Acars Confirmed - 9/11 Aircraft Airborne Long After Crash, PilotsFor911Truth.org Rating Options

[rob balsamo]

Be sure to share this important information via the share and like links above.

ACARS CONFIRMED - 9/11 AIRCRAFT AIRBORNE LONG AFTER CRASH
UNITED 175 IN THE VICINITY OF HARRISBURG AND PITTSBURGH, PA

(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) is a device used to send messages to and from an aircraft. Very similar to text messages and email we use today, Air Traffic Control, the airline itself, and other airplanes can communicate with each other via this "texting" system. ACARS was developed in 1978 and is still used today. Similar to cell phone networks, the ACARS network has remote ground stations installed around the world to route messages from ATC, the airline, etc, to the aircraft depending on it's location and vice versa. ACARS Messages have been provided through the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) which demonstrate that the aircraft received messages through ground stations located in Harrisburg, PA, and then later routed through a ground station in Pittsburgh, 20 minutes after the aircraft allegedly impacted the South Tower in New York. How can messages be routed through such remote locations if the aircraft was in NY, not to mention how can messages be routed to an aircraft which allegedly crashed 20 minutes earlier? Pilots For 9/11 Truth have briefly touched on this subject in 9/11: Intercepted through the excellent research of "Woody Box", who initially discovered such alarming information in the released FOIA documents(1). We now have further information which confirms the aircraft was not in the vicinity of New York City when the attacks occurred. read more...

[truthmatters]

Be sure to share this important information via the share and like links above.

ACARS CONFIRMED - 9/11 AIRCRAFT AIRBORNE LONG AFTER CRASH
UNITED 175 IN THE VICINITY OF HARRISBURG AND PITTSBURGH, PA

(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) is a device used to send messages to and from an aircraft. Very similar to text messages and email we use today, Air Traffic Control, the airline itself, and other airplanes can communicate with each other via this "texting" system. ACARS was developed in 1978 and is still used today. Similar to cell phone networks, the ACARS network has remote ground stations installed around the world to route messages from ATC, the airline, etc, to the aircraft depending on it's location and vice versa. ACARS Messages have been provided through the Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) which demonstrate that the aircraft received messages through ground stations located in Harrisburg, PA, and then later routed through a ground station in Pittsburgh, 20 minutes after the aircraft allegedly impacted the South Tower in New York. How can messages be routed through such remote locations if the aircraft was in NY, not to mention how can messages be routed to an aircraft which allegedly crashed 20 minutes earlier? Pilots For 9/11 Truth have briefly touched on this subject in 9/11: Intercepted through the excellent research of "Woody Box", who initially discovered such alarming information in the released FOIA documents(1). We now have further information which confirms the aircraft was not in the vicinity of New York City when the attacks occurred. read more...

I'm not able to see the "read more" part. I get a message that "internet explorer cannot display the website".

[rob balsamo]

I'm not able to see the "read more" part. I get a message that "internet explorer cannot display the website".

Fixed.. sorry about that... (and thanks for bringing it to my attention) ... the above is being sent out to thousands and sometimes hyperlinks get truncated through the copy/paste process.

If all else fails... just visit http://pilotsfor911truth.org as the article is front page and the 'read more' link works just fine on our front page.

[A. Syed]

Why do I get the impression that Cass Sunstein's payrollees at 911blogger won't approve this? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

Great work, Rob and co. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/thumbsup.gif)




(reason for edit: tone down the swear rhetoric and instead create a new word: "payrollees")

This post has been edited by A. Syed: Dec 2 2011, 02:51 AM

[amazed!]

Yes, thanks to Woody and anybody else who spent the time to flesh this out. Great work!

This confirms that the airplane that hit at WTC was not 175, as many of us have suspected for so long.

I'm curious if it's possible to extrapolate the heading or position of the aircraft? It seems to be generally westbound. I wonder if it made it to Cleveland? I wonder if ACARS data can suggest a landing point?

[9/11 Justice Now]

Yes, thanks to Woody and anybody else who spent the time to flesh this out. Great work!

This confirms that the airplane that hit at WTC was not 175, as many of us have suspected for so long.

I'm curious if it's possible to extrapolate the heading or position of the aircraft? It seems to be generally westbound. I wonder if it made it to Cleveland? I wonder if ACARS data can suggest a landing point?

Really i am quiet confused here i originally thought the ACARS messages where from united 93, does this mean i am wrong?

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rolleyes.gif)

[onesliceshort]

The noose is getting tighter.

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/handsdown.gif)

[kawika]

Could someone please provide the name of the file(s) where these ACARS records come from?

I would like to 1) check my database for other similar records for the other flights and 2) to see if there are possibly more for UA175.

[rob balsamo]

Could someone please provide the name of the file(s) where these ACARS records come from?

I would like to 1) check my database for other similar records for the other flights and 2) to see if there are possibly more for UA175.

It is the first footnote on the bottom of the article itself.

[kawika]

It is the first footnote on the bottom of the article itself.

This record is the 9/11 Commission's version of FAA records. To be absolutely sure it's complete we need to see the original FAA records that were (or weren't) provided to the 9/11 Commission.

Any direction you can provide as to keywords, file type or other identifying data will help me search the FAA database.

Thank you

[rob balsamo]

This record is the 9/11 Commission's version of FAA records. To be absolutely sure it's complete we need to see the original FAA records that were (or weren't) provided to the 9/11 Commission.

Any direction you can provide as to keywords, file type or other identifying data will help me search the FAA database.

Thank you

I don't think the FAA would have any records of ACARS aside from ACARS sent by ATC.

ARINC and the airline have the records, which were provided to the Commission, which were then sent via FOIA, which are linked in our footnote 1.

There are messages missing as described in the article. Dennis also talks about the messages and why we wouldnt have a comprehensive list of all of them.

With that said, we have all the information we need. The aircraft cannot be in NYC and have ACARS messages routed through MDT and PIT based on flight tracking protocol.

[amazed!]

Rob

I understand what ACARS is, but have never used it here in GA.

Since it is basically just a data burst/packet/whatever on VHF, is it known and how whether an aircraft actually receives that information from the ground station? If they acknowledge, then it's easy to understand, but if the crew does not acknowledge receipt of the message, does the software know somehow that the intended aircraft received the message?

[woody]

Yes, thanks to Woody and anybody else who spent the time to flesh this out. Great work!

This confirms that the airplane that hit at WTC was not 175, as many of us have suspected for so long.

I'm curious if it's possible to extrapolate the heading or position of the aircraft? It seems to be generally westbound. I wonder if it made it to Cleveland? I wonder if ACARS data can suggest a landing point?

Thank you for the flowers. I do my best.

Based on the ACARS messages, UA 175 was flying westward over Pennsylvania, at 8:59 it was roughly over Harrisburg, at 9:23 roughly over Pittsburgh. I have a quite specific idea about its flight path afterwards, as well as its later identities, but at the moment, I'd like to keep my powder dry. But I can't resist to mention Delta 89, which is identical to Delta 1989 in the official story. I've compiled the reasons why Delta 89 was NOT the same plane as Delta 1989 here:

http://911woodybox.blogspot.com/2009/06/de...ker-hijack.html

My thesis is that Delta 89 popped up at 9:41 on the screens of military controllers (NEADS) for only three minutes. The place it appeared was right over Cleveland Center in Oberlin (the NEADS girl gives the latlong to the Indy Center controller). From these data, is it possible that Delta 89 is identical to the westbound UA 175? The answer is definitely yes.

[rob balsamo]

.... but if the crew does not acknowledge receipt of the message, does the software know somehow that the intended aircraft received the message?

Yes.... it's all explained in the article.

[kawika]

I don't think the FAA would have any records of ACARS aside from ACARS sent by ATC.

ARINC and the airline have the records, which were provided to the Commission, which were then sent via FOIA, which are linked in our footnote 1.

There are messages missing as described in the article. Dennis also talks about the messages and why we wouldnt have a comprehensive list of all of them.

With that said, we have all the information we need. The aircraft cannot be in NYC and have ACARS messages routed through MDT and PIT based on flight tracking protocol.

I searched my FOIA database using keyword ACARS. Only a few records. One PDF about Flight 93. The other files are labeled "trash", only one is for 9/11/01.

Here is the UA93 ACARS PDF screenshot:

http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/3482/ua93acarsimage.jpg

I am very surprised there are not more, but the agency has held back about 2GB worth, expected release soon.

What it tells me is the 9/11 Commission records are from a different database as formatting is not the same.

If you can think of other keywords to use in searches, please advise.

[lurker]

for those who care re ua93:
the acars message says "NAK" in the 3rd last line (screenshot from above posting).

[rob balsamo]

for those who care re ua93:
the acars message says "NAK" in the 3rd last line (screenshot from above posting).

Yeah... those seem to be in a different format than the other ACARS we have via FOIA.

What is strange is that the pdf says UA93 is a 737... and that it didnt receive the message (if the NAK is a Tech acknowledgement) when the aircraft was reportedly right next to the ground station... PIT.

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/acars/RADES_GE_0923.jpg)

kawika can you send me that full pdf when you get a chance please?

[Sergio]

I searched my FOIA database using keyword ACARS. Only a few records. One PDF about Flight 93. The other files are labeled "trash", only one is for 9/11/01.

Here is the UA93 ACARS PDF screenshot:

http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/3482/ua93acarsimage.jpg

I am very surprised there are not more, but the agency has held back about 2GB worth, expected release soon.

What it tells me is the 9/11 Commission records are from a different database as formatting is not the same.

If you can think of other keywords to use in searches, please advise.

UAL93, Boeing 737 ?????? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/blink.gif)

[dadeets]

This is excellent work. Thanks to all who contributed.

This is what I would call "hard evidence."

Do we have anything else in the "hard evidence" category that corroborates the fact that UA175 was in the vicinity of Harrisburg and Pittsburgh heading west at the time the officials say a plane struck WTC 2?

Dwain

[cheapchippy]

Yes, thanks to Woody and anybody else who spent the time to flesh this out. Great work!

This confirms that the airplane that hit at WTC was not 175, as many of us have suspected for so long.

I'm curious if it's possible to extrapolate the heading or position of the aircraft? It seems to be generally westbound. I wonder if it made it to Cleveland? I wonder if ACARS data can suggest a landing point?

Great work to all. I didnt realise this has been suspected for so long (IMG:style_emoticons/default/salute.gif)