Almost a year ago Rob asked me to try identify the military airtraffic in the 84Rades radar data for the 911Intercepted movie. But it is not an easy task, because when one researches the data deeply, one finds out there are literally hundreds of military planes (or also the planes which despite they don't transpond any military codes certainly behave as military planes and anyway take off or land at military airbases) in the air which all one after another must be tracked to the military bases where they took off or landed. It takes months of work. Especially difficult is to reliably discern the planes, which fly in formations - which one must track manually, blip after blip, because the radar tracking software is usually unable to do such a job - at least not reliably.

This video is one of the very partial results of this effort.


direct link to Youtube

Please make sure you watch this video in fullscreen mode and in the 720p HD.

The 84Rades radar data show 3 military planes in formation which take off from Andrews JNAF already at ~8:35 EDT (12:35 UTC). The planes squawking military transponder codes: M2-6413 (red), M2-6402 (blue) and M2-1212 (pink) fly in a typical formation southwards and they soon disappear into river valley in the southern Virginia. After ~12 minutes they again reappear from another river valley in North Carolina still having each same squawk codes as before they disappeared and being in the same formation, so they can be easily and infallibly identified.

Then they longtime circle near Stumpy Point, NC.

Exactly when the Pentagon is attacked they split and while the M2-1212 flyies immediately back north and lands back at Andrews JNAF at ~10:13 EDT, the M2-6413 and M2-6402 encounter another military plane M2-7004, possibly for refueling operation. Then they also fly back north and land back at the Andrews JNAF. One of them - the M2-6413 - having then consistently also M3-4663 (civil transponder code) takes almost immediately again off and joins the other fighters patroling the attacked Pentagon. Then the M2-6413/M3-4663 lands again at Andrews JNAF.

The other planes in the second contextual part of the video which are marked by various lightgreen colors are the planes transponding military M2 codes. The planes marked by various darkgreen colors are the planes which are transponding civil M3 codes only, but are confirmed to be bound from and/or to various military airports.

Please note that the identification of the airtraffic bound from or to military bases is just preliminary result of longlasting complex research into 84Rades radar data which is still pending.

It is interesting that besides the above planes from Andrews JNAF (the closest military airbase to Pentagon) we can also find a simmilar formation of planes taking off from McGuire AFB (the closest military airbase to New York, NY) - already at ~8:03 EDT just after the "AA11" allegedly took off from Boston. The planes almost encounter both "AA11" and "UA175", then do long trip north and back south and later land back at McGuire AFB*.

A question rises whether this planes indeed are fighterjets - as it very much looks from their flawless maneuvering in formations, from the prompt avoiding radar/disguising in the river valleys or from the fact that one of them most probably later joins the fighters patroling Pentagon - and if positive, then why they were sent so far south and north respectively - it should be noted that it was relatively long before the 9/11 attacks on the respective close targets happened, and why they weren't used to stop the allegedly hijacked planes before they reached their targets.

------
*According to further research of the later 84Rades radar data (in fact I have raw 84Rades datasets which end 24:00 UTC) not covered in the picture linked - the M2-4171 and the nontransponding plane which later starts transponding the M2-0700 land there at ~11:23 EDT and the another plane they fly with - the M3-1545 - possibly a tanker - lands there much later at ~14:20 EDT - after more than 6 hours of being in the air - and possibly meanwhile refuels also the fighters which patrol Boston.

Dear Tume (if I may call you that)

Extraordinary dedicated work, thankyou.
Is this information extracted from the material provided by Commander Richard Rehs, from the 84th Radar Evaluation Squadron --to -- the Federal Bureau of Investigation -- on 13 September 2001?

Robert

Thanks for appreciation of my work, no problem for me with "Tume", many call me like this here, my name is Jan, but I'm usually avoiding to use it publicly in connection to 9/11 research.

Yes, the data indeed seem to been handed over to FBI by RICHARD B. REHS, Lt Col, USAF,
Commander - here is the memo.
(notice the apparent misidentification of the aircraft type for the "(UA) -175" and "UA - 93" planes - not a typo - appears on multiple occassions in the file - interesting is that in this gen. Peterson briefing - which also can be found in the 84Rades datasets - the misidentification for "United Flight 175" persists, but the "United Flight 93" is identified as "Boeing 757")

For the record:
As I look into my file archives I've obtained the basic 84Rades data together with the RS3 software (containing also the Rehs memo) in form of the RAR archive file: Rades_ALL.rar (394 526 720 B) on November 5 2007.
The memo file informations look like this when the file is extracted from the archive (at the time I've had only french Open Office version). Note the weird thing that the info suggests the file was printed even before it was created, but I'm unable to say how significant it is. When we look to the file informations of various files contained in the 84Rades rar archives we find out the info records suggest there were multiple persons who worked on analyzyng the data since the very evening of 9/11 for almost a month after the Rehs memo is dated.

Then on November 27 2007 I've obtained also this RAR archived files: rades.pentagon.rar (482 934 784 B), rades.ual93.rar (331 677 696 B) and rades.wtc.rar (309 657 600 B) which contain also the raw SEADS data up until 16:30 EDT and raw NEADS data up until 20:00 EDT and numerous products from the data the 84 Rades people created between 9/11 and 10/11 2001.

All the files I've downloaded via soon then defunct John Farmer's 84 Rades forum site.

I certify that I didn't any modifications to the datafiles provided to me by John Farmer except solely to the "tracknumber" values 0-65535 which are contained in each and every single blip records helping to identify it as a part of an single aircraft airpath record.
What I did with the data was:
1. running the datafiles through tracker software to obtain raw tracks (assigning tracknumbers to all the blips in the radar datafile) for every moving object recorded often by multiple radars. (tracker software chains the blips into logical tracks using M2, M3 transponder codes identification, MC altitude, radar height, speed and heading parameters and assigns each blip a number which identifies then the blip as being a part of an airpath)
2. manual tracking "blip-by-blip" to discern the consistent multiple tracks where the tracking software was unable to discern planes -especially in tight formations, for stealth planes transponding just sometimes Bcn messages, etc.
3. merging some of the tracks under one tracknumber, where it was above reasonable doubt clear that the tracks identified by the tracking software continue under different tracknumber
4. highlighting the tracks in various colors -for them to be easier discernable from other tracks
when visualized in the RS3 software. (for example I've usually assigned the tracks in visualization with various light-green color tones when the blips contained valid military M2 transponder code or with dark-green color tones when I've found the plane doesn't transpond military M2 identification codes, but took off from or landed at a military airbase. The military tracks in the visualizations used for the video I recolored to be even better discernable from other tracks.)

Please note that I, nor Pilots for 911 Truth assert the 84Rades data are authentic and/or unmodified. On the other hand I don't assert they're fabricated - I can hardly imagine somebody would completely fabricate many hours of airtraffic record at the east and southwest coast of the USA comprising of literally millions of radar message records and many thousands of planes. It would somehow defy my imagination and I certainly would not see a sense of something like that taking place, because something like that would be easily debunkable if one would find out it doesn't correspond to the actual airtraffic on 9/11 traceable from records of other agencies, by witness accounts etc.
Nevertheless I can confirm the data contain false targets, illogically scattered throughout the airspace until like 10:00 EDT, not forming any logical tracks, reportedly injected there for exercise purposes; multiple sets from the data files contain corrupted data, for example duplicite records; the 84Rades product from the data (the derived "UA93" flightpath) omits some key blips - where the radar shows two separate flying objects in the air just before the "UA93" allegedly crashed - which suggests that at least the products from the data were wittingly manipulated to conceal something.
But the data clearly contain a record of a really vast military airtraffic. So far I've found and catalogized hundreds of planes which either openly tranpond military M2 codes or they do not transpond M2 codes, but take off or land at various military airbases. What is for example very startling is that there are numerous military planes circling in the area of Chesapeake Bay just minutes of flight from Washington D.C.. For an idea so looks the military traffic there 9:00-9:30 EDT I've found so far:

(lightgreen transponding M2, dark-green not transponding M2 but bound to an military airbase, the red marker is Pentagon and the red trace is "AA77") It certainly looks like the Pentagonguys not just lied to 911Omission but by far didn't tell us everything concerning 9/11...

Dear Tume.

Thankyou.

I was setting out a series of questions, --hit the wrong button and they disappeared--, which causes me to pause and have a think before encroaching on your valuable time further.
Perhaps just one if I may.

Where you show the 'trace' of aircraft --in your work-- said to be involved in the impacts, what information do you use?

Robert

If you switch the video to 720p and put it fullscreen then 3:12 into the video you'll see a red highlighted trace comming from the upper right corner moving eastwards, that's the trace of the plane said by OCT being involved in the impact into the Pentagon, so called "AA77". You can see it move then right on the screen up until it does the infamous big circle and at 3:41 into the video disappears just right from the red marker with cross upper left - which marks the position of Pentagon. The picture I posted for the idea about the military airtraffic 9:00-9:30 around Washington area I've also posted in my last post shows the "AA77" also in red, also with the red marker showing the position of the Pentagon.

That's for the information in the 84Rades.

As we know there's no hard evidence that the Pentagon plane was the American Airlines Boeing 757 scheduled for AAL flight 77 on 9/11. In fact there's overwhelming evidence to the contrary contained in the oficially released datasets.

From the 84Rades data it is also impossible to link the trace shown in the radar data anyhow to American Airlines flight 77 IAD->LAX, because the red trace appears in mid air only at primary radar above West Virginia at 13:09:29.99 UTC at 38°25'17.01"N 80°46'56.48"W without any identification whatsoever.

My conclusive stance on it is that this plane logically cannot be the AAL-77, because the FDR allegedly found in the Pentagon and which is so alleged by the OCT proponents to come from the N644AA - without any shred of hard evidence to support the claim - quite conclusively shows, that the plane, which has closely simmilar flightpath in the FDR as is recorded in the radar data (various radar data both from 84Rades and also radars at DCA, ADW, IAD and BWI) DIDN'T departed the Gate D26 at IAD, where the AAL-77 was boarded according to many wittness accounts collected by FBI. Only logical conclusion from this very fact (and supported also by other facts found in the course of the 9/11 research) is that the red trace visualizing the 84Rades radar record shown in the video is not the Boeing 757 tailnumber N644AA scheduled for AAL-77 flight from IAD to LAX that fateful day of 9/11. The red trace could be anything, but from the comparison of the multiple officially released datasets (civil and military radar data + the FDR data) I did it is absolutely clear that it COULD NOT be the N644AA. To my knowledge there's not a shred of publicly available evidence to the contrary. And so the claims made by the OCT proponents that the "plane which 'impacted' Pentagon" was the AAL-77 is quite clearly and simply an example of a carefuly maintained myth which is not supported by, literally, any evidence whatsoever and is so completely baseless, moreover contradicted by multitude of the officially released datasets.

The radar trace of the plane which took off from IAD RW30 at ~8:20 EDT, transponding M3-6553 and NEVER switching the transponder off (just changing the squawk code to M3-3743 at ~8:40 EDT) before it disappeared booth from primary and secondary radar, ends near Mt. Alto on the border of the West Virginia and Ohio 12:50:38.66 UTC at 38°49'50.80"N 81°56'29.02"W - that's all the conclusive we can find in the 84Rades data about it.

Nevertheless the further research of the 84Rades radar data can suggest the further fate of the AAL-77, different from the logically and by evidence overwhelmingly excluded possibility that it "impacted Pentagon". But this is now at the stage which I think for various reasons shouldn't be discussed publicly, so at the time I'm open to discuss this issue and its very dire implications and possibly show the evidence of the possible AAL-77 flightpath after it disappeared from the PLA radar only strictly privately.

Just a technical note: as far as I know the admins here don't like lenghthy quotes from the previous posts with no apparent reason.

Dear Tume,

Thankyou.
I think the admins might realise I don't know how to fly this thing completely, perhaps tolerating me, besides what you have to say deserves a second airing.

Have you given any consideration to the document 'National Transportation Safety Board, --Specialists Factual Report of Investigation Digital Flight Data Recorder --NTSB number DCA01ma064, in respect to the ratio of the "Parameters Plotted"/ "Parameters Not Working of Unconfirmed".

This may well have been considered previously, but it seems not a lot of the potential was used.

It would be interesting to 'KNOW' officially, or by an informed person, what the normal ratio, or what "parameters" were usually used on a Boeing 757, particularly those controlled by American Airlines.

Put it down to my 'old snoopy nose' or whatever. but something doesn't smell right.

Robert

Yeah I've read this although unfortunately I don't know forther development of this case. But it strenghtens my suspicion that the "AA77" FDR doesn't come from the N644AA -based primarily on the fact that the position data exclude the possibility the plane was boarded at the Gate 26 - as many wittness accounts collected by FBI suggest for the AAL-77. Moreover the FDR data appear to indicate GPS or even inflight IRS allignment features, which would also suggest the FDR doesn't come from the N644AA, and the suggested modification of the FDR data on 9/13 11:45pm could imply not just that the record was modified, for example to delete the data after the time Pentagon was allegedly hit by the plane (which is also contradicted by the last pressure altitude values in the FDR which are way too high and almost surely would exclude a possibility the plane impacted the Pentagon at the level of the 1/2 floor or that it would appear in the Pentagon surveillance cameras leveled close above the Pentalawn), but directly imply that the FDR was planted to the Pentagon crime scene. The FDR data also show that the cockpit door was never opened (so how the plane was hijacked then? By RC?), but the FDR data on the other hand contain the original GMT timestamping which is 4 seconds ahead from the products made by NTSB from the data and can positively suggest the NTSB fabricated the timing of the "AA77" tabular files and also the timing in their video simulation of the "AA77" flight, especially when we compare the timing/positioning with the multiple radar records available -and we can even decipher why they did the mistake in determining the "impact" time, which then led to the timing fabrication in the "AA77" FDR products. (see here - a post which was censored at 911blogger.)

So indeed I share your nose feeling the FDR's are somehow fishy, especially startling is the fact that NTSB never produced the real serials and so there's literally no evidence which would link the respective FDR's to the N644AA and N591UA. This alone almost surely suggest that the FDR's in fact don't come from the particular planes as the OCT suggests, because otherwise there wouldn't be much a problem for NTSB to publish the serials traceable back to the respective planes and I would really wonder why they didn't find out the serial and simply didn't claim the FDR's having them on them. But maybe the NTSB was not taking part in the conspiracy and only did what they were ordered there to do by the perps. Maybe even the heinous criminals are not as in the past and are currupted and lazy to strive for a perfect crime - maybe because they anyway count on that the dumbed down public will anyway not much press them to make their story straight.

With the quotes you can simply delete them from the reply form (for example by highlighting the text and then pressing Ctrl+X and write there just your replies.

Dear Tume.

Thankyou.
I will use Crtl+X after this one, but I think what you have just said is to important not to repeat again, which could possibly engage somebody who has a detailed understanding of what --would normally-- have been recorded on a FDR used in a --Boeing 757--American Airways controlled-- even better-- would have contained.

This is a shift from what we have discussed so far, but what if a FDR was in an aircraft that did hit the Pentagon building, even the FDR that the data is said to have come away from.
It's a bit fishy that it was said to have been found inside the Pentagon building, but if it was always considered that the full identification of it was never going to be revealed, it may well of started off containing information more connected with the actual flight path of that aircraft, which may not have had "cockpit doors".

Along comes the revelation of people seeing another aircraft, north of the service station.
What to do then?
Change the information to suggest that aircraft, "that would have been considered to make things very confusing" which it appears it has, "big time".

Just staring in the bottom of my 'coffee mug', brings strange things out in the mind, but often they lead to stranger things.
Even if not right on the money, they should not be discarded without some thought, and you are much better equipped to do that.

Robert

I think there were multiple people from both 9/11 truth movement and govt. loyalist side who studied the FDR data and what I know then for example with the pressure altitude they came to very simmilar results, although the govt. loyalists tryied to downplay it by asserting a "divergence" between the pressure and radio altimeters, which was then quite comprehensibly and convincingly debunked by Rob. There are piles of parameters in the FDR, I personally have studied just some of them for very partial reasons, for example to find out which gate the plane bearing the FDR really departed at IAD or to compare the position data with the radar records to find out where the plane was and if it could be at the NOC flightpath, which I've found very possible after studiing some FDR parameters (see here), or for more precise determining the timelag of the 84Rades PLA radar data. But I'm no way an expert on FDR and I was looking into it mostly to compare it with the radars, which are my main concern from the very beginnig I've arrived here at this forum. So please let's go back to the topic of this thread which are the planes from Andrews JNAF as recorded in the 84Rades.

Dear Tume.

Thankyou.
There are a number of questions forming, but before doing so, a bit more consideration and thinking about what you have presented.

Robert

[quote name='tumetuestumefaisdubien' date='Jul 11 2011, 01:21 AM' post='10799851']
If you switch the video to 720p and put it fullscreen then 3:12 into the video you'll see a red highlighted trace comming from the upper right corner moving eastwards, that's the trace of the plane said by OCT being involved in the impact into the Pentagon, so called "AA77". You can see it move then right on the screen up until it does the infamous big circle and at 3:41 into the video disappears just right from the red marker with cross upper left - which marks the position of Pentagon. The picture I posted for the idea about the military airtraffic 9:00-9:30 around Washington area I've also posted in my last post shows the "AA77" also in red, also with the red marker showing the position of the Pentagon.

Dear Tume.

Just to make sure I am interpreting this correctly, do you actually mean the, 'red highlighted', from "the upper left corner".

Never flown an aircraft myself but been up front plenty of times, what strikes me, is if that red trace was making its way through all that apparent traffic, without any identification, how come other pilots were not screaming their heads off about it?

Do you have an altitude spread for all those other aircraft?

Robert

Here is something about the planes from Andrews.

If you look at the video you can see the nontransponding "AA77" (yes, the 'red highlighted', from "the upper left corner") crossed the flightpaths of just couple of planes and from the altitudes in the radar data compared with "AA77" altitudes in FDR is clear that the plane didn't closely encountered another plane.

just couple of planes and from the altitudes in the radar data compared with "AA77" altitudes in FDR is clear that the plane didn't closely encountered another plane.
[/quote]

Dear Tume.

Understood.
Boy it looked like things were going every where to me.

Almost immediately after the red trace that did the circle near the Pentagon.

What is the other red trace that comes from the North/ west, appearing to go right over the top of the Pentagon and continue South, appearing to land near the coast where a lot of othe aircraft appear to be landing?

Robert

Dear Tume.

Jumped ahead of my self a bit there.

The red trace that comes in from the left --West-- before that there is a red trace going towards the left
heading --West--, what is that?
Is it related to the red trace that ended up at the Pentagon doing the circle?

Robert

That's a plane M3-2230 which comes from Toronto, on the way closely encounters "UA93" just when there are the other planes swirling around it (see here), then flyies southeast and is one of the first planes which fly over Pentagon after it was attacked and then continues southeast and lands at Norfolk Itl. Something I've written about it here.

The plane highlighted red flying westwards is the M3-6553 which is said to be the "AA77" - this trace is in timing/positioning virtually identical to the positions given by the data in the alleged "AA77" FDR, allegedly found in the Pentagon. So it is the plane which is officially promoted to be the AAL-77 as it goes west after it departed Dulles.

But there are at least 3 major problems with this OCT account:

1. The alleged FDR shows quite conclusively that the plane bearing it on board didn't departed gate D-26 where the AAL-77 was boarded - as many FBI witnesses claim

2. The plane not only didn't departed the gate D-26 as the OCT claims for the AAL-77, but according to the alleged FDR it clearly departed another gate at ~8:12:25 - more than 3 minutes LATER than at 8:09 which is the departure time the OCT claims for the AAL-77

3. And -at least not last- there indeed is another plane (M3-7020 - not highlighted in the video to not confuse the viewer - because the video is primarily about Andrews fighters) which took off from the same RW30 ~4 minutes BEFORE the M3-6553 (M3-6553 is the plane said to be the "AA77") and it is also westbound flying a bit ahead of M3-6553, later disappearing from the radar bit more souther near the West Virginia/Kentucky border - so from the timing it very well can be the real AAL-77 with the passengers.

So I really don't know whether the red trace flying west at the beginning (M3-6553 - said to be "AA77") is somehow related to the red trace appearing later inbound from west - the plane which later make the circle and dissapears from radar west of the Pentagon wall - also said to be the "AA77" - but being on primary radar only and without any squawk - so I have at the time no means to confirm it or exclude it in the radar data alone - BUT, this "red trace which ended up at the Pentagon doing the circle" has almost identical flightpath as is recorded in the alleged FDR allegedly found in the Pentagon, so I would think it very much could be the same plane as the M3-6553 - but which on the other hand the alleged FDR quite clearly excludes from possibility that it is the real AAL-77 N644AA -the plane where the passengers were boarded at the gate 26 of Midfield Concourse D at Dulles International before 8:09 on 9/11 2001.

So to recap: We have
A] the M3-6553 which quite clearly and most probably can't be the AAL-77, but well can be the "red trace that ended up at the Pentagon doing the circle" - ther's at the time and to my knowledge nothing which would directly contradict it
and then we have
B] the M3-7020 took off ~4 minutes prior the plane A and which well could be the AAL-77 with the passengers, later disappearing close to the Kentucky border and flying somewhere west, nobody at this time - except of course the perps - knows where it ends - again: ther's at the time and to my knowledge nothing which would directly contradict this quite a very logical possibility.

Dear Tume

Thankyou.
You have explained that confusing situation very succinctly.

Early in looking into this, there was a moving plot shown on the internet, which you may be aware of, that unfortunately was not captured by me, it appears.
Looked hi and low for it since.
It showed trace 'in red as I remember' from the west towards the Pentagon, and the circle upto the point where the plot disappeared.
What was apparent, that it appeared that the plot showed two separate identities, very close to each other, through the whole of the trace, the circle clearly suggesting that there were two identities.

At that stage it definitely appeared that way.
It did not appear to be a plot and some other information in association, it appeared to be two definite identities.

As for whether it was an ==authentic plot== I don't know, but it has always stuck with me that there were two identities, which both dissapeared once the circle was completed and they were heading directly for the Pentagon.

Robert

[quote name='23investigator' date='Jul 13 2011, 05:59 PM' post='10799953']
Dear Tume

Thankyou.
You have explained that confusing situation very succinctly.

Dear Tume.

Just a thought that went through my mind that I should bring to your attention, but may well have already been considered by you.

There is a very comprehensive and extensive publication by the

National Transportation Safety Board --Vehicle Recorder Division.

Flight Data Recorder Handbook for Aviation Accident Investigations.
A Reference for Safety Board Staff.

You have probably considered this document, but in case not, have brought it to your attention.

Robert

I never heard about anything like two separated identities of the "AA77" trace. Where you've seen it, from which system this identification came?

You mean this document?

Dear Tume

I will answer your two questions here.

(1) I cannot find the plot I saw.
I will keep looking for it, at that stage I would have taken still shots of it, as I remember, it was not on Youtube and I could not imbed it.
It will show up I am sure, when it does you will be the first to know.

(2) The 'link' you gave me for the document wont work.
It is titled as I described in the post, printed in 'blue' on the cover (first page of document), over a background of a number of different types of FDR in a 'pinky' colour.
There are 58 pages.

Separate consideration.
When I saw the radar trace plot, at around the same time, there was a static print out carried out by somebody, showing plot points from some data, which showed an end plot position, 'dispositioned' to the main plot, to the south.

My memory is, that what I am talking about is at the same time I became aware of your work, with a suspicion that I noticed it on something that you had presented.
--could be wrong about that--
But again it is something that caught my attention and I probably captured it, and just have to find it now.

Much more organised now, than I was then, but I am not in the habit of discarding things.

It will show up --these things do.

Robert

Link repaired

It would be interesting to know which data you mean, because I'm not aware of any such data.



I must say I don't know anything about that considering "AA77". I've indeed - several years ago - have found two separate objects in the air at the radar, just before the "crash", but it was in the case of the "UA93".

Dear Tume

The reply --is playing 'funny buggers' for some reason, but yes that link is to the "document" on FDR--handbook, I was referring to.

Sorry about the other at the moment, will make a real concerted effort to locate, 'what I have been going on about' as I can feel you breathing down my neck, lol.

Hey --you'll be able to talk "ozz" by the time I have finished with you, hehe.

By the way "tume", finally located a photograph of a Boeing 767 -200, brake assembly.
No surprise I guess, but it does not look remotely like the brake assembly in the wheel lying in the street.
That is the first one, before somebody substituted another wheel with a completely different brake assembly, which could be considered to look more like that of a Boeing 767 -200.

So my friend, you need to 'sharpen your pencil', and locate where they swapped over a
Douglas B6 Destroyer, or its close cousin, Douglas A3 Skywarrior, for the allusive Boeing 767.
Because, the configuration is very much like that, as the tire diameters, inner parts that are visible in the wheel stuck in the wall panel, brake assembly, are, very typical of the two Douglas aircraft, in many ways.
The A3 Skywarrior though having twelve slots in the wheel, the B6 Destroyer nine.
As yet, have not been able to find a photograph of the B6 Destroyer brake assembly, but it probably is not a lot different than the A3 Skywarrior, not to say there were not some subtle changes, as there was no arrestor wire available for the B6 Destroyer, just brakes and parachute.

Perhaps there might be somebody who would like to explain the finer details of these things to us.

Robert

Thanks a lot for your fine work, tume.

Everyone here who has "Touching History" by Lynn Spencer, should look for passages where Billy Hutchison appears. He's the frontman of the three-ship formation you have spotted.

(p.183)

This matches your tracks exactly, in the early stages. Spencer obviously has spoken with Hutchison, she goes on with telling his story. The problem: the timing doesn't add up. According to Spencer, Hutchison finished the fueling at 9:50 and flew supersonic back to Andrews, touches down at the runway at about 10:00 only to take off without pause.

Doesn't match the RADES data, does it? It gets even better. After touching down at Andrews, Hutchison is directed to fly northwest to intercept a plane "coming down the Potomac": Flight 93. Hutchison even spots Flight 93 on his radar! Interesting, isn't it? Again: Read Spencer's book, it is very detailed.

A couple of weeks after "Touching History" was released, three Commissioners (Kara, Farmer, and another one) published an article where they accused Hutchison of telling fantasies. (Hutchisons story, if you haven't noticed, is not in accordance with the official story). Lynn Spencer caved in. Hutchison did not, according to John Farmer ("The Ground Truth").

So what do you make of that? One thing is for sure: Hutchison's story is not compatible with the RADES radar tracks after 9:50. Who is right? I myself trust Hutchison.

Here's what the Commissioners had to say with regards to Hutchison:

http://stevenwarran-backstage.blogspot.com...york-times.html

Thanks alot for your woody, looks like we have same two gate problem as in the case of "AA11" also with the "AA77". (And the other UA planes have the W/O problem in BTS - see my compilation from the offline BTS here, so it looks like all four could be swapped already on the ground)

from the data it very much looks like he STARTED refueling 9:50, he wasn't flying supersonic and didn't get to Washington earlier than more half an hour later than he claims.

definitely not.

If he would touch down at 10:00 he definitely wouldn't make it to "UA93" - at least not to the plane which allegedly crashed near Shanksville (btw. there's yet another plane in 84Rades - not the C-130 - which comes to the site from southwest (so the witnesses of the plane bound from south are right), circles it and disappears from the radar there and btw. yesterday I was checking the "UA93" FDR - the NTSB csv against the data decoded by Warren and it very much looks like the NTSB also fabricated the timing in their FDR decodes - this time they made the FDR 3 seconds forwards than are the original timestamps in the FDR [I of course still must confirm it with decoding the FDR myself, but even he is controversial here I don't much think it would be Warren who fabricated the "UA93" FDR decodes]- as the NTSB deliberately did in the case of "AA77" csv and derived video - see here - unfortunately this heavily by multiple datasets supported story was censored at 911blogger and not even here is too popular and was moved to Study...)

Yes, I've read it, it seems even very logical from their side if they've seen the radar.

no it definitely isn't.

To be honest I'm not decided who's right. But I surely don't tend to just trust somebody who works for the military - the primary 9/11 suspect in my opinion - after I've found the literally hundreds of military planes in the air in the 84Rades data, many of them very close to the Washington airspace, some of them (2 planes from Dover AFB) even immediately close to the "AA77" flightpath just before the alleged crash.
The story about the chasing "UA93" looks to me at the time merely like a disinfo phantasy, which would distract from the very question why the Andrews fighters weren't sent back much earlier or just a personal seljustification that he wasn't where he should have been before the attack on Pentagon happened (one of the fighters got to Washington according to radar at 10:13 without refueling, the two which refueled at 10:34 and one of them, supposedly the command fighter as it looks from the formation pattern indeed looks like it took off again at 10:39) And the Hutchinson is not the only thing in the promoting the OCT "Touching History" which is not too credible in my opinion...
I don't know what is true, but logically -if indeed the "UA93" FDR plane crashed near Shanksville, then the Hutchinson story would be clearly a bogus even if he would get to ADW at 10:00, and if it didn't crashed there then the OCT would clearly itself be a bogus and then the Hutchinson story would be anyway not so important story in my opinion and it's credibility as from somebody working for perps would be anyway zero (-we know that the BTS record for N591UA shows the plane took off 8:28 not 8:42 as the OCT claims, and the radar data indeed show a plane which took off from EWR at 8:28, it was westbound quite exactly as if it was flying to SFO - it even intermitently crossed into the Canadian airspace which a commercial would likely do if it intends to fly far west - and was abruptly grounded in Michigan - see the footnote here)

I would not like to speculate what was it when I didn't even seen your photograph. But it is clear that the N612UA has in the BTS database the departure 7:58, taxi time 25 min, Wheels/off time 8:23, and diverted flag positive, so not taking off 8:14 as the OCT claims for "UA175" - see my offline BTS database compilation - and there's indeed a plane which took of from BOS at 8:23 (as also wittnessed by US Aiways pilot Steven Miller) and very soon (already 8:36) disappeared from radar over ocean due to descending to low altitude and North Truro radar going offline at 8:30 and getting off range for Bucks Harbor radar and never appearing again, at least not identifiably in the radar data I have. So what was the plane which strucked WTC2 - it could be virtually anything just most probably not the UAL-175 BOS-LAX Tail N612UA,which pushed back 7:58 from the gate C-19 at Logan and it is very possible the plane was swapped already on the ground.

Dear Tume.

Thankyou.

Do you have a map, of the course the aircraft that went off radar took.
or
Can you point me in the direction to one?

Robert

I made a map for you from the radar:

As you see the plane takes off at 8:23 - as to this day still listed in BTS for N612UA:

and as was confirmed by the S. Miller - pilot of the US Airways 6805 BOS-LGA
Presence of the US Airways 6805 on scene is confirmed both with the radar and BTS database
The takeoff from BOS:

The landing at LGA:

The plane taking off 8:23 as listed in BTS for N612UA is last seen by Bucks Harbor radar over the ocean at:
12:36:21.710 with M3 squawk 4640 at 43 14 26.779 N 070 21 43.140 W

Dear Tume

Thankyou for the map and information.

Finishing off something, will then look a what you have provided.

Good on you.

Robert

Dear Tume

It is some time now, since our last exchange, during which, your last advice to me has caused a considerable amount of contemplation in the 'bottom' of my coffee cup.
Please understand I have the highest respect for the work you have carried out in consideration of the various --radar-- plots and its implication with information brought forward "officially" and by fellow researchers.

In "OZZ" we have a saying, that there is 'heinz variety', but in this instance we could throw in 'campbells' and 'watties' too, with plenty of room in the pot for many other brands.

This has caused me to write to you in this manner.
Call me 'old school', 'old hat' if it comes to that, and I guess at nearly seventy, I feel I could lay claim to have earnt that 'mantle'.

But it appears to me, that what is needed, is a progressive development of interlaced considerations away from the first 'known', or considered first event of the "day'", looking for those who 'singularly' had most influence over them.

I am talking here particularly to the aircraft considered to be involved.
Determining the influences connected with them, "Civil" or "Military".
The key person within each, whether known by name, or by one of the 'coded' mystery voices.

This of course is not a new consideration, but from what I have observed to date, efforts made so far have become very divergent.

One factor does not seem to have been integrated effectively into the prior considerations.
That is the substitution of 'aircraft' within the progression of events.

Clearly those that would have had the most influence in bringing about the 'deception' -- would have been --"Civil" aircraft controllers--.
From the first roll out, to the changes of 'course', 'altitude', confirming radio communications and request of actions from other aircraft.

This is the point that I am at, in the vast amount of reading lately.
Which has revealed some 'very pointed' considerations.

To be able to integrate, "radar" considerations into this, may reveal further, why certain actions were 'carried out', or 'not carried out', by the "Civil" agents, and reveal a very useful pattern of influence over events of the "day".

Look forward to hearing further from you.

Robert