Reply to this topicStart new topic
David Griscom Phd's Analysis Of 9/11 Flight Path Anomalies

post Dec 9 2010, 05:25 PM
Post #1

Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 11
Joined: 9-December 10
Member No.: 5,499

Did you ever notice anything suspicious about Flight 11 and Flight 175?

The paths and plane sites are right in plain sight.
Millions have seen this animated graphic on USA Today.
Click on "See All Flights", then "Go"

Why did Flight 11 from Boston turn Northwest instead of Southwest towards NYC?
Why did Flight 11 "just happen" to cross paths "almost colliding" with Flight 175?
Could terrorists have executed such perfect timing? Coincidence?
Why would terrorists waste 1/2 hour on a detour, and risk being shot down?
Why would they fly in the directon of Griffiss, Stewart, and McGuire Air Bases?

Dr. Griscom explains in his New Hypothesis paper, linked from his new web site

He received his PhD in Physics from Brown University, worked for 33 years as a scientist at the Naval Research Laboratory, and has published 190 scientific research studies to date. He was also selected by NASA to study lunar rock samples.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 11 2010, 08:14 AM
Post #2

Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 1,748
Joined: 13-December 06
From: maryland
Member No.: 315

QUOTE (cicorp @ Dec 7 2010, 08:25 PM) *

thanks for the link!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 11 2010, 04:08 PM
Post #3

Group: Core Member
Posts: 170
Joined: 16-June 10
From: Western Lake Erie, Ohio, Michigan, Canada
Member No.: 5,099

I looked at the Griscom info. I've always considered an aircraft switching scenerio; ala "Operation Northwoods" to be possible.

But, I won't be convinced of ANY AIRCRAFT ID info about 911, until I see airplane parts with serial numbers, and their corresponding maintenance documents from aircraft allegedly destroyed on 911.

After 9 years, am I supposed to believe NO Serial Number IDs of the 4 "destroyed aircraft", have ever been confirmed from forensic crash site evidence? It also seems we cannot positively ID the aircraft that flew that day... or if they ever took off??? Is this correct?

I also understand FDR data supplied by the NTSB for the Pentagon aircraft, has MISSING "serial number ID data" from the raw CSV files!? This is just plain WRONG! Questions resulting from this OCT BS data, will encourage these "aircraft swapping theories". I'm already confused enough, maybe.

Yesterday, I made a post concering FAA Aircraft Registration and FAA Required Serial Number IDENTIFICATION of an Aircraft, including thousands of its component parts.

As I generated that post, I was reminded of the discrete, 8-diget "MODE S Transponder ID Number tied directly by the FAA, to the Aircraft Serial Number in the FAA Aircraft Registration database.

I returned to the "topic" about AA11 being offered for sale, which seems to lead to a "DEAD END". I don't know why. I'm unclear which aircraft ID "refers" to AA11. Was it SN 22330 or SN 22332?
Going back to this post:
elreb tells us:
FAA records clearly state that American Airlines Inc is the registered owner of 22330 (N330AA) A/W date: 03/13/1987 and registered to AA on 04/02/1987.

Now, compare to 22332 (N334AA) that First Union National Bank Trustee was the registered owner A/W date: 04/10/1987 and registered on 01/06/2000.

In July 2009 phaeton666 gives us an update:
Here is a short update regarding serial number 22330. It has been sold on or before 10/21/2008 to a company in Florida, most likely this one:
Magellan Group
ROBERT W. FESSLER Vice President Sales and Marketing, MAGELLAN GROUP is located at the address given below.

Deregistered Aircraft 1 of 1
Aircraft Description
Serial Number 22330 Type Registration Individual
Manufacturer Name BOEING Certificate Issue Date None
Model 767-223 Mode S Code 50712720Year Manufacturer 1987 Cancel Date 10/21/2008
Reason for Cancellation Cancelled Exported To

My question today is:
Has anyone been able to confirm that the 911 Aircraft ID Serial Numbers are "consistent" with the "Mode S" transponder ID numbers, which should be a part of the "RADES" radar tracking data files for all of these aircraft? Has someone tried to do this already? and, what was the result??

[The "Operation Northwoods", aircraft switching scenerio may be possible; after the point where the transponders were turned "off".]

Do we have access to any maintenance records from the 911 aircraft?... including the Manufacturer's build sheet, with serial number information of all installed parts??

Since it appears likely that "no" large aircraft hit the Pentagon, shouldn't ALL the "Searialized Part Numbers" from ALL the 911 aircraft be included in the databases of "stolen aircraft parts networks" on the www?... especially for expensive engine and Avionics components?

It's kind of "late" to be thinking about this now; But those (Pentagon and Shanksville, at least) aircraft, didn't just disappear into thin air or swampy ground, "without a trace".
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 15 2010, 11:19 PM
Post #4

Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331

Good work by Griscom, and an interesting hypothesis. I do appreciate his distinguishing between a hypothesis and a theory.

I think he places a bit too much faith in the radar data, but who knows, maybe it's accurate.

My bet is they never boarded the passengers. I did not read every sentence of his piece, but he seems to be unaware of the 2 different calls to Logan ground control by UA 175
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Dec 29 2010, 12:28 PM
Post #5

Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 45
Joined: 12-July 10
Member No.: 5,140

Still looking this over, but seems like nice work at first glance. However, one thing that caught my attention was on his analysis of the Chopper 5 footage, particularly in the segment entitled "No Plane in the Wide Shot", the case is made for a real 767 to have been visible far to the south before the zoom in occurred. I agree, except that conclusion assumes the plane did not drop from a higher altitude from a point much closer in range to the South Tower. A zoom-in might not have captured that type of approach. I've not studied these facets of the 9/11 story as closely as others, but I seem to remember there was also some conflicting video footage where, in some instances, the plane seemed to swoop in from a dive and then level off fairly quickly...and yet in others, the plane seemed to just glide in on a fairly level flight path for considerable time and distance.

I would love to see some technical analysis of the multiple angles of approach for the plane that hit the south tower. Perhaps it's in this piece and I just haven't gotten that far?

This post has been edited by FreshKills: Dec 29 2010, 12:30 PM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
post Jan 22 2014, 02:20 AM
Post #6

Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 194
Joined: 10-October 13
From: South West London, UK
Member No.: 7,552

QUOTE (cicorp @ Dec 9 2010, 09:25 PM) *
Dr. Griscom explains in his New Hypothesis paper, linked from his new web site

I believe this is the link:

The problem I have with Griscom's hypothesis, is that the Flight 11 plane (N334AA) arrived at
Logan airport, at approximately 0650 EST as Flight 198 from San Francisco.

Presumably, it contained a working AT&T Airfone system; which could have produced call logs from
that flight.

Surely, flight attendant Betty Ong's distress Airfone call, was transmitted through that same plane's phone
system, (I gather) continuously, from: 08:18:47 to 8:45:47 A.M..

Presumably it was relayed via all the relevant radio base stations, along the way to Lower

But if that aircraft had switched with a drone plane, then landed at Griffiss AFB (Rome, NY), long before the
08:46:40 A.M. crash, as Dr. Griscom suggests; then how does he explain the continuation of Ong's
report (approx. 200 miles), beyond that vicinity?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:


RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 20th January 2020 - 01:37 PM