How Were the Cockpits Taken ? Examining the Logistics

reply to post by ULTIMA1


How can you be so sure about the latter there chief? You make it sound as if a couple middle aged pilot's seated up front in the aircraft should by default in someway gain the upper hands on their aggressors. Explain that one again and lets not forget the circumstances involved at the time --

The pilots weren't armed whereas the hijackers were with razor sharp blades.

The pilots were caught totally by surprise from a seated position with their backs facing their aggressors (five of them in total wielding razors.)

I seriously doubt you would have fared any better considering the circumstances. If you read the transcript of the flight 93 tapes, it's more than obvious that those pilots were begging for their lives before they had much time to react to anything. Pleading for those nuts to 'Please Stop' from continuously stabbing them literally to death.

I read in another post in where you're supposedly in law enforcement and making requests for 'official' government documents relating to this stuff. For the purpose of driving your independent 'investigation' into the terrorist attacks of September eleventh. (just curious, do you spell 'responsible' and 'especially' like that when you're writing a police report out, or requesting this sensitive material from the government?) Let's hope not for your own sake.

Since you supposedly possesses such keen investigative skills, why do you just dismiss one of the biggest advantages that these five hijackers had going for them on that day? (other than being armed of course)...And that would be the element of surprise. How many instances do we have of inmates getting the upper hand on corrections guards with unassuming little, homemade weapons? Countless instances and the key ingredient to their success is the element of surprise.

You can't defend against something you are not prepared for, simple as that.

What nonsense!! total suprise? HOW do the highjackers have total suprise when they have to : Breach four cockpit doors BEFORE even ONE pilot could key a mike? you never answer this. No onw wants to examine the mechanics of : Entering a cockpit by breaching the door, slashing two pilots to death ( times 4 ), hauling their bodies from the very cramped cockpit area, and assuming the controls.

You assume that pilots sit glassy eyed staring at the controls, oblivious to any noises behind them, including the cockpit doors being kicked in..and willing to simply give up their planes, or stretching their necks out to be cut..how silly!! It only takes a SECOND or two for a pilot to key a mike, yet it did not happen even ONCE!! WHAT tapes of pilots begging for someone to stop? There is no such tapes!! The only tapes show the alleged highjacker using the wrong mike and instead of talking to the rear of the plane, the lessage goes out over the air..like the highjackers did not know the difference between the handset for the rear, and the ATC mike..but they DID know how to turn the transponders off, right? So silly.

In all FOUR cases, are we to believe that the ' highjackers ' got incredibly lucky and managed to overwhelm all FOUR cockpits with the same lighting speed and efficiency? Are we to accept the fable that not ONE pilot could key a mike or send the alert in the time it takes to enter, slash to death two men, haul their carcasses from the cockpits, and assume the controls..are we to believe that? HGow? No way possible and you know it.

How could all FOUR cockpits be breached and the pilots killed and hauled and replaced with a new pilot BEFORE even ONE pilot could key the mike and send a mayday? How? There is NO rational way to explain it, OTHER then remote taking. Even if the door were kicked in, another supposition not backed by any official evidence, there would be time to key a mike, in all FOUR cases. Why didn't we hear about all four planes sending at least a mayday as the cockpits were being taken? Because they were taken INSTANTLY, thats why. Only INSTANTANEOUS taking explains why no alerts were sent and no maydays sent. And, instant means remote, no other way.

You have to accept odds and coincidences and suppositions galore to believe the official story, which by the way, NEVER attempts to go into detail about the takings, do they? the official story simply says that the highjackers ' gained entrance ' into the cockpits, never saying HOW . The reports from the planes are all different; one says that the highjackers reported having bombs, a bluff as no bombs were ever found, no resideu, no proof, nothing. If a highjacker says " Hey, I have a bomb!!" that does NOT mean that the pilots say " Oh, OK, you say you have a bomb, I will just get out of the cockpit and let you fly this thing, OK?

There were NO reports of any bombs from any source quoted except the roll playing people, like Betty Ong: Listen to her tape and tell me that she is under stress..she is speaking from a script. It is more than obvious. The phone calls were PHONY, the radio transmission from 93 was a PHONY, all staged to make it look like a highjacking..Remember the tape of the guy telling his Mom his last name, and repeating " You believe me, don't you Mom " over and over? An obvious set up.

Remote taking is the ONLY likley way to explain the facts: Instant takeovers, no radio maydays, no alerts.nothing. Just instant occupation of all four cockpits, and ONLY remote control can account for that.

Also, don't be too hard on people for spelling errors, I type fast and cannot go back and correct all the mistakes before posting, so forgive the obvious errors and just concentrate on the message; a few words misspelled do not mean much.

reply to post by eyewitness86


In response to eyewitness86's latest diatribe,

Holy Christ!

Reminds me of that scene from 'Misery' with Kathy Bates describing her trips to the movie theatre cliff-hangers as a child. How on one Sunday a car went over a cliff and on the following Sunday the driver had miraculously survived having escaped the plunge....So she stood up and protested 'have you all got amnesia???'....(at the top of her lungs in the crowded theatre)....'He didn't get outta the cockamamie car!!!!!'

Quote from 'eyewitness86' --

So until someone can show some LIKELY evidence that can explain two second takeovers, remote highjacking is the only answer that makes any sense at all.

First of all, learn how to spell hijacking right for once would you? (you've screwed it up just too many times at this point) Just because the airplanes were 'high' in the air doesn't mean it's referred to as a 'highjacking' ace. And isn't that the typical demand; a demand for evidence. Where's your even 'likely' evidence that those tapes have been faked evidence seeker? Aside from that, if they're (the cabal) going to hire a room full of actors to shout 'I don't want to die' into a tape recorder to fool Joe Public; why the hell not forge four sets of tapes instead of one?

I'm sorry, I apologize to the ATS staff at this point. But the sheer stupidity going on here is just getting impossible not to throw attention to. How were the planes taken so fast you ask? Here's a real world exercise I would like to demonstrate just for you eyewitness86. Suppose I could place you in a little room somewhere seated in a chair wearing a set of headphones with your back to the door.

Then when you least expect it; I will crash through that door, swipe your headphones off and a buddy of mine will start beating you over the head with a nerf baseball bat. You know what your conclusion would be following such a little experiment as that? 'Gee, it happened all so fast...I didn't know what to do.'

Originally posted by illuminatinatifofotty
How can you be so sure about the latter there chief? You make it sound as if a couple middle aged pilot's seated up front in the aircraft should by default in someway gain the upper hands on their aggressors. Explain that one again and lets not forget the circumstances involved at the time --

The pilots weren't armed whereas the hijackers were with razor sharp blades.

The pilots were caught totally by surprise from a seated position with their backs facing their aggressors (five of them in total wielding razors.)

Well for 1 at least one of the pilots was a Viet Nam vet, i do not think he would be afraid of 2 guys with boxcutters. Second the cockpit is a very tight area, 1 pilot could have held off the 2 hijackers while the other pilot called for help or set the emergency transponder codes.

How were all the pilots caught by surprise when at least Flight 93 (posibly Flight 77) had 2 warnings?

Research shows that the pilots of flight 93 were attempting to confirm the warnings....when the cockpit was stormed.

"The hijackers attacked at 9:28. While traveling 35,000 feet above eastern Ohio, United 93 suddenly dropped 700 feet. Eleven seconds into the descent, the FAA's air traffic control center in Cleveland received the first of two radio transmissions from the aircraft. During the first broadcast, the captain or first officer could be heard declaring "Mayday" amid the sounds of a physical struggle in the cockpit. The second radio transmission, 35 seconds later, indicated that the fight was continuing. The captain or first officer could be heard shouting:" Hey get out of here-get out of here-get out of here."

It would appear the pilots WERE fighting back, and attempted to get a MAYDAY off. Dropping 700 feet in the struggle....it sounds like it was chaotic.

Plus, if someone were to storm a cockpit and start attacking/slashing my friend (who is strapped to their seat) with a knife-like object, the 1st thing on my mind would be to save my friend. Sure, it takes seconds to adjust a transponder (or get a mayday off, which he did)....but it takes seconds to also slice thru a carotid artery on a strapped in person.

originally posted by ULTIMA1
1. Pilots are highly trained professionals.

At flying aircraft? Yes. At close quarter hand to hand combat? Not so sure.

2. Pilots are responsable for the people on their planes, they are not just going to hand it over without a fight, speically to 2 guys with boxcutters.

Do you not consider a box cutter a lethal weapon?

reply to post by ULTIMA1

Well for 1 at least one of the pilots was a Viet Nam vet, i do not think he would be afraid of 2 guys with boxcutters.

Hundreds of thousands of Americans had served in the Indochina conflict. Even so (and no disrespect to veterans whatsoever) But just because they happened to serve during those years, doesn't automatically mean that they are a living, breathing, mercenary, capable of fending off maniacs with box cutters at the drop of a hat and without warning, all while their backs are to their assailants on top of it all lets not forget.

Do you honestly believe that the last sounds of those people struggling for their lives recovered from that flight data recorder was complete bs? Is your conspiracy theory so sound in your mind that you would entirely dismiss the tapes of those guys pleading for their lives on that day?

Are you really convinced to lay no blame at the feet of those Muslim fanatics (who stabbed them to death in cold blood?) Plus at the same time, sit there and insinuate that those pilots failed in their duty in someway because they didn't struggle enough? You claim to be in law enforcement (which I highly doubt at this point) because anybody capable of such wild speculation (especially regarding such a touchy subject as this) -- wouldn't have the mentality necessary to obtain such a position. That much is screaming obvious to me at this point.

Originally posted by Dr Love

I have a question for John Lear: Take the example the poster above gave about a "terrorist" holding a knife up to the flight attendant's neck and threatening to kill her if you don't give up the cockpit. What would you have done and is there an unwritten rule among pilots to never give up the plane in such an event?

War is hell!

She dies.

There is no unwritten rule that I know of but no pilot that I ever knew would be stupid enough to get out of his seat for a hijacker.

Thanks for the post.

Thanks for the answer John.

I've also noticed how the debunking in this thread has somehow gone from one of hostage taking in order to get the cockpit door open, to one of the "terrorists" storming the cockpit with almost Navy SEAL-like speed and efficiency and killing the pilots.

Yes people, debunkers can have it both ways.

Peace

Are you kidding me? You actually believe blood in a cockpit is going to phase these individuals in the slightest? They're on their way to incinerate themselves along with the plane and every living soul on it. It doesn't require a lot of athletic maneuvers to steer an airliner; you sit in a seat and steer!

Again, simple logic at play here. Somebody has just reached around from behind you and slit your throat, what's your immediate reaction going to be? Well obviously to put both of your hands to it and force your chin into your chest while you slowly lose consciousness due to blood loss.

try to manipulate an object, then try the same while covered in blood. it phased them if it happened, and if it didn't happen the original story is wrong.

Let me say one thing here.

Many of you are talking about 'picking up a mike" or "grabbing the mike" thats not the way it works these days. Most all pilots wear a headset with microphone that extends from the earpiece to in front of the lips.

Headsets are not like in the movies with big round coverings. Headsets are tiny plastic ear pieces that are positioned just inside the ear and allow the pilot to hear not only ATC transmissions but everything else going on in the cockpit.

The button for the microphone that is at his lips is behind the right vertical lobe of the control wheel. It is keyed with the right index finger. The approximate time to key a micrphone in this manner is less than one tenth of a second.

If there were any attempt to take over the cockpit at least one of the 8 pilots would have had time to get off a message to ATC.

The message would not be Mayday Mayday. Thats movie bs. There would be no reason to send a Mayday because the ship hasn't been lost yet nor would there be any reason to think that it was going to be lost.

Here is what would probably be said if someone was trying to break into the cockpit:

"Center, American 77, we have someone trying to get in the cockpit. Will advise."

Or:

"Center, United 93, we have an univited guest in the cockpit. Will advise."

No pilot is going to start calling Mayday because someone is in the cockpit. Mayday is a last ditch call. Thats stupid.

This transmission is going to be coincidental with the airplane being rolled or pitched up and down to get the hijackers off balance.

Please don't give me any more of your totally uninformed suggestions that some unaware, sleepy pilot is going to give up the ship without a knock down drag out fight. First of all its MORNING. The pilots are all charged up for a day of flying ahead of them. They've probably just finished their 4th cup of coffee.

Now I respectfully request that you limit your uniformed speculation to fact.

I would also respectfully suggest that all voice tapes from the aircraft whether from the voice recorder or from ATC tapes are all fabricated.

911 was a PsyOp. It was a hoax on the American public. The story about 19 Arab hijackers is total and complete fiction.

P.S. Chick, I know you are out there. Sooner or later you are going to have to account for your part in this.

I'm just glad we have an experienced pilot whose a member of ATS to clear up some of this garbage. Now, if we only had a member who was an experienced fanatical, razor sharp box cutter wielding terrorist, who also happens to be a well trained pilot, we could clear up the other side of the argument.

Well, you know what they say, wish in one hand.........

Peace

Originally posted by Dr Love
I'm just glad we have an experienced pilot whose a member of ATS to clear up some of this garbage. Now, if we only had a member who was an experienced fanatical, razor sharp box cutter wielding terrorist, who also happens to be a well trained pilot, we could clear up the other side of the argument.

Yeah we need a real terrorist who can tells us how they would do it dealing with pilots who may refuse control by killing them with a razor sharp box cutter which people tend to ignore as weapons.

Originally posted by deltaboy

Yeah we need a real terrorist who can tells us how they would do it dealing with pilots who may refuse control by killing them with a razor sharp box cutter which people tend to ignore as weapons.

Thanks for the post Deltaboy and your input. What you don't seem to understand here (at the risk of an overly gruesome post) is the amount of blood in the cockpit after slitting the throats of 2 pilots.

Now assuming you could get one body out of the seat, which in my opinion would be very, very difficult with all the blood, no matter your determination to kill yourself, there is just going to be too much blood on the control wheel and throttles and trim tab control to accomplish the job in the precision manner that the government would have us believe occurred.

And what are all the passengers doing while watching this macabre act through the door you just broke down? Ordering a second drink? Sitting meekly in their seats? Praying? All of them?

500 mph?

Hitting a 208 foot wide building dead center with a 156 foot wide airplane?

No. That would be realistically impossible.

Twice?

That is a fairy tale. A Grim Fairy Tale.

Originally posted by johnlear

Thanks for the post Deltaboy and your input. What you don't seem to understand here (at the risk of an overly gruesome post) is the amount of blood in the cockpit after slitting the throats of 2 pilots.

Now assuming you could get one body out of the seat, which in my opinion would be very, very difficult with all the blood, no matter your determination to kill yourself, there is just going to be too much blood on the control wheel and throttles and trim tab control to accomplish the job in the precision manner that the government would have us believe occurred.

Too much blood? Its not like we are possibly dealing with hijackers who are drowned in blood or have a hard time with blood covering cockpit controls while trying to maintain flying that those planes crashed immediately because blood covering controls means automatic crash. And I don't think they are going to neither faint over the sight of blood as well. They may have a rough time dealing with the bodies, but they had about 5 men to cover everything. Its not like there was only one terrorist onboard.

And what are all the passengers doing while watching this macabre act through the door you just broke down? Ordering a second drink? Sitting meekly in their seats? Praying? All of them?

500 mph?

You think every passenger are built and trained to handle this situation? How about terrorists keeping them contained by telling them bombs are on board. They seem to know how to deal with civilians who may try to be heroic.

Hitting a 208 foot wide building dead center with a 156 foot wide airplane?

No. That would be realistically impossible.

Twice?

Probably because nobody like you has ever tried something like it before.

Originally posted by deltaboy

Hitting a 208 foot wide building dead center with a 156 foot wide airplane?

No. That would be realistically impossible.

Twice?

Probably because nobody like you has ever tried something like it before.

I don't get this part of your answer. Lear said "realistically impossible".
Are you saying these "terrorists" were as well trained as John Lear at piloting an aircraft?

Peace

reply to post by deltaboy

like i said it was around 7 pints if they were mid sized men. thats a lot.

reply to post by johnlear
I'm alway interested in your aviation input. By your own admission (hopefully I haven't misread your posts from times past), you haven't always been the 'poster boy' for airline pilots, so I tend to believe your thoughts on the mindset of pilots and actions. Streetwise, on might say. No disrespected intended.

If the transponder was being changed and the pilot was interrupted, would the new code, even if not completely entered, take effect or is there a 'set the change' step involved? Just wondering if an attempted change might have been detectable.

Originally posted by Dr Love

I don't get this part of your answer. Lear said "realistically impossible".
Are you saying these "terrorists" were as well trained as John Lear at piloting an aircraft?

They knew how to get from point A to point B without crashing...in a sense.



Unless the two towers were standing in the way.

[edit on 5-10-2007 by deltaboy]

Originally posted by illuminatinatifofotty
But just because they happened to serve during those years, doesn't automatically mean that they are a living, breathing, mercenary, capable of fending off maniacs with box cutters at the drop of a hat and without warning, all while their backs are to their assailants on top of it all lets not forget.

I did not say he was a mercenary. I stated he would not be afraid of 2 guys with box cutters.

Also as stated with the cockpit being a confined space 1 pilot could have kept 2 hijackers at bay while the other was making a call or sending a signal.