# White House Defense Systems **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [April 18, 2016, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-defense-systems/752580 "2016-04-18T18:42:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Asuka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@Asuka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Asuka)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2016, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-defense-systems/752580/21 "2016-04-19T21:58:29Z")
> [@smithsb](#): > > Individual SA-2 and SA-7 shoulder launched missiles downed AC-130 gunships in the Vietnam war. A single Strela-2 brought a 130 down in Desert Storm. All crews were lost. > > The film was wild fantasy. Somehow White House Down was even stupider. They use an ICBM to shoot down an aircraft. And not by detonating the warhead, it physically crashes into an aircraft to destroy it. ---
**Author:** ![drachillix](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/48db29/32.png) [@drachillix](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drachillix)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2016, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-defense-systems/752580/22 "2016-04-20T00:05:14Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > It’s not clear from the movie where the AC-130 took off from. It apparently appeared very quickly. And yes, the tailing two fighters were directly on the side of it for some reason that seemed odd. And after they were shot down, it took over 4-5 minutes for other response aircraft to be on site. I found that unbelievable. > > After that, it took over 15 minutes for ground personnel to arrive. That seemed unbelievable too. > > While the president did get to the secure bunker, spoiler - they had a mole in the bunker too. > > It was a very entertaining movie 🙂 But the AC-130 and the hundred of ground personnel seemed far fetched. Well 4-5 min is not a long time unless those jets are sitting on the flightline with pilots in them and engines running. According to a couple online sources an f-16 should be ready to fly in 5 min from the pilot hitting the cockpit. f-22’s supposedly have a more “automated” startup procedure that runs quicker, but probably not much. 15 min for ground personnel, ambulances dont arrive much quicker and they are pretty much standing by waiting for a call any minute. ---
**Author:** ![Gray\_Ghost](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c0e974/32.png) [@Gray\_Ghost](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gray_Ghost)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2016, 2:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-defense-systems/752580/23 "2016-04-20T02:17:55Z")
> [@drachillix](#): > > Well 4-5 min is not a long time unless those jets are sitting on the flightline with pilots in them and engines running. According to a couple online sources an f-16 should be ready to fly in 5 min from the pilot hitting the cockpit. f-22’s supposedly have a more “automated” startup procedure that runs quicker, but probably not much… Then add the time it takes to add ordnance to the aircraft. Unless the aircraft is already sitting in the hanger with live ordnance attached, which involves its own set of problems. To answer the OP somewhat, I am guessing besides the answer that **smithsb** posted, there are a few toys we aren’t being told about to prevent airborne threats. Of course, [Frank Corder](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Eugene_Corder) may have slammed his Cessna 150 into the lawn of the White House without help from the Secret Service. Re: C-130s, AIUI they aren’t allowed to operate in daylight, for the MANPADS reason **smithsb** wrote. Probably different survivability if they aren’t currently in a pylon turn when they take the missile strike though. ---
**Author:** ![DorkVader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/73ab20/32.png) [@DorkVader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DorkVader)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2016, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-defense-systems/752580/24 "2016-04-20T04:03:58Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > A couple of Stinger missiles could certainly take down a C-130 but not reliably and quickly enough to neutralize the threat to the White House for one that is deviating suddenly from its flight plan let alone a larger airliner. C-130’s are extremely rugged aircraft by proven design and hitting them in the engines (which Stinger missiles are designed to do) would be ineffective to prevent any type of suicide mission because the last few miles to target would still likely be somewhat controllable. Stinger missiles are hand-held SAM’s and not very large. While they can certainly disable even large aircraft, they will generally not cause them to explode and drop from the sky. > > Despite the extremely restricted air space over the White House and the Capitol, there are allowed corridors for many different types of aircraft just minutes away so the effective difference is minimal. > > My definition of a “small” aircraft is one under 12,500 pounds. Oh I know what a stinger is, used to be “qualified” on the BFV Linebacker, posted without proper follow through on the thought.:smack: ---
**Author:** ![Si\_Amigo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/si_amigo/32/2877_2.png) [@Si\_Amigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Si_Amigo)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2016, 2:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-defense-systems/752580/25 "2016-04-20T14:05:05Z")
I recall hearing a report on 9/11 of a missile battery being spotted popping out of the White House lawn. Watched all day and never heard another word about. I know I didn’t imagine it because I searched for more information on this immediately afterward and sporadically over the years. Either it was a mis-report of something else happening or someone was cut off from talking about. I suspect the first one but the conspiracy theorist in me wants to believe the second scenario. 🙂 I do believe that now there is a missile defense system for the White House, so googling for information now is biased towards that. ---
**Author:** ![Channing\_Idaho\_Banks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/channing_idaho_banks/32/250_2.png) [@Channing\_Idaho\_Banks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Channing_Idaho_Banks)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2016, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-defense-systems/752580/26 "2016-04-20T15:15:20Z")
Where is Wesley Snipes when you need him? ---
**Author:** ![Tired\_and\_Cranky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a87d85/32.png) [@Tired\_and\_Cranky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tired_and_Cranky)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2016, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-defense-systems/752580/27 "2016-04-20T15:55:36Z")
> [@Si\_Amigo](#): > > I recall hearing a report on 9/11 of a missile battery being spotted popping out of the White House lawn. Watched all day and never heard another word about. I know I didn’t imagine it because I searched for more information on this immediately afterward and sporadically over the years. Either it was a mis-report of something else happening or someone was cut off from talking about. I suspect the first one but the conspiracy theorist in me wants to believe the second scenario. 🙂 Your memory may be faulty. Perhaps someone mentioned something like a missile battery protecting the White House, you filled in some extraneous untrue details, and then time did its work to solidify the misremembered report in your head. It’s also possible they were wrong. Real-time reporting is often very shoddy. At least one news station that I recall reported bombs at the Capitol building. Didn’t happen. ---
**Author:** ![Me\_Billy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e480ec/32.png) [@Me\_Billy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Me_Billy)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2016, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-defense-systems/752580/28 "2016-04-20T16:23:08Z")
The security at the White House (and other places) is mostly based on what has happened historically in the past. And that is “lone nut cases” trying to get in. One person. So you will find they are best equipped to handle that type of thing. Note that nut cases typically are not successful people dripping in money. So they would typically not posess a helicopter or C-130! Businesses handle security in the same manner. It is history which dictates various levels of security per insurance company dictates. Therefore you might find a “beer warehouse” to have very sophisticated top of the line security systems - much better than a bank. And that is because they have had more break-ins in the past [than banks]. ---
**Author:** ![Si\_Amigo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/si_amigo/32/2877_2.png) [@Si\_Amigo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Si_Amigo)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2016, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-defense-systems/752580/29 "2016-04-20T17:04:51Z")
> [@Tired\_and\_Cranky](#): > > Your memory may be faulty. Perhaps someone mentioned something like a missile battery protecting the White House, you filled in some extraneous untrue details, and then time did its work to solidify the misremembered report in your head. > > It’s also possible they were wrong. Real-time reporting is often very shoddy. At least one news station that I recall reported bombs at the Capitol building. Didn’t happen. I don’t think it’s a false memory because I clearly remember thinking when I heard it “that’s odd and interesting” and kept waiting for a follow up news report that day as they tracked the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania. But then again that day was choke full of news and misreported stories. So much real news that following up speculative sightings didn’t merit a followup so I wrote it off as such. You would think that the lawn would have shown some indication of an opening into the ground anyway. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/white-house-defense-systems/752580.md?page=1)