IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Was It Aa77 That Reappeared Near Iad?, Air vehicle swap when AA77 lost on radar

Robin Hordon
post Dec 6 2006, 03:55 PM
Post #1





Group: Guest
Posts: 99
Joined: 2-December 06
Member No.: 274



Folks,

I don't think that a Boeing airliner hit the Pentagon. If not, what did, and where did that swap take place?

My first answer would be the flying vehicles were swapped when AA77 was lost to radar for "X" number of miles west of the IAD area. I think that someone on this site stated that they saw, maybe on radar, a high speed target passing the IAD area headed toward DC. Was this craft ever positively identified and confirmed to be AA77? Another "craft's" PRIMARY target going at high speeds would look the same.

The standards when air traffic controllers use when "positively identifying" a primary target that they are following are to either...match a primary target over a navaid or intersection when the pilot reports being over that point, or...by asking the pilot to execute two turns of 30 degrees or more and then watching to see if the primary target follows those instructions. If either of those events occur, then it can be considered that the primary target is the aircraft in question and the controller is allowed to claim "your are in radar contact". Failing either of those, there is no positive radar contact.

Did anyone do this to AA77 when it "reappeared"?

Does anyone anywhere have any facts or evidence that the high speed eastbound target west of IAD that "popped back up on radar" was in fact AA77?

Further questions, it really disturbs me as being far, far too coincidental that the captain of AA77 had been in the military working at the pentagon on hijacking defense , or some similar protocols a few years earlier.

So, I'm asking if anyone knew of this fellow's military flying background because if he had any experience in running low altitude bombing "OB" runs, this would be very interesting.

The old "OB" low altitude bombing runs were practice excersises over terrain within the USofA that if flown over in "exacting ways", would be a fair representation of SOVIET terrain that would have to be flown over should there have been a bombing attack executed into the USSR. The designator OB...ie: Oil Burner, was later changed to "Olive Branch"...sound manipulative...or familiar?

Here is the tie-in, and some of it came from a woman's testimony near that "Special Mountain" west of DC where "an airplane was swallowed up by the mountain". Not that I'm ready to believe the "swallowed up part"...BUT...most likely there was an airplane similar to what she described. For example, if there were an airport on the other side of a long ridge in which you were standing and the runway was on the valley floor on the other side of that ridge, could it not look like a mountain "swallowed up" the aircraft slowly descending from a sight line above the ridge and/or mountain to an altitude below the sightline of the ridge or mountain? So, here is another dot.

Without any doubt, the Appalacian mountains in that part of our country have long valleys with fairly high ridges along each side and I KNOW that there is no radar coverage down in the valleys.

So, if there were to be an airbourne vehicle swap, it could have taken place when AA77 was "lost" from radar coverage...perhaps at low altitude in one of these valleys. Then, the "new" craft could take over in that, or really any other area nearby, still under the radar coverage, and then BECOME the primary target ASSUMED TO BE AA77, that "pops-up" west of IAD/DC heading eastbound and on into the pentagon.

So...what happened to AA77? Here is where the captain's past experience may have allowed him to perform some very low altitude "winging" of AA77 returning back west, or elsewhere keeping very low to the ground along valleys and such.

Perhaps the big Boeing landed at an AFB, or even at a civilian facility using different call signs or whatever. AA77 did not have the numbers AA77 painted on the side...and who was keeping accurate track of which aircraft landed where that day. AAL would think AA77 is down and not look for it. If the airplane went to a civilian airport to land, who there would double check that the AAL jet was actually AA77...and if it was part of the plan to land at a military base in the emergency, well, that's just part of the plan. The passengers could be told anything.

What I'm postulating all may sound crazy, but if AA77 did not hit the pentagon, where did it go?

Please remember, the people, [read: military personnel], involved in this event would only be top notch, and very, very, very dedicated to the mission. Even one's families wouldn't count.

And yeah, what would have happened to the passengers on AA77 is indeed very troubling. But somewhere I saw a clip showing that a military craft might be bringing "corpses" back to the DC area a few days after 9/11. Nice flight for a nap..a long, long nap?

Sadly, if one accepts that 9/11 was an inside job, then one must accept that these guys are cold blooded killers. Consequently, how are the lives of a handful of "airline passengers" going to be of any concern when one considers the scope of the events before, during and after 9/11/01?

They would just become "collateral damage" that had to be dealt with...but in a different way!

So, if anyone has info on AA77's captain and his military flying background, and if anyone has a "fair" representation of the flight path and last point of radar contact of AA77"...[ Again, I don't trust anything "with the US Government as originator"...but I'l start there]...and further, where the primary target "PRESUMED" to be AA77 popped back up in its easterly heading, I'd love to get it.

I will be superimposing the tracks over terrain maps to see how close the flight paths are to mountains, ridges and valleys in which some of what I postulate might have taken place. Never know about this stuff...


Love, Peace and Progress...

Robin Hordon

BTW:

Can anyone PROVE that the FDR which was supposed to be from AA77 is absolutely and positively FROM AA77? And a follow-up question...Does anyone know if its IMPOSSIBLE to RECREATE each and every bit of electronically recorded data on such FDR's?

Seems to me that current humanity and computer technology can "simulate" almost everything "aviation" nowadays. Why not internal FDR data and info too?

So, be wary my pilot friends, the info that y'all are running with right now for your simulations may be exactly what they want out there. But certainly don't stop...yet please be hesitant before you try and "prove" anything based upon this federally released "data". RDH
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 6 2006, 04:41 PM
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



The FDR data doesnt prove anything and we never make that claim. We arent here to prove anything. It is the govt's job to prove their story... period.

What the FDR does show are numerous conflicts with the official story. The conflicts cross-check with other parameters in the FDR, its just that those parameters do not cross check with the official story. We want to know why...

Lets be clear. If the FDR is fake.. it is as alarming as it being accurate since it came from the NTSB. The NTSB says the FDR came from AA77. The responsibility falls on their shoulders (and the govt) to explain the conflicts.

Cheers!
Rob
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
patriot2006
post Dec 6 2006, 10:47 PM
Post #3





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 5
Joined: 6-December 06
Member No.: 297



Hi friends--

I've been following the inside job scenario since 9-11-01. After a time, I chose to try to leave the Pentagon issue alone, merely because the evidence concerning the event was so scarce, hence open to speculation. As it is, there has not been one published image of a plane or convincing pieces (i.e., the engine part that apparently belongs to an A-3 SkyWarrior).

But now it appears that the FDR data doesn't even match the path of the blurred image purported to be flight 77.

Of course it begs the question of the source of this flight data and the chain of custody. Was this data actually derived from a FDR recovered from the Pentagon? Seems unlikely to me, although I'm sure that's what the officials would be telling us. In that case the data would more than likely be fake. But if they were going to fake data, wouldn't they make it match their story? And if indeed flight 77 actually flew over the Pentagon and an A-3 hit the Pentagon, then what happened to the passengers?

You see why this is such a troubling topic? Too much is open to speculation. Actually, I believe flight 77 DID fly over the Pentagon just as the A-3 hit, and the passengers (except possibly Barbara Olson--maybe her, too) were "dispatched".

I'll be reading!
Steve
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Robin Hordon
post Dec 7 2006, 02:51 AM
Post #4





Group: Guest
Posts: 99
Joined: 2-December 06
Member No.: 274



Newbie,

I think that if AA77 flew over the pentagon and "dropped", escorted, shadowed another airborne craft, it would have been too easily detected flying away. On that same point, there were quite a few eyewitnesses [some of them plants for sure] who saw varying things as the "airbourne craft" approached and hit the building. All eyes would be turned to the fireball. I think that there would be unanimity about seeing a Boeing fly overhead...dontcha think?

Now, if you were planning an attack on the pentagon, would you create a scenario where the "bomber" per se, would be flying away overhead...and take such a risk? Wouldn't that IMMEDIATELY bring an end to any and all speculation about an inside job? Remember, the pentagon was the last hit...and everybody and his brother were concerned about "ANYTHING WH..and ANYTHING DC". There were some cameras...

How would the folks in the hotel across the street NOT see a B757 fly away?

If AA77 did not hit the pentagon, it still had its passengers on board to wherever it ended up...and they did have to be dispatched!

I first thought that AA77 was escorted out over the ocean where, or with, or by those fighters that ended up out there...but there would have been debris in the water that would have washed ashore or seen by the shipping community.

Love, Peace and Progress...

Robin Hordon
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JackD
post Dec 13 2006, 03:56 PM
Post #5





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 295
Joined: 13-November 06
Member No.: 238



Robin H

interesting speculation. first assumption, that AA77 took off with wheels-off as per BTS website needs checking. second, IF indeed it took off as a real flight (despite not being scheduled) -0- did it really have the passengers on it who were on the 'manifest' -- such as Barbara Olson?

Assuming the above, note the location of the odd 'handle' turn to the north in 77 flight path, about halfway before it fell off radar. the turn does not correspond well to the ATC's directions (told to go 20 degree turn to avoid traffic -- yet they turn 90 to the right...)

Was 77 swapped at that point? was there a glitch? the planners of 9/11, if it were really an inside job, would have wanted the whole hijack-to-crash time, for ALL flights total, to be as short as possible --- otherwise, you'd have to explain, rather red in the face, why hijacked planes were flying around UNINTERCEPTED from 819am until 1003am.

something went very wrong with the AA77 plan -- and they fell back on a plan B
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Robin Hordon
post Dec 14 2006, 04:44 AM
Post #6





Group: Guest
Posts: 99
Joined: 2-December 06
Member No.: 274



Jack D...

The AA77 " story"seems to have "holes in it" everywhere one looks...and I think that there is fertile soil to be tilled all along the entire flight path...IF...there is a flight path. We need more info...

That jug-handle turn is really hard to explain...IF there were a replacement/additional airplane there, it still wouldn't explain the odd turn...because those pilots are good and any manuevers so large wouldn't be needed, nor effective at collision avoidance...when that close, one uses vertical changes to avoid contact...HUGE L-R is too slow acting. If its Burlingame making it "look" like a hijack, I'm not sure that the pilot-controller dialogue would show that the cockpit had been taken over at that time...not sure...

I agree that the HI PERPS would want short flights...in fact I think that it is a common view that they wanted to be all "in a bunch" per se...and AA77 had an unanticipated departure delay...surely this created troubles for the scheme...

And trust me on this...THEY ARE RED IN THE FACE...BIG TIME...because they have been caught creating three different stories to cover up the fact that theyw were soooooo late in "scrambling and assigning" fighters!

This is why I'm so distrusting of a DVD and FDR given out by the HI PERPS? GEEESH, how convenient?

BTW...did we get a CVR for AA77 also?...and does that match up with other flight parameters/events?

Love, Peace and Progress...

Robin Hordon
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 14 2006, 11:43 AM
Post #7



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



No CVR... Mueller said the CVR was unusable. However the animation provided does show ATC transmission in real time.

As for the FDR (here i go repeating myself again)...

The FDR came from a govt agency...

The FDR conflicts with the govt story....

The govt needs to explain why... does anyone disagree?

It doesnt matter if the FDR is fake, real or created by Dr. Seuss. It came from a govt agency.. they have to answer for it. Im not sure why people seem to want to ignore the FDR just because they think it might be fake. It is FACT that it came from a govt agency.. thats all we need.

(font enhanced for clarity.. hopefully.. this time its clear)

Robin.. please call me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Dec 14 2006, 11:50 AM
Post #8



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Robin Hordon @ Dec 7 2006, 01:51 AM)
Newbie,

I think that if AA77 flew over the pentagon and "dropped", escorted, shadowed another airborne craft, it would have been too easily detected flying away. On that same point, there were quite a few eyewitnesses [some of them plants for sure] who saw varying things as the "airbourne craft" approached and hit the building. All eyes would be turned to the fireball. I think that there would be unanimity about seeing a Boeing fly overhead...dontcha think?

First... please try not to call new posters 'newbie'. We like to show respect to our new guests.

Next... i see the flyover as very plausible IF the FDR is accurate. We have discussed this on the phone. However, you wont see theory on the main website.

The people on the east side of the river were in chaos evacuating from downtown DC and the Mall area. If they turned to see an aircraft... it would have been departing north just like all other aircraft have been doing all morning out of DCA up the river.

The people on the west side would have had their view blocked by the big fireball.

Now.. this is all pure speculation, but i certainly see it as possible.

As for the technology available???



http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...wtopic=556&st=0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JackD
post Dec 14 2006, 10:01 PM
Post #9





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 295
Joined: 13-November 06
Member No.: 238



QUOTE (Robin Hordon @ Dec 14 2006, 03:44 AM)
That jug-handle turn is really hard to explain...IF there were a replacement/additional airplane there, it still wouldn't explain the odd turn...because those pilots are good and any manuevers so large wouldn't be needed, nor effective at collision avoidance...when that close, one uses vertical changes to avoid contact...HUGE L-R is too slow acting. If its Burlingame making it "look" like a hijack,

just throwing this out FYI - for contemplation:

One theory, which has interesting backing, is that the entire 9/11 plan had contingencies to fall back on, in case there was a problem with the "Plan A" aspect, then quickly, Plan B or C could go into effect.

goes like this:
AA77 SHOULD have been the FIRST hijack, and FIRST strike on Pentagon. THis would give the DoD an 'excuse' for not being on top of things at WTC -- since they were 'under attack'

However, AA77 took off delayed -- so already plans might have begun to change to Plan B --- then, the jug-handle may have been the attempt to either remote-commandeer the plane, or a swap, (your pref) -- after which the Plan C contingency went into effect.

This is all of course purely for speculation -- but consider that Burlingame, as an expert consultant in anti-terror strategies, would have been a great pilot to be flying a "simulated hijack" craft .
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 13th November 2019 - 05:11 AM