It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
You are forgetting, though, an important fact. The transponder. IN FACT! I goofed, in my post above....because I forgot too. It is quite possible I was wrong (Gasp!!)
ATC agents?
Originally posted by Thermo Klein
for the record this is called investigation, it is not making definitive remarks, unsubstantiated assumptions... it's a look into what might be (yet another difference between people who search for truth over fighting for what they already believe).
8:50:51 am - Last contact FROM AA 77
8: 52 am - AA 77 makes a 180 degree unplanned turn with no ATC contact
for next TWENTY-THREE MINUTES ATC agents try to contact AA 77 or simply do nothing (that's 8:52 to 9:15 am)
(before everyone goes crazy, the 12 minutes previously discussed was from last attempt by ATC to the guard frequency try by other AA flight)
9:15 am (FINALLY) - ATC asks another AA flight to check guard frequency (or however you're technically supposed to say that.)
If you guys say this is normal, fine.
I say, for an aircraft that makes an unscheduled u-turn and is out of radio contact, I wouldn't sit around on my butt for more than twenty minutes before I took action.
Can't really say much else - most people in this thread are far more interested in discrediting me personally than actually wondering if 20 minutes no-contact is out of line...
Originally posted by Tosskey
there are people in this very thread with actual knowledge of how Airlines and ATC works, and yet you dismiss their opinions simply because they disagree with your view on how you THINK it happened, or what you THINK you would have done in their situation.
If that isn't clinging to ignorance, then I don't know what is.
Originally posted by Thermo Klein
Originally posted by Tosskey
there are people in this very thread with actual knowledge of how Airlines and ATC works, and yet you dismiss their opinions simply because they disagree with your view on how you THINK it happened, or what you THINK you would have done in their situation.
If that isn't clinging to ignorance, then I don't know what is.
I dismiss some of their opinions because they completely disregard anything was amiss that day. Sure they have great information and experience concerning ATC - do they have insider information on a day when multiple planes crashed? Do they have insider ATC information for when a plane loses contact for 20 minutes while deviating off course? No... and they continually disregard any attempt at recognition of these facts. I am not clinging to ignorance, I'm trying to engage in a conversation with people who continually refuse to acknowledge the events of the day and keep falling back on standard operating procedure.
(by facts I mean from the flight data, as if it were AA 77, since that's what we're talking about)
Originally posted by Thermo Kleinfor reasons I can't know for sure, you refuse to address the one question I'm asking; it's not that hard - is the situation I mention in the above paragraph NORMAL?
Originally posted by Reheat
One other point that is ignored is that the Controllers at Indianapolis did not know about the events in NYC. They were working instead of watching TV. I guess all truthers were glued to the TV's in 2001 and presume everyone else was too. If you don't work or never have I suppose that's a logical assumption... That along with a poor education and a lack of critical thinking skills promotes some of the crap, but some of it is also intentional I believe.....
Originally posted by Thermo Klein
reply to post by Tosskey
Tosskey,
My knowledge is out of date but the basics are still true, so let me try to help.
ATC is keeping safe separation. If two or more targets are on a collision course and they can contact all but one to change course it is a manageable problem.
Flight conditions that day were clear and unlimited visablity, under such conditions pilots have primary responsibilty for their own safe separation. Loss of radio contact with one flight is a problem but not as immediately critical as it would be on a cloudy rainy day.
The transponder going off is a problem, but that does not necessarily mean loss of radar contact.
A takeover by force might cause the flight crew to send the prearranged signal for a takeover. I understand that
did not happen.
An inquiry as to why the diviation from the approved IFR flight plan is observed, not normal but the target has not vanished. This need attention but hey, stuff happens, and as long as there are not two out of contact targets of a collision course not a big problem.
Now please do not poke a lot of holes in my message an tell me I am part of a coverup. I am just saying the facts we have would be an incident on an outherwise normal day.
you guys are relentless this thread... I give!
All I want to know is how a plane can be out of contact, make a surprise 180 degree turn, turn off its transponder, and basically disappear for 23 minutes...
I give - if you expert pilots all assume 9/11 was just a typical day like any other, and that an aircraft making an unapproved destination change 180 degree u-turn, and being out of contact for 23 minutes is NORMAL then I'm not going to get anywhere exploring this any longer.
I doubt I will be convinced this is normal but if you all say so, fine.
Originally posted by benoni
Your right thermo...not one of them has addressed the points you made re. the 12 minutes.
I dont claim to be a knowitall when it comes to 9/11, but I can recognise deliberate obfuscation when I see it....
This thread qualifies as being loaded with obfuscation.
At about 9;10, the Center reported that fact [loss of radio and radar contact] to FAA’s Great Lakes Region and to the Air Force’s Rescue Coordination Center at Langley AFB, Virginia.