100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: 9/11: as it happened on the ground | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I ask only 1 question that I thought was very fundamental. If you think it was a demolition then how could they wire all those huge buildings with explosives and no one notice? He only says he doesn't have all the answers. I find this the most fundamental question for the conspiracy theory to even be possible yet there is no answer to it. Is there anyone that does demolitions that could even say how long it would take to wire even 1 building and how much explosives and wiring would be necessary? where is the wtc? it was being put on barges and sent to china within 24 hours after. like cash for clunkers. shouldnt this have been a crime scene? and saved in warehouses somewhere like flight 800. there is a guy who took pictures after and questioned the collapse he is running for his life now. the people who heard explosions in the building are all dead. of natural causes of course they are the illuminati the first plane hit was filmed from ground level but more important where are all the tapes from the pentagon? Again no answers only questions. The so called explosions could have been internal collapses. Such as parts of floors collapsing to the floor below and office furniture falling etc. Depending how much stuff fell and how far internally it could make loud noises. Anything combustible in the building etc. I don't know everything thats in the building. People were in NY city and could film that. I am pretty sure they don't let people hang out around the pentagon. actually, something i found weird, the FBI went to all the buildings around the pentagon and collected all the CC cameras video's that day, and never returned them...there are a few pictures from someone that was staying at the hotel from his balcony... How do you know what they took and what was or wasn't returned? If they didn't want us to know we wouldn't know. When police take stuff as evidence they keep it too. just typing what i've read... i really don't know how true or untrue that is... Thats cool. Oh see how that works. You can question something and then get a response and acknowledge it and not yell conspiracy. Let that be a lesson to some people. 
i don't think it was a conspiracy by our government, but there is some questions that are kind of strange to me about the pentagon part.. and i also think the Air Force shot down the jet heading for the white house, which i think was the right thing to do... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I ask only 1 question that I thought was very fundamental. If you think it was a demolition then how could they wire all those huge buildings with explosives and no one notice? He only says he doesn't have all the answers. I find this the most fundamental question for the conspiracy theory to even be possible yet there is no answer to it. Is there anyone that does demolitions that could even say how long it would take to wire even 1 building and how much explosives and wiring would be necessary? where is the wtc? it was being put on barges and sent to china within 24 hours after. like cash for clunkers. shouldnt this have been a crime scene? and saved in warehouses somewhere like flight 800. there is a guy who took pictures after and questioned the collapse he is running for his life now. the people who heard explosions in the building are all dead. of natural causes of course they are the illuminati the first plane hit was filmed from ground level but more important where are all the tapes from the pentagon? Again no answers only questions. The so called explosions could have been internal collapses. Such as parts of floors collapsing to the floor below and office furniture falling etc. Depending how much stuff fell and how far internally it could make loud noises. Anything combustible in the building etc. I don't know everything thats in the building. People were in NY city and could film that. I am pretty sure they don't let people hang out around the pentagon. actually, something i found weird, the FBI went to all the buildings around the pentagon and collected all the CC cameras video's that day, and never returned them...there are a few pictures from someone that was staying at the hotel from his balcony... How do you know what they took and what was or wasn't returned? If they didn't want us to know we wouldn't know. When police take stuff as evidence they keep it too. just typing what i've read... i really don't know how true or untrue that is... Thats cool. Oh see how that works. You can question something and then get a response and acknowledge it and not yell conspiracy. Let that be a lesson to some people.
i don't think it was a conspiracy by our government, but there is some questions that are kind of strange to me about the pentagon part.. and i also think the Air Force shot down the jet heading for the white house, which i think was the right thing to do... I wasn't referring to you. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You see how this works right? He asks a question and we provide answers and science to back it up. He then just ignores it or says the same thing. Things like "Pancake Theory" Not Pancake Fact. Science has lots of theories that much of the science community considers true. Not to mention with his attitude his "conspiracy theory" would fit in the same boat because its not "conspiracy fact". I ask only 1 question that I thought was very fundamental. If you think it was a demolition then how could they wire all those huge buildings with explosives and no one notice? He only says he doesn't have all the answers. I find this the most fundamental question for the conspiracy theory to even be possible yet there is no answer to it. Is there anyone that does demolitions that could even say how long it would take to wire even 1 building and how much explosives and wiring would be necessary? See here is where the theorists get around this. The new theory is that they used some incredible explosive called nano- thermite that you can theoretically paint on with a brush.. This has evolved over time from simple thermite to thermate to super thermite and now nano-thermite. and of course the only people who have access to said nano-thermite is the US military. Now if I was planning this type of operation would I really want to use something that was only directly traceable right back to me? Wouldn't you want to use something widely available so if someone found trace elements they couldn't directly link you to the crime? I really can't understand these people that actually believe this stuff. It's bizarre. right off the bat you have to wonder how the mighties military money can buy was powerless to stop the plane that hit the pentagon. Thats enough to raise a few eye brows let alone all the other items on the weird list of how it happened. thats all for me for now I am buzzed stuffed with shrimp and zuccini on the grill and full of beer. Aahhhh life is good. yeah its pretty crazy to imagine that they couldn't find a plane that had turned off the transponder within the 40 minutes it had turned around and flew back to the pentagon.. Its not like they had alot of space to fly around in or that there weren't hundreds of other planes flying around. your theory is very compelling It's not always easy to spot a plane which is why they have transponders. Some planes don't even have transponders and some don't turn them on unless they are in a radar control zone where they are required (usually within ten miles of the airport). If your altitude is down near the elevation of the tops of tall building you are obscured by "ground clutter". At a mile every ten seconds you cover a lot of territory. But you have an answer for that I'm sure. 
"Logic and critical thinking are the hallmarks of a free society, while rote memorization and repetition are the dictator's counterfeit." -- Michael Rivero |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You see how this works right? He asks a question and we provide answers and science to back it up. He then just ignores it or says the same thing. Things like "Pancake Theory" Not Pancake Fact. Science has lots of theories that much of the science community considers true. Not to mention with his attitude his "conspiracy theory" would fit in the same boat because its not "conspiracy fact". I ask only 1 question that I thought was very fundamental. If you think it was a demolition then how could they wire all those huge buildings with explosives and no one notice? He only says he doesn't have all the answers. I find this the most fundamental question for the conspiracy theory to even be possible yet there is no answer to it. Is there anyone that does demolitions that could even say how long it would take to wire even 1 building and how much explosives and wiring would be necessary? See here is where the theorists get around this. The new theory is that they used some incredible explosive called nano- thermite that you can theoretically paint on with a brush.. This has evolved over time from simple thermite to thermate to super thermite and now nano-thermite. and of course the only people who have access to said nano-thermite is the US military. Now if I was planning this type of operation would I really want to use something that was only directly traceable right back to me? Wouldn't you want to use something widely available so if someone found trace elements they couldn't directly link you to the crime? I really can't understand these people that actually believe this stuff. It's bizarre. right off the bat you have to wonder how the mighties military money can buy was powerless to stop the plane that hit the pentagon. Thats enough to raise a few eye brows let alone all the other items on the weird list of how it happened. thats all for me for now I am buzzed stuffed with shrimp and zuccini on the grill and full of beer. Aahhhh life is good. yeah its pretty crazy to imagine that they couldn't find a plane that had turned off the transponder within the 40 minutes it had turned around and flew back to the pentagon.. Its not like they had alot of space to fly around in or that there weren't hundreds of other planes flying around. your theory is very compelling It's not always easy to spot a plane which is why they have transponders. Some planes don't even have transponders and some don't turn them on unless they are in a radar control zone where they are required (usually within ten miles of the airport). If your altitude is down near the elevation of the tops of tall building you are obscured by "ground clutter". At a mile every ten seconds you cover a lot of territory. But you have an answer for that I'm sure.
"Logic and critical thinking are the hallmarks of a free society, while rote memorization and repetition are the dictator's counterfeit." -- Michael Rivero Even high school students understand the concept of flying "below the radar". It is also a standard military tactic. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I ask only 1 question that I thought was very fundamental. If you think it was a demolition then how could they wire all those huge buildings with explosives and no one notice? He only says he doesn't have all the answers. I find this the most fundamental question for the conspiracy theory to even be possible yet there is no answer to it. Is there anyone that does demolitions that could even say how long it would take to wire even 1 building and how much explosives and wiring would be necessary? where is the wtc? it was being put on barges and sent to china within 24 hours after. like cash for clunkers. shouldnt this have been a crime scene? and saved in warehouses somewhere like flight 800. there is a guy who took pictures after and questioned the collapse he is running for his life now. the people who heard explosions in the building are all dead. of natural causes of course they are the illuminati the first plane hit was filmed from ground level but more important where are all the tapes from the pentagon? Again no answers only questions. The so called explosions could have been internal collapses. Such as parts of floors collapsing to the floor below and office furniture falling etc. Depending how much stuff fell and how far internally it could make loud noises. Anything combustible in the building etc. I don't know everything thats in the building. People were in NY city and could film that. I am pretty sure they don't let people hang out around the pentagon. actually, something i found weird, the FBI went to all the buildings around the pentagon and collected all the CC cameras video's that day, and never returned them...there are a few pictures from someone that was staying at the hotel from his balcony... How do you know what they took and what was or wasn't returned? If they didn't want us to know we wouldn't know. When police take stuff as evidence they keep it too. just typing what i've read... i really don't know how true or untrue that is... Thats cool. Oh see how that works. You can question something and then get a response and acknowledge it and not yell conspiracy. Let that be a lesson to some people.
i don't think it was a conspiracy by our government, but there is some questions that are kind of strange to me about the pentagon part.. and i also think the Air Force shot down the jet heading for the white house, which i think was the right thing to do... I wasn't referring to you.
i know, i was tossing my 2 cents in there... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my circle we cant understand how people can believe the official version of 911. right off the bat you have to wonder how the mighties military money can buy was powerless to stop the plane that hit the pentagon. Thats enough to raise a few eye brows let alone all the other items on the weird list of how it happened. thats all for me for now I am buzzed stuffed with shrimp and zuccini on the grill and full of beer. Aahhhh life is good. yeah its pretty crazy to imagine that they couldn't find a plane that had turned off the transponder within the 40 minutes it had turned around and flew back to the pentagon.. Its not like they had alot of space to fly around in or that there weren't hundreds of other planes flying around. your theory is very compelling It's not always easy to spot a plane which is why they have transponders. Some planes don't even have transponders and some don't turn them on unless they are in a radar control zone where they are required (usually within ten miles of the airport). If your altitude is down near the elevation of the tops of tall building you are obscured by "ground clutter". At a mile every ten seconds you cover a lot of territory. But you have an answer for that I'm sure.
"Logic and critical thinking are the hallmarks of a free society, while rote memorization and repetition are the dictator's counterfeit." -- Michael Rivero Even high school students understand the concept of flying "below the radar". It is also a standard military tactic. For those who don't know what a transponder is or does, here is some info from Wiki. There are two basic types ... Mode C and Mode S. Europe has upgraded to Mode S so pilots from the US must upgrade if they want to take their planes over there. Since the transponder is what tells the radar controller the plane's altitude, the pilot can remove this information from the data simply by turning the transponder off. The air traffic controller then does not know if the plane is within controlled airspace or not since the controlled airspace has upper and lower altitude limits. A military aircraft would be unlikely to turn off his transponder in most battle situations since the transponder tells his fellow pilots and missile launchers "I am your friend. Don't shoot at me!". As a courtesy, when I fly near or over a radar control zone I call up the tower and say the equivalent of "I am just passing through." I am not required to say anything at all if I don't penetrate the levels shown on the FAA sectionals as "controlled airspace". If my transponder is turned off (which it sometimes is) they wouldn't know if I was at 1000 or 10,000 feet altitude... or flying in the middle of their control zone. If you are caught in a control zone without clearance, you get in big trouble. from Wiki Primary radar The rapid wartime development of radar had obvious applications for air traffic control (ATC) as a means of providing continuous surveillance of air traffic disposition. Precise knowledge of the positions of aircraft would permit a reduction in the normal procedural separation standards, which in turn promised considerable increases in the efficiency of the airways system. This type of radar (now called a primary radar) can detect and report the position of anything that reflects its transmitted radio signals including, depending on its design, aircraft, birds, weather and land features. For air traffic control purposes this is both an advantage and a disadvantage. Its targets do not have to co-operate, they only have to be within its coverage and be able to reflect radio waves, but it only indicates the position of the targets, it does not identify them. When primary radar was the only type of radar available, the correlation of individual radar returns with specific aircraft typically was achieved by the Controller observing a directed turn by the aircraft. Primary radar is still used by ATC today as a backup/complementary system to secondary radar, although its coverage and information is more limited.[2][3][4] Secondary radar The need to be able to identify aircraft more easily and reliably led to another wartime radar development, the Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) system, which had been created as a means of positively identifying friendly aircraft from enemy. This system, which became known in civil use as secondary surveillance radar (SSR) or in the USA as the air traffic control radar beacon system (ATCRBS), relies on a piece of equipment aboard the aircraft known as a "transponder." The transponder is a radio receiver and transmitter which receives on one frequency (1030 MHz) and transmits on another (1090 MHz). The target aircraft's transponder replies to signals from an interrogator (usually, but not necessarily, a ground station co-located with a primary radar) by transmitting a coded reply signal containing the requested information.[5] Both the civilian SSR and the military IFF have become much more complex than their war-time ancestors, but remain compatible with each other, not least to allow military aircraft to operate in civil airspace. SSR can now provide much more detailed information, for example, the aircraft's altitude, and it also permits the exchange of data directly between aircraft for collision avoidance. Given its primary military role of reliably identifying friends, IFF has much more secure (encrypted) messages to prevent "spoofing" by the enemy, and also is used on all kinds of military platforms including air, sea and land vehicles. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my circle we cant understand how people can believe the official version of 911. right off the bat you have to wonder how the mighties military money can buy was powerless to stop the plane that hit the pentagon. Thats enough to raise a few eye brows let alone all the other items on the weird list of how it happened. thats all for me for now I am buzzed stuffed with shrimp and zuccini on the grill and full of beer. Aahhhh life is good. yeah its pretty crazy to imagine that they couldn't find a plane that had turned off the transponder within the 40 minutes it had turned around and flew back to the pentagon.. Its not like they had alot of space to fly around in or that there weren't hundreds of other planes flying around. your theory is very compelling It's not always easy to spot a plane which is why they have transponders. Some planes don't even have transponders and some don't turn them on unless they are in a radar control zone where they are required (usually within ten miles of the airport). If your altitude is down near the elevation of the tops of tall building you are obscured by "ground clutter". At a mile every ten seconds you cover a lot of territory. But you have an answer for that I'm sure.
"Logic and critical thinking are the hallmarks of a free society, while rote memorization and repetition are the dictator's counterfeit." -- Michael Rivero Even high school students understand the concept of flying "below the radar". It is also a standard military tactic. For those who don't know what a transponder is or does, here is some info from Wiki. There are two basic types ... Mode C and Mode S. Europe has upgraded to Mode S so pilots from the US must upgrade if they want to take their planes over there. Since the transponder is what tells the radar controller the plane's altitude, the pilot can remove this information from the data simply by turning the transponder off. The air traffic controller then does not know if the plane is within controlled airspace or not since the controlled airspace has upper and lower altitude limits. A military aircraft would be unlikely to turn off his transponder in most battle situations since the transponder tells his fellow pilots and missile launchers "I am your friend. Don't shoot at me!". As a courtesy, when I fly near or over a radar control zone I call up the tower and say the equivalent of "I am just passing through." I am not required to say anything at all if I don't penetrate the levels shown on the FAA sectionals as "controlled airspace". If my transponder is turned off (which it sometimes is) they wouldn't know if I was at 1000 or 10,000 feet altitude... or flying in the middle of their control zone. If you are caught in a control zone without clearance, you get in big trouble. from Wiki Primary radar The rapid wartime development of radar had obvious applications for air traffic control (ATC) as a means of providing continuous surveillance of air traffic disposition. Precise knowledge of the positions of aircraft would permit a reduction in the normal procedural separation standards, which in turn promised considerable increases in the efficiency of the airways system. This type of radar (now called a primary radar) can detect and report the position of anything that reflects its transmitted radio signals including, depending on its design, aircraft, birds, weather and land features. For air traffic control purposes this is both an advantage and a disadvantage. Its targets do not have to co-operate, they only have to be within its coverage and be able to reflect radio waves, but it only indicates the position of the targets, it does not identify them. When primary radar was the only type of radar available, the correlation of individual radar returns with specific aircraft typically was achieved by the Controller observing a directed turn by the aircraft. Primary radar is still used by ATC today as a backup/complementary system to secondary radar, although its coverage and information is more limited.[2][3][4] Secondary radar The need to be able to identify aircraft more easily and reliably led to another wartime radar development, the Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) system, which had been created as a means of positively identifying friendly aircraft from enemy. This system, which became known in civil use as secondary surveillance radar (SSR) or in the USA as the air traffic control radar beacon system (ATCRBS), relies on a piece of equipment aboard the aircraft known as a "transponder." The transponder is a radio receiver and transmitter which receives on one frequency (1030 MHz) and transmits on another (1090 MHz). The target aircraft's transponder replies to signals from an interrogator (usually, but not necessarily, a ground station co-located with a primary radar) by transmitting a coded reply signal containing the requested information.[5] Both the civilian SSR and the military IFF have become much more complex than their war-time ancestors, but remain compatible with each other, not least to allow military aircraft to operate in civil airspace. SSR can now provide much more detailed information, for example, the aircraft's altitude, and it also permits the exchange of data directly between aircraft for collision avoidance. Given its primary military role of reliably identifying friends, IFF has much more secure (encrypted) messages to prevent "spoofing" by the enemy, and also is used on all kinds of military platforms including air, sea and land vehicles. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my circle we cant understand how people can believe the official version of 911. right off the bat you have to wonder how the mighties military money can buy was powerless to stop the plane that hit the pentagon. Thats enough to raise a few eye brows let alone all the other items on the weird list of how it happened. thats all for me for now I am buzzed stuffed with shrimp and zuccini on the grill and full of beer. Aahhhh life is good. yeah its pretty crazy to imagine that they couldn't find a plane that had turned off the transponder within the 40 minutes it had turned around and flew back to the pentagon.. Its not like they had alot of space to fly around in or that there weren't hundreds of other planes flying around. your theory is very compelling It's not always easy to spot a plane which is why they have transponders. Some planes don't even have transponders and some don't turn them on unless they are in a radar control zone where they are required (usually within ten miles of the airport). If your altitude is down near the elevation of the tops of tall building you are obscured by "ground clutter". At a mile every ten seconds you cover a lot of territory. But you have an answer for that I'm sure.
"Logic and critical thinking are the hallmarks of a free society, while rote memorization and repetition are the dictator's counterfeit." -- Michael Rivero Even high school students understand the concept of flying "below the radar". It is also a standard military tactic. For those who don't know what a transponder is or does, here is some info from Wiki. There are two basic types ... Mode C and Mode S. Europe has upgraded to Mode S so pilots from the US must upgrade if they want to take their planes over there. Since the transponder is what tells the radar controller the plane's altitude, the pilot can remove this information from the data simply by turning the transponder off. The air traffic controller then does not know if the plane is within controlled airspace or not since the controlled airspace has upper and lower altitude limits. A military aircraft would be unlikely to turn off his transponder in most battle situations since the transponder tells his fellow pilots and missile launchers "I am your friend. Don't shoot at me!". As a courtesy, when I fly near or over a radar control zone I call up the tower and say the equivalent of "I am just passing through." I am not required to say anything at all if I don't penetrate the levels shown on the FAA sectionals as "controlled airspace". If my transponder is turned off (which it sometimes is) they wouldn't know if I was at 1000 or 10,000 feet altitude... or flying in the middle of their control zone. If you are caught in a control zone without clearance, you get in big trouble. from Wiki Primary radar The rapid wartime development of radar had obvious applications for air traffic control (ATC) as a means of providing continuous surveillance of air traffic disposition. Precise knowledge of the positions of aircraft would permit a reduction in the normal procedural separation standards, which in turn promised considerable increases in the efficiency of the airways system. This type of radar (now called a primary radar) can detect and report the position of anything that reflects its transmitted radio signals including, depending on its design, aircraft, birds, weather and land features. For air traffic control purposes this is both an advantage and a disadvantage. Its targets do not have to co-operate, they only have to be within its coverage and be able to reflect radio waves, but it only indicates the position of the targets, it does not identify them. When primary radar was the only type of radar available, the correlation of individual radar returns with specific aircraft typically was achieved by the Controller observing a directed turn by the aircraft. Primary radar is still used by ATC today as a backup/complementary system to secondary radar, although its coverage and information is more limited.[2][3][4] Secondary radar The need to be able to identify aircraft more easily and reliably led to another wartime radar development, the Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) system, which had been created as a means of positively identifying friendly aircraft from enemy. This system, which became known in civil use as secondary surveillance radar (SSR) or in the USA as the air traffic control radar beacon system (ATCRBS), relies on a piece of equipment aboard the aircraft known as a "transponder." The transponder is a radio receiver and transmitter which receives on one frequency (1030 MHz) and transmits on another (1090 MHz). The target aircraft's transponder replies to signals from an interrogator (usually, but not necessarily, a ground station co-located with a primary radar) by transmitting a coded reply signal containing the requested information.[5] Both the civilian SSR and the military IFF have become much more complex than their war-time ancestors, but remain compatible with each other, not least to allow military aircraft to operate in civil airspace. SSR can now provide much more detailed information, for example, the aircraft's altitude, and it also permits the exchange of data directly between aircraft for collision avoidance. Given its primary military role of reliably identifying friends, IFF has much more secure (encrypted) messages to prevent "spoofing" by the enemy, and also is used on all kinds of military platforms including air, sea and land vehicles. if i remember correctly, they told all planes to land, then tracked the ones that weren't landing... i know they scrambled jets, and i'm pretty sure they shot the one heading for the white house down... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In my circle we cant understand how people can believe the official version of 911. right off the bat you have to wonder how the mighties military money can buy was powerless to stop the plane that hit the pentagon. Thats enough to raise a few eye brows let alone all the other items on the weird list of how it happened. thats all for me for now I am buzzed stuffed with shrimp and zuccini on the grill and full of beer. Aahhhh life is good. yeah its pretty crazy to imagine that they couldn't find a plane that had turned off the transponder within the 40 minutes it had turned around and flew back to the pentagon.. Its not like they had alot of space to fly around in or that there weren't hundreds of other planes flying around. your theory is very compelling It's not always easy to spot a plane which is why they have transponders. Some planes don't even have transponders and some don't turn them on unless they are in a radar control zone where they are required (usually within ten miles of the airport). If your altitude is down near the elevation of the tops of tall building you are obscured by "ground clutter". At a mile every ten seconds you cover a lot of territory. But you have an answer for that I'm sure.
"Logic and critical thinking are the hallmarks of a free society, while rote memorization and repetition are the dictator's counterfeit." -- Michael Rivero Even high school students understand the concept of flying "below the radar". It is also a standard military tactic. For those who don't know what a transponder is or does, here is some info from Wiki. There are two basic types ... Mode C and Mode S. Europe has upgraded to Mode S so pilots from the US must upgrade if they want to take their planes over there. Since the transponder is what tells the radar controller the plane's altitude, the pilot can remove this information from the data simply by turning the transponder off. The air traffic controller then does not know if the plane is within controlled airspace or not since the controlled airspace has upper and lower altitude limits. A military aircraft would be unlikely to turn off his transponder in most battle situations since the transponder tells his fellow pilots and missile launchers "I am your friend. Don't shoot at me!". As a courtesy, when I fly near or over a radar control zone I call up the tower and say the equivalent of "I am just passing through." I am not required to say anything at all if I don't penetrate the levels shown on the FAA sectionals as "controlled airspace". If my transponder is turned off (which it sometimes is) they wouldn't know if I was at 1000 or 10,000 feet altitude... or flying in the middle of their control zone. If you are caught in a control zone without clearance, you get in big trouble. from Wiki Primary radar The rapid wartime development of radar had obvious applications for air traffic control (ATC) as a means of providing continuous surveillance of air traffic disposition. Precise knowledge of the positions of aircraft would permit a reduction in the normal procedural separation standards, which in turn promised considerable increases in the efficiency of the airways system. This type of radar (now called a primary radar) can detect and report the position of anything that reflects its transmitted radio signals including, depending on its design, aircraft, birds, weather and land features. For air traffic control purposes this is both an advantage and a disadvantage. Its targets do not have to co-operate, they only have to be within its coverage and be able to reflect radio waves, but it only indicates the position of the targets, it does not identify them. When primary radar was the only type of radar available, the correlation of individual radar returns with specific aircraft typically was achieved by the Controller observing a directed turn by the aircraft. Primary radar is still used by ATC today as a backup/complementary system to secondary radar, although its coverage and information is more limited.[2][3][4] Secondary radar The need to be able to identify aircraft more easily and reliably led to another wartime radar development, the Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) system, which had been created as a means of positively identifying friendly aircraft from enemy. This system, which became known in civil use as secondary surveillance radar (SSR) or in the USA as the air traffic control radar beacon system (ATCRBS), relies on a piece of equipment aboard the aircraft known as a "transponder." The transponder is a radio receiver and transmitter which receives on one frequency (1030 MHz) and transmits on another (1090 MHz). The target aircraft's transponder replies to signals from an interrogator (usually, but not necessarily, a ground station co-located with a primary radar) by transmitting a coded reply signal containing the requested information.[5] Both the civilian SSR and the military IFF have become much more complex than their war-time ancestors, but remain compatible with each other, not least to allow military aircraft to operate in civil airspace. SSR can now provide much more detailed information, for example, the aircraft's altitude, and it also permits the exchange of data directly between aircraft for collision avoidance. Given its primary military role of reliably identifying friends, IFF has much more secure (encrypted) messages to prevent "spoofing" by the enemy, and also is used on all kinds of military platforms including air, sea and land vehicles. if i remember correctly, they told all planes to land, then tracked the ones that weren't landing... i know they scrambled jets, and i'm pretty sure they shot the one heading for the white house down... I would imagine that the first line of defence would be an air intercept and after that our defencive missle battaries. Even a man launched stinger would have done the trick. It makes one wonder. Why did the 9/11 commission leave Norman Mineta's testimony out of the final report? Mineta: "During the time that the airplane was coming into the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President...the plane is 50 miles out...the plane is 30 miles out....and when it got down to the plane is 10 miles out, the young man also said to the vice president "do the orders still stand?" And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said "Of course the orders still stand, have you heard anything to the contrary!??" http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070102162002AARrf0D |
|
|
|
|
|
|
It really was the terrorists.
|
|
|
|
|
