You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #151: Is this a serious contention? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
leanings Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-24-04 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #145
151. Is this a serious contention?
That aircraft should have been scrambled from Houston? Let alone the fact that the entire US would have been left undefended for any further contingency. Do you think those aircraft would have had any fuel remaining to loiter or otherwise affect the outcome of the situation?

The reason I called the idea that those bases were within "range" stupid is that "range" doesn't simply mean that the aircraft goes there at full throttle and then crashes into the ground. At that speed of 1400 mph, an Eagle can go for about 8 minutes. Even getting above Mach 1 requires getting into afterburner. That's one of the supposed advantages of the F-22: supercruise.

The sloppiness of these sources doesn't reflect too much credit upon them: "at 10:01 a.m. the FAA ordered the 180th Fighter Wing out of Swanton, Ohio to scramble their F-16 fighters..." Oh, the FAA ordered them to scramble? Huh. I never heard of that contingency. So a Guard base got a couple of fighters up an hour and a half after all this was on CNN. Did they happen to have some flight training scheduled that day, maybe? Do you have any idea of how long it takes to preflight an aircraft, suit up a pilot, warm up an APU, get munitions out of their storage bunkers, fuel the plane, load the ordnance...this stuff about how Andrews should have had fighters up in 30 minutes after the FAA realized something was going on is just poppycock to anyone who is even remotely familiar with the subject material.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC