A Question For Us Radar Controllers Options

[ivanvedder]

Hy, this is an italian Atcer, I have a question for all the radar controllers here:
In 2001 (in case of a plane with transponder off) did you have to select a different setting on your radar to see his primary response?
this is what the 9/11 commission says:

"On 9/11, the terrorists turned off the transponders on three of the four hijacked aircraft. With its transponder off, it is possible, though more difficult, to track an aircraft by its primary radar returns. But unlike transponder data, primary radar returns do not show the aircraft's identity and altitude. Controllers at centers rely so heavily on transponder signals that they usually do not display primary radar returns on their radar scopes. But they can change the configuration of their scopes so they can see primary radar returns. They did this on 9/11 when the transponder signals for three of the aircraft disappeared."

Is there any guy (especially from Boston or New York, Cleveland, and Indianapolis) who can answer?
In the italian sistem if an aircraft loses the transponder signal (or if we have an a/c without it) we see directly (with no changings of configurations) a specific simbol (+) with the speed indication.
thanks for your help
ciao!

This post has been edited by ivanvedder: Feb 21 2007, 09:22 AM

[Westgate]

Hi Robin - I am Radar illiterate I am afraid, so please forgive my following question from your excellent and detailed postings - it's referenced below:-

"The NORAD "injects" never make it to any FAA controllers radar...they are only seen on NORAD radars because THEY ARE NOT REAL! It would be very irresponsible to load in fake stuff on a live controllers' scope and then have that controller do the bob and weave with fake aircraft. The exercises have some real targets, the responding aircraft, but all the other inputs are all computer generated. Its a play world during the exercises...and when ATC calls them off for emergencies, they are OVER, and the "real world rules". These "inputs" and all the NORAD exercises are just a smoke screen for the public to say "OOOOOH", now I understand...when they absolutely do not understand. Just more psy-ops and public PR spewed out by the military and Bush Regime to cover their guilty tracks."


Robin
Way back in the early days of 911 research, much was suddenly made of the discovery of the various military exercises taking place on 911. It was suggested that false injects caused some confusion to the ATC system, at least for the first 45 minutes or so, until FAA called 'game off'
This, of course, has been repeated endlessly by all sorts of researchers in all manner of publications and posts. Just so I can get it clear in my mind, are you saying there were no false injects appearing on the FAA screens, only on the NORAD screens? Were the exercises 'real targets' visible on the FAA screens though please?
Does this mean that the NORAD exercises are indeed just a wrong avenue to explore, of no actual significance? Thus the researcher who first made much of NORAD'S significance in his book, was 'barking up the wrong tree'. (Mike Ruppert and 'Crossing the Rubicon')
I am enjoying this thread so very much, thank you for taking the time to help enlighten us on this complex subject. It is becoming ever more incredible as you realise the sheer scale of duplicitous cover-ups and smoke-screens expertly placed for the ignorant researcher like myself.