9/11 Planes... my theories

I don't appreciate the attitude towards my degree. I myself said it is 'only' a bachelor and so what do i know, you don't have to ask about specialties. I'll continue this discussion with you if it doesn't involve contemptuous remarks about my diploma as if i began this thread saying 'i'm an expert....'

I'll begin by saying you base a lot of what you wrote on what the FDR said... and i have already stated that i do not believe those are the real FDR hence i cannot argue with you about that point as i've already made the assumption that any such data is invalid.

I respect that you are a pilot, and thats awesome i wish i could be one too but i can't afford it and i'm not fit for military. I'm sure you know infinitely more about a planes systems than i do. However it is presumptuous of you to amuse that SOMEONE ELSE with perhaps a PHD in radio control, avionics or aircraft systems etc could not devise a technology that could take all control away from you, as a pilot.

Originally posted by tortillawraps

I'm a graduate of aerospace engineering at Tu Delft in the Netherlands, currently in 2nd year of Masters.

Then you'd better get your money back because they didn't teach you anything.

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by tortillawraps

I'm a graduate of aerospace engineering at Tu Delft in the Netherlands, currently in 2nd year of Masters.

Then you'd better get your money back because they didn't teach you anything.

Thankfully its the degree that matters and not the knowledge when looking for a job then!

reply to post by tortillawraps


Wayne Anderson is a tool. And/or a fool.

His nonsense has been thoroughly trashed, already, here on ATS threads.

His "pulling all the circuit breakers" is ludricous. No pilot, if faced with this purely fantasy scenario, would take the time to do that...when all they have to do is push two buttons, and remove ALL normal AC (and, because the T/Rs would then be de-powered, all DC) electricity in just a second (or less) time.

Especially in VMC, and in daytime.

Also, as a last ditch effort, the Battery Switch to 'OFF'. Then there are NO SOURCES of electricity anywhere, except for the batteries in the emergency exit lighting system, and the handheld flashlights in the cabin, at the flight attendant's positions. None of which are hooked into the airplane's electrical systems. [Emer. Exit Lights batteries receive a trickle charge, of course, when the switch is in "Armed" position, and normal power is on the busses. Doesn't work the other way, they can't power the reverse direction].

Tell us, what is the power source for these alleged "remote control" devices, when ALL electrics are off?

(and, no....don't try to claim the RAT or HDG, even if the HDG were installed).

Good luck........

There may or may not have been something in those planes that isn't officially sanctioned by the FAA, such as a hidden power supply.

However if you read my theory i say that i believe the pilots would have been incapacitated quickly. Unconscious pilots wouldn't be pulling out any circuit breakers or even attempting to fly the plane. Who knows, maybe only once the pilots were out did the plane suddenly come under exacting remote control. In that scenario you don't have to worry about pilots trying to get back control.

Let me ask you, if your flying and someone is banging on your cockpit door trying to break in, would you contact ATC or at least sqwk 7500? You would do something. Now maybe one of the planes or two was caught by surprise and the pilots had no time, but not all of them.

reply to post by Bordon81

They had magneto switch's that controled a dual magneto ignition setup on the small planes in my day.

Magnetos are for piston engines.

Turbine engines don't need continuous ignition sources for continuous operation. The ignitors, in the combustion chambers, are electric. Each engine has two sets of ignitors, powered from different sources, for redundancy. They are normally powered from their respective Main AC Busses. They can also be alternatively powered directly from the aircraft battery, via the Standby AC Bus. The STBY Bus power comes from the aircraft battery, which is 28VDC of course...and an inverter to make it into AC.

The ignitors are used for engine start. Once running, the heat of combustion provides ignition, normally. As a precaution, they are positioned to "continuous" for take-offs, and landings, to guard against flameout. Also, in certain weather conditions, like heavy rain, in turbulence and when the engine anti-ice is turned on. Some models of jets have an "Auto" position, (for automatic), and the ignitors will switch on under various conditions automatically. Most pilots like to set them to a positve"on" position, however, when required, out of habits formed before "Auto" was an option, years back. Either "continuous", or in an emergency inflight engine re-start situation (B-757/767) the "Flight" position.

OP you are probably not fully cognizant of how fanatical 9/11 ers can be.
I have seen both sides resort to disinfo and character assassination to make an argument, so dont expect to make any friends with this thread.
that being said, i believe that you have a valid point.
I wonder if you are aware of Comptroller of the pentagon who oversaw the loss of some trillion dollars of defense budget mony just prior 9/11?
Seens this guy retied from that and had a company which made electronic remote controls for aircraft?
Dov Zakhiem i believe.Hes a dual passport citizen of US and Isreal.
This technology was available and it is even further supposed that the pentagon plane was one of the first experimental conversions, a fighter aircraft filled with explosives.

Keep theorising, buddy, after all thats all that ANYBODY can do till evidence of a solid nature points the finger.....

reply to post by tortillawraps


At 54 minutes and 40 seconds into this video a similar scenario is explained in detail. Instead of cabin pressure which you can feel with your ears, they used a knock out gas to incapacitate everyone in the plane.

video.google.com...#

I think in a similar or somewhere else in this video the pentagon plane had Navy technicians familiar with the auto plane technology on board. They may have killed off the installers of the automatic flight systems. Less witnesses.

reply to post by tortillawraps

Let me ask you, if your flying and someone is banging on your cockpit door trying to break in, would you contact ATC or at least sqwk 7500?

The very FIRST response, to a "banging on the door", would be to use the interphone to call to the back, and get a flight attendant to talk to, to ask what was going on. The squawk of 7500 is (was...kind of obsolete now) to communicate a hijacking situation covertly to ATC. Assumption was, the bad guy was already in the cockpit, and you could not speak openly on the radio. ATC, and all airlines, would back then have certain code words, that "sounded" normal, but weren't. A simple cabin disturbance, such as some "banging" on the door, doesn'tmean you immediately call ATC! They aren't the babysitter.

You would do something.

Yeah, you'd ask the other crewmembers, who are your eyes and ears, in the cabin.

Now maybe one of the planes or two was caught by surprise and the pilots had no time, but not all of them.

Yes, all of them!

It was very easy, back in the cavalier-attitude halcyon days of innocence, to barge in when the door was already deliberately opened by someone in the crew. Generally, it was quite common, on flights of long duration and early morning departures especially, that right around the 20-minute mark, give or take....just about top of climb...the F/As would be taking in breakfast and/or coffee, OJ, whatever....to get that out of the way, before they started the passenger beverage/meal service. It was routine.

Puzzling that no one in the so-called "9/11 truth movement" can grasp this simple concept. The ones who don't get it have never worked in the airline industry.

Odd....in Europe I've witnessed, while travelling, as recently as two years ago the same cavalier attitude, at times. Flight deck door wide open, for several minutes, while the F/A busied herself, arranging the drinks and food, to take forward. Terrible security.....

reply to post by Doctor Smith


Alex Jones is either a crackpot, or a provocateur.

In any case, no one with three neurons to rub together listens to that nonsense that he spews, anymore.

He has ZERO credibility, and that garbage compilation video is plain as day evidence of his either willful deceit (for ratings and attention) or complete insanity (if he truly believes any of the rubbage he spouts).

But, that sort of insane rambling IS the reason this "conspiracy" baloney, in this form as evidenced in this, and many other threads of this type, continues to have "legs". It plays on the utter lack of technical knowledge and science understanding of the fringe minority, in the general population on this planet.

reply to post by tortillawraps


Tortillawraps great thread S&F, I support some of your theories as well, because the OS theories are a joke and are mostly imposable to begin with. I am convince the two planes that hit the WTC were remote controlled aircraft just by the manner and movements they were flying. Can I prove these planes were flown by remote control with evidence, no I cannot. Can weedwhacker prove these planes were not flown with remote control technology, no he cannot. All he can do is give his bias opinion and nothing more.

A real commercial pilot retired or not is not going to sit on ATS 24/7 defending the OS with trash talking, insults, and nothing more than given their opinions. I think some of the OS defenders forgot we are in here to deny ignorance, not to support it! A real commercial pilot is not going to dismiss every single piece of evidence that goes against the OS as some of you wannabe pilots do.
Here is part of an article that I found very interesting from a professional pilot from Pilot for 911Truth.

Impossible to Prove a Falsehood True
by George Nelson
Colonel, USAF (ret.)
With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased, rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Shanksville, Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged. Regarding the planes that allegedly flew into the two WTC towers, it appears that heavy aircraft were involved in each case, but no evidence has been produced that would support the government's version of what actually caused the total destruction of the buildings, let alone proving the identity of the aircraft. That is the central problem with the government's 911 story.
As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to have been involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history.
It has now been more than five years since the tragic events of 9/11/01 , and still the general public has seen no physical evidence that should have been collected at each of the four crash sites, (a routine requirement during mandatory investigations of each and every major aircraft crash.) The National Transportation Safety Board has announced on its website that responsibility for the investigations and reports have been assigned to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, but the FBI has refused to publicly release any copies of their mandatory investigations. The FBI response to a request for copies of their reports under the Freedom of Information Act was a refusal. The agency claimed that their investigation reports were "in a file", and that the FBI was exempt from FOIA release, "due to the sensibilities of surviving families of the crash victims".

pilotsfor911truth.org...

I believe Colonel Nelson has told the truth as it still stands today, the one thing that points the finger at our government in doing a false flag operation, is none of the regular proto-calls were followed for the first time in America history to planes flying off there given courses and the fact that FAA destroyed all their tapes to what really happened that morning, and NORAD just sitting on their a.., and did absolutely nothing for an hour while these planes flew over highly restricted airspace for the first time in NORAD history. The government, military excuses are not enough and surly provides no proof to their hearsay information. However the most painful part coming from our government and the Pentagon concerning the events of 911 is their silence.

i cam across a three part video series of very comprehensive info related to 9/11 and well, more... it is all so interconnected... the main website is abeldanger.net

the three videos....

Pattern of the Crimes

Pattern of the Signs

Pattern of the Times

they are each around 30 minutes in length and the info contains way more then just 9/11, starting as far back as 1833...

how can i say more, other then give them a look and then sit and wonder why you never saw that coming

oh a hint of who to be informed about KPMG

and money, oh of course the money...

Remote Takeover on 9/11: A Critical Analysis

www.911myths.com...

Hopefully this will save Weedwacker some typing.

reply to post by waypastvne

www.911myths.com...

I am not trying to be facetious, however 911 myths has been proven to be a disinformation website only consistent of the authors beliefs, in fact it is now look upon as credible as Alex Jones rants and raves and his opinions. 911 Myths lacks critical scientific evidence into supporting the authors’ opinions, even if the author supports theories from the truth movement.

Some videos of the attack on the south tower seem to show the plane pulling up from a fairly steep dive then making a quick roll to the left as it begins pulling up. It appears that it makes a drop of nearly 500 feet in an extremely short time.
If the reported speeds are correct then the G-load would have been tremendous possibly incapacitating a human pilot.
Your theory would be the simplest method to implement outside control if such is the case. Keep researching, someday hopefully we will all have a story that we can agree on.

reply to post by Asktheanimals


Nope.

Some videos of the attack on the south tower seem to show the plane pulling up from a fairly steep dive then making a quick roll to the left as it begins pulling up. It appears that it makes a drop of nearly 500 feet in an extremely short time.

Watch them again, time them, look carefully. Especially the view from across the river, the one at the almost right angle. You can see the airplane was wings level as it slowed the rate of desent, and last few seconds was very shallow descent rate...the left bank was only added at last second, as he saw his aim was slightly off.

"500 feet"? That's nearly one half the height of the Towers. Look at the "side view" video, you will see....wings level, quite a distance away (one video I'm thinking of, airplane enters the frame of video on left, and is in view for abut seven seconds until impact).

No "excessive" g-forces required...sorry to burst your bubbles. But, it is just the same recycled claims, over and over, all without any basis in fact, and a close examination reveals their lack of veracity.

reply to post by impressme

911 myths has been proven to be a disinformation website....

That's your claim. You are full of claims, based on flawed assumptions to begin with, and little else.

The irony is thick, young Padawan.....

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

Please edit the quoted portion to the salient material needed to make your point! There is no need to repeat entire posts within the body of your response. Too many and too large quotes hampers the readability of our busy and populated message threads. Also, it adds unnecessary file size to the download of a thread page for members who are browsing ATS on modems (not everyone is on broadband, we're a very diverse global community).

Quote the post immediately before yours: This makes no sense, and quoting the entire previous post above yours will result in a slight warning.

reply to post by weedwhacker


This is why I said some videos, the ones basically shooting from the north and slighlty east. and one shot from a helicopter that was a bit above the towers in altitude. Not the side view which I agree, seems to be level. Just depends on the angle of view.

Originally posted by tortillawraps

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.

I see it one of two ways (with my scenario).

1) Those people are fictitious. All the (cell and air) phone calls don't make sense. So is it too far of a stretch to say the people didn't even exist? Because it was VERY nice of the killers to allow them to make phone calls wasn't it? And if they DID allow them, why? They knew they'd all be dead. It makes NO sense.

And the stories of the few broad-casted on MSM (i.e.Barbara Olsen) are absurd and just screams 'phony'. And the famous "Hello Mom? This is Mark Bingham. You believe me don't you...." again, doesn't make sense.
Was voice-morphing used? Maybe.

2) All those people met their fate at Newburgh NY when the two planes (that 'struck' the towers) intersected at almost the exact same time. And who knows where they are now. Dead? 'Milk Carton kids" and were shipped off to the Moon or in a D.U.M.B.????

Who knows OP. The more bizarre the suggestion the more plausible it sounds if you really think about it.

This government (plus, the UK and Israel) are made up of White-collared criminals. Don't put anything pass anyone 'in charge' when it comes to murdering the minion for profit.

This analysis of the flight paths suggests that it was necessary for AA 11 and UA 175 to both pass over Stewart AFB in New Windsor, NY at the same time. The reason why this was necessary is unclear. This occurred at approximately 8:36am, the same time that AA 77 (the flight that hit the pentagon), deviated from its flight path before it was officially hijacked.

The fact that AA 11 and UA 175 crossed paths at the same time is too improbable to be regarded as a coincidence, implying that this was necessary for the attack. Further research needs to be done on this topic to determine what happened to AA 11 and UA 175 over Stewart AFB in New Windsor, N.Y. at 8:36am when AA 11 began a rapid decent. It is also very peculiar that at the same time that AA 11 and UA 175 crossed paths, AA 77 deviated from its flight path before it was hijacked. What happened at 8:36am on 9/11/01?