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.

 

Airfield Where Flight 77 Landed?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2006 @ 08:12 PM
link   
Flight 77 was lost on radar in West Virginia, South West of Charleston WV, there is a abandoned Airfield that has abandoned industrial sites on it and still has the airstrip which is 2600 feet in length. It is such a coincidence that the plane dissapeared off radar just 3 miles outside of this strip??? An abandoned airstrip is just the place where a plane can be landed and no one would know about it. Also to mention how flight 77 was not scheduled to fly that day. Now this may seem bizzare but I would not hesitate one damn second to believe that the Government would do this sort of thing. They have hidden many things that we might never know about. This might be one of them, why is it that the plane went off radar over the area where the strip is? why is it the plane was not supposed to fly that day.. but indeed did... and ended up being one of the planes hijacked?... why is it that the "Plane" hit the empty section of the pentagon? The government can hide somethings but they cannot always hide everything from the people who want to know the truth.




posted on May, 31 2006 @ 08:48 PM
link   
can you take a snap shot of this landing strip from Google maps? I don't disagree that there is one there, just curious about it because I think it's very plausible 77 landed somewhere around there.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 08:51 PM
link   
if you go onto google maps its hard to see it but you can if you look... type in spring hill wv and look NW above it a little past the river



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 08:55 PM
link   
www.airfields-freeman.com...

thatrs the site about it... its the most supspicous thing i could find towards this



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by mck3114
Flight 77 was lost on radar in West Virginia, South West of Charleston WV, there is a abandoned Airfield that has abandoned industrial sites on it and still has the airstrip which is 2600 feet in length.


Flight 77 was a Boeing 757-223. Boeing 757-200 models need 7,600ft of runway for takeoff and either 4,800ft (dry) or 5,500ft (wet) for landing.

2600ft is not enough runway to land a 757 in one piece.

Additionally, the runway being discussed isn't paved.

[edit on 31-5-2006 by Xenophobe]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by mck3114
www.airfields-freeman.com...

thatrs the site about it... its the most supspicous thing i could find towards this


cool, but which one? they listed a couple.



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 09:16 PM
link   
Doesn't really matter, all of the airfields listed are too short.

I'd like to add that just because the aircraft's transponder was turned off near Charleston WV doesn't mean that it had to land nearby. It could have landed anywhere, or even hit the Pentagon.

[edit on 31-5-2006 by Xenophobe]



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 09:17 PM
link   
the first one about wertz airfield is the one i looked at



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 09:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xenophobe
Doesn't really matter, all of the airfields listed are too short.

I'd like to add that just because the aircraft's transponder was turned off near Charleston WV doesn't mean that it had to land nearby. It could have landed anywhere, or even hit the Pentagon.

[edit on 31-5-2006 by Xenophobe]


Why, what's the minimum strip a 757 needs?

True, but it would make the most sense it landed near where not only did it's transponder turned off, but where the radar stopped being able to track it. And why was 77 the only one the radar couldn't track all the way?



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Thats a good ass point... it wouldnt be the mountain because of how high they were.... or of course the theory of it was trashed... and a new plane was sent out... such as that mysterious plane that was above the pentagon what plane was that? One day if the truth comes out it was a missile then it would be hell



posted on May, 31 2006 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by diggs
Why, what's the minimum strip a 757 needs?


Look up a few posts, I posted the data on Post Number: 2217102



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 08:29 PM
link   
What about the "fact" that it wasnt listed?



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Could you clarify your question please?

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 14/1/2007 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 10:00 PM
link   
mck3114 said it wasnt listed. I wanna see something backing this up. If mck3114 can back it up, why was the flight even in the air in the first place?



posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tasketo
mck3114 said it wasnt listed. I wanna see something backing this up. If mck3114 can back it up, why was the flight even in the air in the first place?

Early BTS stats did not list AA 11 and 77.



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by mck3114
why is it that the "Plane" hit the empty section of the pentagon? The government can hide somethings but they cannot always hide everything from the people who want to know the truth.



Can anybody just accept the fact that somethings are just coincedence. Maybe that's why the terrorist flew it into the emptiest section, who knows? The fact is, the government doesn't need to hide anything, becuase they have nothing to hide. The plane went out of contact becuase there transponders were turned off by the terrorists in control of the plane. I have said this many times in other threads, they found remains from the passengers! Did they tell everyone to turn around and then parachute those into the Pentagon????????? Not to mention, Osama Bin Ladan admitted to attacking the pentagon! Do you all ignore that peice of evidence??



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Oh please.. coincidences don't happen in the HUNDREDS like they did on 9/11. There comes a point where the amount of coinsidences are too staggering to just ignore. And you better believe the government has SOMETHING(S) to hide after 9/11, if not for the fact that couldn't stop the attacks all together, waiting 5 years to release 2 Pentagon videso speaks VOLUMES to the fact that they have something to hide, the trial was a BS cover for supressing the evidence anyway. And please, Osama did NOT admit to these attacks, that man in that video the military conveniently found doesn't even come close to looking or acting like Osama bin Laden. Please link me to the remains that were found also.. because all I know is they said they found "DNA" of "some" passengers, and DNA can be collected off anything and samples can be easily planted.

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 14/1/2007 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jun, 13 2006 @ 11:49 AM
link   
I can think of several coincidences on 9/11, but hundreds? And how do you know how Bin Laden acts? Are you friends with him? The fact is, he DID admit to the 9/11 attacks, as did video's of Al-Zawari (i know, the spelling is wrong), his right hand man, and if the video was indeed faked, how come Bin Laden hasn't said in his later video that it was, and why wasn't he claiming his innocence? Also, the man in the tape looked exacly like Bin Laden.


link
anotherlink

In the last paragraph,of the first one, a blast expert who was on the scene said he held body parts.

in the 2nd one, it says they identified 19 of the victims, and found wedding rings and so forth.
You say yourself that they found DNA, though you say it is easy to plant, how would they get those people's DNA? And when would they plant them? And how would they plant them with anyone noticing?

The trial was not a BS cover for supressing the evidence because that is the truth. When you are using evidence in a court of law to convict someone, they can't show the tapes. How do we know Paul Bernardo and Karla Homolka raped and killed those girls in Toronto years back. We never saw the tape. Why? Because it was evidence in a court.


[edit on 13-6-2006 by nt327]

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 14/1/2007 by Mirthful Me]


BPI

posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 01:14 AM
link   
Here's a link to 65 coincidences: 100777.com...

I don't know Bin Laden personally, but the guy on the confession tape wasn't Bin Laden. Obviously you havn't seen the tape, Here's a link: www.whatreallyhappened.com...

Bin Laden originally denied the 9/11 attacks. Then the Marines miraculously found a confession tape in Afghanistan in a pile of rubble. Then within days of the Zogby poll showing 1/2 Americans want to reopen the investigation, Bin Laden releases an audio tape stating Moussaoui wasn't one of the 19 he chose for 9/11. Funny how he is specific with the "official story." The jury didnt convict Moussaoui of being involved in 9/11. 3 jurors said he had limited knowledge of 9/11 and 3 other jurors said his invovelment was very minor. he was convicted of conspiracy to commit terrorist attacks & conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction.

I believe Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon, but there are many interesting theories showing other possibilities. You say that they were withholding the Pentagon tapes for the Moussaoui trial. Was that really evidence? They showed those frames at the trial? What information could those frames give to a jury? That wasnt even enough evidence to show Flight 77 hit the building. How could it be evidence to Moussaoui's involvment?



posted on Jun, 14 2006 @ 02:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by nt327
Can anybody just accept the fact that somethings are just coincedence. Maybe that's why the terrorist flew it into the emptiest section, who knows?


IF you look at the estimated flight paths (there are a couple of versions) both take the aircraft over KDCA's VOR beacon DCA, so he was probably flying in on one of the radials then when he went over he knew to turn towards an estimated heading to take him into the Pentagon.. It's how you navigate in aircraft so it's not really unusual..

Estimated flight paths

204.108.4.16..." target="_blank" class="postlink">KDCA Approach information showing location of DCA



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join