On 9/11, U.S. radar was facing wrong way

Star Ledger ^

[Sub-Driver]

WASHINGTON -- A top U.S. air defense official testified yesterday that an outdated "cold war" view of the world before the 9/11 attacks blinded the nation to mounting evidence that hijacked airliners were becoming the terrorist's weapon of choice.

Maj. Gen. Craig McKinley, commander of the North American Aerospace Defense Command, said even the nation's radars were, in retrospect, turned the wrong way, looking out to sea for incoming invaders rather than searching the skies for threats from within the country.

[ml/nj]

"What I'm trying to get at is the government wasn't prepared for this event," said Kean.

I saw this article this morning in the printed Ledger, and it angered me. Kean and the Ledger certainly had the oportunity to share their great insights for protecting the nation before 9/11, but instead their prescriptions (e.g. unlimited immigration, "tolerance" for deviancy, etc.) back then led us to 9/11.

Now they still don't get it. Next week they'll probably treat us to some article glorifying Islam.

(And BTW, I've met Kean and I've had an opportunity to speak with him. I was astonished by his shallowness. It continues to amaze me that he could be a university president. - The governor thing is less surprising because politicians do seem to be a pretty shallow bunch.)

ML/NJ

[The Duke]

9/11 was a great tragedy, but it wasn't a drop in the proverbial bucket compared to the scenario that those "outward looking radars" are there to defend us against.

POP QUIZ: What is the purpose of the "DEW LINE"?

[Prodigal Son]

Stephen Push, a spokesman for the Families of September 11 group, decried the testimony, saying, "I think it's disgraceful that no one will take responsibility for the mistakes that were obviously made."

I don't know, maybe it's just me, but I think the responsibility for 9/11 rests solely and 100% on the shoulders of Osama bin Laden.

[darkwing104]

Isn't 20/20 hindsite a wonderful thing.

[buzzsaw6]

Just for the record: Maj Gen McKinley is Commander of Continental US Norad Region or CONR and 1st Air Force, not the commander of NORAD, which is General Eberhart.

[Grut]

Even thirty years ago, when I was flying penetration exercises against it, NORAD had become useless against the air-breather threat. We had to come in at high altitude, for instance, because otherwise NORAD couldn't see us at all.

Which is why I suspect it doesn't really matter which way they were looking on 9/11.

[Monty22]

DEW line.. Distant Early Warning radar system designed to spot incoming ICBM's from over the north pole.

[grania]

Isn't 20/20 hindsite a wonderful thing.

That's true. That being said, I was shocked that there weren't always at least a few fighter jets up there keeping an eye on the East and West coasts.

[nuconvert]

You learn from mistakes. (hopefully)

[Thommas]

I suspect it doesn't really matter which way they were looking on 9/11.

I suspect you are correct. As an Air Traffic Controller of over 20 years, my perception of what could have been done with the WTC aircraft is grim. In the time it takes to humanly recognize the nature of an incident like this, it is over. The idea to shoot down any aircraft that has a communication failure, loses its transponder or behaves erratically for a few minutes would mean the downing of a dozen aircraft every day.

If NORAD was set up to monitor all the daily flights for erratic behavior, it would have a staff nearly as large as the FAA, and the results would be the same or worse. Worse being the complications that arise with overlapping duties or missions.

The true cure for this, sadly, is removal of the privilege (or right) for private citizens to fly aircraft. Id est, fewer planes means closer monitoring and restrictions on routes and proceedures. This could be coupled with mandatory public motorized mass transportation, etc., etc. In short, how far do we restrict our freedoms to be "absolutely" safe?

[jlogajan]

On 9/11, U.S. radar was facing wrong way

What? Is he saying they weren't detected on radar? What a dolt.

[thmiley]

This is a smokescreen. NORAD didn't need their radar units pointed at the U.S. That's what air traffic radar is for.

No one has explained adequately why the U.S. Air Force did not intercept the hijacked jets on 9/11. There was a huge gap in time between the time the jets shut off their transponders and turned off course and the time they crashed into their targets. Every one of those jets could have been intercepted by military fighter jets.

Remember golfer Payne Stewart's ill-fated flight?

Either the jets were ordered to stand down (get your tinfoil hats on!) or the military was asleep at the switch and thus criminally negligent. Either way, heads should roll.

Most likely, though, they will cover up individual failures or criminal conspiracy. Accountability and Washington, D.C. don't mix.

[aristeides]

Either the jets were ordered to stand down (get your tinfoil hats on!) or the military was asleep at the switch and thus criminally negligent.

I heard parts of the hearing on C-SPAN yesterday. It turns out there was a NORAD exercise the morning of 9/11. I suspect initial reports of what was going on that morning were discounted as being part of the exercise.

But that raises the question: how were the terrorists able to learn and take advantage of the timing of that exercise? Just as we've had to wonder how they later that morning showed knowledge of White House codes and communication procedures.

[ItisaReligionofPeace]

They didn't have knowledge of the exercise. You give them way too much credit. They didn't have knowledge of white house codes either.

[ml/nj]

As an Air Traffic Controller of over 20 years, my perception of what could have been done with the WTC aircraft is grim. In the time it takes to humanly recognize the nature of an incident like this, it is over. The idea to shoot down any aircraft that has a communication failure, loses its transponder or behaves erratically for a few minutes would mean the downing of a dozen aircraft every day.

This I disagree with.

First, a fighter that goes up to intercept one of your dozen aircraft doesn't have to shoot it down. All of us (pilots) have been taught to recognize the international sign for interception and that if such interception should occur we should follow the intercepting aircraft to a field to land.

Second, the 9/11 planes weren't exactly operating as a confused 172 pilot might if he were IFR and had an electrical failure. The WTC planes were at altitude on a western course 100 miles north of NYC being piloted by very experienced pilots. Such pilots who were really in trouble at that point probably would have headed for Rome AFB. I'm sure that all sorts of alarms went off five minutes after they broke off communicantions and turned south. My understanding is that planes were scrambled, but that they just couldn't get to NYC (from Otis AFB on Cape Cod) in time to do any good.

ML/NJ

[Dog Gone]

We never would have shot down the planes that crashed into the towers because we had no way of knowing what their intentions were. It wasn't until the second one hit that we were certain this was no accident.

[aristeides]

As for the codes and communications procedures, White House sources leaked that to Safire and others at the time to explain Bush's absence from the White House until the evening.

As for knowledge of the exercise, that could have been a coincidence, sure. But the prudent thing is to assume that it was not. In any case, I don't understand how you could have knowledge that it was just a coincidence. Care to explain?

[ChefKeith]

Bush's authorization to shoot down United Airlines Flight 93, which eventually crashed in Pennsylvania, minutes after that plane already was shot down.

YEAH RIGHT!

[aruanan]

He comes across as a Barney Fife saying after the event, "Yeah, I said to myself when I first saw him that that guy was up to no good."