Terrorist attack on 10th anniversary of 9/11.

[Fisplen]

So I remember on the 10th anniversary I had fears that something was going to happen on that day , I had thoughts that another plane would be hijacked and flew into the Empire State Building or something.

Anyway , lets use that scenario.

So at about 8:10 AM Boeing 737 American Airlines flight 779 takes off from Washington bound for Chicago , however sometime during the flight a hijacking occurs and the flight is turned towards New York , at about 8:57 AM it crashes into the Empire State Building.

What would happen?
Would the building survive?
If so would it have to be demolished?
And approximately how high would the causality list go on for?
And what would be the impact on Americans?

I think if it were any plans to demolish it I think it wouldn't have gone ahead due to the massive heritage the Empiree State Building has on Americans and the world.

Lets say it's Al-Qaeda again taking revenge on the killing of Bin Laden a few months before.

I think the war in Afganistan plans to withdraw would be postponed to something like 2017 or a little later.

Anyway what do You think would happen?

EDIT : Due to the unlikely ness of this happening on the 10th anniversary , lets say it happend TODAY.

 

[Trotsky]

So you're suggesting that someone affiliated with the decimated Al-Qaeda manages to plan, outfit and execute a repeat of 9/11 in response to the death of bin Laden 4 months prior? Is that what you're suggesting?

 

[Fisplen]

Basically put , yes.

 

[Trotsky]

Basically put , yes.

You're suggesting that someone affiliated with the decimated Al-Qaeda manages to plan, outfit and execute a repeat of 9/11 in response to the death of bin Laden 4 months prior?

 

[Fisplen]

Well it was only an idea that popped into my head.

I guess looking back now it wasn't that plausible , ok then lets say this has been in the planning for some time , ( about 5 years ) and the death of Bin Laden has only fuelled the anger in the Organisation , lets say they are successful in hitting the Empire State Building.
( feeling slightly embarrassed )

 

[Trotsky]

During those 5 years leading up to 2011, Al-Qaeda was being systematically fucked into oblivion by U.S. military and intelligence operations. I really don't think the surviving leadership had the resources to implement a sequel to 9/11 that also called for doing the exact same thing that they did in 2001.

 

[Fisplen]

Woah , I just read this article and it turns out intelligence says that before Bin Laden was killed they WERE planning an attack on the 10th anniversary , however more than likely it would have been foiled.

 

[Dustin]

Woah , I just read this article and it turns out intelligence says that before Bin Laden was killed they WERE planning an attack on the 10th anniversary , however more than likely it would have been foiled.

The attack you are speaking of was to be carried out against trains moving in excess of 200 mph, something that the us regrettably lacks.

I've read that Al Qaeda has been getting stronger and using Syria as a base. Would it be possible for then to try and orchestrate another large attack within the next couple years?

 

[OptimumPx]

Ignoring the logistics of planning and executing such a plan in only 4 months, a 9/11-stlye attack on the Empire State Building would be very different then what happened with the Twin Towers.

First of all the ESB was built to the (much) older 1916 building code which required one stairwell for each 2,500 square feet of floor area, and one of those staircases was required to be a "fire tower" reenforced with masonry and containing a 107-square-foot vestibule on each floor to vent smoke from it. Also all structural steel had to be protected by masonry or concrete cladding to protect against fire...no spray-on fireproofing here.

Don't forget that the ESB is much wider then the WTC towers were. On 9/11 in the North Tower all of the stair cases were destroyed and in the South Tower only one survived but few found it...it would be impossible for one plane to knock out all of the stairs in the ESB.

Simply put all skyscrapers built before the introduction of the 1968 building code were, by modern standards, ridiculously overbuilt. There's no way the ESB would fall, or need to be demolished.

But of course that all assumes that the plane would make it to the ESB in the first place. I think that in a post 9/11 world US plane passengers won't sit by and let the hijackers take control of the aircraft. While before 9/11 the worst they expected was to be held for ransom after 9/11 they would automatcally expect the worst and fight back à la Flight 93. Especially on the 10 anniversary.

 

[Shadow Hawk]

But of course that all assumes that the plane would make it to the ESB in the first place. I think that in a post 9/11 world US plane passengers won't sit by and let the hijackers take control of the aircraft. While before 9/11 the worst they expected was to be held for ransom after 9/11 they would automatcally expect the worst and fight back à la Flight 93. Especially on the 10 anniversary.

This is the biggest change... a paradigm shift occurred because of 9/11: before 9/11/2001, to survive a hijacking required you to keep your head down, obey the hijackers, don't call attention to yourself, and wait until the negotiators arranged your release. The new paradigm is take back control of the plane nownownownow before they fly it into a building and kill you all. Every semi-able bodied person will charge the hijackers; the hijackers would need machine guns to keep control of the plane more than ten minutes. And that would only buy them a few minutes.

So, no hijacking a plane and flying into a building. Leasing a plane might work... with enough money, you can lease a 747, overpower the crew and fly it into a building. But you can't do it with a plane full of passengers who'll resist to the death.

 

[fscott]

So I remember on the 10th anniversary I had fears that something was going to happen on that day , I had thoughts that another plane would be hijacked and flew into the Empire State Building or something.

Anyway , lets use that scenario.

So at about 8:10 AM Boeing 737 American Airlines flight 779 takes off from Washington bound for Chicago , however sometime during the flight a hijacking occurs and the flight is turned towards New York , at about 8:57 AM it crashes into the Empire State Building.

What would happen?
Would the building survive?
If so would it have to be demolished?
And approximately how high would the causality list go on for?
And what would be the impact on Americans?

I think if it were any plans to demolish it I think it wouldn't have gone ahead due to the massive heritage the Empiree State Building has on Americans and the world.

Lets say it's Al-Qaeda again taking revenge on the killing of Bin Laden a few months before.

I think the war in Afganistan plans to withdraw would be postponed to something like 2017 or a little later.

Anyway what do You think would happen?

Plus the 737 is a smaller plane with less fuel. Also on Saturday, July 28, 1945, a B-25 Mitchell bomber hit the building and did little damage.

 

[Shadow Hawk]

Plus the 737 is a smaller plane with less fuel. Also on Saturday, July 28, 1945, a B-25 Mitchell bomber hit the building and did little damage.

A B-25 is smaller than a 737, and runs off hi-test gasoline vice jet fuel... but yes, the Empire State Building was built with a lot of excess strength and could take a impact that the WTC couldn't.

 

[Orville_third]

Al-Quaida is not a monolithic organization. Many groups claiming to be "Al-Quaida in ______" are more like franchises or tribute groups. They don't follow the direct lead of Al-Zawahiri. I see no problem with one of those groups planning a 9/11 style attack. That said, the problem with the hijackings have mostly already been stated. (Plus the reinforced cockpit doors, and likelihood of NORAD/NG jets flying to intercept.

Now if they tried another style of attack...

 

[LostCosmonaut]

As others have mentioned, hijacking a passenger aircraft post-9/11 is difficult at best. I believe hijacking a cargo aircraft is much more plausible, as they usually have only a few crew on board. As I recall, someone tried to hijack a FedEx plane a while back.

 

[Beedok]

I think it would be cheaper and easier just to get a whole bunch of shootings going or something. A bunch of people with AKs and RPGs in New York and Washington or something wouldn't be that difficult would it? I mean they wouldn't even need to smuggle the AKs would they?

 

[Fisplen]

Ok , but if this DID happen , what would be the reaction of the US public?
How much longer would the US stay in Afganistan?
And lets say on the same day incase this failed , BOMBS are planted on the observatory of the ESB on the 86th floor , and a few of them go off.

And to make it even worse bombs are planted on various stadiums and music areans.

Atleast 2 musical artist that were popular in 2011 die from this.

 

[Peelitebkearns]

This is almost ASB for many reasons. Setting aside Al-Qaeda's ability to plan such an attack in 2011 (and it's fesability), the 10th anniversary is just too obvious a time to carry out an attack, so(from their perspective, not mine), why bother then when you can take everyone by surprise on another day?

Also, there's the fact that September 11th 2011 was a Sunday, so what's the point in flying a plain into the ESB when there are fewer people in the building than there otherwise would be? Sadly, I think any 9/11 scail attack (at least on the Empire State Building) would be carried out on a working day, to maximise the casualties/impact.

That's not to say that Al-Qaeda wouldn't try to carry out a smaller attack on the anniversary,, though even then, intelligence would be all over plots on that day, so it'd be very, very risky.

 

[Flocculencio]

This is the biggest change... a paradigm shift occurred because of 9/11: before 9/11/2001, to survive a hijacking required you to keep your head down, obey the hijackers, don't call attention to yourself, and wait until the negotiators arranged your release. The new paradigm is take back control of the plane nownownownow before they fly it into a building and kill you all. Every semi-able bodied person will charge the hijackers; the hijackers would need machine guns to keep control of the plane more than ten minutes. And that would only buy them a few minutes.

So, no hijacking a plane and flying into a building. Leasing a plane might work... with enough money, you can lease a 747, overpower the crew and fly it into a building. But you can't do it with a plane full of passengers who'll resist to the death.

Very true. Post 9/11 passengers really have nothing to lose.

 

[Fisplen]

Ok then , instead lets say this took place TODAY , right now right here.
Still same plane and flight number and still happens at same time in the morning.

 

[mattep74]

Wasnt there fighters in the air above NYC during the 10th anniversary?