# Why no Helicopters at WTC on 9/11? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 8, 2003, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915 "2003-08-08T21:28:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2003, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/21 "2003-08-09T14:24:01Z")
I’m not a pilot, but I work in the aerospace industry, but I’ll make two observations: Firstly, as **Broomstick** notes, firefighting aircraft crash every year. [Here’s](http://www.qnet.com/~carcomm/wreck26.htm) a cite. There was a recent [video](http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/06/18/national/main512650.shtml) of a Hercules crashing. Secondly, passenger-carrying helicopters are **big**. Look at the [Chinook](http://www.helis.com/60s/h_h47.php), the Wessex, or the [Halo](http://www.helis.com/70s/h_mi26.php). Even had one been near enough and made it through the maelstrom, would it have had room to land? Are the blades strong enough to have sliced through the radio mast stays without damage? ---
**Author:** ![bibliophage](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bibliophage/32/7615_2.png) [@bibliophage](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bibliophage)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2003, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/22 "2003-08-09T15:49:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by threemae \* > **I vaguely recall an article in the Wall Street Journal in the last year or so that dealt with precisely this issue.** I remember it too, and I found it. “No Escape: Could Helicopters Have Saved People From Trade Center? — Police Choppers Hovered, But Roof Was Locked; Rescuers Feuded in Past — A Daring Mission in 1993” by Scot J. Paltrow and Queena Sook Kim, Oct 23, 2001, p. A1. **Walloon** ’s link provides almost all the same information. ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2003, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/23 "2003-08-09T18:32:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by LonesomePolecat \* > \*\* And despite Bosda’s explanation (no disrespect meant to Bosda), I think there’d still be pilots with the gonads to take the risk. After all, we saw quite a number of other examples of heartbreaking and inspiring courage that day. Have choppers successfully been used for other fire rescues? \*\* Gonads ain’t the point. _Control_ is the issue. If you don’t have good control, you ain’t gonna be able to rescue anybody. More likely, you’d crash into the top of the building, killing the people you were trying to help. And oh yeah, yourself too. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2003, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/24 "2003-08-09T21:02:17Z")
To review why helicopters were not used to rescue people from the World Trade Center towers: 1. The steel doors to the roofs were locked. 2. The control centers that could open the locks were on lower floors and were disconnected by the crashes. 3. If people could have gotten onto the roof of the South Tower, they would have choked to death on the [thick black smoke](http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38209000/jpg/_38209633_towers_ap.jpg) that completely shrouded the roof and much of the airspace above it. 4. If people could have gotten onto the roof of the North Tower, any helicopter trying to land on the roof risked crashing into the forest of antennae and cables covering the roof. 5. About half of the roof of the North Tower was covered by black smoke anyway. 6. Hot air updrafts from the fires created a highly risky level of turbulence. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2003, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/25 "2003-08-09T21:08:41Z")
[Another view](http://www.soyboricua.com/wtc/wtc_smoke_10.jpg) of the smoke that completely obscured the roof of the South Tower and much of the roof of the North Tower. ---
**Author:** ![RotorHead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/85e7bf/32.png) [@RotorHead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RotorHead)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2003, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/26 "2003-08-09T23:31:32Z")
I’m a pilot myself. Airplanes and helicopters. I fly a Bell Jetranger. For those of you not familiar with that, it is a turbine-powered helicopter, such as is used for tv news reporting, and some police operations. Most of the points made so far against the possibility of rescue by helicopter are absolutely correct. Thermal updrafts: these would have been so strong, it doesn’t matter how big your cojones are, you will die if you try to go through that. If the turbulence doesn’t tear the blades off the helicopter first, the ash will cause flame-out. At that temperature, the density of the air would be so low that flying through it at all may well be impossible. There is a noticeable difference in performance of an aircraft with even a 30 or 40 degree temperature change. Make it as hot as the tower area was, and forget it. A pilot would be near suicidal to enter a level 5 thunderstorm. Such storms routinely cancel or delay flights. The conditions at the towers were far worse. The comparison with firefighting airplanes is not sufficient. An airplane handles induced external stress differently than does a helicopter. In a rotorcraft, low or negative g-forces are proscribed in entirety, because it can result in mast bumping, which may well lead to physical seperation of the rotor. As for weight and balance, most helicopters don’t have much room to spare. Get too heavy, and the helicopter won’t be able to hover. Cant do a rolling takeoff from a pinnacle with people hanging on the skids. hanging on the skids itself is problematic, because it would quickly exceed the lateral balance limits. Then the pilot would be incapable of maneuvering, and it could easily cause a crash. The majority of helicopters that have any passenger capacity are military, and chances are, there were not a whole lot of them in the immediate vicinity of NYC to begin with. It has been a long time since I visited the towers personally, but perhaps someone else could chime in: was there even space enough to land at all? I recall seeing a bunch of equipment and such up there. Even a jetranger is 30 feet wide. Even if all other factors were put aside, there is absolutely no way you could have rescued hundreds of people 3 at a time. ---
**Author:** ![Jodocus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f04885/32.png) [@Jodocus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodocus)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/27 "2003-08-10T00:11:36Z")
I saw an interview with some of the helicopter pilots that were there on 9/11. They were asked the same question. They said there was not enough room to land on top of the towers since there were transmission towers and cables everywhere. They even showed stock footage and you could easily see there was not enough room to land a helicopter up there. ---
**Author:** ![Ale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@Ale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ale)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/28 "2003-08-10T03:20:45Z")
> [@](#): > > Are the blades strong enough to have sliced through the radio mast stays without damage? Nope, not at all; the cables would have sliced the blades like butter. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/29 "2003-08-10T05:56:29Z")
[A first-hand account](http://www.nycop.com/Stories/Dec_00/World_Trade_Center_Bombing/body_world_trade_center_bombing.html) from a pilot of the helicopter flights that safely removed 135 people atop the WTC after the 1993 parking garage bombing. The key sentences: > [@](#): > > Every flight done for the duration of the WTC disaster was done 1) only if needed, 2) at the total discretion of the PIC (pilot in command), 3) with final approval of every flight being my difficult decision. Each flight was evaluated taking into consideration visibility, wind, light conditions and of course, need. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/30 "2003-08-10T06:03:40Z")
> [@](#): > > Before the first tower collapsed, no one in FDNY or anywhere else thought that the towers would collapse. Apparently, even Al Qaeda didn’t. If memory serves, on that tape of bin Laden and a sheik watching the news on September 11th, OBL makes a comment to the effect that ‘nobody else thought the towers would fall except me,’ but that he did because of his greater experience with building materials. > [@](#): > > no one expected the towers to collapse. They were designed to withstand the impact of an airliner, and they did. There was a lot going on before the fires brought them down, I can understand **Ale** dreading it would happen, but the buildings were reinforced very strongly. The problem was the intense heat from the fires. The hijacked planes were cross-country flights, so they had a lot of fuel and were burning at extremely high temperatures. ---
**Author:** ![aeropl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f05b48/32.png) [@aeropl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aeropl)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 7:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/31 "2003-08-10T07:13:58Z")
Even _if_ helicopters were able to land on the roof and rescue people, it would be a tough proposition. The average helicopter holds probably 4 to 6 people. Thousands and thousands of people needed to be rescued. The situation would be like that of titanic and the lifeboats, with everybody fighting to get on. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 7:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/32 "2003-08-10T07:48:09Z")
**aeropl** , if you’ll read one of my earliest posts above, about a thousand people were above the crash site (93-98 floors) in the North Tower, not “thousands and thousands”. 203 people on floors 106-110, 744 people on floors 101-105, and 192 people on floors 96-100 (although many of that last group were killed instantly at the crash site). The thick, choking smoke engulfing the South Tower excluded it from any consideration of a roof rescue. ---
**Author:** ![adnan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f19dbf/32.png) [@adnan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adnan)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/33 "2003-08-10T08:13:59Z")
could it be that they didnt want any forms of aircrafts in the area due to them not wanting anything else flying into the buildings, i dont think there was only 1 answer to why there were no air attempts for a rescue. i’m no pilot but i do agree with the pilots here, hidden air current changes can be lethal in thos esituation and probably have made it worse, imagine helicopters landing on the fire dept. With all the confusion at the time i dont think they wanted to take any risks of things getting worse. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 8:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/34 "2003-08-10T08:21:27Z")
**adnan** , as I said above, New York Police Department helicopters were circling the buildings during the fire and collapse. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 10:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/35 "2003-08-10T10:30:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by adnan \* > could it be that they didnt want any forms of aircrafts in the area due to them not wanting anything else flying into the buildings There were some aircraft up, providing news coverage and information. An ariel perspective can be valuable in an emergency and provide information not obtainable otherwise. But often a telephoto lens is better than getting close physically for reasons of safety. It’s pretty routine for aircraft to be warned off an accident/disaster area, so much so that the regs cover the procedures and warnings used. For the most part, pilots such as myself stay back from situations like that because 1. The whole burning-produces-air-currents thing mentioned at length in prior posts 2. You want to stay out of the way of life-flight choppers or any other airborne authorities or trained personnel who will be dealing with a situation 3. You want to stay out of the way of newscoptors 4. They’re probably going to slap a flight restriction over the area soon anyway, and you don’t want to be hauled in on a violation. > [@](#): > > i dont think they wanted to take any risks of things getting worse. Exactly. In a rescue situation the last thing you want is to wind up with even more people needing rescue. ---
**Author:** ![FrankDrebin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e480ec/32.png) [@FrankDrebin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FrankDrebin)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2012, 10:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/36 "2012-08-22T10:14:35Z")
> [@Quintas](#): > > Most of the people who died were trapped on the floors above the impact. I’m imagining people going to the roof and grabbing on to the landing struts of the copter,then the helicopter could fly down to the river and hover 10-20 feet over the water and the people jump and then head back up to get more people. Granted, it would take some guts to hold on to the landing struts 2000 feet above the street, but considering the alternative, I think I would’ve tried it. Any reason this would not be feasable? Or why not suspend a net between two choppers and let people jump on it through the windows? ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2012, 10:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/37 "2012-08-22T10:42:47Z")
> [@FrankDrebin](#): > > Or why not suspend a net between two choppers and let people jump on it through the windows? That only works in the movies. And Bruce Willis and Harrison Ford were busy that day. Please note that you are responding to a thread from 2003. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2012, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915/38 "2012-08-22T11:38:45Z")
Since this is a zombie which had been answered 9 years ago, I’ll close the thread before the suggestions get even more ridiculous. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-no-helicopters-at-wtc-on-9-11/193915.md?page=1)