UA 93 reaching its 9/11 target - Relocation of Congress and/or POTUS

Dr. No

After reading that the suicidal co-pilot of 4U9525 already "trained" on the way to Barcelona and reading into suicide by pilot again, divided into pilot- and hijacker-induced incidents, I came to think of United Airlines Flight 93 once again. And considering that there may indeed have been a fifth attack envisioned for 9/11, both White House AND Capitol could have been damaged or destroyed or whatever.

Of course, one may think that a rebuilding of both houses could be taken for granted. But what if not? And even if the President and Congress only do a provisory relocation, where would they go?
 

Viper81

I don't see a fourth attack succeeding. The airspace was already cleared/clearing, there were F-16s on their way to intercept UA93 (and prepared to ram), and I doubt the SAMs protecting those buildings were going to second guess downing an airliner heading for them.
 

Carl Schwamberger

Dr. Nodelescu said:
... And even if the President and Congress only do a provisory relocation, where would they go?
Click to expand...

There is a short term facility near DC for relocation. Built during the Cold War it is fairly well protected. In theory it has all the necessary meeting space, living quarters, and communications suite to keep Congress & the executive branches functional for a few weeks or months. It would make sense for this facility to include the Supreme Court, but I've not seen any specifc mention of them in the literature.
 

riggerrob

Was Congress sitting on 9/11?
How many Congressmen were in the building?
How many senators were in the building?
How many would have died?
How long would it take to assemble the remnants of elected officials at a different location?
How long would it take to elect replacements for the dead and disabled?
How would Washington area hospitals have handled so many casualties?
 

corditeman

First get the politicos out...

...The President could be got out, but Congress would be difficult.

To be honest, Washington is a bloody awful location for the modern capital of the USA. I read once of proposals to re-site the capital in Omaha, Nebraska; far more central for transport, lots of convertible underground quarry space and no Beltway lobbyists. Washington can then become what it is best used as - a Museum for the Constitution and the dumping-ground for time-serving bureaucrats.

Think about it - a mid-western capital with decent air-conditioning and no 'Foggy Bottom' mosquitoes!
 

Questerr

Viper81 said:
I don't see a fourth attack succeeding. The airspace was already cleared/clearing, there were F-16s on their way to intercept UA93 (and prepared to ram), and I doubt the SAMs protecting those buildings were going to second guess downing an airliner heading for them.
Click to expand...

Downing a airliner in a terminal dive with a Stinger is a fairly ridiculous idea.
 

mattep74

riggerrob said:
Was Congress sitting on 9/11?
How many Congressmen were in the building?
How many senators were in the building?
How many would have died?
How long would it take to assemble the remnants of elected officials at a different location?
How long would it take to elect replacements for the dead and disabled?
How would Washington area hospitals have handled so many casualties?
Click to expand...

The White house and the capitol were evacuated a few minutes after the strike on the Pentagon so if UA 93 hit it the buildings would be empty
 

corditeman

Questerr, I agree...

...Read Tom Clancy on the crashing Japanese Jet hitting the Capitol building. To use a missile able to down a fighter or a helicopter on a crashing airliner would be pointless. You might blow off an engine-pod, but that is all.
 

MattII

Or what if Flights 77 and 93 had differing priorities, so 77 was the Capitol Building flight while 93 was the Pentagon one?
 

Carl Schwamberger

MattII said:
Or what if Flights 77 and 93 had differing priorities, so 77 was the Capitol Building flight while 93 was the Pentagon one?
Click to expand...

If the time sequence is the same for each aircraft as OTL then the Capitol building takes a hit & the TV pictures are more lurid.

Congress in its self preening egotistical manner hogs more of the attention long after the attack & a lot of members take the thing personally. A few of them will act heroically during and sensiblly after, most will be as useless as their previous career/track record indicates.

Unlike the Pentagon rebuilding the Capitol will be more political, argumentive, slower, expensive, ect... Replacing the WTC proved a political can of worms for New York City and the nation in general. It wont be much different for the Capitol building.

Many folks will feel a degree of satisfaction seeing congress critters on the front line so to speak vs safe & far away from the battle. Dead congressmen jokes will appear.

If even a handful are 'removed from office' by the attack it subtly changes the legislative dynamics. If more than a dozen are killed then there are major changes that compound almost logamarithimcly with each additional individual killed.
 

Ian_Yorkland

Banned
Viper81 said:
I don't see a fourth attack succeeding. The airspace was already cleared/clearing, there were F-16s on their way to intercept UA93 (and prepared to ram), and I doubt the SAMs protecting those buildings were going to second guess downing an airliner heading for them.
Click to expand...
They were prepared to RAM UA93!!!!:eek:
 

Carl Schwamberger

Ian_Yorkland said:
They were prepared to RAM UA93!!!!:eek:
Click to expand...

Two F16 pilots of the 121st MD Air National Guard were 'scrambled' when the extent of the hijackings was understood. Actually a lot of USAF, USN, USMC, NG aircraft were sent up, but those two were assigned to patroi on the direction of Flight 93, NW of DC. The aircraft were ordered up before they could be armed. I've no clue why. Perhaps the commander wanted to clear the airfield, or wanted eyes in the sky ASAP? Anyway when the pilots heard aircraft were flying into buildings they discussed ramming, if they intercepted a hijacked aircraft. I have no idea if they were refering specifically to F93 or even knew it was one of the hijacked aircraft. At the time 93 was aloft the air traffic had not all been cleared and there were still a number of airliners aloft over the east central seaboard. At that moment no one had a clue how many more had been or would be hijacked.
 

MattII

Ramming does seem a bit desperate mind, I'm sure there are other ways, even unarmed of bringing down an airliner.
 

Carl Schwamberger

MattII said:
Ramming does seem a bit desperate mind, I'm sure there are other ways, even unarmed of bringing down an airliner.
Click to expand...

Hypothetically placing the air intake of one of the airliners engines is the exhaust stream of another jet engine might cause a flame out. I heard claims this has happened on carrier decks, but no clue it it is true or a sea story.

If it is possible then at least three engines would have to be stopped this way.

Manuvering close enough to do this might be tantamount to ramming. The slightest slip or turbulence could lead to collision.
 

Paul V McNutt

Banned
The Capitol had been evacuated right after the twin towers attack., So if flight 93 had hit it, nobody would have been killed. The Capitol is too big a building to be destroyed by one airplane. The most likely targe would have been the dome. If you take out the rooms it is still a functional building.
 

redlightning

Banned
If the White House is destroyed I think it's obvious that the President relocates to Camp David for the duration of the reconstruction. Congress prepares temporary operations inside of a large auditorium or hotel in the greater Washington D.C. area which is highly secured.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top