United 93 Still Airborne After Alleged Crash - According To Atc/radar, PilotsFor911Truth.org
Apr 25 2009, 04:48 PM
Group: Respected Member
Joined: 28-August 06
Member No.: 20
Admin Edit: Article merged with original posts from United 93 Forum section. Article is posted below.
I'm still in the process of gathering evidence that the radar blip beyond Shanksville which was believed to be Flight 93 by every controller, supervisor, and official, was a real plane and not just an artefact on the Traffic Situation Display. (This TSD theory is promoted by the govt loyalist site, Cheap Shot aka Colin Scoggins, Lynn Spencer etc.). And there is plenty of evidence.
But what I found now is so far-reaching, and in the light of Domenick's findings and the shootdown discussion I think it's helpful to make it public right now. It's a transcript within the FAA Command Center, between the National Traffic Management Officer, East Position ("ntmo-e") and Doug Davis of the Operations Center ("doug"). I've highlighted the relevant parts.
1405 (10:05 a.m.)
ntmo-e: ok united ninety three we're now receiving a transponder on and he is at eighty two hundred feet
doug: now transponder and he's eighty two-hundred
ntmo-e: southeastbound still
doug: eighty two hundred feet and now getting a transponder on him
doug: ok buddy
ntmo-e: ok we've lost radar contact with united ninety three
doug: all right
ntmo-e: sixteen south of Johnstown where they lost united ninety three and it was heading turning one four zero heading
doug: which will put him to what do you think
ntmo-e: uh I guess that put him down coming right just west of Dulles
ntmo-e: if he stays on that heading of course
doug: how we doing John with getting stuff on the ground
ntmo-e: uuhh we're the're not the're still going to their original destinations if you look at TSD you'll see that the eastern part of the unites states is thinning out
ntmo-e: uh you know airports like dulles uh new york there we have no aircraft going into there
ntmo-e: ok uh there is now on the on united ninety three
ntmo-e: there is now a report of black smoke in the last position I gave you fifteen miles of Johnstown
doug: from the airplane or from the ground
ntmo-e: uhh they're speculating it's from the aircraft
doug: ok bud
ntmo-e: uhh who hit the ground that's what they're speculation it's speculation only
doug: hey john
doug: do we have anything on delta nineteen eighty nine is she still heading to cleveland?
ntmo-e: delta nineteen eighty nine was returning to Cleveland and they were no longer treating it like a hijacked aircraft
ntmo-e: I don't know if he's landed ok; the last position of united I'm going to give some coordinates united ninety three
ntmo-e: three nine five one north zero seven eight four six west
doug: zero seven eight four six
doug: all right
ntmo-e: you got the thirty nine fifty one north
doug: ya thirty nine fifty one north zereo seven eighty four six west
ntmo-e: that's the last known position of united ninety three
United 93 switched on the transponder at 10:05 (two minutes after its alleged crash), and the transponder indicated an altitude of 8200 ft. It is heading southeast.
One minute later, at 10:06, radar contact with United 93 is lost, at the position 39,51 north, 78,46 west. This point is about 13 miles southeast of the crash site.
This is the death of the TSD theory. An extrapolated radar blip (without an underlying plane) is hardly capable of switching the transponder on, is it?
There can be no doubt that United 93 did not crash at Shanksville.
This post has been edited by rob balsamo: Apr 28 2009, 11:40 AM
May 4 2009, 11:01 AM
Group: Student Forum Pilot
Joined: 5-January 09
Member No.: 4,057
In my book "9/11 Unveiled" I concluded the section on Flight 93 with the following:
There is yet another twist to the saga of Flight 93.
ABC affiliate WCPO in Cleveland reported: "A Boeing 767 out of Boston made an emergency landing Tuesday at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport due to concerns that it may have a bomb aboard, said Mayor Michael R. White. . . . United identified the plane as Flight 93."
However, in February 2006, Liz Foreman, whose name was attached to the original story, stated that "an Associated Press bulletin, was posted on WCPO.com during the morning of September 11, 2001. The story stated that Flight 93 landed in Cleveland. This was not true. Once the AP issued a retraction a few minutes later, we removed the link."
|Lo-Fi Version||Time is now: 2nd September 2014 - 10:05 AM|