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.

 

Jury Trial !!! NO PLANES *ever* hitting *any* WTC & directed energy weapons used in WTC distruction.

page: 7
10
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2007 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

If you can find some photos of military planes with commerical jetliner style windows in them please let me know:

So commercial jetliner wings are hollow, but military wings are not? Did you know that there's a considerable amount of titanium and depleted uranium inside boeing wings and engines?


Photo of the military version of a 757 called "Catfish" used for F-22 training.

s114.photobucket.com...

You do know they stopped using Depleted Uranium in Boeing aircraft? The 757 and 767 use Tungsten as counter weights.




posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 05:09 PM
link   
can anyone please tell me whats news there are about the suit?



posted on Oct, 12 2007 @ 06:12 PM
link   
For information on Directed Energy Weapons check out the following site.

www.ndu.edu...



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 02:56 AM
link   
So he doesn't think ANYONE will testify to having seen the planes hit the towers? I hope he's happy with his disgusting life. Typical lawyer.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 10:28 AM
link   
reply to post by u2r2h
 


Dismissed with prejudice.



posted on Jul, 12 2008 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Yeah, I know this is a response to an old post, but oh well.

Too bad that's not a military plane. It's a BOEING testbed used to test systems FOR the military. It's owned and flown by Boeing.

However, let me help you out a little bit. Here's a REAL military plane with commercial plane windows.








Boeing began testing the F-22's avionics aboard the 757 in March 1999. To date, Boeing has completed more than 1,000 hours of testing on the FTB including sensor testing against various targets in the Pacific Northwest and military targets at Edwards Air Force Base, Calif. The FTB also has done risk-reduction testing in Fort Worth, Tex., for communication, navigation and identification (CNI) functions.

The test avionics are operated from a simulated F-22 cockpit installed in the test bed cabin. The cockpit has primary and secondary F-22 displays, as well as a throttle and stick. There is room on the aircraft for up to 30 software engineers and technicians who can evaluate the avionics, identify anomalies and, in some cases, resolve problems in real time.

www.boeing.com...


[edit on 7/12/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Too bad that's not a military plane. It's a BOEING testbed used to test systems FOR the military.


But who ordered testbed made and who is in charge of the testbed?

COULD IT BE THE MILILTARY, YES or NO ?



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:12 AM
link   
BOEING built the testbed to test software and avionics for the military plane that they were building. The military ordered the F-22, BOEING made the choice on how to test the components they were building for it. The military has nothing whatsoever to do with how the tests are done, or what is used to test the components.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The military ordered the F-22, BOEING made the choice on how to test the components they were building for it.


So if the military ordered the F-22 don't you think they would have wanted test done?

Can you show me any reports that state the military has nothing to do with the testing?



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:22 AM
link   
The military leaves the initial testing of software and avionics up to the company building the plane. Of course they want it tested, but it's up to the company doing the building to do the testing. The military may get involved once things get to the simulation portion of the tests, but usually not until they have the actual airframe built. Just like if the military wants upgrades done, they tell the company what they want the plane to be capable of, and leave it up to them to develop the upgrades.

It would be stupid and manpower intensive if the military was involved in every little detail of building one of their planes. It would also be insanely expensive (as if they aren't expensive enough already) if they had to be involved in every detail from writing the flight control software, to designing the testbeds.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
It would be stupid and manpower intensive if the military was involved in every little detail of building one of their planes.


But isn't that why the military has units just for the testing of planes.

en.wikipedia.org...

Military programs differ from commercial in that the government contracts with the aircraft manufacturer to design and build an aircraft to meet specific mission capabilities. These performance requirements are documented to the manufacturer in the Aircraft Specification and the details of the flight test program (among many other program requirements) are spelled out in the Statement of Work. In this case, the government is the customer and has a direct stake in the aircraft’s ability to perform the mission. Since the government is funding the program, it is more involved in the aircraft design and testing from early-on. Often military test pilots and engineers are integrated as part of the manufacturer’s flight test team, even before first flight. The final phase of the military aircraft flight test is the Operational Test (OT). OT is conducted by a government-only test team with the dictate to certify that the aircraft is suitable and effective to carry out the intended mission. Flight testing of military aircraft is often conducted at military flight test facilities. The US Navy tests aircraft at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, MD (a.k.a. “Pax River”) and the US Air Force at Edwards Air Force Base, CA. The U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School and the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School are the programs designed to teach military test personnel. In the UK most military flight testing is conducted by three organisations, the RAF, BAE Systems and Qinetiq. For minor upgrades the testing may be conducted by one of these three organisations in isolation, but major programs are normally conducted by a joint trials team (JTT), with all three organisations working together under the umbrella of an Integrated Project Team (IPT)



[edit on 13-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 13-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:42 AM
link   
And those are for after they have the aircraft built. Not to write flight control software or initial testing. They have nothing to do with testing anything before the aircraft is built. As I said, they would be involved in testing the actual plane, like with the F-35. A military pilot has flown that. But the military didn't do any of the testing of the flight controls, or radar, or anything else that Boeing did with that testbed.

Yes, the military MAY be integrated into testing before first flight, but they didn't order Boeing to change that 757 into a testbed. That was Boeing's decision. There may have been military personnel onboard, but it is still NOT a military plane. It's still a Boeing aircraft.

[edit on 7/13/2008 by Zaphod58]

[edit on 7/13/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
And those are for after they have the aircraft built.


Well you made my point with this quote.

There may have been military personnel onboard.

[edit on 13-7-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:47 AM
link   
As I corrected myself, just because the military has personnel on the plane it still doesn't make it a military plane. The military has had many people involved in TESTING of systems, but that doesn't mean that every plane they test it on is a military plane. It's called JOINT testing. The plane in question is still a BOEING plane, which means it's a CIVILIAN plane.

[edit on 7/13/2008 by Zaphod58]



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 12:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
As I corrected myself, just because the military has personnel on the plane it still doesn't make it a military plane.


But my point was that military did have control of the testing, and you just proved my point.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Photo of the military version of a 757 called "Catfish" used for F-22 training.

s114.photobucket.com...¤t=757cat.jpg


No, you said that it was a military plane. You didn't say anything about the military being in charge of the testing. The military may have been INVOLVED in the testing but it was NOT a military plane.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 01:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
No, you said that it was a military plane.


If the military is involved in testing then it is a military mission so it is a military plane.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 01:03 AM
link   
No it isn't. It is a civilian plane on a military mission. A military plane is a plane OWNED by the military. If this was a military plane then Boeing wouldn't still have it or still be using it for test flights and it wouldn't have an N number under the tail.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 01:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
No it isn't. It is a civilian plane on a military mission.


If the military is involved in testing then it is a military mission so it is CONSIDERED a military plane.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 01:20 AM
link   
No, it isn't. I dealt with many civilian planes that were on military missions, and they were never considered military planes. The airline or agency that owned it was still responsible for the plane and supplying any parts necessary for maintenance. Flying a military mission doesn't make them military planes, or even considered to be military planes.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join