Originally posted by Zaphod58
And the areas where they flew had ONE type, and only ONE radar covering the area.

So if the NTSB report is correct about the flight data recorder that most of the flight was controlled by the autopilot then that would mean that the terrorist knew how to program the autopilot to aviod the different radar areas along the way.

They would have to have an idea of the Beamwidth and scan of the radars.

I have had 3 jobs.

1. Crew Chief, US. Air Force
2. Federal Police officer, NSA
3. Data Analyst, Defense Special Missile and Aeronautics Center (DEFSMAC), NSA
and now Office of Weapons and Space, NSA

Now working on 25th year in government service.

Or you figure out approximately where the holes are in the radar coverage, and plot a course through them. It's not THAT hard to set or change a course with an autopilot. Or MAYBE, it was dumb luck. Who knows, but there is no denying that the US had and still has major holes in its internal radar coverage.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Or you figure out approximately where the holes are in the radar coverage, and plot a course through them. It's not THAT hard to set or change a course with an autopilot. Or MAYBE, it was dumb luck. Who knows, but there is no denying that the US had and still has major holes in its internal radar coverage.

I did not hear any reports from the flight attendents that called that the terrorist had maps, although i do believe thier was a report of them buying a GPS system.

But what are the chances of 4 planes with someone who had little training knew how to reprogram the autopilot to aviod the radars.

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Flight 175 stops transmitting its transponder signal. It is 50 miles north of New York City, headed toward Baltimore. [Guardian, 10/17/2001; Newsday, 9/10/2002; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] However, the transponder is turned off for only about 30 seconds, and then changed to a signal that is not designated for any plane on that day. [Newsday, 9/10/2002]

Why did flight 175 change transponder codes ? Hijackers in the other planes just turned them off, 175 changed thier codes.

Who knows. Maybe they decided that changing it would give them a better chance of getting through. Or one of the pilots was able to switch it back on after they took the cockpit. If he wasn't quite dead, he might have been able to switch the codes, and get it back on before, thinking that they'd intercept the plane since it didn't have the right transponder. We'll never know why they changed the codes, because everyone who might tell us is dead.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

I choose to accept what official documents state.

Excepting...apparently, Official US Government documents pertaining to 9/11.

Originally posted by darkbluesky

Excepting...apparently, Official US Government documents pertaining to 9/11.

I have not found to many government documents on 911 that support the official story, and i have not been able to find any FBI or NTSB crime scene reports.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Who knows. Maybe they decided that changing it would give them a better chance of getting through.

I doubt if the terrorist did it on purpose since they did not even know how to work the radios.

911 commission report:

Like Atta on Flight 11, Jarrah apparently did not know how to operate the communication radios; thus his attempts to communicate with the passengers were broadcast on the ATC channel. See FBI report,“CVR from UA Flight #93,”Dec.4,2003

Have you ever seen a transponder control? It's a whole lot easier to operate than a radio is. It has the switch to turn it on and off, and four rotating dials with numbers on them. That's all they'd need to know how to use.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Have you ever seen a transponder control? It's a whole lot easier to operate than a radio is. It has the switch to turn it on and off, and four rotating dials with numbers on them. That's all they'd need to know how to use.

Oh like the radio is much more difficult. I guess they did not pay attention in the beginning of flight training about radios.

Here is some more info on the radar.

142. Primary radar contact for Flight 77 was lost because the “preferred” radar in this geographic area had no primary radar system, the “supplemental” radar had poor primary coverage, and the FAA ATC software did not allow the display of primary radar data from the “tertiary” and “quadrary” radars.

143.David Boone interview (May 4,2004);Charles Thomas interview (May 4,2004);John Thomas interview (May 4, 2004); Commission analysis of FAA radar data and air traffic control software logic.

144.John Thomas interview (May 4,2004);Charles Thomas interview (May 4,2004).We have reviewed all FAA documents, transcripts, and tape recordings related to American 77 and have found no evidence that FAA headquarters issued a directive to surrounding centers to search for primary radar targets.Review of the same materials also indicates that no one within FAA located American 77 until the aircraft was identified by Dulles controllers at 9:32. For much of that time, American 77 was traveling through Washington Center’s airspace. The Washington Center’s controllers were looking for the flight,but they were not told to look for primary radar returns.

145.John White interview (May 7,2004);Ellen King interview(Apr.5,2004);Linda Schuessler interview (Apr. 6, 2004); Benedict Sliney interview (May 21, 2004); FAA memo, “Full Transcription; Air Traffic Control System Command Center, National Traffic Management Officer, East Position; September 11, 2001,” Oct. 21, 2003, pp. 14, 27.

[edit on 4-4-2007 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 4-4-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Wow, this thread really took off just after I lost all ability to see it... and then kept going off, way off... Catching up now...

Originally posted by Mouth
[…] a primary radar track can be easily dropped if the plane flies low enough, out of radar coverage. This is how the hijackers were able to fly freely. […]So, the hijackers tflew low for a little bit to lose radar contact, and popped back up, without any controller batting an eye, especially in the northeast, where there is always a ton of traffic.

Thanks, and again sorry for the two-week delay. Wow, that’s interesting. So there’s no kind of continuity – it could just pop out and back in and be invisible. I always thot they were visible ‘till near the end (except 77), just the visibility was useless – this would be a good explanation for why this was so.

So, the hijackers turned off their transponder, which by the way has an on off switch which helps reset it when needed

I always wondered about this – so the off-switch is for reset? In mid-flight? I can see that, but a “turn off and stay off” switch seems pretty stupid to have had – suicide hijackings were a known threat, and some areas – like app. To the Pentagon – were scoped out only by transponder – what a lucky break for the hijackers?

Re: Airports: Reagan's not international but Dulles is, and it's right by the Pentagon, less than 20 miles - that's where Danielle O'Brien was...
Re: Landing Gear: Most witnesses I’ve seen either don’t mention it at all or specify the gear was clearly not down. The record is thus about 90% clear that it was not down at all.

not even to the part where we get back to radar.... I'll have to come back. Ultima, glad to see you still at it.
Waynos and Zaphod, your thoughts and humor are appreciated.


[edit on 6-4-2007 by Caustic Logic]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

As stated earlier and i will state it again, the AEWC od AWACS can be set up for recon. How many more times do i have to post facts and photos.

Do you know of the Combat Sent program ?????

do not diss the Recce world by saying that AWACS can play....