IPB




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

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

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
9/11gate, "AA77" FDR numerology

tumetuestumefais...
post Mar 2 2011, 06:55 AM
Post #41





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,106
Joined: 7-November 07
From: Prague or France
Member No.: 2,452



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 1 2011, 10:56 PM) *
For the third time, see here.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...;#entry10795540

It seems only those with a verified aviation background understand this.

And for perhaps the 4th time, the aircraft should have never left the ground with an IRS more than 1/2 mile in error.

But I'm having not the verified aviation background and it seems to me I understand that.
As I wrote, I don't insist on the idea of the INS adjustment and I'm not insisting even on the south side pushback. What I insist on (- and that's why I mainly posted the picture to show how closely the pattern fits the needed taxiways pattern confirming relative exactitude of the positioning - contrary to the Farmer's brand new "idea" about the sheer "inexactitude" of the IRS when the plane is on ground) is that the answer to the question:
D26? is: No way.
(I measured the maximum E/W displacement of my pathway plot - derived from the UnderTow's coordinates - from the taxiways margins and I found <<30m, the E/W distance between the place of pushback and the Gate D26 is 110+ meters)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 2 2011, 07:12 AM
Post #42



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,717
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Mar 2 2011, 06:55 AM) *
(I measured the maximum E/W displacement of my pathway plot - derived from the UnderTow's coordinates - from the taxiways margins and I found <<30m, the E/W distance between the place of pushback and the Gate D26 is 110+ meters)



Actually, the displacement is more than 3000 feet, which is why the aircraft should have never left the ground. (that is if the data actually came from an aircraft).

And again, it is impossible to have a position recorded for the "place of pushback" when the engines arent started till after pushback.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tumetuestumefais...
post Mar 2 2011, 07:39 AM
Post #43





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,106
Joined: 7-November 07
From: Prague or France
Member No.: 2,452



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 2 2011, 12:12 AM) *
Actually, the displacement is more than 3000 feet, which is why the aircraft should have never left the ground. (that is if the data actually came from an aircraft).

To refine, I was of course meaning the relative displacement error when the pathway is superimposed on the logical position -if we want even think the plane ever departed IAD.
The whole thing was meant to counter this Mr. Farmer's (anti)idea:
"A closer look at the terminal location does indicate a change from the end of flight 11 to the south side of the terminal, but again the data reflects a significant degree of uncertainty while taxiing to runway 30. So to reach ANY positional conclusions base on this data would be foolish."
...
"In conclusion, a reasoned study of the Warren RO does not indicate which gate the plane departed from. It is much too dynamic a system and designed for in-flight use, not taxiing on a runway. If anything, it serves to once again validate that the plane which took off from Dulles was indeed AAL77 and that it did terminate its flight at the Pentagon. "
Link
QUOTE
And again, it is impossible to have a position recorded for the "place of pushback" when the engines arent started till after pushback.

Yeah this is weird, I have no idea why the "tail" is in the data. But somehow Mr. Farmer forgot it:

taken from the link above, credits: John Farmer (how he did fit it on the runway below the bottom of the picture which is missing is a mystery for me - maybe Mr. Stutt helped him to adjust the coordinates again...)

Here's interesting wittness account about the engines start:
http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/9n4uho52z...e5050ec/000.jpg
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 2 2011, 07:46 AM
Post #44



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,717
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Mar 2 2011, 07:39 AM) *
To refine, I was of course meaning the relative displacement error when the pathway is superimposed on the logical position -if we want even think the plane ever departed IAD.


Yes, i know what you meant, but your positioning is far from logical my friend.


QUOTE
Here's interesting wittness account about the engines start:
http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/9n4uho52z...e5050ec/000.jpg


Which corroborates what i've been saying.

Normally pilots wait for the all clear to start. This pilot started his engines after pushback, but before the tug was disconnected and clear.

In other words, the engines were NOT started before the push at the gate. The first position recorded was after pushback.

Also keep in mind, according to Farmer and his "audio", (along with your other sources such as Wiki)..."Flight 77" departed Gate D26.

The data in this thread did NOT depart Gate D26. So the above witness statements are basically moot.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tumetuestumefais...
post Mar 2 2011, 08:05 AM
Post #45





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,106
Joined: 7-November 07
From: Prague or France
Member No.: 2,452



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 2 2011, 12:46 AM) *
Also keep in mind, according to Farmer and his "audio", (along with your other sources such as Wiki)..."Flight 77" departed Gate D26.

The data in this thread did NOT depart Gate D26. So the above witness statements are basically moot.

Yeah I wanted to write a notice below the link that they're most probably talking about another plane, but then I told myself the brighter of us will understand.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 2 2011, 08:37 AM
Post #46



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,717
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Mar 2 2011, 08:05 AM) *
Yeah I wanted to write a notice below the link that they're most probably talking about another plane, but then I told myself the brighter of us will understand.


True... but there are laymen that read here, and of course we have the obsessive compulsive from the cesspit relying on people who cannot determine the difference between an Airbus and 757.

You think Farmer's "consultants" will show him the Jeppesen IAD Gate chart with the numerous notations requiring contact with Ramp Control prior to push and the requirement for clearance to a Spot number prior to entering taxiways and prior to contacting Ground Control? Nah, i suppose they been beat up by the data enough, why would they throw more fuel on the blazing fire already burning down their house.....

Too funny.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paul
post Mar 2 2011, 09:17 PM
Post #47





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 241
Joined: 8-November 08
From: Australia
Member No.: 3,978



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 3 2011, 12:07 AM) *
True... but there are laymen that read here, and of course we have the obsessive compulsive from the cesspit relying on people who cannot determine the difference between an Airbus and 757.


Gee i wonder who that could be?

laughing1.gif laughing1.gif laughing1.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Paul
post Mar 2 2011, 10:10 PM
Post #48





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 241
Joined: 8-November 08
From: Australia
Member No.: 3,978



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 1 2011, 02:56 AM) *
Thanks OSS...

There seems to be a bit of confusion as to why the Landing data does not match with takeoff data, when trying to match it to a gate at Concourse D.

The reason for this is the aircraft was apparently moved (towed) overnight to the staging area as depicted in the original plots done by Undertow i attached above. (i refuse to trust anything that comes out of the Stutt/Legge camp as clearly they are not sincere as has been demonstrated ad nauseam).

When the aircraft is moved without the aircraft being fully powered up (engines running, all systems on line.. .etc) and the INS being realigned, the INS will drift. So that is why there is a conflict between Landing and Takeoff data.

INS navigation is a bit before my time, but when i was coming through the ranks fueling and towing planes on the ramp (in my teens), i remember many times we were told to put a Gulfstream or Challenger in a spot where it can sit for hours. The reason for this is that the pilots were aligning the INS. This HAS to be done prior to flight or else your INS will be all screwed up during flight, as you can see from this data we are analyzing. It's almost as if the pilots who were flying this aircraft didnt care about the INS positional data. Did they have alternative means for navigation? It appears so.

Now, with that said, some have claimed the Lat/long shows being aligned in flight based on the data. Well, i'm sure it did. Probably on a bench. But it wasnt done in an actual aircraft. This is impossible as already pointed out by Capt Ralph Kolstad who has flown N644AA (the aircraft described as AA77).

For now... Forget about the landing data trying to match it to a gate (we know it's offset as well, it shouldnt be, but it is...). All we are concerned with is the morning data after engine start.

If we adjust the morning lat/long plots after engine start to D26, this is what we get.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pics/IAD_Adjust_D26.jpg

This above aircraft clearly did NOT depart gate D26 from IAD. Thats the bottom line.


So was the aircraft towed moved to a different gate or is this a different aircraft altogether? What possible motive could the perps
have for wanting to move the aircraft to a different gate? Can we tell which explanation is true and which one is false?

How do we know it was moved or whether it was a different aircraft that took off? I am a bit confused here?

dunno.gif dunno.gif dunno.gif We'll?

This post has been edited by rob balsamo: Mar 3 2011, 12:12 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 2 2011, 11:52 PM
Post #49



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,717
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Mar 1 2011, 08:49 PM) *
"Morning Ramp, American 77 ready for push, Delta Twenty Six, expecting runway thirty, "

"American 77 push approve"

"push approved, American 77"

(push commences... push stops when in position... tug disconnect... all clear... engine start.. .after start checks)

"Ramp, American 77 ready for taxi".

"American 77, Ramp, Taxi to spot 82 and contact ground".

"Spot 82, American 77"

(aircraft taxi's to spot 82)

"Morning ground, American 77, spot 82 with information Echo, taxi"

"American 77, Dulles Ground. .good morning, taxi to runway 30 via Foxtrot, Yankee".


So after giving the cesspit a full script of what its suppose to sound like when pushing from a gate, low and behold, i'm sent this...



Only problem is that when "AA77" contacted ground in the first audio, "AA77" claims he is at D26, not Spot 82.



So either the above pilot did not taxi to Spot 82 and contact ground and therefore disobeying an instruction, or someone doesnt know how to follow a proper script.


When contacting ground, pilots reference a Ramp Spot number, not a gate. There are 18 different Spots on the Midfield Terminal Ramp numbering 70-83 and 100-105. How the heck is Ground control supposed to know which Spot "AA77" is exiting from the Ramp if he was only told a Gate?

Answer - He doesnt.

Try again guys.

laughing1.gif

And again, we already have several sources claiming "AA77" departed Gate D26. Tume posted them on the first page of this thread. But thanks for the corroboration. If the above audio is authentic (and for some reason the pilot screwed up), it further proves the data did not come from "AA77", unless of course they want to think the aircraft taxied on and took off from.. .grass.

FDR Lat/Long adjust for a D26 Push

First there wasnt any evidence linking the data to American 77, N644AA.

There is now overwhelming evidence that the data in which the NTSB provided, did not come from any aircraft described as "American 77".

1. Aircraft do not start their engines at the gate, corroborated by the Rampers statements. (If the engines were started at the gate, the rampers wouldnt have pushed at all. They would be standing far away).
2. The more than 3000' offset in the raw data. Not possible if the data were from "AA77" as American Airlines requires a full alignment prior to each flight.
3. After the data is adjusted to properly fit the taxiways and runway, it did not come from D26.

Thanks to Randi's Kids for the corroboration, but we already know the govt claims "AA77" pushed from D26.

Now you just have to get us lat/long data showing that, preferably data which has already been aligned as required by American Airlines.

The data which has been provided thus far, does not support a push from D26, it doesnt support American Airlines SOP, nor does it support an impact with the Pentagon. Please show us what happened to AA77 and its passengers! It's been almost 10 years!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 3 2011, 12:11 AM
Post #50



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,717
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Paul @ Mar 2 2011, 10:10 PM) *
So was the aircraft towed moved to a different gate or is this a different aircraft altogether? What possible motive could the perps
have for wanting to move the aircraft to a different gate? Can we tell which explanation is true and which one is false?

How do we know it was moved or whether it was a different aircraft that took off? I am a bit confused here?

dunno.gif dunno.gif dunno.gif We'll?


Paul,

Sometimes when an aircraft stays overnight at an airport, it is moved to what is called a "Staging Area" if the gate they arrived at, needs to be used for more aircraft coming in, or will be used by a different aircraft in the morning, or needs maintenance.

The Green plots on the diagram reflect this. Its not proof this is what happened, but highly suggestive that is what happened.

The next morning, the aircraft is then towed to its departing gate. Based on the data, it is impossible for the aircraft to have departed Gate D26. Therefore, according to the sources tume has provided claiming "AA77" departed Gate D26, and the audio provided by the Cesspool swimmers, the data did not come from "AA77", because clearly the data cannot be aligned to D26.

So, if AA77 did push from D26, where is that data?

I'm asked many times a day, "If AA77 didnt hit the Pentagon, then where did it go?"

Here is my typical reply.
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...t&p=9458664

I'll now add to that by saying, Get the data from the plane which pushed off Gate D26, and lets find out!

And again Paul, please reduce the quotes when quoting another post for a reply. I have had to reduce the quotes in your posts on almost every post you make. I just reduced the quote in your reply, again, by removing the img tags.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 3 2011, 12:59 AM
Post #51



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,717
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Got a response from another friend of mine at American Airlines who is Capt on the 757/767 and flown other types...

QUOTE
....on cursory examination something is screwy those things are so accurate in the 75, 76, 73, and FK100, that we always, always put in the exact gate coordinates on each gate at each airport when preparing to go, so that -may- indicate some trickery of some kind that "they" forgot to delete, maybe an empty (of pax) "flyover" acft flying seconds ahead of "whatever really hit the pentaCON" ???




Ralph has also explained that he has never seen an error of more than 1/4 mile, which is usually when flying over the pond to Europe because he couldnt get an update.

Usual drift is a few hundred feet, then corrected with an update (if the IRS was properly aligned at the gate of course, which is SOP at AAL prior to each flight).

But again, there shouldnt be any error at the gate when aligned. Any error shown to the pilot prior to taxi, and the aircraft is grounded. Ralph explained that if he saw such an error even develop during taxi, he would have returned to the gate.

Just more corroboration demonstrating that the data did not come from an American Airlines aircraft.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bruce Sinclair
post Mar 7 2011, 03:55 AM
Post #52


Core Member


Group: Contributor
Posts: 154
Joined: 31-March 08
Member No.: 3,074



Just a couple of points to add to the discussion:

When you call for push-back clearance, the normal phraseology is "American 77, push (or push back) at your discretion" not "American 77 cleared for push". This is quite important, as the lead hand on the headset and the Captain ultimately determine if it is safe to push the aircraft off the gate. So normally you are never "cleared" as this implies a clearance or that the controller is accepting the responsibility for the safety of the push back. They always throw it back in the Captain's court with the phrase "at your discretion". At least, this has always been my experience.

In regards to engine starts on the push, this is entirely an airline by airline choice. I have worked for airlines that allow engine starts while the aircraft is being pushed back and others that don't. In the Boeing 737 you need to turn off the A hydraulic pumps for this exercise since there is no nose wheel steering lockout pin. On the Airbus A300 B4 that I flew, it has a lockout pin that remains installed until after the push back is complete. So in this case, the main concern is whether the tug is powerful enough and heavy enough to continue the push with the thrust of the idling engine(s).

I hope that the American Airlines pilots will respond to this and advise us whether AA allows engine starts on the push on the B757.

If my memory serves me well, the FDR starts on the ground as soon as it receives a signal of oil pressure from the first engine being started. At least, this is the way it works on the B-737-200. Once airborne, it will continue to record even if both engines are shut down since the air-ground sensor knows that the airplane is still airborne.

Fondest regards,

Bruce
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Mar 7 2011, 04:31 AM
Post #53



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,717
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Bruce Sinclair @ Mar 7 2011, 03:55 AM) *
Just a couple of points to add to the discussion:

When you call for push-back clearance, the normal phraseology is "American 77, push (or push back) at your discretion" not "American 77 cleared for push".


I've heard both, including things like "After the 73 passes from left to right behind you, you're cleared to push..."

QUOTE
They always throw it back in the Captain's court with the phrase "at your discretion". At least, this has always been my experience.


If that were the case, then we would hear, "Takeoff at your discretion", or "Land at your discretion". smile.gif

Even though you get a clearance, the Capt has final authority for the safe operation of that aircraft and it's occupants. Just because a clearance is issued, does not absolve the Capt of his responsibilities.

"... at your discretion" usually implies "there is no one else pushing or entering gate... so push when you want".

QUOTE
In regards to engine starts on the push, this is entirely an airline by airline choice. I have worked for airlines that allow engine starts while the aircraft is being pushed back and others that don't. In the Boeing 737 you need to turn off the A hydraulic pumps for this exercise since there is no nose wheel steering lockout pin. On the Airbus A300 B4 that I flew, it has a lockout pin that remains installed until after the push back is complete. So in this case, the main concern is whether the tug is powerful enough and heavy enough to continue the push with the thrust of the idling engine(s).

I hope that the American Airlines pilots will respond to this and advise us whether AA allows engine starts on the push on the B757.


Rampers confirm engine start is not initiated until after they are clear.

http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/9n4uho52z...e5050ec/000.jpg

It seems he started after push, but before all clear.

If we start while in push, the rampers will stop the push and leave the tug till the engine is shut down.

The only time an engine start is allowed at the gate, is when ground power or an air start is required and prior arrangements are made with the ground crew.

If the above aircraft pushed from the South of the Concourse, that engine was started at the gate, not "during the push".

But we already know it mostly looks like a push from the North of the concourse, and then engine start after the push. This conflicts with AA77 push from D26.

With that said, i'll double check with Ralph, but i pretty much know what he is going to say... especially with those large suckers hanging well below the wing to suck in anything floating (or walking) around the gate area.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bodicca
post Apr 19 2011, 04:39 PM
Post #54





Group: Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: 8-May 07
Member No.: 1,027



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Feb 22 2011, 01:54 PM) *
Nice sleuthing Jan!

I don't know if this is any help but there were a collection of FBI interviews done with staff at Dulles Airport and Gate D26 is referenced several times.


2 people who were at the gate (presumably D26) Villaseņor and Wendy Lnu (flight attendant collecting boarding passes for "Flight 77" passengers.

http://i56.tinypic.com/efurb.jpg

One alleged passenger checked in but didn't arrive at gate?

http://htmlimg1.scribdassets.com/9n4uho52z...aa1c970/000.jpg

D26

- Flight 77 was not rechecked (normal procedure preflight) due to an "accident" with one of the trailers that ususally pushes aircraft out from gate.

http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/9n4uho52z...a92b5d0/000.jpg

http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/9n4uho52z...6a07647/000.jpg

http://htmlimg3.scribdassets.com/9n4uho52z...c89ca58/000.jpg

http://htmlimg2.scribdassets.com/9n4uho52z...91aabaf/000.jpg


"Squawk" ACARS message (weird)

http://htmlimg3.scribdassets.com/9n4uho52z...76edd21/000.jpg

http://htmlimg2.scribdassets.com/9n4uho52z...288c8bc/000.jpg

"Flight 77" pilot fired engines up too quickly (before ground crew were at a safe distance) and noted how the pilot didn't acknowledge or "wave" as was the "norm"

http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/9n4uho52z...e5050ec/000.jpg


Apparently "Flight 77" left from Gate D26 but there was no pre-flight check due to a "coincidental accident" involving the truck that pulls aircraft from the gates, no communication with ground staff, late boarding and a "passenger" who missed the flight.

Hope it's of some use mate.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bodicca
post Apr 19 2011, 04:46 PM
Post #55





Group: Newbie
Posts: 2
Joined: 8-May 07
Member No.: 1,027



I'm not in any way associated with the airline industry, however, have been following associated events ever since I realized that impossibility of the gvt theory, one month after 911. I'm not sure whether anyone here is aware that on the one-year anniversary of 911, bereaved relatives gathered at the gate where they had said goodbye a year before, whereas American Airlines staff gathered at a different gate (I don't recall the numbers). This certainly reinforces your findings.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Apr 19 2011, 05:25 PM
Post #56



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,717
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (bodicca @ Apr 19 2011, 05:46 PM) *
I'm not in any way associated with the airline industry, however, have been following associated events ever since I realized that impossibility of the gvt theory, one month after 911. I'm not sure whether anyone here is aware that on the one-year anniversary of 911, bereaved relatives gathered at the gate where they had said goodbye a year before, whereas American Airlines staff gathered at a different gate (I don't recall the numbers). This certainly reinforces your findings.


I vaguely remember this. Do you happen to have any sources?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post Apr 19 2011, 08:43 PM
Post #57


dig deeper
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 1,017
Joined: 16-October 06
From: arlington va
Member No.: 96



there may be other sources chronicling other occasions, but i have this one related story handy:

QUOTE
Airport worker honors Sept. 11 victims one at a time
August 18, 2002|By Carol Morello, Washington Post

Today is another workday for James Carlton, and another notch on his flagpole.

As he directs American Airlines planes to and from the gates at Dulles International Airport outside Washington, pilots will salute him and passengers will press sober faces to the windows, watching the middle-aged man in the orange vest standing on the tarmac with a baton in his right hand and a U.S. flag in his left.

In between handling baggage and cleaning the aircraft lavatories, Carlton has taken it upon himself to be there with his flag for every American Airlines flight that arrives or departs during his shift. He began the routine the day he returned to work after Sept. 11, one man's memorial to 246 people who perished aboard the four hijacked planes. For every victim, Carlton dedicates one day with a flag.

Saturday was the 213th tally mark written carefully in pen on the 5-foot pole, row after row filling the wood shaft with the black tip. He has 33 days to go.

Almost a year has passed since Carlton began his commemoration, and still he goes out with his flag in all kinds of weather, much of it harsh on runways where heat shimmers in waves above the concrete and wind drives raindrops like hard pellets.

"I'd like people to know they're not alone," said Carlton, 50, a retired Air Force jet mechanic who has worked for the airline for 11 years. "I want them to know somebody cares and they're not alone in their grief."

Reminders of grief are in plain view throughout the labyrinth of corridors and offices where American Airlines crew members prepare for flights. Two of the four hijacked planes belonged to American. One, Flight 77, which was crashed into the Pentagon, left from Gate 26 at Dulles, carrying a crew of six and a longtime company employee as a passenger.

On one wall is a photograph and poem about Mary Jane Booth, who was secretary to the general manager and was aboard Flight 77 on her way to a conference. Another wall holds photographs of one of the flight attendants, Michelle Heidenberger. And tacked to a bulletin board is a picture of airport employees who lined up to cheer the first plane that left Dulles when flights resumed Sept. 13.

Two days later, Carlton was driving morosely to work from his home in Fredericksburg, Va., when, as he puts it, "I had a little discussion with God."

"I said, basically, 'What can I do?' " he recalled as he waited with his flag furled tightly while a Dallas-bound flight went through final boarding before pulling away from the gate. "I couldn't go back in the Air Force, because I'm too old. And the lines for giving blood were already long. Then it came to me. I had an old cloth flag at home that I was going to give to the Boy Scouts for disposal. It was like a voice in my head said, 'Fly this flag for each person who died.' I started the very next day."

He added up the numbers of people who were aboard all four flights. Then he subtracted 19, because there was no way he was going to fly a flag on behalf of a hijacker.

"Bastards," he spits out. "No, ma'am, I don't fly it for bastards."

Only once has he carried his flag in the name of a specific victim. That was after he met a passenger's wife when she came to the airport to stand quietly at Gate 26 thinking of her husband's last moments. That day, he carried his flag in honor of the man, and the wife and two children he left behind.

"Usually, I don't know who I'm flying it for," Carlton said. "I leave it up to God to decide."

Greeting every American Airlines flight in or out of Dulles does involve some juggling. Other fleet service clerks who work alongside Carlton frequently swap work assignments so he can be the designated "wing walker" directing the pilot to and from the gate.

"That's just Jimmy," said co-worker Jeffrey "Cheesedog" Womer. "He's a very proud guy -- of the country and of American Airlines."

The reaction to Carlton's mission has been overwhelmingly positive, although some detractors feel that he is resurrecting memories of a tragedy that already weighs too heavily on their minds.

"There are people, including myself, who want to put it behind us, but it's a constant reminder," said Larry Reid, one of Carlton's co-workers and an American Airlines employee for 30 years. "We all feel bad about it. But I want to get beyond it."

Dennis Hazell, the airline's general manager, said he has received no complaints, either from employees or passengers. To the contrary, he said, he had heard several compliments from customers touched by Carlton's gesture.

"I knew it would go a long way, not only for the healing of employees, but for customers, too," he said.

Carmen Villani, an American pilot, routinely gets on the public announcement system and explains Carlton's mission to passengers as they taxi past him on the runway. He said he always gives Carlton a salute and a thumbs- up. Then he walks down the ramp to thank him, every time.

"It's a fine tribute," said Villani, who often piloted Flight 77 and knew the crew members who were killed. "For me, personally, it's very special."

Watching Carlton in action, it appears that many pilots feel the same way. He stands on the tarmac, his gloves in his back pocket, his earmuffs guarding against the noise of jet engines roaring just a few feet from his head. Invariably, when planes taxi past him, and the flag billows full in the gusts caused by the jets, small cockpit windows pop open briefly. Inside, pilots and co-pilots can be seen saluting him and giving him a hearty thumbs-up.

What a beautiful reception," co-pilot Mike Gonzalez, flying into Dulles for the first time since September, said after he alighted from a plane that had come from Dallas. "I'm glad to see everybody is still thinking of it and caring about it, not forgetting."

Carlton said he receives fewer waves from passengers than he did at first. He doesn't believe it's because his presence is a reminder that scares people awaiting takeoff. Rather, he suspects it reflects the numbing distance of time.

"Some days, I wonder, does anybody care anymore?" he said. "That's the American way of life -- to get back to business. But then somebody waves at me, and I know some people still do care."


the above is an excerpt, read rest at:
http://articles.sfgate.com/2002-08-18/news...ight-attendants


i'll see if i can dig up any others...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
paranoia
post Apr 19 2011, 09:41 PM
Post #58


dig deeper
Group Icon

Group: Administrator
Posts: 1,017
Joined: 16-October 06
From: arlington va
Member No.: 96



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Apr 19 2011, 06:25 PM) *
I vaguely remember this. Do you happen to have any sources?


this thread references the boston gate / flight 11 discrepancy (lists quotes and links):
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/g...d.main/1613600/


related material ("Flight 11 - The Twin Flight" by woodybox):
http://911search.bravehost.com/twinflight11.htm
http://911review.org/inn.globalfreepress/H...ahijacking.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 6 2011, 05:38 PM
Post #59



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,717
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



I have been informed that LaBtop is a bit upset (an understatement) that i suspended him for trolling and is now on a rampage at ATS attacking our work and me personally.

So let me clarify for the readers.

At no time have i claimed the data shows the aircraft departing gate D9 or 11 as LaBtop is now deceptively asserting. Tume made that claim in his original post.

QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Feb 24 2011, 03:37 AM) *
It's not completely clear what a number the gate has - we have there two gates:
9 and 11.


Matter of fact, if you look at the diagram i provided on our original article at our website, the picture clearly shows Gate D19 or 21, not D9 or 11 as LaBtop is deceptively claiming i said...



Also, I never claimed any specific gate for the data as it was too hard to discern an exact gate, we have only claimed in our article that the aircraft did not push from gate D26, which apparently, LaBTop agrees with, but instead, elects to attack us using deception.

As I have explained elsewhere on this forum, given that the terminal is rather narrow and there is a margin for error in IRS coordinates (I believe it's around 50 feet give or take, after being initialized and aligned, IIRC)... it's impossible to determine north or south push, but the more likely push is from the north due to airline procedure as i have explained in this thread and elsewhere and agreed upon by other verified aviation professionals.

A North push is from gate D21 or D19, a south push is from D18 or D16.

What is for certain, is that the data does not and cannot line up with a D26 push, this, once again, makes the govt story false.

Hope this helps clear up any confusion caused by an obvious disgruntled and deceptive anonymous troll nick-named "LaBTop", who clearly does not have any experience whatsoever in aviation related topics.

For those interested in reading why LaBTop was suspended and how often he is wrong, you can start here...
and it ends here with LaBTop refusing to provide evidence for his claims time and time again.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Aug 6 2011, 09:00 PM
Post #60





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,943
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Rob, he's probably one of those clowns from over at the former Debate Both Sides. There was some organization represented over there, but I can't remember it's name.

We humiliated those guys over there, and they are probably sore.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
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: 28th November 2014 - 10:42 AM