How Were the Cockpits Taken ? Examining the Logistics

roadgravel
here's an answer to your question.

8:47 At almost the same time American 11 crashed into the North Tower, United 175's transponder code changed several times. The changes were not noticed for several minutes as the controller tried to locate American 11.

NPR.org

go to www.letsibeledmondspeak.com or www.whistleblowers.org or call 202-225-3976 and request waxman to let sibel edmond speak.she is a former fbi employee that can prove foreknowledge by the fbi.she has a gag order on her right now.SPREAD THE WORD.

reply to post by Boone 870
Thanks. That might indicate that the hijack code was attempted to be entered. If that was the case then efforts were being made, they just failed.

Originally posted by roadgravel
Thanks. That might indicate that the hijack code was attempted to be entered. If that was the case then efforts were being made, they just failed.

Or it was the hijackers trying to change or turn off the transponder.

reply to post by ULTIMA1


That is also a possibility. But, who knows for sure? It could've went either way.

I have read newspaper reports of one of the pilots on flight 11 keying the microphone several times after the hijack. I can't find any recordings or transcripts to back them up.

Originally posted by Boone 870
That is also a possibility. But, who knows for sure? It could've went either way.

I had seen i report that stated that flight 93 had pushed the "emergency button' i guess they were talking about the transponder code knob.

Some people refer to the transponder knobs as an emergency button because some transponders like the military use and ones that have an IFF have an actual emergency switch, you just flip the switch to emergency instead of setting codes.

They are working on new transponders that if someone trys to turn them off it will send out an emergency code, or it will lock and not let you change the code once it has been set to an emergency code, to stop a hijacker from changing it.

The Rapid Response Team (RRT) on Aircraft Security recently made recommendations for changes to aircraft design and operation that would help meet the demand for increased onboard security. An FAA-published report states that these modifications should include a method to ensure continuous transmission of a hijack signal, even if the flight deck selected code or function is turned off. Three suggested modifications that can be accomplished quickly are:
- Ability to set and lock in the hijacking code so the hijacker cannot disable it
- A panic button that initiates the hijacking code in an emergency situation
- An independent transponder that cannot be disabled by the hijacker
How it Works:
The Transponder lock installs behind the transponder control panel using existing wiring. No new wiring is required. When a pilot channels code 7500 using the existing control panel, the Transponder lock switches on and continuously transmits code 7500 until a company unique unlock code is channeled on the control panel and the aircraft is on the ground. Activation of the lock is indicated by a short (3 second) activation of the display test function on the control panel. Power interruptions do not defeat the lock. After the lock is engaged, the control panel ATCRBS output is ignored, precluding the transponder from entering standby or channeling another code. All TCAS mode selections continue to operate normally from the controller panel after the lock is engaged.
Optionally, an external PANIC switch may provide a direct trigger for the Transponder Lock. An AUX power input provides for switching the transponder to a backup power source, if the lock is enabled and primary power is lost. These optional features require the addition of two wires at the control panel.

EW here is a link to a CNN article aboutFlight 93.

In order to be credible all aspects of the official story must be addressed with a rational argument. I agree that you have a strong hypothesis backed up with with a strong rational argument. However simply insisting it is not possible while at the same time discounting the entire official story will not persuade the average person. So what I am searching for is evidence...maybe that is impossible but I think necessary.

A quote from the article:
"The hijackers attacked at 9:28," the report says. "While traveling 35,000 feet above eastern Ohio, United 93 suddenly dropped 700 feet. Eleven seconds into the descent, the FAA's air traffic control center in Cleveland received the first of two radio transmissions from the aircraft.

"During the first broadcast, the captain or first officer could be heard declaring 'Mayday' amid the sounds of a physical struggle in the cockpit. The second transmission, 35 seconds later, indicated that the fight was continuing. The captain or first officer could be heard shouting: 'Hey get out of here -- get out of here -- get out of here.' "

Originally posted by Leo Strauss
In order to be credible all aspects of the official story must be addressed with a rational argument.

Do not forget about the 2 warnings that flight 93 received.

1. Secure cockpit doors.

2. Message about the other hijackings.

So how were the pilots of flight 93 surprised by the hijackers ?

originally posted by John Lear
Headsets are not like in the movies with big round coverings. Headsets are tiny plastic ear pieces that are positioned just inside the ear and allow the pilot to hear not only ATC transmissions but everything else going on in the cockpit.

large photos link below.
Maybe sometimes they are like in the movies.

For the people who seem to think it would be impossible for 2 or 3 hijackers to drag the dead bodies out of the pilot seats, here are a couple of photographs that may help you realize that it's not impossible.

Notice how close the seat is to the center console and the forward panel.
Now notice how far away the seat is from the center console and the front panel.

See the difference? It is apparent from the photos that the seats can be moved back as well as split to the outside of the aircraft for easier access.

One more to look at. Do you notice anything missing? I did. I don't see a separately held handset for communicating with the passenger cabin. I'm going to try and find out what all the buttons and switches do on a 757 yoke.

All of the above photos are of Boeing 757-200's and they are from www.airliners.net

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
um...Highly trained in what? Sitting in an arm chair for six hours?

and, er...Badly trained in what? I mean, I know I disagree with their interpretation of Islam (which is kinda ironic, me being an infidel and all), but all those videos we've seen recovered from abandoned Al Qaida camps tend to suggest they were VERY well trained terrorists...

If you re-read my post, the context was stating they were badly trained as pilots, and untrained in flying jet aircraft. They may have been "very well" trained as far as terrorists go, but be realistic, don't compare it to anything professional.

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
...and as for the "religous freaks" reference, why don't you change "freak" to "zealot" and then google it...The best fighters have always been the Jesus/God/Allah-freaks...

Entirely irrelevant but I see that you couldn't pass up the chance to use a "google it" phrase, followed by your own use of the word "freaks".

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Plus, prior to Septeber 11, 2001, it might not have been plicy to hand over your Boeing, but how many jetliner hijackings had ended in ALL of the hostages dying?

Prior to September 11, 2001 smart money would have said "accede to hostage demands, fly to airport of their choice, sit tight and wait for SAS/GSG9/CIGN/Delta/Royal Netherlands Marines/Israeli Paras or other force who in recent decades have accomplished spectacularly successful hostage rescues."

Therefore, if a hijacker enters the cockpit holding a razor-sharp blade to the throat of a stewardess and demands the pilots leave their seats, it is no stretch of the imagination to accept that the pilots stood up and left their seats in the expectation that within a few days the cavalry would come to their rescue and they could all go home.

I don't know of any hijackings that resulted in all the crew/passengers dying. I also don't know of any hijackings where the pilots gave up control of the plane to an untrained hijacker. Prior to 2001, smart money would have said "accede to hijacker (not hostage) demands", but not give control of this huge flying bomb to somebody that can't fly it. Do you realise the moment this happens, everybody on that plane is as good as dead?

Therefore, if a hijacker enters the cockpit holding a blade to the throat of a stewardess demanding the pilot leaves their seat, it is completely unbelievable that the pilots stood up and left their seats expecting the cavalry would come to their rescue. Who is going to rescue them at 35,000 feet? Superman?

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
And for a short and in no way comprehensive list of hijackings that involved no deaths, I give you...

en.wikipedia.org...

What you gave me, is a list of hijackings that never demanded a pilot relinquish control of the plane.

I still do not understand how people can believe the odds involved in asuming that in all FOUR cases, not one pilot was able to send a mayday. The area is cramped and only two maximum highjackers could have fit in the area to assault the pilots, who would have been fighting and keying the mike to ATC, no doubt.

We have to assume INSTANT access to the cockpits, instant success disabling both pilots ( times four ), hauling the bodies out: ( by the way, although it may be ' possible ' to do so, what is the time frame involved? More than enough time for a mike to be keyed!!) and assuming the controls. John Lear a page or two back gives a diagram of the transponders and shows where the handset is located for talking to the passengers; any pilot trained well enough to fly and navigate those planes to their destinations would surely have known the difference between the radio to ATC and the passenger announcement handset; after all, they managed to turn all four transponders off as a first act, apprantly!!

How can anyone claim an element of suprise when there has been no evidence that a cockpit door would have been able to be breached with a single kick? thats an assumption, and not likley. It would probably take a number of blows to break, more than enough time to key a mike, and even if access was fast, still the closest pilot would have been fighting off the highjackers with the cockpit ax, no doubt, while the other one radioed ATC and steered the plane.

Mr. lear also said that ALL of the pilots he has taked to about this say that they would have rolled the planes, pitched them to send the highjackers tumbling off balance and therefore susceptible to the passengers and crews efforts to subdue them. That is more likley than any other scenario presented so far, I believe. Giving up the plane was impossible; no pilot has ever or would ever do that: So we still have to wonder why NONE of the EIGHT pilots was able to key a mike and announce a mayday..or activater the transponder alert. We have to assume INSTANT taking and PERFECT conditions for the highjackers in order to believe that. No way.

When you look closely at the individual mechanics involved in entering, killing, hauling, and assuming control, there is always enough time for the pilots to have been able to send a mesage, especially by radio. but it never happened, not once out of four. Odds like that are beyond belief.

Some thoughts drifting around in my head right now after mulling this topic and its replies for some minutes:

"Officially" we are led to believe only one of the planes passengers attempted to regain control of their plane after the pilot relinquished control of it to a terrorist. They did this as a result of phone calls made that informed them of the fate of the other three planes.

I can see why the passengers may have overlooked this, as well as having not been involved in the decision making at the time, but what posessed the pilots into handing these terrorists a missile with a guaranteed 50 lives lost as a result? There is no way that the crew, or passengers on board thought these "Islamic looking" hijackers were going to have the skills or intention to land them safely on a runway somewhere and make their demands.

Another interesting point to note is the terrorists, once they took control of Flight 93 and had gotten wind of the "uprising", discussed using the fire axe in the cockpit to "quell the charge", or to cut off the oxygen. Why was this option placed behind handing the terrorists a missile when the pilots had control of the aircraft?

On all four planes?

Wikipedia link to Flight 93 incident

reply to post by ULTIMA1



Do not forget that the pilots of flight 93 were attempting to confirm the messages they received when the hijackers stormed the cockpit.

I'm suprised that there isn't a panic button/switch located in the cockpit, and that for the pilots to warn ATC they have to enter a code into the transponder? How long is this code 4 numbers? 6? 8?

I would've imagine that on top of your usual transponder code way of issuing a message to ATC that a hijacking is takeing place, there would be a panic button as a last (quicker if you will) resort, for more serious occasions where people are being killed, and pilots are being attacked by knives or gunfire.

After hitting this button it should light that plane up like a christmas tree on radar for ATC to track, and there should be no way to disable it.

Question for Mr. Lear:

Why is it that a commercial plane even has the ability to even turn it's transponder off? I can only come up with nefarious reasons right now, that can lead to confusing, and bad situations.

I'm sure there's a simple reason for this, that I'm overlooking. But shouldn't it be a different code for every plane, that is changed weekly/daily, and ones only the pilots know?

I'd appreciate any light you could shed on this for me.

Eyewitness86

In the last post alone, you referred to the mics not being keyed four separate times. Please stop doing that! You are wrong. Did you not read any of the posts that I have made? If not, maybe you should and then you will realize that you are wrong. Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, and Wrong!

John Lear a page or two back gives a diagram of the transponders and shows where the handset is located for talking to the passengers

Wrong again! John posted a diagram from a 727. There were no 727's hijacked on September 11. Can you or John show me this handset in a 767 or 757? I posted pictures of a 757 flight deck on this page, can you show me where the handset is?

after all, they managed to turn all four transponders off as a first act, apprantly!!

Wrong again! I pointed out earlier that flight 175 had its transponder on all the way until it impacted the south tower.

How can anyone claim an element of suprise when there has been no evidence that a cockpit door would have been able to be breached with a single kick? thats an assumption, and not liklely.

Again, have you not been reading my post? As I've pointed out earlier, all commercial aircraft are required to have a key readily available in the passenger compartment so that the flight crew can enter the cockpit or, all flight attendants on the aircraft have to have a key on them at all times during the flight. Who says the hijackers had to kick the doors down to gain access to the flight deck? Will you at least consider the possibility that the hijackers used a key?

Originally posted by Disclosed
Do not forget that the pilots of flight 93 were attempting to confirm the messages they received when the hijackers stormed the cockpit.

But they still received the message didn't they? Oh and do not forget they had a secure cockpit door warning before that.

So please tell me how the hijackers could have surprised them and they did not have time to get off a call or message, specially since they were just on the internal message sysyem sending a message to confirm the hijack message?

Please read my other post...which answers your questions.

Originally posted by Disclosed
Please read my other post...which answers your questions.

Please answer the question if you can, The pilots had recieved 2 warnings.

So tell me how the hijackers could have surprised them and they did not have time to get off a call or message, when they were just on the internal message sysytem sending a message?



[edit on 5-10-2007 by ULTIMA1]

I have answered your question on the last page. Please refer to that post for your answer. You had asked the exact same question....

Oh, and yes...some pilots still say "Mayday!" when an emergency does happen....example:

www.news24.com...

Phuket crash: Pilot sent mayday
23/09/2007 08:02 - (SA)

Bangkok - The pilot of the One-Two-Go budget airline that crashed in Phuket a week ago, killing 89 people, issued a distress signal to the airport tower before skidding off the runway, news reports said Sunday.

"The chief pilot shouted 'mayday' repeatedly to ask for help until he lost contact with the control tower," Pornchai Ua-aree, director of Phuket International Airport, told the Bangkok Post.


[edit on 5-10-2007 by Disclosed]

Originally posted by Disclosed
issued a distress signal to the airport tower before skidding off the runway, news reports said Sunday.

So if the pilot had time to get off a emergency call right before skidding off a runway, why couldn't any of the 9/11 pilots get off a call ?

Specially when some had just been talking to air traffic control and 1 had just been sending a message on the internal message system?