Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

were the 9-11 planes "off-course"???

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   
were the 9-11 planes "off-course"???

you know, when a plane gets "off-course" it gets a warning right???

shouldn't this be a warning sign to government people???






posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 03:34 PM
link   
As soon as the planes were hijacked, their transponders were turned off so air traffic control no longer had a clear indication of where the planes were.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
As soon as the planes were hijacked, their transponders were turned off so air traffic control no longer had a clear indication of where the planes were.


o0o...

thats smart...

thanks...





posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 07:23 PM
link   
At the event of transponder failure (or being turned off) the ATC is obliged to record the aircraft last known position, and predict the route according to flight plan. Then the federal authorities should be notified in case of USA for example it would be FAA, which should then coordinate with the Air Force, and try to maintain communication with the aircarft. If the aircarft does not respond, "Radio silence" is in act, and radars should be used to track the aircraft, then, they should be escorted by interceptors from the nearest base which should try to force the aircraft to a landing, or destroy it.



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 07:25 PM
link   
So why didn't they? Seriously, this has always bothered me, these planes were off course for quite some time, why didn't anyone notice or act in any way?



posted on Apr, 22 2005 @ 07:27 PM
link   
Because destroying a civilian aircraft would then require too much explanations especially with all that "free media".



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 06:55 AM
link   
there is a lot of inforamtion about the procedure that should be taken by Air traffic control and i know for a fact that this information was passed onto the US military promptly.

There is plenty of evidence out there regarding the time delays to the fighter groups ( on what was supposedly stanby, but managed to take over 30 mins to get airborne) and the lacklustre response from bush which was over 1 hour.

PS you do know that there is an automatic cordon for aircraft flying off route by the military. What i find difficult to understandis the only day it didnt become active was this day.

www.dtic.mil...

This give more food for thought.

It provides actual military and government quotes/transcripts which do not paint a pretty picture.

911research.wtc7.net...

[edit on 23-4-2005 by juggle]



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 10:03 AM
link   
I suggest you read the 9/11 Comission Report. It's really long, but I read the whole thing in two days, and it was totally worth it.

There were A LOT of issues with the planes on 9/11. A lot. To say it briefly, teh transponders were turned off. There was very little information on the topic, and nobody thought it could be a terrorist plan until after - the idea of planes as missiles was unthough of. The military didn't talk to the FAA, and vice-versa. In fact, the ATCs didn't know that one of the planes was missing until seven minutes after it crashed into the WTC. There was also a chain of command reporting system that utterly failed. The guy needed to report to his higher up, but didn't have the authority to do it. The guy who did wasn't there.

There's a lot more to it, but try and find the report. It's fascinating. A bit dense at times, but well worth it.



posted on Apr, 23 2005 @ 11:21 AM
link   
thank you everyone...

this was a great discussion...







new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join