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 )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
La Vanguardia On Device(s) On Under Boeing Ua175, Boeing Cites "Security Reasons"

Aldo Marquis CIT
post Jan 19 2012, 09:53 PM
Post #1


Citizen Investigator


Group: Contributor
Posts: 1,179
Joined: 16-August 06
Member No.: 10



I know how Rob has felt in the past about the claim of their being an object on the bottom of the plane purported to be Flight 175. And he ain't for it. But I figure since we have pretty solid evidence that the plane that hit the South Tower appears to be swapped out with a modified, high-speed, remoted guided aircraft a' la Operation Northwoods that I should post a credible examination of this object on the bottom of the alleged "Flight 175", which just so happens to include response from Boeing. I am putting this here for reference also.

La Vanguardia (Spanish for The Vanguard)[2] is Catalonia's leading daily newspaper as well as the fourth best-selling in Spain. It has its headquarters in Barcelona, Catalonia's largest city.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Vanguardia



QUOTE
The Plane that Crashed Into The South Tower Of The
World Trade Center Shows Shapes Of Unknown Origin


By Eduardo Martín de Pozuelo
La Vanguardia - Spain
June 22, 2003
[Translated into English; original in Spanish below]

BARCELONA - One and a half years after 9/11 many questions remain as to the circumstances surrounding the attacks on the Twin Towers. One of these unknowns is the nature of certain forms or marks which can be seen on the fuselage of the plane which crashed into the south tower of the World Trade Center. "La Vanguardia" asked Boeing about these marks, who claimed they were unable to respond for reasons of national security and referred it to the independent commission which has been conducting an inquiry since 31 March into what happened.

In the frozen images of various film shots of the final run of United Airlines flight 175, there are three strange shapes discernible, which the aeronautical experts consulted find difficult to explain. They consist of two long shapes located underneath the fuselage, one towards the bow and the other towards the stern of the plane. There is a third, seemingly pyramidal in shape, on the underbelly, almost in the center of the plane. Boeing's department of commercial aviation, with headquarters in Seattle, examined the photographs for ten days and, having announced an explanation for the phenomenon, declined to make a statement on what it saw. Finally a spokesman stated that Boeing was unable to offer an opinion "for security reasons" and because it had not officially participated in the investigation of the attacks.

Various aeronautical engineers at official Spanish centers have found no clear explanation for the reflections or shapes which can be observed on the hijacked plane. However, a contour-detection digital analysis of the stills, carried out at the Escola Universitària Politècnica de Mataró, concludes that the "objects discerned cannot be due to shadows caused by the angle of incidence of the sun upon the plane as they always appear as the same shape and size, although their luminosity varies." This result was reached having subjected the photographs to a digital image process "which would respond to changes in luminance" which can be seen with the naked eye and which, in principle, would make no sense, given that the fuselage of commercial airplanes is cylindrical and flat, according to the cited technical report.

The author, who has had extensive professional experience in digital image processing, artificial neuronal networks and biometry, says in the report that "the same treatment" was applied to each of the photographs "using three standard digital image processing algorithms", the technical data of which are detailed at length in the dossier. Having clarified that "the images studied are taken from different angles of observation", it establishes that the "objects detected present distinct luminosity as they are in relief" and adds that "this is the only possible explanation", finally pointing out that "the objects detected can be clearly distinguished from the landing gear."

The reconstruction of the events leading up to the horrific attack on the second tower show that preparations for the United Airlines flight UA-175 from Boston to Los Angeles were routine on the morning of 11 September 2001. The aircraft, a B-767-222, registration N612UA, left the United terminal at Logan International airport at 7:58 and was in the air by 8:15. There were 56 passengers on board, including five Al Qaeda terrorists armed with box-cutters. The captain was fifty-year-old, ex-Naval pilot, Victor Saracini.

The aircraft followed its usual route until 8:47, when, at the level of George Washington bridge, which joins the north side of Manhattan to New Jersey over the River Hudson, it changed course veering sharply left. The hijackers, having slit the throats of several stewardesses, had taken control of the cockpit. For twelve minutes the Boeing flew over the Hudson following its western shore, until it again made another tight left turn. Right before it was the south tower of the World Trade Center, into which it crashed at 9:03.

At the time live television cameras were broadcasting a fire in the north tower, caused by the impact of an American Airlines B-767 which had taken place at 8:48. Millions of viewers witnessed live the UA-115 (sic) fly into the south tower, between floors 78 and 84, causing a much greater explosion than the one caused minutes earlier by the American Airlines plane.

The official investigation by the Federal Aviation Authority determined that the Boeing crashed into the building at a velocity of 937 kilometers per hour. Another study by the Massachusetts Technology Institute, however, established a speed of 859 kilometers per hour at the moment of impact.

Neither of the two investigations mentioned there was any strange form attached to the aircraft. Their conclusions form part of the half million documents serving as a departure point for the ten members of the national commission looking into the causes of the attacks.

The commission began its investigations at the New York Port customs building. Its objective is to continue the investigation started by the Joint Senate-House of Representatives Intelligence Committee. Before handing over to the national commission, the committee identified several human and organizational errors which had hindered work by the intelligence services to prevent the attacks. The White House then tried to get ex-Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, to preside the commission. Having failed to achieve this, it then cut off financing and the commission has still not received the eleven million dollars budgeted for their work. The commission, which has the support of both the Democrat and Republican parties, is due to present its conclusions to Congress in May 2004. The families of the 2,798 people who died on 9/11, 1,095 of whom were in the south tower of the World Trade Center in New York, will have to wait until then for concrete answers as to how the biggest attack the United States has ever suffered was carried out.

http://www.amics21.com/911/misteriosos.pdf


QUOTE
El avión que estrellaron contra la torre sur del World Trade Center
presenta formas de origen desconocido


Los misteriosos reflejos del 11-S

by Eduardo Martín de Pozuelo
La Vanguardia
June 22, 2003

Barcelona - años y medio después del 11-S, persisten muchas dudas sobre las circunstancias que rodearon los atentados contra las Torres Gemelas. Una de esas incógnitas se refiere a la naturaleza de unas formas o manchas que pueden observarse en el fuselaje del avión que se estrelló contra la torre sur del World Trade Center. "La Vanguardia" preguntó por las manchas a Boeing, que alegó no poder contestar por motivos de seguridad nacional y se remitió a la comisión independiente que desde el 31 de marzo indaga lo sucedido.

En las imágenes congeladas de las distintas filmaciones del tramo final del vuelo 175 de United Airlines se pueden apreciar tres extrañas formas, que los técnicos aeronáuticos consultados no aciertan a explicar. Se trata de dos formaciones alargadas, situadas sobre la parte inferior del fuselaje, hacia la proa y hacia la popa del aparato. Hay una tercera, aparentemente piramidal, ubicada en la panza, casi en el centro del avión. El departamento de aviación comercial de Boeing, con sede en Seattle, examinó las fotografías durante diez días y, tras anunciar una explicación sobre el fenómeno, declinó pronunciarse sobre lo que veía. Finalmente, una portavoz manifestó que Boeing no podía opinar "por razones de seguridad" y por no haber participado oficialmente en la investigación de los atentados.

Varios ingenieros aeronáuticos de centros oficiales españoles no han encontrado una explicación clara sobre los brillos o formas que se observan en el avión secuestrado. En cambio, un análisis digital de detección de contornos de las fotos, efectuado en la Escola Universitària Politècnica de Mataró, concluye que los "objetos que se advierten no pueden ser debidos a sombras provocadas por el ángulo de incidencia del sol sobre el avión porque siempre aparecen con la misma forma y tamaño, aunque sí con distinta luminosidad". Para llegar a ese resultado, las fotografías fueron sometidas a un procesado digital de imagen "que diera respuesta a los cambios de luminancia" que se aprecian a simple vista y que, en principio, no tienen sentido, dado que el fuselaje de los aviones comerciales es cilíndrico y liso, según se expone en el citado informe técnico.

Su autora, con una dilatada experiencia profesional en procesado digital de imágenes, redes neuronales artificiales y biometría, señala en su informe que a cada una de las fotos se le aplicó "el mismo tratamiento utilizando tres algoritmos estándares del procesado digital de imágenes", cuyos datos técnicos desarrolla profusamente en el dossier. Tras aclarar que "las imágenes estudiadas tienen distintos ángulos de observación", establece que "los objetos detectados presentan a su alrededor distinta luminancia por tener relieve" y añade que "esta es la única explicación posible", para matizar finalmente que "los objetos detectados se distinguen perfectamente del tren de aterrizaje".

La reconstrucción de los hechos que precedieron al terrorífico atentado contra la segunda torre, indican que los preparativos del vuelo de United Airlines UA-175 que cubre la ruta entre Boston y Los Ángeles fueron rutinarios en la mañana del 11 de septiembre del 2001. El avión, un B-767-222, matrícula N612UA, abandonó la terminal de United en el aeropuerto Logan International a las 7.58 horas y a las 8.15 ya estaba en el aire. A bordo iban 56 pasajeros, incluidos cinco terroristas de Al Qaeda, armados con cortaplumas. El capitán era Victor Saracini, de 50 años, ex piloto de la Navy.

El aparato siguió la ruta habitual hasta las 8.47, cuando, a la altura del puente George Washington, que une la parte norte de Manhattan con Nueva Jersey por encima del río Hudson, efectuó un brusco viraje a la izquierda. Los secuestradores, después de degollar a varias azafatas, se habían hecho con la cabina de mando. Durante doce minutos, el Boeing estuvo sobrevolando la orilla oriental del Hudson hasta que realizó otro giro muy cerrado hacia la izquierda. Delante tenía la torre sur del World Trade Center, contra la que impactó a las 9.03 horas.

En ese momento, las cámaras de televisión retransmitían en directo un incendio en la torre norte, provocado por el impacto de un B-767 de American Airlines que se había producido a las 8.48 horas. Millones de espectadores pudieron ver en directo cómo el UA-115 entraba en la torre sur, entre los pisos 78 y 84, y provocaba una explosión mucho más potente que la causada minutos antes por el avión de American Airlines.

La investigación oficial de la Administración Federal de Aviación determinó que el Boeing chocó contra el edificio a 937 kilómetros por hora. Por su parte, un estudio del Instituto Tecnológico de Massachusetts estableció una velocidad de 859 kilómetros por hora en el momento del impacto.

Ninguna de las dos investigaciones mencionó que hubiera alguna forma extraña adosada al avión. Sus conclusiones forman parte del medio millón de documentos que sirven de partida a los diez miembros de la comisión nacional que están revisando las causas de los atentados.

La comisión empezó sus trabajos en el edificio de aduanas del puerto de Nueva York. Su objetivo es proseguir con la investigación que inició el comité de inteligencia conjunta Senado-Cámara de Representantes. Antes de traspasar las competencias a la comisión nacional, el comité identificó varios fallos humanos y de organización que dificultaron la labor de los servicios de inteligencia para prevenir los atentados. Entonces, la Casa Blanca intentó que el ex secretario de Estado, Henry Kissinger, presidiera la comisión. Al no conseguirlo cortó la financiación y a la comisión todavía no han llegado los once millones de dólares que ha presupuestado para su trabajo. La comisión, que cuenta con el apoyo de los partidos demócrata y republicano, deberá presentar sus conclusiones al Congreso en mayo del 2004. Las familias de las 2.798 personas que murieron el 11-S, 1.095 de las cuales estaban en la torre sur del World Trade Center de Nueva York, esperarán hasta entonces respuestas concretas sobre la ejecución del mayor ataque que ha sufrido Estados Unidos.

http://www.lavanguardia.com/buscador/index...p;x=50&y=17











This post has been edited by Aldo Marquis CIT: Jan 23 2012, 07:45 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Jan 21 2012, 11:02 AM
Post #2





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,910
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Thanks for all that Aldo.

After having first seen those unusual contours on the airplane's belly, I am still of the opinion that the airplane was a modified 767.

My theory is that the modification is part of the work necessary to convert the 767 into tanker configuration, and if records here at PFT are accurate, my guess would be that the airplane was one of a batch of about 24 that were delivered to USAF at McDill AFB by one of the companies owned or controlled by Dov Zakheim.

There was a long running controversy at the Pentagon and in the press during the 90's regarding which airplane would replace the KC-135 and the KC-10, the 2 tankers in the USAF inventory. A modified 767 was the favorite candidate, and apparently some were modified by Zakheim's company in Israel.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 26 2012, 09:53 AM
Post #3



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



Just thought I'd add a few images and videos to this thread. There's definitely at least one object to the right underside of this aircraft. 

Just an addition to Aldo's link to the Spanish article

http://www.amics21.com/911/report.html

http://www.amics21.com/911/breakdown.html

Two interesting images taken from this site

http://www.amics21.com/911/flight175/third.html

http://www.amics21.com/911/imags/nobumps.jpg

http://www.amics21.com/911/imags/bumps.jpg

And this "old school" thread at LCF

http://z15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...?showtopic=9781

And here

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=3397


Here are images of tail number N612UA

http://usuarios.multimania.es/aeroespace/c...es/N612UA01.jpg

http://usuarios.multimania.es/aeroespace/c...es/N612UA06.jpg

(There was allegedly a military grade 767 refueller mentioned- kc 135? - that is claimed to have a similar appendage but I can't find it)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KC-135_Stratotanker

This is the clincher for me personally. The so called "shadow" has a physical reaction on impact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMayTWzOGY0

I think that this anomaly and that of the Flight 11 preimpact(?) explosion were the reason that NPT was tagged on to the images and videos captured. 2cents.

http://911anomalies.files.wordpress.com/20...tdp51.gif?w=450

Clearer image seen in this Simon Shack video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjQmxS-DpyM

The flash isn't touched upon at all by this guy.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Mar 26 2012, 10:22 AM
Post #4





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,910
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Good stuff OSS.

The KC designates a tanker. KC-135 was a modified Boeing 707. KC-10 was a modified Douglas DC-10.

To my knowledge, the 767 was talked about as a replacement for the older aircraft but was never given a designation as such. Zakheim's company delivered about 25 of candidate (prototype, if you wish) aircraft to the USAF from Israel.

It is my theory that perhaps 2 out of that batch of 25 were used that day, only as a POSSIBLE explanation for the external bulges/fairings we see.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Mar 27 2012, 10:46 PM
Post #5



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



QUOTE (amazed! @ Mar 26 2012, 03:22 PM) *
Good stuff OSS.

The KC designates a tanker. KC-135 was a modified Boeing 707. KC-10 was a modified Douglas DC-10.

To my knowledge, the 767 was talked about as a replacement for the older aircraft but was never given a designation as such. Zakheim's company delivered about 25 of candidate (prototype, if you wish) aircraft to the USAF from Israel.

It is my theory that perhaps 2 out of that batch of 25 were used that day, only as a POSSIBLE explanation for the external bulges/fairings we see.


Definitely a consideration.

Found these too

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbCcb6NV8Io

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54VHUi7-wDk

Finally, pause this video at 00:28

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RpNSF-er88

Look at the "bulge" to the underside of the right wing and fuselage. Then compare it to the image posted earlier

http://www.amics21.com/911/imags/nobumps.jpg

http://www.amics21.com/911/imags/bumps.jpg




This post has been edited by onesliceshort: Mar 27 2012, 10:54 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Apr 3 2012, 11:25 AM
Post #6



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



Military aircraft with appendage



Haven't identified the above yet.


This one (or more what the appendage actually is) caught my eye



E-8C

http://www.af.mil/information/factsheets/f...heet.asp?id=100

QUOTE
FILE PHOTO -- The E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System is a joint Air Force - Army program. The Joint STARS uses a multi-mode side looking radar to detect, track, and classify moving ground vehicles in all conditions deep behind enemy lines. The aircraft is the only airborne platform in operation that can maintain realtime surveillance over a corps-sized area of the battlefield. (U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Shane Cuomo)
Download HiRes
 
 

Mission 
The E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System, or Joint STARS, is an airborne battle management, command and control, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platform. Its primary mission is to provide theater ground and air commanders with ground surveillance to support attack operations and targeting that contributes to the delay, disruption and destruction of enemy forces. 

Features 
The E-8C is a modified Boeing 707-300 series commercial airframe extensively remanufactured and modified with the radar, communications, operations and control subsystems required to perform its operational mission. The most prominent external feature is the 27-foot (8 meters) long, canoe-shaped radome under the forward fuselage that houses the 24-foot (7.3 meters) long, side-looking phased array antenna. 

The radar and computer subsystems on the E-8C can gather and display detailed battlefield information on ground forces. The information is relayed in near-real time to the Army and Marine Corps common ground stations and to other ground command, control, communications, computers and intelligence, or C4I, nodes. 

The antenna can be tilted to either side of the aircraft where it can develop a 120-degree field of view covering nearly 19,305 square miles (50,000 square kilometers) and is capable of detecting targets at more than 250 kilometers (more than 820,000 feet). The radar also has some limited capability to detect helicopters, rotating antennas and low, slow-moving fixed wing aircraft. 

As a battle management and command and control asset, the E-8C can support the full spectrum of roles and missions from peacekeeping operations to major theater war. 

Background

Joint STARS evolved from Army and Air Force programs to develop, detect, locate and attack enemy armor at ranges beyond the forward area of troops. The first two developmental aircraft deployed in 1991 to Operation Desert Storm and also supported Operation Joint Endeavor in December 1995. 

Joint STARS supported NATO troops over Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1996, Operation Allied Force from February to June 1999, and Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. 

The 116th Air Control Wing is America's first "Total Force" wing. The former 93rd Air Control Wing, an active-duty Air Combat Command unit, and 116th Bomb Wing, a Georgia Air National Guard unit, were deactivated Oct.1, 2002. The 116th Air Control Wing was activated blending Guard and active-duty Airmen into a single unit. 

The 116th ACW is the only unit that operates the E-8C and the Joint STARS mission. The 17th and final E-8C aircraft was delivered on March 23, 2005. 

General Characteristics 
Primary Function: Airborne battle management 
Contractor: Northrop Grumman Corp. (primary)
Power Plant: Four Pratt and Whitney TF33-102C 
Thrust: 19,200 pounds each engine 
Wingspan: 145 feet, 9 inches (44.4 meters)
Length: 152 feet, 11 inches (46.6 meters) 
Height: 42 feet 6 inches (13 meters) 
Weight: 171,000 pounds (77,564 kilograms)
Maximum Takeoff Weight: 336,000 pounds (152,409 kilograms) 
Fuel Capacity: 155,000 (70,306 kilograms)
Payload: electronic equipment and crew
Speed: 449 - 587 miles per hour (optimum orbit speed) or Mach 0.52 - 0.65 (390 - 510 knots) 
Range: 9 hours 
Ceiling: 42,000 feet (12,802 meters) 
Crew: (flight crew),  four; (mission crew) normally 15 Air Force and three Army specialists (crew size varies according to mission) 
Unit Cost: $244.4 million (fiscal 98 constant dollars) 
Initial operating capability:  December 1997
Inventory: Total Force wing, 17; Reserve, 0


And this one (not identified yet, but the appendage appears very similar to the anomaly on the "UA175" underbelly)



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radome

QUOTE
A radome is often used to prevent ice and freezing rain from accumulating directly onto the metal surface of the antennas. In the case of a spinning radar dish antenna, the radome also protects the antenna from debris and rotational irregularities due to wind. Its shape is easily identified by its hardshell, which has strong properties against being damaged.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm..._On_Halifax.jpg
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Apr 4 2012, 09:19 AM
Post #7





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,910
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



Yes, and I think somewhere in that JSTARS program, the name "Rivet Joint" comes up.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aldo Marquis CIT
post Jul 7 2014, 06:55 PM
Post #8


Citizen Investigator


Group: Contributor
Posts: 1,179
Joined: 16-August 06
Member No.: 10



Flight 11: http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=21848
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aldo Marquis CIT
post Jul 7 2014, 07:09 PM
Post #9


Citizen Investigator


Group: Contributor
Posts: 1,179
Joined: 16-August 06
Member No.: 10



For the first genuine evidence unequivocally proving an inside job on 9/11, go here:

www.citizeninvestigationteam.com

(Secretly recorded virtual confession of involvement contained within video presentation)
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: 21st August 2014 - 05:59 PM