Lt. Col. Timothy (Duff) Duffy, a 102 Fighter Wing (FW) F-15 pilot at Otis ANGB, had already heard about the suspected hijacking, thanks to a phone call from the
FAA's Boston Approach Control. He had the call transferred to the unit's command post, grabbed Maj. Daniel (Nasty)Nash, his wingman, and started suiting up. Another officer told Duffy, "This looks like the real thing." 

 Consequently, he jammed the F-15's throttles into afterburner and the two-ship formation devoured the 153 mi. to New York City at supersonic speeds. "It just seemed wrong. I just wanted to get there. I was in full-blower all the way," he said. 

Unknown to Duffy, Nash and every commander being notified at the time,  American Flight 11 had crashed into the  north tower of the World Trade Center  (WTC) about the time both F-15s were taking off. ...

 "NEADS instantly ordered the scramble,  then called meto get Cinc [Norad commander-in-chief] approval for it," said Capt. Michael H. Jellinek, a Canadian Forces (Navy) officer serving as Norad command director that morning. ...
In essence, technicians were half-blind, trying to separate hijacked airliners from thousands of skin-paint returns. At the time,
more than 4,000 aircraft were airborne over the nation, most in the northeast sector, which monitors half a million square miles of airspace. 
She and other troops were constantly on the phone with the FAA, airlines and others, looking for clues. 
Flying supersonically, the F-15s were still 8 min. from Manhattan when United Airlines Flight 175 smashed into the WTC's south
tower. "Huntress," the NEADS weapons control center, had told Duffy his hijacked target was over John F. Kennedy International Airport. He hadn't heard about the United aircraft yet. 

 "The second time I asked for bogey dope [location of AA11], Huntress told me the second aircraft had just hit the WTC. I was shocked . . . and I looked up to see the towers burning," Duffy said. He asked for clarification of their mission, but was met with considerable confusion. 

At one time or another, President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld and key military officers were heard on the open line. 

 AT THE TIME, NORAD had 20 fighters on armed alert throughout the North American
continent. Only 14 were in the continental U.S. at seven bases; the rest were in Alaska and Canada. Within 18 hr., 300  fighters would be on alert at 26 locations. 
Calls from fighter units also started pouring  into Norad and sector operations centers, asking, "What can we do to help?" ...

 ...  NEADS controllers put F-16s at Langley AFB, Va., on battle-stations alert at 9:09 a.m., prepared to back up the F-15s over New York. But the FAA command center then reported 11 aircraft either not in  communication with FAA facilities, or flying unexpected routes. At 9:24, the Langley-based alert F-16s were scrambled and airborne in 6 min., headed for Washington. 
... At 9:41, American Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon, elevating tension levels even further.  ...

We didn't know how many more 
"there were. . . . Are there five? Six? The only way we could tell was to implement Scatana--sanitize the airspace. 

  ... American Flight 77 had hit the Pentagon, and United Flight 93 was being tracked, heading for Chicago or Cleveland, then Washington, prompting the F-16s' scramble. 
When someone--possibly President Bush--ordered the military to a Force Protection Condition Delta wartime posture, Norad commanders ordered massive steel doors be closed, "shutting down Cheyenne Mountain for real," the first time in its 43-year history, an officer said.

.... Another  rumor referred to a Ryder rental truck full of  explosives and driven by "Arab-looking  men" targeting the mountain. 

                "It didn't make sense, but those phone calls were happening," Glover said. Every rumor was treated as a potential threat. 
 ... Duffy and Nash were directly over the north WTC tower when it collapsed. When they finally returned to Otis, they had been on CAP about 5.5 hr. 

Above Washington, F-16s flown by crews of the 119th FW from Fargo, N.D.--which had been pulling Norad alert duty at Langley AFB--were prepared to shoot down United 93, if it came toward the capital city.

WHILE ALL MILITARY units responded quickly and professionally on Sept. 11, "citizen soldiers" were typically first on the scene. .... Since then, outmoded procedures have been altered to ensure faster reactions from all units.

 "Within a couple of hours, many of these units went from normal training to generating armed combat air patrols over many U.S. cities....


This article was published obviously in cooperation at least with NORAD..Nowhere else we could obtain the names of the alleged pilots. So lets treat this one as the semiofficial version of the DoD.

The starter is something which looks like a quote from Boston center, but it is not said if it is really a quote. The deception starts with the first sentence.

"At 8:40 a.m. EDT,..."
How comes? The hijacking was
noticed at 08:15, at least 08:20. The standard procedure requires IMMEDIATE response, so 10 minutes delay should not occurr.
But most stunning is that they received the call at 08:40, but OTIS got alarmed at 08.38!

"He notified NEADS commander Col. Robert K. Marr, Jr. ..."

Yes - make it complicated, put in a long chain of command, so that every taken action seems to be prompt and adequate.

 "... tried to locate hijacked aircraft after terrorists silenced the transponders."

Whow! How sophisticated! I, equipped with my simple mind, I would just say: look for the blip WITHOUT transponder signal! But it is simple, and the problem is complicated: "In essence, technicians were half-blind,  trying to separate hijacked airliners from thousands of skin-paint returns." 
But the FAA could tell the UA175 exactly, where AA11 was coming opposite direction. And Captain  Saracini SAW AA11 (before being hijacked himself). Nobody is interested in 4000 aircraft in Florida, California or Alaska. Only some hundred in the region count. And with the open line to FAA it can be clarified exactly. Like in every control center of the world every screen/controller
only has some aircraft - not thousands - to control. Additionally, as we know from radioing FAAcontrollers to UA175, they were "clearing the skies" around AA11. 
BTW: how do they monitor their own AWACS, fighters, tankers when they are exercising? 

"Marr called Maj. Gen. Larry Arnold,... and suggested interceptors be scrambled."

as I said - a long chain ... they tell us how heroically and with INSTINCTS they shortened the chain. And they really let us know that
"Someone in the NMCC would call ... ask about availability ... seek approval from the Defense Secretary--Donald H.
Rumsfeld--to launch fighters."
To INTERCEPT! I guess every single bomb dropped in Afghanistan and Iraq has Bushs handwritten signature ...:-))
and now they tell us, that because of a private phone call "a phone call from the
FAA's Boston Approach Control." - just in the middle of an exercise, Duffy and Nash are going to forget the regulations and the coming orders of Mr. Rumsfeld!

"Since then, outmoded procedures have been altered to ensure faster reactions from all units." Not only one but several regulations are just modified! Just on that day! LOL! They are proud to tell us how "outmoded" their procedures were and how fast they were to disobey them! So things can happen like this:
"When someone--possibly President Bush--ordered the military to a Force Protection Condition Delta wartime posture,..."
When someone ordered all-out war, maybe it was Mrs.Rice or Bob Hope, we just can`t remember ...

"Consequently, he jammed the F-15's throttles into afterburner..."
"Flying supersonically, the F-15s were still 8 min. from Manhattan"
Afterburner? Full throttle? So why 8 minutes too late? How did the manage to stay in the air after 18 minutes full throttle flight and no tanker in sight?

"At one time or another...", at that time, at that point - the whole article lacks time quotations except the ones which are common knowledge. The more it reveals the acting personal the more it gets unclear when they do what they do.

 And when they tell us it gets laughable:
"The second time I asked for bogey dope [location of AA11], Huntress told me the second aircraft had just hit the WTC."

So 18 minutes Duffy did not know what he was hunting for? The allegedly only two fighters of UAairforce airborne "at that time" are not notified about their target? In the 11 minutes of flight between 08:52 and 09:03 - they were not exchanging words with their ground control?

"We didn't know how many more "there were. . . . Are there five? Six? The only way..."

Why not put some interceptors in the air? Even unarmed ones? Why not redirect airborne interceptors which are doing their ecercise as it is said?

"Every rumor was treated as a potential threat. " 

Why? Just WHY?

"Above Washington, F-16s flown by crews of the 119th FW from Fargo, N.D.--which had been pulling Norad alert duty at Langley AFB--were prepared to shoot down United 93, if it came toward the capital city."
No word about Andrews AFB. No question about the sense to stay like a lame duck above the target instead of intercepting the approaching aircraft.

 #e another article same style concerning the involvement of Toledo

all three articles of aviation week:
Aviation Week:

 June 3rd,2002
 June 10th 2002
 the recent one

  Quote:Two F-15's take off from Otis ANG Base, 8 minutes after being ordered to go after Flight 11, which has already crashed. [8:52, NORAD, 9/18/01, 8:52, CNN, 9/17/01, 8:53, Washington Post, 9/12/01, 8:52, Washington Post, 9/15/01] This is 38 minutes after flight controllers lost contact with the plane. They go after Flight 175 instead. According to Maj. Gen. Paul Weaver, director of the Air National Guard, "the pilots flew 'like a scalded ape,' topping 500 mph but were unable to catch up to the airliner." [Dallas Morning News, 9/16/01] NORAD Major Gen. Larry Arnold says they were headed straight for New York City and travelling about 1100 to 1200 mph. [Slate, 1/16/02] "An F-15 departing from Otis can reach New York City in 10 to 12 minutes, according to an Otis spokewoman." [Cape Cod Times, 9/16/01] They would have been flying an average of about 1125 mph to reach New York City in 10 minutes. F-15's can travel over 1875 mph. [Air Force News, 7/30/97] Presumably in such an emergency they would be flying much faster than 1125 mph, yet these planes take about 19 minutes to reach New York City - less than 600 mph.  Why so slow?? If they really had taken 10 minutes, the fighters would have reached New York City before Flight 175.

Excerpts with comments in(  )
A second hijacked airliner had just sliced into the towers on the morning of Sept. 11, and the two Otis pilots were trying to clear the airspace over Lower Manhattan.
"We did everything we could do to get there in time," the Cape pilot said yesterday, sitting in the same control room where he first heard about the hijackings last fall.
  On the morning of the 11th, Nasty was sitting in the Otis control office, its walls lined with pilot schedules and charts, working an "alert" shift for another pilot, who was scheduled for training that day.
 While the unit always had two pilots on alert, much of the regular flying time was
 devoted to training high over the Atlantic.

            At 8:40 a.m., all that was going to change.
(So the local newspapertakesthe new timeline )

An American Airlines flight out of Boston had apparently been hijacked, a colleague told Nasty.

(A colleague? We just learned Duffy got a call from FAA Boston. Not Nasty) 

There hadn't yet been an official call for a scramble, but the two pilots on alert duty hustled to a nearby room and donned flight gear.

As they walked across the airfield to their jets, which stood armed on alert, a horn
sounded and the public address system blared their instructions: This was an official military scramble. They should report to their battle stations. According to the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD - which is responsible for U.S. and Canadian airspace - the scramble was ordered at 8:46 a.m.

(But Mr.Wibel did not hear that alert.At 08:46 he might not even have heard about the first impact. TV was changing programm only at 08:52)

            Within moments, they were traveling at supersonic speeds. All the pilots knew was that they were to intercept one airliner that appeared headed toward New York City.

(So it takes only moments to get full speed!)

                  The plan was to find the airliner on the jets' radar, follow it, let the ground controllers know what was going on.

(What we call intercepting, which can be done even by notweaponized interceptors)

  But it was already too late. By the time the jets had left Otis, Flight 11 had crashed into the World Trade Center. Eleven months later, Nasty doesn't even recall hearing that the first plane hit.

(When he scrambled at 08:52 groundcontrol could and should have told him in the nest 10 minutes by radio that the first plane hit and that their target should be UA175)

And by the time he heard a word about a second hijacked plane, United Airlines Flight 175, it had already smashed into the second tower before the horrified eyes of millions on TV.

(So he never heard about Flight 175 until after it hit the WTC?)

Visibility was extremely clear that morning, and Nasty could see the plume of black smoke pouring from the first tower.

 (So, they obviously got there before the second plane hit. - Contradictions, contradictions!)
... But within minutes, the pilots received orders to head to Manhattan for combat air patrol, which would become a routine mission for Otis pilots over the next several months.

(Instead of intercepting AA77)

 ... They refueled in midair just over the water.

(So obviously conserving fuel was not a paramount issue. As we already know they went allegedly with afterburner to Manhattan)

 Both pilots were together, near John F. Kennedy Airport, about 15 miles from the World Trade Center, when the first tower collapsed.

 ( But I thought one was patrolling while the other was redirecting  planes.)

  At the time of the first two hijackings, the military pilots couldn't be sure the commercial pilots weren't having electrical problems, for example. 

(What  an interesting example! As we pointed out several times on i.e., "electrical problems" explain a lot of what happened (no radio, no transponder, no way to regain control over the computers. But everybody who thinks about intercepting normally takes other examples: dead or dying pilot, computer problems. This is a revelation to take electrical problems as an example )

Besides, the only person who could have ordered them to be shot down was the president, and he was still at a public event when the second tower was hit.

(Makes sense until the first tower is hit. May even make sense until the second tower is hit at 9:03 EDT as he contends. But after 9:03 EDT, it makes no  sense whatsoever--as any "civilian controller" could tell)
 As soon as he climbed off his jet, Nasty was told by a crew member on the ground that another airliner had smashed into the Pentagon. And he was told that a military F-16 had shot down a fourth airliner in Pennsylvania, a report that turned out to be incorrect.
(which can be doubted)


“The sector commander, Colonel Marr, ordered two Massachusetts-based F-15 fighter jets to prepare for takeoff. In six minutes - considered a quick response time - the jets left for New York, closing the 153-mile gap at speeds of 950 mph.”
Toledo Blade, Dec 9, 2001 

"We did everything we could do to get there in time," the Cape pilot (Nash) said yesterday,…Within moments, they were traveling at supersonic speeds.
Cape Cod Times, August 21, 2002

Consequently, he jammed the F-15's throttles into afterburner and the two-ship formation devoured the 153 mi. to New York City at supersonic speeds. "It just seemed wrong.  I just wanted to get there. I was in full-blower all the way," he said. (Duffy)
Aviation Week, June 3, 2002

Maj. Gen. Paul Weaver, director of the Air National Guard: "the pilots flew 'like a scalded ape,' topping 500 mph but were unable to catch up to the airliner."
(Dallas Morning News, 9/16/01)

 NORAD Major Gen. Larry Arnold says they were headed straight for New York City and travelling about 1100 to 1200 mph. 
(Slate, 1/16/02) 

"An F-15 departing from Otis can reach New York City in 10 to 12 minutes, according to an Otis spokewoman." 
(Cape Cod Times, 9/16/01)

They would have been flying an average of about 1125 mph to reach New York City in 10 minutes. F-15's can travel over 1875 mph.
(Air Force News, 7/30/97)

Scrambling effective (take off) at 08:52 - allegedly
Arriving 18-19 minutes later, 8 minutes after the second impact (09.03)- allegedly

Considering obstacles like
- full gear, heavy load: fuel/weapons (but isn´t that normal?)
- takeoff in the opposite direction (after takeoff by an interceptor corrected in some seconds)
- takeoff  speed slow 
- best weather conditions

"The F-15 flown by the 102th Fighter Wing can fly up to 1,875 mph, according to the Air Force. It would take an F-15 about 10 to 12 minutes to fly from Otis to New York City."

The problems of the bushist lies:

- the times of the impacts are fixed, they can`t be changed
- the times of  loosing radio contact, transponder signals, changing course of the Boeings were fixed too
- they can`t tell the public they were not going full speed to intercept
- they can`t lower the speed of F-15
- reaction time and scrambling preparation time must be reasonable (so the unreasonable part of delay, ten minutes, rests on the FAA. Every minute less would cause even more questions, i.e. “when you got alarmed at 08:20, why did you not scramble in time?)
- they must fit the F-15s in (some days later than 911) into already existing informations
- they can`t rely on bad visibility, worse weather conditions
- they can rely on officers who do their duty, which they think now is to pretend that the US government reacted in time. But US military are not going to take guilt as being lame or unprofessional on their shoulders.
- they need to tell us they did their very best – but obviously they failed

And this is why they will never get out of that Gordon knot.

 But slow c-130 wer in the air

(c) Andreas Hauß, August 2002,