New Operation Northwoods Theory Twist : Laser Guided Plane, Tower 7, and the WTC Observation Deck

Just thought I would drop this into the mix for those Operations Northwoods junkies.

Quote from : Wikipedia : Operation Aphrodite

Operation Aphrodite was the World War II code name of a secret USAAF program that began in 1944.

The United States Eighth Air Force used 'Aphrodite' both as an experimental method of destroying V-weapon facilities and as a way to dispose of B-17 and PB4Y bombers that had outlived their operational usefulness, although only two PB4Ys were modified for the Navy's sister operation, Project Anvil.

The plan called for B-17 aircraft which had been taken out of operational service (various nicknames existed such as 'robot', 'baby', 'drone' or 'weary Willy') to be loaded to capacity with explosives, and flown by radio control into bomb-resistant fortifications such as German U-boat pens and V-1 missile sites.

It was hoped that this would match the British success with Tallboy and Grand Slam supersonic ground penetration bombs but the project was dangerous, expensive and unsuccessful.

Operation Aphrodite


While this is in no way complete and definitive, it is however, something pre-dating the debacle that was sold and refused, called Operation Northwoods.

I found it interesting nonetheless that this was out there and it is something I have seen before.

While I do understand those who do not support the Operation Northwoods theory, there is just far too much evidence to the contrary, and the connections to 9/11 are eerily similar, and as well the politics, of those behind the scenes.

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


Did you notice the bit near the bottom of the 'Wiki' article??

After the last mission, the Strategic Air Forces decided Operation Aphrodite was unfeasible and scrapped the effort. The only drone that actually hit the target did not explode, supplying the Germans with an intact B-17 and a set of radio controls. Only one drone had done any damage. The failure of the program was attributed to the lack of suitable implementations of available technology.

The best they could have possibly hoped for, in that era, using what was very rudimentary "radio control" was to keep the airplane straight and level, and at constant speed until in the vicinity of target, then dive it in to the ground, hopelfully ON target.

Please note that the "drones" were accompanied for most of the time by following airplanes, to include a fighter escort, and presumably for the benefit of whoever was "flying" by R/C.

Also, at least ONE crewmwmber was onboard, part of the way, and parachuted out (that was plan, anyway) prior to 'impact'. Didn't always work so well, though.

Fast-forward to 1984, and the Boeing 720 that was equipped with R/C for a fuel additive test, and deliberately crashed in the desert, at the test site.

Didn't go exactly as planned, because it is DAMNED difficult!! Flying an airplane by R/C isn't easy, especially if you're sitting somewhere on the ground and all you have are some instruments for reference, and perhaps a video camera to replace the pilot's "eyes".

Sitting on the ground and remote-controlling, you lack all of the OTHER sensory cues piltos use....ALL you have is vision, and your brain to interpret it.

In neither case were these airplanes (in WWII, or 1984) going very fast.

Compared to the ~500 MPH of the jets on 9/11. It required a human being at those controls, to accomplish what those airplanes accomplished. It is just a fact.


Of course, in addition, the airplanes were tracked from their various departure points. Crewmembers used the AirFones onboard to call the ground, and report the hijackings. Some passengers used the AirFones too, and some managed to get cellphone connections, near the end when the airplanes were at low altitudes.


Waving "Operation Northwoods" around is just a distraction, (really more of a thought exercise) and ignores a boatload of other facts regarding the airplanes used on 9/11.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

 

Did you notice the bit near the bottom of the 'Wiki' article??

I did not miss that but thank you for bringing it up.

You will notice I did state it was not complete nor definitive.

Meaning there was plenty of information yet to be discussed.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
The best they could have possibly hoped for, in that era, using what was very rudimentary "radio control" was to keep the airplane straight and level, and at constant speed until in the vicinity of target, then dive it in to the ground, hopelfully ON target.

Granted.

The technology was not up to par and or the standards for electronics.

It was the basic "drone" which was so stupid as to be ignorant.

But, as I pointed out, it pre-dates Operation Northwoods.

By the time Northwoods came along I am sure the technology caught up.

Then again, as well, well before 2001 and 9/11.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Please note that the "drones" were accompanied for most of the time by following airplanes, to include a fighter escort, and presumably for the benefit of whoever was "flying" by R/C.

Again, I knew that information, this was considered at the time "high-tech".

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Also, at least ONE crewmwmber was onboard, part of the way, and parachuted out (that was plan, anyway) prior to 'impact'. Didn't always work so well, though.

I have read extensively on Operation Aphrodite as well as others along the same lines.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Fast-forward to 1984, and the Boeing 720 that was equipped with R/C for a fuel additive test, and deliberately crashed in the desert, at the test site.

Didn't go exactly as planned, because it is DAMNED difficult!! Flying an airplane by R/C isn't easy, especially if you're sitting somewhere on the ground and all you have are some instruments for reference, and perhaps a video camera to replace the pilot's "eyes".

Sitting on the ground and remote-controlling, you lack all of the OTHER sensory cues piltos use....ALL you have is vision, and your brain to interpret it.

Yes, think "smart-bombs", and the preliminary and similar technology is understood.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
In neither case were these airplanes (in WWII, or 1984) going very fast.

Of course.

Mediocre and excruiating results were received.

Do not forget, however, that this means the designs and research and development was definitely on the drawing board, and people always look to history.

To re-implement designs which the technology is better for later.

The airline industry, as well as car industry, and others, do this all the time.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Compared to the ~500 MPH of the jets on 9/11. It required a human being at those controls, to accomplish what those airplanes accomplished. It is just a fact.

Yet we have "drones" capable of raining death in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Sorry, there's much more to this story, beneath the surface of it all.

I'm thinking now of a combination of my original laser-targeted/guided plane, mixed with an A.W.A.C., the combination could definitely do it in a pinch.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Of course, in addition, the airplanes were tracked from their various departure points. Crewmembers used the AirFones onboard to call the ground, and report the hijackings. Some passengers used the AirFones too, and some managed to get cellphone connections, near the end when the airplanes were at low altitudes.

What does the phone calls have to do with anything here?

And I've used those AirPhones before you get better reception with them than cell phones, providing they haven't been abused by passengers.

Swipe a credit card and you're in business.

Originally posted by weedwhacker
Waving "Operation Northwoods" around is just a distraction, (really more of a thought exercise) and ignores a boatload of other facts regarding the airplanes used on 9/11.

It is after all, called a theory, hence the title of the thread.

I will say this though, weedwhacker, I want to thank you for showing respect.

You earned the star I just gave you.

After our last debacle I was certain you had not learned to be amicable.

Even if we disagree, there is nothing to suggest we cannot discuss things.

Rationally.

And as far as a thought-exercise, it beats listening to the lies of the 9/11 Commission.

I would much rather discuss the feasibility of Operation Northwoods.

Because the 9/11 Commission is as much a joke as the Warren Commission.

An actual investigation involves detectives and Agents not a panel which most likely covered up information that would embarrass Bush about his families relationship with the Bin Ladens and Al Saud families prior to 9/11.

Oddly similar in fact to the Bush families relationship with Hinckley prior to Reagan being shot, would you not say, and in fact another eerie puzzle piece.

It is odd, is it not, that the Bush family always seems to have ties to the underworld.

Criminals and the criminals they are in bed with, odd indeed.

And of course, Prescott Bush, and the Trading with the Enemy Act.

Wow, three generations of Bush boys, all in bed with bad guys.

Personally, however, I believe George W. Bush was Cheney's beard.

Since Cheney got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and the TWTEA too.

[edit on 14-5-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]