9/11 Planes... my theories

My theories which may or may not have been brought up before. I haven't ready every single thread about 9/11 but i believe that

1) The pilots and passengers on all of the 9/11 planes would have been incapacitated rapidly after the planes took off to ensure that the operation went smoothly. This would have been achieved simply by remotely fiddling with the cabin pressurization system. 'Cabin alt' would have been set to not pressurize the planes as they climbed (set to manual or somehow sabotaged remotely.)

This would result in all the passengers passing out due to lack of oxygen (hence unable to do anything to help themselves) and the pilots too would have been incapacitated as its likely they wouldn't notice the lack of oxygen until too late. Even if they did, i'm sure their oxygen supply via masks would have run out quickly or been switched off remotely.

Now you have planes full of unconscious pilots and passengers and hence absolutely no communication with ATC that they are being hijacked. Those who planned 9/11 also would have considered this somewhat humane as no-one would have been aware of crashing into buildings. Look into Helios flight 522. Everyone on this plane was incapacitated including the pilots because the pilots didn't know the cabin alt switch was set to manual. Even with ATC telling the pilots to check this button, the pilots still failed to correct the issue and even to done oxygen masks. This shows just how quickly a lack of oxygen can confuse and incapacitate.

2) On to the issue of remote control... this technology was around before 9/11 and working. The only way to ensure that the planes hit their targets IS to use remote technology (as you can see i believe the US government is behind this).

One of the planes was full of engineers and various personal involved with aviation or the air force. Guess what, these individuals are the ones who IMPLEMENTED the remote technology for 9/11. They thought they were on a test flight, testing the new remote control system.. little did they know they were patsies and by putting them on a 'test flight' it was an easy way to dispose of them so they would not talk about their roles afterwards. This explains why this flight had such an unusual demographic of passengers.

3) Why the black boxes are first 'not found' and then 'without serial numbers'? With the above scenario unfolding you absolutely cannot let experts see the real FDR or CVR. That data would reveal the same pressurization failure on all of the 9/11 planes (clearly impossible to be a coincidence) and it would reveal that the planes must have been flown remotely as you cannot assume that unconscious pilots are able to fly the planes. It would take literally 1 hour for NTSB or any expert to realize that the planes were hijacked remotely if they ever saw the real black boxes. This is why black boxes that were 'found' are fake and not from those flights.

So now you basically have drones and not airplanes under your command, on a pre-programmed route to their targets. Can you see how this scenario gives the culprit's the absolute highest chance of success? No possibility of the pilots informing ATC of 'the plane is flying itself can't even turn of autopilot even'... no passengers going crazy and making calls that might leak to the outside world what was going on on those planes. Calls that were supposedly made were fake.

Under this scenario the culprits would have had a success chance of like 99.99%. The culprits wouldn't have done it any other way.

Not knocking you, I just don't think any of this happened at all.

When I read the topic title I mistakenly read "9/11 Planes... my heroes" haha.

One thing though, how do you think they would of faked the voices on the calls from the planes? I'm of the thought that perhaps maybe something DID happen that was strange, but perhaps just, what if everything that happened was mostly as factual as it gets? as in, terrorists did hijack the planes, terrorists did drive them into the WTC, and the terrorists were linked to al qaeda. It seems the more we drift away from the "official fact", the more surreal the theories turn out to be, like someone trying to find that everything coincides with the number 11, or 23. You will find it because you are looking for it, and you will make it so.

Note: I didn't adjust the colors, somebody else did.

reply to post by tortillawraps


Unless you want to make Truthers look nuttier than they already do, then please just concentrate on debunking the fantasy prtrayed in the OS..
We dont need to know how it was done, just that it didnt happen as the OS depicts..

I feel the same way you do OP except, I think the passengers and crews were taken off all four planes (probably in Newburgh NY where all four planes intersected en-route) and then the remote control principles were implemented.
I don't think anyone was on board any of those two planes (Shanksville and Pentagon were missiles).

Somehow my scenario makes me feel better about this murderous act this government committed. Bastards!

I have no idea what technology is used to morph voice but it must be possible if you have a large enough sample of someone talking to electronically copy that. I think you have to consider which scenario had the highest chance of success... terrorists taking over the planes, with no communication from the pilots reporting this... and then flying them like top gun pilots... or simply using technology that already existed.

I heard an interview with an engineer on pilots 4 truth which was all about this remote technology. A test was done during an autopilot checkup of a plane by an engineer who was working on remote control technology. The pilots in the plane performing the standard check did not know what to expect when suddenly the plane started acting crazy and not responding to any inputs or controls. They tried taking out all the circuit breakers and still couldn't get any kind of control over the plane. This was before 9/11 by a good margin.

Originally posted by LifeSux

Note: I didn't adjust the colors, somebody else did.

edit on 6-11-2010 by LifeSux because: (no reason given)

Is that supposed to be a serial number on a black box? Thats irrelevant, i didn't say the black boxes didn't have engraved serial numbers, it is the records which match the 9/11 planes to the serial numbers that are missing. Hence we cannot know which serial number black boxes really belong to the 9/11 planes.

Originally posted by Human_Alien
I feel the same way you do OP except, I think the passengers and crews were taken off all four planes (probably in Newburgh NY where all four planes intersected en-route) and then the remote control principles were implemented.
I don't think anyone was on board any of those two planes (Shanksville and Pentagon were missiles).

Somehow my scenario makes me feel better about this murderous act this government committed. Bastards!

In this scenario you have many potential leaks... if so who died in the planes as reported by media from the passenger lists? And surely people on those flights would be suspicious that they didn't go to their destination.

Quite an elaborate and risky plan when the absolute same thing could have been accomplished with a couple of missiles/bombs and some bluescreen CGI which looks like some kid's project. One of the goals for the perps was to minimize risk. Real airplanes were not necessary for 9/11, just the illusion of planes and the ever important power of suggestion. It's amazing what people can see and believe when they naively let others fill in the blanks for them.

If real airplanes were used, they may have been used for shooting the missiles or doing a fly over to deceive. This remote control holographic stuff is only thrown in there to muddy the waters.

Is it elaborate? I don't think so... about as elaborate as creating a set of instructions and uploading them to the planes via the mode S transponder or however it was done. Once the tech is in place its about as simple and fool proof as pushing an autopilot switch on the plane. If you are willing to shoot down any plane that doesn't function correctly then you have a 0% chance of any leaks occurring. For an operation that potentially could have those at the highest levels of government involved, anything more than 0% chance of failure would be unacceptable.

reply to post by tortillawraps


You obviously know nothing about jet airliners, aviation, flying, and/or any other aspects of the real world.

Is it really necessary for me to dissect your misconceptions, point-by-point, with actual information, from the perspective of a trained and experienced airline pilot? One who actually has thousands of hours on the B-757/767?

Did you know you can easily research ALL of those "theories" of yours, and find how incredibly incorrect they are, for dozens of reasons?

If you don't believe me, then print up some copies, go down to the airport, and strike up a conversation with an airline pilot, and show him/her your list of "theories". Might make their day, if they needed a laugh for any reason.... :shk:

('Course, like me, instead of laughing, many will sincerely try to help, and teach...especially if, like me, flight instruction was part of their background at some point in their careers....)

reply to post by tortillawraps


My conclusion is not wrapped too tight.....

Originally posted by tortillawraps
One of the planes was full of engineers and various personal involved with aviation or the air force. Guess what, these individuals are the ones who IMPLEMENTED the remote technology for 9/11. They thought they were on a test flight, testing the new remote control system.. little did they know they were patsies and by putting them on a 'test flight' it was an easy way to dispose of them so they would not talk about their roles afterwards. This explains why this flight had such an unusual demographic of passengers.

An interesting theory, which I'm sure many have contemplated like so.

A question, however, about the above point. Can you please post a link(s) that give more information about this "test flight" these military personnel were on as I haven't heard this line of thought before and I find it very intriguing...

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by tortillawraps

 

You obviously know nothing about jet airliners, aviation, flying, and/or any other aspects of the real world.

Is it really necessary for me to dissect your misconceptions, point-by-point, with actual information, from the perspective of a trained and experienced airline pilot? One who actually has thousands of hours on the B-757/767?

Did you know you can easily research ALL of those "theories" of yours, and find how incredibly incorrect they are, from dozens of reasons?

If you don't believe me, then print up some copies, go down to the airport, and strike up a conversation with an airline pilot, and show him/her your list of "theories". Might make their day, if they needed a laugh for any reason.... :shk:

('Course, like me, instead of laughing, many will sincerely try to help, and teach...especially if, like me, flight instruction was part of their background at some point in their careers....)

edit on 6 November 2010 by weedwhacker because: spell

I'm a graduate of aerospace engineering at Tu Delft in the Netherlands, currently in 2nd year of Masters. That however is not even worth mentioning because what does a bachelor grad know? But yes, it is necessary for you to dissect what i wrote otherwise your just attacking the messenger and not the message. So go ahead, dissect please. Helios flight 522 shows that it is not only possible but DID happen for pilots and crew to be incapacitated by the wrong position of a single switch. Remote technology is also possible... but please dissect away.

Originally posted by tortillawraps
One of the planes was full of engineers and various personal involved with aviation or the air force. Guess what, these individuals are the ones who IMPLEMENTED the remote technology for 9/11. They thought they were on a test flight, testing the new remote control system.. little did they know they were patsies and by putting them on a 'test flight' it was an easy way to dispose of them so they would not talk about their roles afterwards. This explains why this flight had such an unusual demographic of passengers.

Thanks for the thread.

I tend to lean more towards the remote control plane theory vs the no plane theory (with exception of the pentagon where it seems witnesses heard something that sounded like a missle launch).

I have heard about the passengers that you mention here several times before, and find it very interesting. Can you provide a link to a passanger list that provides their background/occupation?? I would thing this would be very telling evidence if it is true.

ETA: cameraobscura beat me too it... I second that!,,,

I don't have links... it was just a logical conclusion i came to. When you have that many engineers and experts on a single plane, but with no official explanation as to why... then clearly something is going on. And it makes sense, because the culprits would want to tie up as many 'lose ends' as possible. Implementing the remote control for 9/11 would have required a number of engineers and specialists and these are just whistle blowers in waiting if they aren't disposed of.

reply to post by weedwhacker


They had magneto switch's that controled a dual magneto ignition setup on the small planes in my day. Funny thing was the magneto's must have been wound backwards too each other because you had to pick one switch position or the other. Nowadays they apparently have a both position as well.

Originally posted by cameraobscura

Originally posted by tortillawraps
One of the planes was full of engineers and various personal involved with aviation or the air force. Guess what, these individuals are the ones who IMPLEMENTED the remote technology for 9/11. They thought they were on a test flight, testing the new remote control system.. little did they know they were patsies and by putting them on a 'test flight' it was an easy way to dispose of them so they would not talk about their roles afterwards. This explains why this flight had such an unusual demographic of passengers.

An interesting theory, which I'm sure many have contemplated like so.

A question, however, about the above point. Can you please post a link(s) that give more information about this "test flight" these military personnel were on as I haven't heard this line of thought before and I find it very intriguing...

Here it is you need to right click and download the audio interview:

pilotsfor911truth.org...

It was fascinating to hear that even taking out every circuit breaker the plane wouldn't let them take back control. The suggestion was made that perhaps there is something in these planes that isn't in the FAA approved wiring designs.

reply to post by tortillawraps

I'm a graduate of aerospace engineering...

And?? So?

You are familar, then, with the Boeing 757 and 767? Specifically? Have flown them, understand airline procedures, checklists, the EICAS and how it works, what pilots do to NOT make the sorts of "oversights" that your "theories" rely upon?

You are intimately familar with every system and sub-system on the airplanes?

AND, you are aware of how bloody complicated, and labor intensive any sort of "remote control" retrofit would be, on the B-757/767 (or ANY off-the-production-line Boeing passenger jet)??

AND, you are aware that the DFDRs from American 77 and United 93 clearly recorded the MCP being programmed, by human hand? The autopilot disengaged. Re-engaged, then disengaged again, in an undisciplined manner, in differnet ways, on the two airplanes?

AND, you are aware that the techinques used, for vertical navigation on both airplanes differed? Because, the pilots on each airplane utilized different controls, for their descents?

Can you name at least two ways, using the autoflight system, to conduct a descent from one altitude, to another, with an automated level-off at the new altitude? Two ways, slightly different in technique, but with similar results (new final altitude).

AND, you are aware that the #1 VORs on both airplanes were manually tuned to the frequency of the DCA VOR (at National Airport, near Washington D.C.)? You are aware that there are various modes when the IRS navigation computers will be in "auto-tune", for position updating...and it takes a deliberate movement of a rotary selector switch to alter the EHSI display mode, in order to allow independent VOR tuning, yes??

Tell me you knew all of this, ahead of time (before you just now read all of it).

What specific aspects of aerospace engineering are you most cognizant in? Which area is your speciality?