One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
256 Passengers on 9-11
Page <prev 2 of 24 next> last>>
Apr 27, 2018 00:51:39   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
woodguru wrote:
Look at the high resolution videos taken by news cameras that the CIA held until they got them back years later, you decide what those were. Also why did so many eye witnesses describe the planes as black?

My brother in law was in the air force as a loadmaster. It's safe to say he knows every plane in the AF inventory. I showed him one of the videos, (there are several) up to before the building came into view, he knew exactly what kind of refueling plane it was and said it had a remote control module on it that had been fitted to 40 of them at McGill AFB. I reached over and started the video again, as it went into the building he completely freaked out on me, yelled what are you trying to say, the military did that. I calmly told him I hadn't said a thing, let his own eyes tell him what he was seeing.

I always wondered what happened to the passengers, it actually was one of the big things that I couldn't get around.

You simply can't get people to look at the hundreds of contributing factual events, all the little things, they are too gummed up with a thousand conspiracy theories to where it all sounds too crazy.

I don't talk about it to people because it simply won't fly with most. The demolition of those two buildings was the most sophisticated demolition in history, buildings don't randomly fall onto themselves floor by floor, it would be a million or billion to one chance of that happening. Two is a trillion to one. I saw a meeting where some of the world's top demolition experts were brought in as consultants by the 9/11 commission, their reports is what states the odds of a building that tall simply falling on it's own footprint. They say it's impossible.

People, almost all people see the videos of those buildings coming down and the universal statement is that there is definitely something wrong with it. Your brain tells you that there is something unnatural about it, something weird about the fountain of molten metal spewing out just prior to the collapse. No fire of any kind does that to girders.
Look at the high resolution videos taken by news c... (show quote)
You really should stick to commenting on things you know something about.

Yeah, there is something unnatural about the collapses of the WTC towers. It isn't natural for heavy jets flying at high speeds to crash into tall buildings, breaking a whole bunch of support systems and setting everything on fire.

And yes, there is something weird about the fountain of molten metal spewing out just prior to collapse. In fact, there are a number of things that are weird about that.

First of all, the molten metal shower is spewing in fits and spurts out of the window between perimeter columns #256 and #257 on the 80th floor at the NE corner of the South Tower. There is no such thing recorded in any photo or video of any other location in the entire WTC complex.

Second, the molten shower coincides almost exactly with the path of the right engine through the building.

Looking at the north face of the South Tower, there is a noticeable bulge in perimeter columns 251 to 259 from the 79th to the 82nd floors. Moreover, another bulge appears in perimeter columns 236 to 238 from the 79th to the 81st floors. This bulge coincides with the path of the fuselage keel beam through the building.

(the keel beam is the heaviest and strongest longitudinal part of the aircraft, it is the foundation around which the aircraft is built, the main wing spar is supported by the keel beam).

The distance between these two bulges is a close match to the distance between the center of the fuselage and that of the right engine. In addition the angle between these two bulges are within a few degrees of matching the bank angle at which the jet entered the south face of the tower. The slight difference the degrees is most likely because the fuselage struck the heavy floors in the tower core.

The photos below are visuals of all just said.

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE COLLAPSE OF WTC TOWERS 1, 2 & 7 FROM AN EXPLOSIVES AND CONVENTIONAL DEMOLITION INDUSTRY VIEWPOINT

What does your brain tell you now?





This photo below is of the east face of the South Tower at the NE corner. The mass of wreckage inside floors 81, 82 and 83 is clearly seen.
This photo below is of the east face of the South ...

Nuff said.
Nuff said....

Reply
Apr 27, 2018 05:55:07   #
rebob14
 
Sicilianthing wrote:
There were no commercial plane crashes on September 11, 2001
by Editor

Mongoose
Thanks to Alert Reader.

EVERY supposed one of the 256 passengers on 9-11 paid for their tickets in cash on THE MORNING 0f 9-11! NOT ONE used a single credit card and there are no electronic receipts from anyone or any company anywhere in the world. Why? There were no commercial plane crashes on 9-11.

Except for the supposed Atta and all of his massive incriminating evidence on a supposed suicide flight….NOT ONE single supposed passenger parked a car at any airport on 9-11 NOT ONE. Why? There were no commercial plane crashes on 9-11.
There were no commercial plane crashes on Septembe... (show quote)


Since that day, I’ve wished I’d not been such a close witness of the NYC attacks. Reading delusional rants like yours makes me grateful that I was so close to the event.............as painful as the memory still is, at least I know what is truth!

Reply
Apr 27, 2018 08:20:09   #
JIM BETHEA
 
There have been hundreds of takeoffs and landings with remote control 757's for years ~ as a matter of fact, these landings are more accurate than humane pilot landings ~ If you watch the ground crews working on commerical airlines out on the tarmacs, you will see them hook-up their "roll around consoles" to these jets which takes over "full control" of these planes ~ Once connected the pilots have no control whatsoever over these aircraft ~

As for the building uprights, these were what the buildings were "suspended" on ~ sorta like free standing with attachments ~ it is absolutely impossible that these beams would all break apart with the same slanted cuts ~ if you were to buy the pancakel effect, then these uprights would have remained independant and would have remained mostly entact with some twists, etc ~ If was also a bit suspect that these [Thermite cut beams] were rapidly hauled off in a caravan of trucks that had GPS systems installed to monitor them so they could get evidence loaded on bargages and off to China for salvage sales??

Of all of the hundreds of unanswered questions, I find that the most "hard to swallow' is that a fairly fragile airframe of these jets can just blow right through 3 walls of 3 feet thick re-enforced w steel walls of the Pentagon?? Many small missiles will not even do this feat!!!

And for the noted scientist that were trying to explain away everything; I never heard their explanation of how all of these cars in the surrounding areas were catching on fire and explosing from the "INSIDE" out and and not ignited from the outside in by smoke and dust? EMP of their electrical systems....

Reply
 
 
Apr 27, 2018 08:25:06   #
Sicilianthing
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
From an avionics maintenance/avionics systems technician with extensive experience with both types of both aircraft types used on 9/11, and who has performed routine maintenance (767 overhaul for two and a half years) as well as non-routine maintenance, ie troubleshooting and repair.

9/11 Myths:Remote Takeover on 9/11: A Critical Analysis

Central to many "inside job" 9/11 conspiracy theories is the idea that hijackers weren't controlling the 4 ill-fated flights involved in the attacks. Instead there was some sort of remote system guiding the aircraft to their targets. How might this work? Lets look at the options:

1) Military tankers fitted as "drones" and disguised to look like AA and UA jets. The problem with this approach is the questions that remain unanswered. What happened to the 4 flights? The passengers and crew? The airplanes themselves? Neither the people nor the airplanes were ever heard from again, that much we do know. A further look at this theory really makes it seem implausible especially since the airlines involved, United and American, would have to be involved in the murders of their employees and customers. Think about this for a moment. What possible motive would these airlines have to do that? Especially since they've lost billions of dollars in the wake of the attacks. United,having lost close to 10 billion dollars itself (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/may2005/unit-m13.shtml), wallowed in Ch. 11 for 4 years. American has only recently returned to profitability after suffering staggering losses itself, barely escaping bankruptcy. These airlines had everything to lose and nothing to gain by partaking in a government sponsored terror operation. If you are thinking that only a few fat cats agreeing to this would be all that was necessary, think again. The pilots are dead - they were not involved. So, if the 4 flights landed safely somewhere else as part of the conspiracy, that’sa pretty neat trick considering the pilots would never agree to be murdered. How did they fly the planes to secret bases against the pilots will? Remote control? I'll go into that in lucid detail a bit later. But wait a minute, if they can control the airplane from the ground, why use military drones then? Why not use the actual flights themselves in the attack?

2) No planes at all. This theory is not worth going over in detail because of the myriad of dilemmas that need reconciliation. The biggest one being the fact that hundreds of people saw American Flight 11 crash into the North Tower with their own two eyes. Tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, saw United Flight 175 hit the South Tower with their own eyes. Enough said.

3) Remotely guiding Flights 11, 77, 93 and 175 into their respective targets. This solves all of the problems presented above and then some. But how would it be accomplished, theoretically? Is there an easy way ? Short answer. No, there is not an easy way to do this for two reasons:

-A very well trained flight crew
.
-A very complex and very redundant web of systems that work together to control every aspect of flight.

Moreover, the pilots have complete control over these systems from the flight deck, and they are constantly monitoredby the airplanes defenses such as the Master Caution/Warning System, Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System (EICAS) as well as the Aircraft Condition Monitoring System(ACMS). I'm getting ahead of myself, though. I'll go into these systems later on, in depth, and show how they can not only detect a sabotage, but detect problems in real-time as they happen.

Moreover, the pilots have complete control over these systems from the flight deck, and they are constantly monitoredby the airplanes defenses such as the Master Caution/Warning System, Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System (EICAS) as well as the Aircraft Condition Monitoring System (ACMS). I'm getting ahead of myself, though. I'll go into these systems later on, in depth, and show how they can not only detect a sabotage, but detect problems in real-time as they happen.


From here on, this analysis is technical with detailed descriptions of aircraft electronics systems in the 767/757 jets. Only those with electronics or avionics backgrounds will be able to understand.

Glossary of Terms/ Acronyms

757/767 Overview

Electrical System

Autoflight System (AFCS)

Flight Management System

EICAS

ACARS

Navigation System

Flight Controls

Hydraulic System

Remote Takeover Overview/Assumptions

Scenario 1: Autopilot - Used In Conjunction With ACARS And Other Systems Already In Place

Scenario 2: "Foreign" Takeover System

Scenario 3: Scenario 1 With Sabotage Designed To Disable Crew

Raytheon and JPALS

Conclusion
With modern technology, almost anything is possible; certainly "robo-jets" are possible. The purpose of this essay was to show that taking over an airliner via "remote control" is not as easy as The Lone Gunmen pilot episode made it look. There is no button a ground controller can push to magically take control of an airplane. But, even if there was, the pilots could thwart the takeover attempt by killing the power anyways.

If I was planning a conspiracy that would involve taking over airliners and crashing them into predetermined targets, I might choose a 777 or an Airbus A330/340. These are FBW aircraft, so you can't simply remove electrical power if you want control of the airplane. I might also use a DC-10 or a 747 Classic, no EICAS to worry about. To me, the 757/767 is simply the worst choice as a "robojet", unless you completely redesigned the plane.

I hope this essay has been helpful. The difficulty of turning an airliner into a cruise missile is probably common sense for most sensible folks; but I think it’s an important topic as it relates to 9/11, so I decided to tackle it from a technical standpoint. The information presented on the aircrafts systems is accurate, as it’s summarized from the "Description and Operation" sections of the 757/767 Maintenance Manuals. Thanks to Mike W for inviting me to write this for his wonderful site. Also, thanks to Bogglehead from theScrewLooseChange blog, who got me thinking about this topic in the first place. Feel free to contact me with any suggestions or questions at : apathoid@earthlink.net.
From an avionics maintenance/avionics systems tech... (show quote)


>>>>

This Topic states there are no paper trails to the passengers tickets on the planes, parking receipts that match anyone’s on any of the planes
Zero
Zilch
Nada
Zip

So again No Commercial
But could be stealth military psyops and equipment used or something way above your paygrade.

I”m still circling back to the passenger manifests and where are the cars, parking receipts, video of them in the airports boarding, walking, queing whatever else they do before they board the flights...

But what tangled webs our little minds weave.

Then there’s that new video of the Israeli special ops company posing as electrical engineers carrying all those boxes of special explosives they were attaching to all the beams for months... I forgot the name of that 3 or 4 letters on the boxes...

I’m out and so are you.

Reply
Apr 27, 2018 08:32:15   #
Sicilianthing
 
rebob14 wrote:
Since that day, I’ve wished I’d not been such a close witness of the NYC attacks. Reading delusional rants like yours makes me grateful that I was so close to the event.............as painful as the memory still is, at least I know what is truth!


>>>>

I can respect that it’s just that these planes were from who knows where and were not commercial flights like the author says, there are ZERO Papertrails to the passengers, cars, receipts, boarding, eating, shopping, parking, getting dropped off, sitting in the passenger boarding area... ZERO !

Reply
Apr 27, 2018 08:35:51   #
Sicilianthing
 
JIM BETHEA wrote:
There have been hundreds of takeoffs and landings with remote control 757's for years ~ as a matter of fact, these landings are more accurate than humane pilot landings ~ If you watch the ground crews working on commerical airlines out on the tarmacs, you will see them hook-up their "roll around consoles" to these jets which takes over "full control" of these planes ~ Once connected the pilots have no control whatsoever over these aircraft ~

As for the building uprights, these were what the buildings were "suspended" on ~ sorta like free standing with attachments ~ it is absolutely impossible that these beams would all break apart with the same slanted cuts ~ if you were to buy the pancakel effect, then these uprights would have remained independant and would have remained mostly entact with some twists, etc ~ If was also a bit suspect that these [Thermite cut beams] were rapidly hauled off in a caravan of trucks that had GPS systems installed to monitor them so they could get evidence loaded on bargages and off to China for salvage sales??

Of all of the hundreds of unanswered questions, I find that the most "hard to swallow' is that a fairly fragile airframe of these jets can just blow right through 3 walls of 3 feet thick re-enforced w steel walls of the Pentagon?? Many small missiles will not even do this feat!!!

And for the noted scientist that were trying to explain away everything; I never heard their explanation of how all of these cars in the surrounding areas were catching on fire and explosing from the "INSIDE" out and and not ignited from the outside in by smoke and dust? EMP of their electrical systems....
There have been hundreds of takeoffs and landings ... (show quote)


>>>>

Bullseye JACKPOT !
And I can add so much more to this... so now the families of the dead and the investigators have signed the petition to re open the investigation now that Trump is in office... this will allow the 28 pages to be released...

Bush Family, Banksters, Mossad and the other evil CryptoJews involved in the various cover ups of theft are all the usual suspects and it’s about to BLOW !

Reply
Apr 27, 2018 10:33:48   #
Esley
 
woodguru wrote:
Look at the high resolution videos taken by news cameras that the CIA held until they got them back years later, you decide what those were. Also why did so many eye witnesses describe the planes as black?

My brother in law was in the air force as a loadmaster. It's safe to say he knows every plane in the AF inventory. I showed him one of the videos, (there are several) up to before the building came into view, he knew exactly what kind of refueling plane it was and said it had a remote control module on it that had been fitted to 40 of them at McGill AFB. I reached over and started the video again, as it went into the building he completely freaked out on me, yelled what are you trying to say, the military did that. I calmly told him I hadn't said a thing, let his own eyes tell him what he was seeing.

I always wondered what happened to the passengers, it actually was one of the big things that I couldn't get around.

You simply can't get people to look at the hundreds of contributing factual events, all the little things, they are too gummed up with a thousand conspiracy theories to where it all sounds too crazy.

I don't talk about it to people because it simply won't fly with most. The demolition of those two buildings was the most sophisticated demolition in history, buildings don't randomly fall onto themselves floor by floor, it would be a million or billion to one chance of that happening. Two is a trillion to one. I saw a meeting where some of the world's top demolition experts were brought in as consultants by the 9/11 commission, their reports is what states the odds of a building that tall simply falling on it's own footprint. They say it's impossible.

People, almost all people see the videos of those buildings coming down and the universal statement is that there is definitely something wrong with it. Your brain tells you that there is something unnatural about it, something weird about the fountain of molten metal spewing out just prior to the collapse. No fire of any kind does that to girders.
Look at the high resolution videos taken by news c... (show quote)

I have been saying this all along. Fire in the upper floors would not make the building fall on its footprint. The fuel would flow down the side of the building and if it were hot enough to melt steel (which I doubt) the building would fall towards the side the plane was on. My thoughts.

Reply
 
 
Apr 27, 2018 10:42:23   #
badbob85037
 
Sicilianthing wrote:
There were no commercial plane crashes on September 11, 2001
by Editor

Mongoose
Thanks to Alert Reader.

EVERY supposed one of the 256 passengers on 9-11 paid for their tickets in cash on THE MORNING 0f 9-11! NOT ONE used a single credit card and there are no electronic receipts from anyone or any company anywhere in the world. Why? There were no commercial plane crashes on 9-11.

Except for the supposed Atta and all of his massive incriminating evidence on a supposed suicide flight….NOT ONE single supposed passenger parked a car at any airport on 9-11 NOT ONE. Why? There were no commercial plane crashes on 9-11.
There were no commercial plane crashes on Septembe... (show quote)



Oh sure there were. The jet fuel that burns with a continuing fuel at 500 degrees melts steel at 2,500 degrees and flows out the sides of the building. It also caused building 1 top 10 floors explode throwing out steel beams 100 feet, The fuel then kept the steel melted for two months as they destroyed all remaining evidence At the pentagon a 100,000 pound 737 went through an 8 foot hole in the wall and vanished Another fell into a hole and also vanished In building 3 there was an armory all that was left of the weapons were encased in concrete that melts at 4,000 degrees As bush said you are either with us or against us SO IT'S DO YOU BELIEVE THE FACTS OF SCIENCE AND NATURE OR THE PRESIDENT WHO WE KNOW WOULD NEVER LIE.

Reply
Apr 27, 2018 10:44:39   #
lindajoy Loc: right here with you....
 
Sicilianthing wrote:
>>>>

What elements do you believe in Guru ?


Follow the money involved here, who got what and how much they got in insurance proceeds..Staggering amounts...Then look at those players with Middle East conflcts etc..
There is a lot more to this story than we will ever know or accept as truth..

Lives were lost, people jumping outbof windows, bodies pulled from the rubble etc..

Can you or woods post pictures of these black planes??

Reply
Apr 27, 2018 11:18:33   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
Esley wrote:
I have been saying this all along. Fire in the upper floors would not make the building fall on its footprint. The fuel would flow down the side of the building and if it were hot enough to melt steel (which I doubt) the building would fall towards the side the plane was on. My thoughts.
Think again.

Reply
Apr 27, 2018 13:30:33   #
Sicilianthing
 
badbob85037 wrote:
Oh sure there were. The jet fuel that burns with a continuing fuel at 500 degrees melts steel at 2,500 degrees and flows out the sides of the building. It also caused building 1 top 10 floors explode throwing out steel beams 100 feet, The fuel then kept the steel melted for two months as they destroyed all remaining evidence At the pentagon a 100,000 pound 737 went through an 8 foot hole in the wall and vanished Another fell into a hole and also vanished In building 3 there was an armory all that was left of the weapons were encased in concrete that melts at 4,000 degrees As bush said you are either with us or against us SO IT'S DO YOU BELIEVE THE FACTS OF SCIENCE AND NATURE OR THE PRESIDENT WHO WE KNOW WOULD NEVER LIE.
Oh sure there were. The jet fuel that burns with a... (show quote)


>>>>

Prettymuch and how strange is it that the vaults were completely empty beneath both banks... not a single coin or bill.

Reply
 
 
Apr 27, 2018 13:31:52   #
Sicilianthing
 
lindajoy wrote:
Follow the money involved here, who got what and how much they got in insurance proceeds..Staggering amounts...Then look at those players with Middle East conflcts etc..
There is a lot more to this story than we will ever know or accept as truth..

Lives were lost, people jumping outbof windows, bodies pulled from the rubble etc..

Can you or woods post pictures of these black planes??


>>>>

I’ve never seen the black planes yet but now I’m going to start searching... worse is all those including Bush and family think all of you and us are Goyem for the slaughter...

I just want Trump to make his move.

Reply
Apr 27, 2018 14:10:40   #
Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON
 
Sicilianthing wrote:
>>>>

This Topic states there are no paper trails to the passengers tickets on the planes, parking receipts that match anyone’s on any of the planes
Zero
Zilch
Nada
Zip

So again No Commercial
But could be stealth military psyops and equipment used or something way above your paygrade.

I”m still circling back to the passenger manifests and where are the cars, parking receipts, video of them in the airports boarding, walking, queing whatever else they do before they board the flights...

But what tangled webs our little minds weave.

Then there’s that new video of the Israeli special ops company posing as electrical engineers carrying all those boxes of special explosives they were attaching to all the beams for months... I forgot the name of that 3 or 4 letters on the boxes...

I’m out and so are you.
>>>> br br This Topic states there ar... (show quote)
You're out, for sure, way out, like out beyond the Twilight Zone.

There was a time, early on, when the 9/11 conspiracies began to emerge from the primordial soup that they were merely an aggravating joke, aggravating because none of them produced a punch line. The two most notorious conspiracy nuts in the world, Alex Jones and Michael Ruppert, started the ball rolling. They are, and always have been, as reliable as a politician's promise.

Now, 17 years later, the 9/11 conspiracies, all 200 of them, are drowning in their own bullshit. The attempts by one group of conspiracy nuts conflicts with another, one contradicts another. There are at least a dozen different scenarios about just the aircraft alone--no planes, military tankers loaded with fuel, military jets loaded with explosives, big jets firing missiles, guided missiles, remote controlled military planes, remote controlled commercial jets, commercial jets with explosives embedded in the wings, cruise missiles, high energy pulse weapons, projected computer special effects and holograms.

And, the conspiracy theories attempting to explain the jet impacts, ensuing fires, and the collapse of the towers are even worse. Just the attempts to account for a controlled demolition scenario are so convoluted and dizzying that no rational person could possibly believe them.

Seems the demolition theories all revolve around the fallacious idea that burning jet fuel cannot melt steel. Well, duh, no kidding. Jet A burns in open air at 1400 degrees F, at 1100 degrees F, steel loses 50% of its strength. But jet fuel was not the only thing that burned, hundreds of tons of office contents provided an enormous fuel load, and temperatures within the towers reached 1800F to 2000F. Considering that 21 core support columns in the North Tower and 14 core support columns in the South Tower were severed or severely damaged in the impacts, even someone with a HS level physics background could understand the scientific principles that explain why the towers collapsed.

It is surely no surprise that the anti-Semites would throw their own brand of conspiracies into the mix. One group of Jew hating lunatics even put forth the idea that the little shower of molten metal spewing from a window in the NE corner of the South Tower was sparks flying from the use of an acetylene cutting torch wielded by a Jew.

Back to the passenger paper trails. The moment the doors were closed and the jets began to roll, flight bookings, tickets, boarding passes, and parking lot receipts became irrelevant. Even so, the travel agencies that booked the flights all have records of flight bookings, including payment methods, the airlines involved also have archives containing passenger manifests, seat assignments, time stamped boarding records, and other data confirming who boarded the planes. USAirways published photo copies of the tickets of the two terrorist hijackers, Mohammed Atta and Abdulaziz al-Omari, who boarded the commuter flight from Portland, Maine to Boston, and the routing information on those tickets clearly show that both hijackers were booked on Flight 11 to LA. Moreover, the Comfort Inn in Portland, ME, revealed the lodging invoices--arrival time, room numbers, payment methods, and checkout times for these two terrorists.

What actually happened on 9/11 and what the 9/11conspiracy theorists wish had happened are obviously two very different things.



Reply
Apr 27, 2018 14:42:06   #
JoyV
 
woodguru wrote:
Look at the high resolution videos taken by news cameras that the CIA held until they got them back years later, you decide what those were. Also why did so many eye witnesses describe the planes as black?

My brother in law was in the air force as a loadmaster. It's safe to say he knows every plane in the AF inventory. I showed him one of the videos, (there are several) up to before the building came into view, he knew exactly what kind of refueling plane it was and said it had a remote control module on it that had been fitted to 40 of them at McGill AFB. I reached over and started the video again, as it went into the building he completely freaked out on me, yelled what are you trying to say, the military did that. I calmly told him I hadn't said a thing, let his own eyes tell him what he was seeing.

I always wondered what happened to the passengers, it actually was one of the big things that I couldn't get around.

You simply can't get people to look at the hundreds of contributing factual events, all the little things, they are too gummed up with a thousand conspiracy theories to where it all sounds too crazy.

I don't talk about it to people because it simply won't fly with most. The demolition of those two buildings was the most sophisticated demolition in history, buildings don't randomly fall onto themselves floor by floor, it would be a million or billion to one chance of that happening. Two is a trillion to one. I saw a meeting where some of the world's top demolition experts were brought in as consultants by the 9/11 commission, their reports is what states the odds of a building that tall simply falling on it's own footprint. They say it's impossible.

People, almost all people see the videos of those buildings coming down and the universal statement is that there is definitely something wrong with it. Your brain tells you that there is something unnatural about it, something weird about the fountain of molten metal spewing out just prior to the collapse. No fire of any kind does that to girders.
Look at the high resolution videos taken by news c... (show quote)


The property I am a caretaker of is of an architect who specializes in casting facades. This not only includes casting pieces the size of the whole sides of mansions (his buildings include Cher's mansion and others which have been showcased on the Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous); it includes internal structures such as free standing spiral staircases and unusually sculpted building designs. He has some expertise with metals in buildings. In a discussion with a friend who has bought into this conspiracy theory, he told us any fire which is confined can reach extreme temperatures and melt not only steel but even rock. He stated specific temperatures which I don't remember. This is the principle behind the working of kilns by the way. I never saw kilns several sizes larger than railway cars before meeting him.

In any case, your post is BS!

Now you want to tell the families of the passengers who heroically defied the hijackers that the calls from their loved ones were fake?

Reply
Apr 27, 2018 15:09:51   #
JoyV
 
Blade_Runner wrote:
From an avionics maintenance/avionics systems technician with extensive experience with both types of both aircraft types used on 9/11, and who has performed routine maintenance (767 overhaul for two and a half years) as well as non-routine maintenance, ie troubleshooting and repair.

9/11 Myths:Remote Takeover on 9/11: A Critical Analysis

Central to many "inside job" 9/11 conspiracy theories is the idea that hijackers weren't controlling the 4 ill-fated flights involved in the attacks. Instead there was some sort of remote system guiding the aircraft to their targets. How might this work? Lets look at the options:

1) Military tankers fitted as "drones" and disguised to look like AA and UA jets. The problem with this approach is the questions that remain unanswered. What happened to the 4 flights? The passengers and crew? The airplanes themselves? Neither the people nor the airplanes were ever heard from again, that much we do know. A further look at this theory really makes it seem implausible especially since the airlines involved, United and American, would have to be involved in the murders of their employees and customers. Think about this for a moment. What possible motive would these airlines have to do that? Especially since they've lost billions of dollars in the wake of the attacks. United,having lost close to 10 billion dollars itself (http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/may2005/unit-m13.shtml), wallowed in Ch. 11 for 4 years. American has only recently returned to profitability after suffering staggering losses itself, barely escaping bankruptcy. These airlines had everything to lose and nothing to gain by partaking in a government sponsored terror operation. If you are thinking that only a few fat cats agreeing to this would be all that was necessary, think again. The pilots are dead - they were not involved. So, if the 4 flights landed safely somewhere else as part of the conspiracy, that’sa pretty neat trick considering the pilots would never agree to be murdered. How did they fly the planes to secret bases against the pilots will? Remote control? I'll go into that in lucid detail a bit later. But wait a minute, if they can control the airplane from the ground, why use military drones then? Why not use the actual flights themselves in the attack?

2) No planes at all. This theory is not worth going over in detail because of the myriad of dilemmas that need reconciliation. The biggest one being the fact that hundreds of people saw American Flight 11 crash into the North Tower with their own two eyes. Tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, saw United Flight 175 hit the South Tower with their own eyes. Enough said.

3) Remotely guiding Flights 11, 77, 93 and 175 into their respective targets. This solves all of the problems presented above and then some. But how would it be accomplished, theoretically? Is there an easy way ? Short answer. No, there is not an easy way to do this for two reasons:

-A very well trained flight crew
.
-A very complex and very redundant web of systems that work together to control every aspect of flight.

Moreover, the pilots have complete control over these systems from the flight deck, and they are constantly monitoredby the airplanes defenses such as the Master Caution/Warning System, Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System (EICAS) as well as the Aircraft Condition Monitoring System(ACMS). I'm getting ahead of myself, though. I'll go into these systems later on, in depth, and show how they can not only detect a sabotage, but detect problems in real-time as they happen.

Moreover, the pilots have complete control over these systems from the flight deck, and they are constantly monitoredby the airplanes defenses such as the Master Caution/Warning System, Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System (EICAS) as well as the Aircraft Condition Monitoring System (ACMS). I'm getting ahead of myself, though. I'll go into these systems later on, in depth, and show how they can not only detect a sabotage, but detect problems in real-time as they happen.


From here on, this analysis is technical with detailed descriptions of aircraft electronics systems in the 767/757 jets. Only those with electronics or avionics backgrounds will be able to understand.

Glossary of Terms/ Acronyms

757/767 Overview

Electrical System

Autoflight System (AFCS)

Flight Management System

EICAS

ACARS

Navigation System

Flight Controls

Hydraulic System

Remote Takeover Overview/Assumptions

Scenario 1: Autopilot - Used In Conjunction With ACARS And Other Systems Already In Place

Scenario 2: "Foreign" Takeover System

Scenario 3: Scenario 1 With Sabotage Designed To Disable Crew

Raytheon and JPALS

Conclusion
With modern technology, almost anything is possible; certainly "robo-jets" are possible. The purpose of this essay was to show that taking over an airliner via "remote control" is not as easy as The Lone Gunmen pilot episode made it look. There is no button a ground controller can push to magically take control of an airplane. But, even if there was, the pilots could thwart the takeover attempt by killing the power anyways.

If I was planning a conspiracy that would involve taking over airliners and crashing them into predetermined targets, I might choose a 777 or an Airbus A330/340. These are FBW aircraft, so you can't simply remove electrical power if you want control of the airplane. I might also use a DC-10 or a 747 Classic, no EICAS to worry about. To me, the 757/767 is simply the worst choice as a "robojet", unless you completely redesigned the plane.

I hope this essay has been helpful. The difficulty of turning an airliner into a cruise missile is probably common sense for most sensible folks; but I think it’s an important topic as it relates to 9/11, so I decided to tackle it from a technical standpoint. The information presented on the aircrafts systems is accurate, as it’s summarized from the "Description and Operation" sections of the 757/767 Maintenance Manuals. Thanks to Mike W for inviting me to write this for his wonderful site. Also, thanks to Bogglehead from theScrewLooseChange blog, who got me thinking about this topic in the first place. Feel free to contact me with any suggestions or questions at : apathoid@earthlink.net.
From an avionics maintenance/avionics systems tech... (show quote)


Thanks for the info. Can I use it to send to a friend who has swallowed this conspiracy theory?

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 24 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.