View Full Version : No-Planer Morgan Reynolds Explains His Latest "Theory"
Brainster
28th August 2006, 11:33 AM
Oh, my lord, the humanity (http://www.nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=plane_trick_wtc2)!
Here is some insight into the possible technology they used:
“Lockheed’s legendary ‘Skunk Works’ experimental arm is known to be developing new electro-chromic materials. Their aim is to create camouflage panels which can change color or tint when subjected to an electrical charge. Other engineers like Boeing and Northrop, are also working on similar stealth technologies.
“One of these systems is the “electrochromic polymer” that is being developed at the University of Florida. These thin sheets cover the aircraft’s skin and sense the hue, color and brightness of the surrounding sky and ground. The image received is then projected onto the aircraft’s opposite side. When charged to a certain voltage, these panels undergo color change. Another similar ‘skin’ is being tested at the top-secret Groom Lake facility at Area 51 in Nevada. It is reputed to be composed of an “electro-magnetically conductive polyaniline-based radar-absorbent composite material.” The system also utilizes photo-sensitive receptors all over the plane that scan the surrounding area, subsequently the data is interpreted by an onboard computer which outputs it much like a computer screen making the aircraft virtually invisible to site.”
Read it all; he even endorses the "one-plane" theory that the Onion floated as a joke last month!:eek:
T.A.M.
28th August 2006, 11:39 AM
okie dokie...
so I am confused....I thought the no plane theory meant that planes WERE NOT the cause of any of the attacks. This info seems to be mroe along the lines of "hidden" or "Invisible" planes caused the attacks...
jhc what drugs are these people taking...
realitybites
28th August 2006, 11:47 AM
Oh, my lord, the humanity (http://www.nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=plane_trick_wtc2)!
Read it all; he even endorses the "one-plane" theory that the Onion floated as a joke last month!:eek:
I so wish that crazy sonofabee allowed people to comment on his stupidity.
Marcus Icke considered 41 eyewitness reports from the south tower who claim to have seen an aircraft collide with WTC 2. Many were interviewed that day (more reliable) while others were interviewed later. No one reported seeing a Boeing 767-200 series with United Airlines livery crashing into the tower, an extremely strict standard, but all seemed to report some type of aircraft crashing into the tower.
Imagine that.
Stanley Primnath didn't have the presence of mind to stop and look for the details of the airplane headed straight for his office at 500mph.
I don't know about you guys, but that's the first thing I do when faced with a situation that will most likely end my life.
Say... that Dodge Ram just jumped the median and is heading straight for me. It's probably gonna hit me in about 3 seconds, but before I attempt to swerve out of it's way, let's take a closer look at it, shall we? Oooh. Nice deep red color. Looks maroon-ish. Possibly burnt sienna. Looks like an '04. From the sound of the screaming engine, it's gotta be packin' a Hemi. Is that Bob behind the wheel? Silly Bob. Always doing crazy things with his truck. His wife's gonna' get a hugh kick out of this one. ::sigh:: Oh, this is gonna' really suck for him... looks like he just got new rims.
[rule8]'in [rule8]
Kent1
28th August 2006, 11:56 AM
I so wish that crazy sonofabee allowed people to comment on his stupidity.
Imagine that.
Stanley Primnath didn't have the presence of mind to stop and look for the details of the airplane headed straight for his office at 500mph.
I don't know about you guys, but that's the first thing I do when faced with a situation that will most likely end my life.
Say... that Dodge Ram just jumped the median and is heading straight for me. It's probably gonna hit me in about 3 seconds, but before I attempt to swerve out of it's way, let's take a closer look at it, shall we? Oooh. Nice deep red color. Looks maroon-ish. Possibly burnt sienna. Looks like an '04. From the sound of the screaming engine, it's gotta be packin' a Hemi. Is that Bob behind the wheel? Silly Bob. Always doing crazy things with his truck. His wife's gonna' get a hugh kick out of this one. ::sigh:: Oh, this is gonna' really suck for him... looks like he just got new rims.
[rule8]'in [rule8]
He also replyed to Jones:
http://www.nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=helping_jones
LOL!!
Jones’ correspondent did no scientific work on the “glow” issue, but simply asked an old man what he remembered a quarter-century ago. That is science according to S. Jones, and the way to conduct research. He asked somebody to ask somebody else about the appearance of molten aluminum, temperatures unknown, for the answer to the “glow” question. He accepted the hearsay answer without question because it was the desired answer. Are we in some kind of twilight zone? Is that Rod Serling around the corner?
Blackadder_no
28th August 2006, 12:00 PM
Incredible.
It is simply incredible; to watch this guy remove himself further and further away from reality. His refusal to accept what happened that day must be beyond comprehension.
Meffy
28th August 2006, 12:11 PM
Speaking as a human-sized bipedal skunk, I just want to say that 1) it wasn't MY works, and 2) this guy is nertz.
LashL
28th August 2006, 12:14 PM
He also replyed to Jones:
http://www.nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=helping_jones
LOL!!
I liked these parts, too:
Can a Ph.D. physicist be this retarded?
We are not impressed by Professor Jones editorship of Journalst911.com nor his labeling his webpage a journal.
:)
KingMerv00
28th August 2006, 12:26 PM
Anybody got some wire and a magnet? I think I can use William of Occam's spinning corpse to power downtown Philadelphia.
Bindamel
28th August 2006, 12:40 PM
Oh, my lord, the humanity (http://www.nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=plane_trick_wtc2)!
Here is some insight into the possible technology they used:
“Lockheed’s legendary ‘Skunk Works’ experimental arm is known to be developing new electro-chromic materials. Their aim is to create camouflage panels which can change color or tint when subjected to an electrical charge. Other engineers like Boeing and Northrop, are also working on similar stealth technologies.
“One of these systems is the “electrochromic polymer” that is being developed at the University of Florida. These thin sheets cover the aircraft’s skin and sense the hue, color and brightness of the surrounding sky and ground. The image received is then projected onto the aircraft’s opposite side. When charged to a certain voltage, these panels undergo color change. Another similar ‘skin’ is being tested at the top-secret Groom Lake facility at Area 51 in Nevada. It is reputed to be composed of an “electro-magnetically conductive polyaniline-based radar-absorbent composite material.” The system also utilizes photo-sensitive receptors all over the plane that scan the surrounding area, subsequently the data is interpreted by an onboard computer which outputs it much like a computer screen making the aircraft virtually invisible to site.”
Read it all; he even endorses the "one-plane" theory that the Onion floated as a joke last month!:eek:
Cool, I actually contributed to research on that technology in the mid-to-late 90's!
Okay, so it wasn't quite that cool, but we were working on polyaniline-based materials that would change their microwave signatures dependent on their voltage.
And I suspect some could see the advantage to having a material that could change it's microwave signature, no?
Loss Leader
28th August 2006, 12:46 PM
Holy crap, this guy actually believes the towers were hit by the Defiant (http://www.ussdefiant.addr.com/simm_guide/scematics.htm).
Brainster
28th August 2006, 01:21 PM
okie dokie...
so I am confused....I thought the no plane theory meant that planes WERE NOT the cause of any of the attacks. This info seems to be mroe along the lines of "hidden" or "Invisible" planes caused the attacks...
jhc what drugs are these people taking...
The "theory" is that the chameleon plane pretended to crash into the WTC, but really just disappeared as it was crashing into the tower... that doesn't make any sense.
T.A.M.
28th August 2006, 01:22 PM
From Reynolds reply to Jones reply; a favorite line that speaks volumes...
If mathematical articles cannot be explained in simple English, they are hand-waving, mumbo jumbo.
lol, so i guess functional equations, Laplace Transforms, Linear Equations, and most high level mathematics, that is impossible to explain in plain english, unless you right a novel on each, are all just "mumbo jumbo"...what a moron...
There are tonnes of things in science that cannot be explained adequately in "simple english". Sure you can give a "String Theory for dummies" approach, but those descriptions are far from complete...
I am no fan of Jones work, but Reynolds is an idiot.
realitybites
28th August 2006, 01:23 PM
The "theory" is that the chameleon plane pretended to crash into the WTC, but really just disappeared as it was crashing into the tower... that doesn't make any sense.
'Cause pretending to hijack 4 planes only to use super-ultra-double-top-secret technology in New York and DC really simplifies things.
T.A.M.
28th August 2006, 01:26 PM
There is actually much more historical evidence that "Leprachans" exist, and by god they are small enough to get in and plant them explosives, and if ya have enough of them, they could get the $160 Billion in gold out too....cause ya knows dey loves der gold...;) :D
realitybites
28th August 2006, 01:33 PM
There is actually much more historical evidence that "Leprachans" exist, and by god they are small enough to get in and plant them explosives, and if ya have enough of them, they could get the $160 Billion in gold out too....cause ya knows dey loves der gold...;) :D
Little known fact: 98% of the Leprechaun population is Jewish. One might assume Catholic because of their long association with the Irish, but one would be wrong. The other 2% are agnostic. Additionally, like the dwarves from Middle-Earth, they're widely known to be great miners, only instead of digging and chipping away at rock, they used a substance called thermite to burrow into the Earth.
I'm not saying they did it. Just add 2 and 2 for yourself and see what ya' get.
Food for thought.
Hellbound
28th August 2006, 01:38 PM
Little known fact: 98% of the Leprechaun population is Jewish. One might assume Catholic because of their long association with the Irish, but one would be wrong. The other 2% are agnostic. Additionally, like the dwarves from Middle-Earth, they're widely known to be great miners, only instead of digging and chipping away at rock, they used a substance called thermite to burrow into the Earth.
I'm not saying they did it. Just add 2 and 2 for yourself and see what ya' get.
Food for thought.
So Keebler's Elves and Lucky from Lucky Charms are working together?
T.A.M.
28th August 2006, 01:38 PM
I now have a new theory...to the 9/11 Truth press with this one...it is better than the No Planer...
DAVID COPPERFIELD STAGED THE 9/11 ATTACKS AS PART OF HIS FAIRWELL MAGIC TRICK...
realitybites
28th August 2006, 01:44 PM
So Keebler's Elves and Lucky from Lucky Charms are working together?
Now I didn't say that. I'm just asking questions. What does your Pink Heart tell you?
Hellbound
28th August 2006, 01:51 PM
I bet they were after the blue diamonds the whole time.
KingMerv00
28th August 2006, 01:55 PM
I now have a new theory...to the 9/11 Truth press with this one...it is better than the No Planer...
DAVID COPPERFIELD STAGED THE 9/11 ATTACKS AS PART OF HIS FAIRWELL MAGIC TRICK...
Um....I think he beat you to it:
The range of possibilities runs from an airplane fly-by of some kind coordinated with timed explosions inside the tower to David Copperfield (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w36-oYLek48) on scene. No kidding. He has “disappeared a train” and the Statute of Liberty so maybe he put his mind to work on “disappearing a Big Boeing.”
Bolding mine.
See how hard it is to lampoon these guys?
Meffy
28th August 2006, 02:04 PM
Since the battle amongst the various Little People, I might as well reveal that the letters in "oompa loompa" anagram into "ammo pool a op" -- and if that doesn't vaguely suggest something creepy and exploding, then I don't know what it vaguely suggests.
[edit]
l ampoo n
oompa
Coincidence? I think not!
Kent1
28th August 2006, 02:11 PM
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=110134&mesg_id=111226
For those that don't know. Judy Woods is Jane Doe. LOL!!!
T.A.M.
28th August 2006, 02:29 PM
You cant be serious, you mean he actually really believes it might have been Copperfield...OMG.
If there was ever, ever, any doubt in my mind before that these people were insane, it is now resolved. He is a loony tune...
apathoid
28th August 2006, 03:00 PM
So, Morgan Reynolds is arguing that a sooper-seekrit chameleonic plane was used and it was equipped with techology to make it invisible at the last second? And that the invisible "drone" didnt actually hit the WTC but turned away? This actually makes sense to someone? Why not just crash a drone into the (rule8)'ing building :confused:
Ok here is the problem. Since it would take at least a thousand feet at 800 feet/sec to turn away - it would appear to disappear way too early or a hundred feet or so off to the side. Since "UA 175" disppeared less than 10 feet or so away on a collision course, its safe to say that whatever it was actually hit the building(unless it can slow from 550 mph to zero in a hundredth of a second and then hover or fly backwards).
So I guess my question is - is Reynolds this (rule8)'in stupid or is he simply beyond nutty?
T.A.M.
28th August 2006, 03:13 PM
TWO Options re: Reynolds
(1) He is certifiably INSANE.
(2) He is a true FBI?CIA Plant, sent to spread misinformation.
I hate to think I am letting myself contemplate the silliness of option (2), but my god, what other explanation is there for this rediculous crap he is getting on with...
Arkan_Wolfshade
28th August 2006, 03:19 PM
option (3) Reynolds is a nom de plume for David Icke?
KingMerv00
28th August 2006, 03:31 PM
option (3) Reynolds is a nom de plume for David Icke?
I'm having trouble seeing the difference between options 3 and 1.
Johnny Pixels
28th August 2006, 03:32 PM
Here is some insight into the possible technology they used:
“Lockheed’s legendary ‘Skunk Works’ experimental arm is known to be developing new electro-chromic materials. Their aim is to create camouflage panels which can change color or tint when subjected to an electrical charge. Other engineers like Boeing and Northrop, are also working on similar stealth technologies.
“One of these systems is the “electrochromic polymer” that is being developed at the University of Florida. These thin sheets cover the aircraft’s skin and sense the hue, color and brightness of the surrounding sky and ground. The image received is then projected onto the aircraft’s opposite side. When charged to a certain voltage, these panels undergo color change. Another similar ‘skin’ is being tested at the top-secret Groom Lake facility at Area 51 in Nevada. It is reputed to be composed of an “electro-magnetically conductive polyaniline-based radar-absorbent composite material.” The system also utilizes photo-sensitive receptors all over the plane that scan the surrounding area, subsequently the data is interpreted by an onboard computer which outputs it much like a computer screen making the aircraft virtually invisible to site.”
So if a plane is flying over land these magic sheets will make the top of the plane green/brown, and the bottom of the plane grey/blue?
Why did no one think of this before?
http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/5837/camelxu8.jpg
How much visual sighting of aircraft happens these days?
Dog Town
28th August 2006, 03:34 PM
I'm for one, two, or three! I'm really an all of the above!
gumboot
28th August 2006, 04:33 PM
I think a lot of idiots are still stuck on the "stealth" = invisible thing, instead of "stealth" = small radar cross-section.
Having said that, some guys made a jacket that uses fibre-optic cable to make it "invisible" by transferring light through the fibres to the other side of the jacket. It is far from truely invisible, but it is very cool.
-Andrew
Brainster
28th August 2006, 07:16 PM
I think a lot of idiots are still stuck on the "stealth" = invisible thing, instead of "stealth" = small radar cross-section.
Having said that, some guys made a jacket that uses fibre-optic cable to make it "invisible" by transferring light through the fibres to the other side of the jacket. It is far from truely invisible, but it is very cool.
-Andrew
Yes, I remember that from a couple years ago. People can "see" through you which is not quite the same thing as being invisible. Of course, they've probably improved it a bit since then, but this was years before. I also suspect that cloth would only work for somebody at the same level as you, that if somebody were looking down at you from a height they'd see the same thing as somebody looking from the same altitude, which of course would look wrong then.
hellaeon
28th August 2006, 07:41 PM
This is so fricken stupid. I dont think I could try and be this stupid.
1) On a serious note I believe he may just be slightly ill upstairs.
2) Or Its a joke
It actually makes me angry to hear people sprout this crap then believe it. Hollywood has a lot to answer for.
kevin
28th August 2006, 07:58 PM
[QUOTE=realitybites;1881066]
Say... that Dodge Ram just jumped the median and is heading straight for me. It's probably gonna hit me in about 3 seconds, but before I attempt to swerve out of it's way, let's take a closer look at it, shall we? Oooh. Nice deep red color. Looks maroon-ish. Possibly burnt sienna. Looks like an '04. From the sound of the screaming engine, it's gotta be packin' a Hemi. Is that Bob behind the wheel? Silly Bob. Always doing crazy things with his truck. His wife's gonna' get a hugh kick out of this one. ::sigh:: Oh, this is gonna' really suck for him... looks like he just got new rims.
[thread derail]
last accident I was in, a red truck made a right turn from the left lane of a 3 lane. I dodged the truck but hit a curb and did major damage to my car.
My description of the vehicle: big, red, truck, with a moron driving it.
Oh and he took off of course, so I've learned my lesson: next time hit the truck.
[/thread derail]
defaultdotxbe
28th August 2006, 08:18 PM
Holy crap, this guy actually believes the towers were hit by the Defiant (http://www.ussdefiant.addr.com/simm_guide/scematics.htm).
we already discussed this in another thread and determined it must have been using a klingon cloaking device, the defiant has a romulan cloaking device
please do some research before spouting such BS :D
[thread derail]
last accident I was in, a red truck made a right turn from the left lane of a 3 lane. I dodged the truck but hit a curb and did major damage to my car.
My description of the vehicle: big, red, truck, with a moron driving it.
Oh and he took off of course, so I've learned my lesson: next time hit the truck.
[/thread derail]
wow, i have almost the exact same story, blue suv coming the opposite way turned left directly in front of me, i swerved, hit a tree and totaled my perfect-condition 1996 thunderbird lx :( :(
(i learned the same lesson as you, next time, t-bone the moron)
CurtC
28th August 2006, 09:00 PM
From Reynolds reply to Jones reply; a favorite line that speaks volumes...If mathematical articles cannot be explained in simple English, they are hand-waving, mumbo jumbo.
I, for one, look forward to reading the proof of the Poincare Conjecture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincare_conjecture) in plain English.
steve s
28th August 2006, 09:26 PM
If mathematical articles cannot be explained in simple English, they are hand-waving, mumbo jumbo.
I, for one, look forward to reading the proof of the Poincare Conjecture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poincare_conjecture) in plain English.
Issac Asimov once wrote that "kindergarten terms are suitable only for kindergarteners." The Loosers are seeking kindergarten terms.
Steve S.
Brainster
28th August 2006, 10:49 PM
Reynolds applies more pressure to Jones (http://www.nomoregames.net/index.php?page=911&subpage1=helping_jones) with a new article. More interesting to me, though, is that a No-Planer finally admits he really means no plane (at least not into WTC2):
But let us go there. Each tower suddenly had a large hole in it, spread over five or more floors, at least 100 feet wide and some 15 feet tall or higher at its apex. No one disputes these holes, only the cause. Something caused the holes, Steven, one side asserting plane crashes, another internal explosives (let us put aside earthquakes and other possibilities for the sake of this present argument).
:rolleyes:
Blackadder_no
28th August 2006, 11:35 PM
I think a lot of idiots are still stuck on the "stealth" = invisible thing, instead of "stealth" = small radar cross-section.
Having said that, some guys made a jacket that uses fibre-optic cable to make it "invisible" by transferring light through the fibres to the other side of the jacket. It is far from truely invisible, but it is very cool.
-Andrew
Are you sure? The one I remember depended on an image being projected onto a reflective raincoat, and even then it would only be "invisible" when seen through another camera.
Let me see if I can find a link... ah, there it is:
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2777111.stm
gumboot
28th August 2006, 11:43 PM
Are you sure? The one I remember depended on an image being projected onto a reflective raincoat, and even then it would only be "invisible" when seen through another camera.
Let me see if I can find a link... ah, there it is:
news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/2777111.stm
No this one definately allowed you to see "through" it. IT was very far from perfect. But as Brainster says, it was a few years ago and the product may be improved.
In any event, short of knitting a fibre-optic jersey for the aircraft, I'm not sure how useful it would be in this scenario...;)
-Andrew
Blackadder_no
29th August 2006, 03:50 AM
Is there no end to the fantasy?
In an effort to explain to me that the Pentagon is one of the "best-protected buildings in the world", one CTer just claimed that there were "300 fighters on alert just a few hundred yards away".
gumboot
29th August 2006, 04:02 AM
Is there no end to the fantasy?
In an effort to explain to me that the Pentagon is one of the "best-protected buildings in the world", one CTer just claimed that there were "300 fighters on alert just a few hundred yards away".
Oh that's just priceless...
-Andrew
CurtC
29th August 2006, 06:43 AM
Maybe by "300 fighters" he meant "300 soldiers."
Darth Rotor
29th August 2006, 06:51 AM
Maybe by "300 fighters" he meant "300 soldiers."
/old joke
The last time a soldier showed up in the Pentagon, nearly every colonel there saluted him, as they didn't recognize his rank and figured he outranked them.
/old joke
DR
Blackadder_no
29th August 2006, 07:12 AM
Maybe by "300 fighters" he meant "300 soldiers."
Nope, he meant fighter aircraft (he wrote "jagerfly" in Norwegian).
Oh, now he's corrected it to Andrews AFB. That's a lot of hundred-yards.
His sources? Emperors-clothes and David Ray Griffin...
It seems some CTers don't actually care what they claim, as long as it's different from the "official" theory.
Hellbound
29th August 2006, 07:38 AM
No this one definately allowed you to see "through" it. IT was very far from perfect. But as Brainster says, it was a few years ago and the product may be improved.
In any event, short of knitting a fibre-optic jersey for the aircraft, I'm not sure how useful it would be in this scenario...;)
-Andrew
Just an addition, this was still unidirectional. It would only work in one direction, and movement pretty well spoiled the effect. I recall the one you're discussing, IIRC it was research in conjunction with the "Force 2000" type military modernization programs.
However, to my current knowledge, research into this particular technology has been dropped. It was expensive, bulky, unidirectional, fragile, and only marginally effective. I have pretty good info (I know a person who is directly involved in the Force 2000 project as an engineer, although on a different aspect), but of course there's always the chance they calssified it to some unholy level ;) However, I myself don't see the usefulness of it with fiber-optics...you can't get 360 degree coverage or anything similar.
A better idea is electro-chromic materials, like the new OLEDs that have been desinged. They can be applied like a paint, made into thin, flexible layers, and manipulated to a high degree. They also change colors with electrical impulse. Think of it like a flexible LCD screen, only with a faster color response (less shadowing, ghosting, traces, etc). A coating such as this on a vehicle would allow for push-button changing of a camouflague pattern...or even the addition of simple colorimeters to determine a color for a section of aircraft (for example, a blue, black, or gray color on the bottom that matches the color of the sky above, based on input from a sensor on the top of the plane...or a blue-green, green, or brown color on the top that matches the average color of the ground/sea below).
However, none of these technologies would give anything remotely approaching invisibility, not at such short ranges and under such circumstances. Think about a chameleon, and that's about the limit of what they could do with them (currently).
Brainster
29th August 2006, 08:36 AM
Here's a picture. As you can see, the technique works best with bright, loud colors in the background.
Hellbound
29th August 2006, 08:39 AM
Brainster:
I beleive that one is the projection technology.
chipmunk stew
29th August 2006, 08:44 AM
Brainster:
I beleive that one is the projection technology.
Yeah, it works like this:
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_512244f460bae1fdd.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=1179)
http://science.howstuffworks.com/invisibility-cloak6.htm
Hellbound
29th August 2006, 08:48 AM
Thanks for verifying, chipmunk :)
The fiber-optic coat was developed, but was actually two-directional (I mis-staed saying unidirectional). It would work from a small angle to the front and a small angle to the rear. It was also, as I stated, bulky, expensive, and fragile.
Even the projection technology, though, will suffer from a small angle of effectiveness. Really, there isn't a technology we currently know of that could produce real invisibility (unless you have a few black-hole-type objects to carry around and warp gravity). The best we can do is projections or representations that have small angles of effectiveness.
chipmunk stew
29th August 2006, 09:11 AM
Thanks for verifying, chipmunk :)
The fiber-optic coat was developed, but was actually two-directional (I mis-staed saying unidirectional). It would work from a small angle to the front and a small angle to the rear. It was also, as I stated, bulky, expensive, and fragile.
Even the projection technology, though, will suffer from a small angle of effectiveness. Really, there isn't a technology we currently know of that could produce real invisibility (unless you have a few black-hole-type objects to carry around and warp gravity). The best we can do is projections or representations that have small angles of effectiveness.
That's why illusionists always limit their audiences' viewing angles.
ktesibios
29th August 2006, 10:32 AM
Umm, why go through all this trouble with electrochromic thingies and fiber optics and projectors and stuff when all you really need to do is to paint the plane hot pink and put a Somebody Else's Problem field on it?
Cuddles
29th August 2006, 10:47 AM
Is there no end to the fantasy?
In an effort to explain to me that the Pentagon is one of the "best-protected buildings in the world", one CTer just claimed that there were "300 fighters on alert just a few hundred yards away".
Ants. There were 300 army ants nearby. Unfortunately they couldn't jump high enough.
KingMerv00
29th August 2006, 11:21 AM
Is there no end to the fantasy?
In an effort to explain to me that the Pentagon is one of the "best-protected buildings in the world", one CTer just claimed that there were "300 fighters on alert just a few hundred yards away".
Hope they take off vertically. I didn't see a runway nearby when I visited in July. Perhaps they come out of a basketball court like in the X-Men movies?
CurtC
29th August 2006, 11:24 AM
Actually, there is a big runway just a few hundred yards from the Pentagon.
Darth Rotor
29th August 2006, 11:26 AM
Cursed Double Post. :(
Darth Rotor
29th August 2006, 11:33 AM
Hope they take off vertically. I didn't see a runway nearby when I visited in July. Perhaps they come out of a basketball court like in the X-Men movies?
Andrews Air Force Base is nearby the Pentagon, about 15 miles as the crow flies, just over the Wilson Bridge into Maryland on the South Beltway loop.
Unlike other air force bases, Andrews wasn't host to a fighter wing on 11 Sept, 2001. As far as I know, it still isn't.
Andrews AFB, Md.
• 316th Wing (Air Force One)
• 459th Air Refueling Wing (Tankers)
• 89th Airlift Wing (Cargo)
DR
KingMerv00
29th August 2006, 11:43 AM
Actually, there is a big runway just a few hundred yards from the Pentagon.
Where? The highway? Did I miss a giant runway somehow?
Johnny Pixels
29th August 2006, 11:51 AM
Where? The highway? Did I miss a giant runway somehow?
Here (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&z=14&ll=38.859627,-77.03948&spn=0.026266,0.058537&om=1)
:D
KingMerv00
29th August 2006, 11:55 AM
Here (http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&z=14&ll=38.859627,-77.03948&spn=0.026266,0.058537&om=1)
:D
Smart a$$.:D
Besides, that about 4000 feet, not a "few hundred yards".
Darth Rotor
29th August 2006, 12:00 PM
Smart a$$.:D
Besides, that about 4000 feet, not a "few hundred yards".
It looked to be just over one kilometer by the scale on the map, to me. No fighters there, but I hear you can buy a one way ticket to the 14th Street Bridge there, if you fly on Air Florida. :cool:
DR
Johnny Pixels
29th August 2006, 12:08 PM
It looked to be just over one kilometer by the scale on the map, to me. No fighters there, but I hear you can buy a one way ticket to the 14th Street Bridge there, if you fly on Air Florida. :cool:
DR
You not heard about the 767s that have missile firing pods attached? I read about them on the internet somewhere...
:)
gumboot
29th August 2006, 05:23 PM
Andrews AFB had two fighter squadrons on 9/11...
121st Fighter Squadron of the 113th Fighter Wing (DC Air National Guard) with F-16s. This squadron was not an alert squadron and was not on duty, but had several aircraft doing training on 9/11. After the first attacks the aircraft were recalled and came back to arm their aircraft with dummy rounds before establishing the first CAP over DC, at the request of the Secret Service (independent of NORAD). They were also given separate authority to shoot down any hijacked airliners from the Secret Service.
The other squadron was Marine Fighter Attack Squadron VMFA-321 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VMFA-321) "Hell's Angels" of the Marine Air Guard, flying F/A-18 Hornets. I believe they also were not on duty on 9/11. They were disbanded in September 2004.
The 121st FS have been heavily involved in protection of DC ever since, and in fact their squadron name is now "Capital Guardians".
From their website (http://www.dcandr.ang.af.mil/index.htm):
Mission
Capital Guardians, patriotic Americans, supporting and defending the United States of America and the Nation's Capital when directed by the President in order to assure the survival and success of liberty.
-Andrew
© 2001-2009, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.
vBulletin® v3.7.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.