Posted on 08/12/2002 12:50:43 PM PDT by Sub-Driver
FAA says it had 11 other suspect planes on Sept. 11
Monday August 12, 2002
By RICHARD PYLE Associated Press Writer
WESTBURY, N.Y. (AP) In the tense minutes after two hijacked jetliners smashed into New York's World Trade Center and another hit the Pentagon, air traffic controllers had as many as 11 other suspect aircraft on their screens, federal aviation officials said Monday.
The concern over possible additional hijackings did not end until 12:15 p.m. on Sept. 11 3{ hours after the first attack on the twin towers when the last of 4,546 commercial aircraft were safely on the ground nationwide.
``Somewhere in the first hour after the first plane hit, we were receiving reports of additional confirmed hijackings. The list at that point in time started to grow,'' said Frank Hatfield, Eastern Region division manager for FAA air traffic control operations.
``All reports were treated as unconfirmed hijackings until we eliminated that as a possibility. We were not satisfied that the last number was four until 12:15 p.m., and every airplane in the country was on the ground,'' he said.
``No one had ever envisioned a scenario where the United States would land every plane in the sky.''
Airports became jammed with the unexpected aircraft, yet there were no mishaps, he said.
Hatfield and other FAA officials briefed news media on Monday at the New York Terminal Approach Control Center, known as TRACON, on Long Island.
Mike McCormick, air traffic control manager at New York Center the main traffic control center for New York area airports made the unprecedented decision at 9:04 a.m. to declare ``ATC Zero,'' meaning that normal services were suspended and no aircraft could fly into, out of or through the region's airspace.
At that time there were still hundreds of aircraft in the skies around New York and the western Atlantic, for which the Long Island-based center had responsibility.
The decision came just after the second plane, United Airlines Flight 175, struck the south tower of the World Trade Center, confirming that the country was under terrorist attack.
Unlike the first hijacked plane, American Airlines Flight 11, the second Boeing 767's transponder was working and he knew where it was headed, McCormick said, even before the Newark Airport control tower picked it up visually as it flew south along the Hudson River, turned and headed back toward the twin towers.
``I wanted to make sure everyone understood that this (attack) was not a single aircraft, that this was not a single event. There was at least one other aircraft involved and there could be many more, and we needed to prepare for all eventualities,'' McCormick said.
The officials said many changes have been effected in emergency procedures since Sept. 11 but declined to go into detail for security reasons.
Hatfield said, however, that the time frame for the FAA to make contact with the military in an emergency ``has been shaved from minutes to seconds.''
On that day, the first two military interceptors, Air Force F-15 Eagles from Otis Air Force Base in Massachusetts, scrambled airborne at 8:52 a.m., six minutes after the first attack, but too late to do anything about the other jets heading for the Trade Center or Pentagon.
Those struck at 9:02 and 9:40 a.m., respectively. The fourth hijacked plane, United Airlines Flight 93, crashed near Somerset, Pa., at 10:07 a.m.
McCormick said that under the new procedures, ``We are in direct instantaneous communication with our military and those people responsible for defending our country.''
Hatfield said security now has a much higher priority than it did before Sept. 11.
``We have searched our souls and tried to figure out what we could have done differently on that day,'' he said. ``Probably the best thing we could have done was to improve our communications, and over the last year we have aggressively addressed that issue.''
But then I'm an optimist...
I was at ABQ that morning, having arrived at the airport just when the announcement of no flights was made.
There was a TV van out front and three Albuquerque police officers, and maybe 100 people around.
No attempt was made to secure the airport thereafter for the purpose of keeping on the ground there, any teams of terrorists.
No police checkpoint, nor even one patrol car, at the exit had been established to check peoples' faces --- the news media van would have been a great asset for filming all departing parties.
Do you base that on the conclusion that the plane impacted at the location of the waterlines and all the waterlines were located in one place?
The reason I ask is because the two different towers were impacted in two different locations.
IIRC, this was the flight that was bound for Denver. Again, IIRC, speculation was that their target was Rocky Mountain Arsenal.
No, it means that the sprinkler systems on the floors actually hit were rendered inoperative. F = M*A and all that.
In a word, sabotage. Kathleen Harris, the woman who gave out false licenses in Tenn, was killed in a highly suspicious car fire. Her car was seen with the passenger compartment fully involved in flames BEFORE it crashed. Fire fighters said the fire was strange in that it kept reignighting.
Some sick f really likes to burn people.
One such tie emerged on Wednesday, 19 September. At least four people being sought in the terror investigation, including one now in custody, were booked on one or more flights on the 22nd leaving San Antonio. Some were headed to Denver; others were continuing to California.
Besides all that, what would be the downside of investigating the unlicensed plumber Sakhera Hammad's connection to the world trade center?
Consider these guys all walked on the driver's license fraud. What was the motivation for burning their co-conspirator Ms. Smith alive with gasoline in Odtllah's car if all that was involved was a 4 month time served sentence ? What is the downside in interviewing the owner of the non- existent Denko Mechanical and asking Mr.Davidenko why he provided a letter to the court explaining Hammad was his employ with the alias Sergio Denko. Why not ask Mr. Davidenko who hired his non-existent company to work on the sprinkler system in the WTC with unlicensed Muslim plumbers days before 9-11?
Seriously, Poohbah, none of these questions interest you at all?
Your explanation requires that the pipes be exactly as strong as the rest of the main supporting structures in the towers.
Newsflash: they weren't.
Fair enough. Still you have no interest in why the Hammad cousins were in the WTC?
Occam's Razor: do not multiply entities unnecessarily.
We have two possible explanations for the WTC sprinkler system failing: the first is that the impact of each plane ruptured the pipes in the impact regions. This is a simple explanation. It is supported by reports of water flowing down the fire escapes--i.e., the sprinklers came on, but the water did not reach the fires because of the ruptured pipes.
The second possibility is that the Hammad cousins, who were apparently unlicensed plumbers, were able to perform an act of sabotage that, if detected prior to aircraft impact, would warn one and all that the building was targeted for some sort of attack. This violates the most basic OPSEC considerations, increases operational complexity (and thus risks failure of the enterprise), and is probably unnecessary (a fully loaded 767 is much more than the buildings were designed to withstand).
The first problem is that such an operation violates Al-Qaeda doctrine. Al-Qaeda has a well-deserved reputation for excellent operational security. Your theory disregards that fact.
Really. Remember how Project Bojinka was stopped? Yousef and his buddies set their Manilla hotel room on fire building the bombs for the airplanes. All the plans including a plan to assasinate the Pope were found on a laptop.
That was in 1995. And Al-Qaeda learned from that little fiasco. Their OPSEC improved considerably right afterwards.
Still you have no interest in why the Hammad cousins were in the WTC?Occam's Razor: do not multiply entities unnecessarily.
We have two possible explanations for the WTC sprinkler system failing: the first is that the impact of each plane ruptured the pipes in the impact regions. This is a simple explanation. It is supported by reports of water flowing down the fire escapes--i.e., the sprinklers came on, but the water did not reach the fires because of the ruptured pipes.
The second possibility is that the Hammad cousins, who were apparently unlicensed plumbers, were able to perform an act of sabotage that, if detected prior to aircraft impact, would warn one and all that the building was targeted for some sort of attack. This violates the most basic OPSEC considerations, increases operational complexity (and thus risks failure of the enterprise), and is probably unnecessary (a fully loaded 767 is much more than the buildings were designed to withstand).
Interesting conjecture, but you still haven't addressed his point. Why were the Hammad cousins in the WTC under demonstrably bogus cover prior to 9/11?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.