Author Topic: Pilot Reports 'Missile' Fired at Jetliner Near LAX (11/28/05) (Read 1248 times)

eagl · « **Reply #30 on:** December 07, 2005, 11:13:51 AM »

Sundowner,

I can't give you a full answer, but it would involve countermeasures, maneuvering, radio calls, crew coordination, and if possible a weapons release.

Maverick · « **Reply #31 on:** December 07, 2005, 11:40:44 AM »

While it wasn't a SAM of any type, the concorde was brought down by just a little bit of FOD in the wrong place. It landed too, but not in a good way. It's silly to think a SAM could not do major damage to a civilian aircraft especially on takeoff with full fuel and load. All it takes is a hit in the right spot. Compromising hydraulics and that plane would be practically unmanageable and a good example is the flight that terminated in Sioux City.

Sundowner · « **Reply #32 on:** December 08, 2005, 05:01:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by eagl
Sundowner,

I can't give you a full answer, but it would involve countermeasures, maneuvering, radio calls, crew coordination, and if possible a weapons release.

Rgr that bud,

Was kinda trying to be a bit tongue in cheek with ya.

Im an old F-4, F-16 crew dog here.
Thanks for the job you guys do.

Sir

Sun

deSelys · « **Reply #33 on:** December 08, 2005, 07:32:23 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Golfer
What if I told you that your ears are of such immense height that they're in the atmosphere too?

ROFLMAO!!!

hacksaw1 · « **Reply #34 on:** December 09, 2005, 03:45:44 AM »

December 05, 2005

Update On the American Airlines LAX Contrail Sighting Story

As regular readers know, I've been working the story about a pilot who saw a mysterious contrail after departing LAX.

This morning I received an email from Tim Wagner, a spokesman for American Airlines. He told me that AA doesn't make their frontline employees available for interviews. However, he did provide further information on the sighting:

- Flight #612 was at 13,000 feet altitude - 7-10 miles offshore.
- Cloud ceiling was at 4-5,000 feet (someone on the ground or on a boat
wouldn't have been able to see the aircraft)
- Captain saw straight vertical rocket contrail up to about 6,000 feet
- Rocket was approximately 3-4 miles away from flight #612
- That equals a horizontal separation of about 4 miles and a vertical
separation of well over a mile.
- The captain never used the word "missile" and never believed the
aircraft was a target of the rocket.

This official version bears small relationship to the stonewalling I got from the FBI, or to the initial reports - in fact, all the reports - that appeared in the mainstream media.

http://www.dailypundit.com/newarchives/006220.php#006220

Best Regards,

Cement

Wolfala · « **Reply #35 on:** December 09, 2005, 04:09:14 AM »

ATC recording link:

It was American 612

FLIGHT: AA #612 (NOT #621 as incorrectly reported)
DATE: November 26, 2005 (NOT November 28, 2005 as originally and incorrectly reported)
TIME: Departure from LAX at 12:50 PST (en route to ORD)
TIME INCIDENT: 12:52 PST
LOC: Approx 6600ft above pacific South/South-West of LAX

Approx 28:30 sec into the large recording.

http://www.liveatc.net/.archive/kont/KONT-SoCal-Nov-26-05-1530.mp3

http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/Nov262005AA612.mp3

USHilDvl · « **Reply #36 on:** December 09, 2005, 10:29:50 AM »

eagl,

I thought the only lasers of sufficient wattage to be destructive were pretty hefty chemical systems, that currently require a 747 to carry? I would imagine a commercially viable package would have to occupy only a few cubic feet at most, no? Not to mention the enormous power consumption.

Have there been improvements lately? I ask in all seriousness, as I can't say I make a study of the things...just what I pick up when I come across it.

It's a shame we've even got to worry about this crap.

On the other hand...maybe we should sell the terrorists some of them rocket-powered toilets...tell 'em they're secret, one-man assault spacecraft.

USHilDvl · « **Reply #37 on:** December 09, 2005, 10:34:14 AM »

Having heard those recordings, I now reaffirm my bull**t meter readings on the bottle rocket scenario.

I still don't know what it was, obviously, but tweren't no bottle-rocket.

I have spoken.

Chairboy · « **Reply #38 on:** December 09, 2005, 10:45:55 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by USHilDvl
eagl,

I thought the only lasers of sufficient wattage to be destructive were pretty hefty chemical systems, that currently require a 747 to carry? I would imagine a commercially viable package would have to occupy only a few cubic feet at most, no? Not to mention the enormous power consumption.

They're not destructive lasers, they just disrupt the IR sensor head so that it can't maintain a lock on the target.

Bluefish · « **Reply #39 on:** December 09, 2005, 11:30:28 AM »

Hmmm, I wonder if it could have been something launched from Catalina; that's more than 14 miles SW of LAX (not sure how many), but in the general vicinity.

Wolfala · « **Reply #40 on:** December 09, 2005, 11:45:10 AM »

They said 1/2 way between us and the coastline - so Catalina is not only on the wrong side of the aircraft (actually off the nose by nearly 25 miles), but it is nearly 4 times the linear distance from the coastline.

The report was made abeam Zamperini, which is south of LAX, and North of Santa Catalina VOR.