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.

 

NEW VID! Remote Controlled Planes as Weapons!!

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 12:26 PM
link   
Operation Aphrodite:

IF THE LINK DOES NOT WORK CLICK HERE www.youtube.com...

The plan called for B-17 aircraft which had been taken out of operational service to be loaded to capacity with explosives, and flown by remote control into bomb-resistant fortifications.

"No one could of envisioned anyone using a plane as a weapon"- wh


(mods.. can u embed this vid for me please, had a hard time) tnx




[edit on 26-12-2007 by IvanZana]

[edit on 26-12-2007 by IvanZana]




posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 02:07 PM
link   
In the 40' sthey had planes with tv camera in the cockpits and they were flying the planes remotley.
So technically they could crash it into a civilian target and cry it was an accident.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 

Some people argue that on 911 the planes where remotely flow. The technology is common now especially with 50 years of refinements.

Another thing, is it not odd the Joe F. Kennedy Jr. Died during the trials?



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Wow, I never knew they had the ability to remote control a plane with a camera feed to see back in the 1940's. Kinda makes me wonder what exactly the military can do now?



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 06:45 PM
link   
there's another show on history channel----the one about scrap yards, they go to an airplane scrap yard----
they go into how they re-rig f-4 with remote controls to use as target practice for fighter pilots and testing new missile's and such

i figure this---since i was little--the 80's remote control cars ,trucks and airplanes have been popular---and the planes are awesome----and that's on a hobby, retail level
so yeah what does the milt, gov't have right????

i agree though the in cockpit camera in the 40's is interesting



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by 1Angrylightbulb
Wow, I never knew they had the ability to remote control a plane with a camera feed to see back in the 1940's. Kinda makes me wonder what exactly the military can do now?



Well in the 80's they tried to fly a 707 on remote control.

The whole flightdeck was filled with hydraulic maneuver-cylinders and stuff.

The guy controling the aircraft had it visual all the time, still it allmost crashed twice on takeoff, it didn,t look pretty at all.

They didn't even manage to crash it right.

It was all a part of a fuel additive test.

The 707 is like the 767 and 757 a non fly by wire aircraft.

No central on board computer to hack into like the conspiracy folks claims.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 07:47 PM
link   
The planes had to have pilots onboard for takeoffs and to steer it to proper
heading. Pilots would bail out afterwards. A controller plane would fly
close behind the drone and guide (or at least try) to the target. Was
dangerous as planes were usually "war weary" aka flying wrecks
considered expenable. Joseph Kennedy, older brother of JFK, was killed
during one of these missions to fly one of these planes into German V1
(buzz bomb) launch site. Plane exploded soon after takeoff. Not as
easy as some people make it out to be.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 07:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana
Operation Aphrodite:



Is that better?

Looks like you left off two chars.



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freaky_Animal
No central on board computer to hack into like the conspiracy folks claims.


From Boeing's own web site...


A fully integrated flight management computer system (FMCS) provides for automatic guidance and control of the 757-200 from immediately after takeoff to final approach and landing...
Flight decks of the 757 and 767 are nearly identical and both aircraft have a common type-rating....


Source

[edit on 26/12/2007 by ANOK]



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 






A fully integrated flight management computer system (FMCS) provides for automatic guidance and control of the 757-200 from immediately after takeoff to final approach and landing... Flight decks of the 757 and 767 are nearly identical and both aircraft have a common type-rating....


You conspiracy guys have been repeating this lie for years.

The Boeing Flight Management System i in no way a fly by wire system.
It's a guidance for the autopilot and is gone as soon as L and Vnav is disconnected, or the autopilot itself for that matter, from that point it's all down to cables and hydraulics.

(I'm a senior captain in my airline and rated on 737-777)



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 10:49 PM
link   


Remote controlled autopilot to prevent hijacking

Post-September 11 air travel security concerns have spurred Boeing to develop and test a tamper-proof, remote-controlled autopilot system. They've already patented the project, which sounds similar to a European effort announced last year. The idea goes like this: If anyone attempts to force their way into the cockpit, autopilot can be activated manually or by pressure sensors that are installed in the cockpit door. This would eliminate any possibility of terrorists using the aircraft as a deadly missile, although it doesn't mean other terrible things couldn't happen en route to the nearest military base or commercial airport. Once the "uninterruptible autopilot system" is activated, it cannot be reversed. Ground controllers can then guide the plane to its destination via remote digital control using radio waves, satellite GPS, and existing landing aids known as "autoland function." Boeing insiders claim the anti-hijacking autopilot kits will be ready in three years and can be fitted to airliners throughout the world.

www.engadget.com...

THE 70's

In the mid-seventies America faced a new and escalating crisis, with US commercial jets being hijacked for geopolitical purposes. Determined to gain the upper hand in this new form of aerial warfare, two American multinationals collaborated with the Defense Advanced Projects Agency (DARPA) on a project designed to facilitate the remote recovery of hijacked American aircraft. Brilliant both in concept and operation, “Home Run” [not its real code name] allowed specialist ground controllers to listen in to cockpit conversations on the target aircraft, then take absolute control of its computerized flight control system by remote means.
From that point onwards, regardless of the wishes of the hijackers or flight deck crew, the hijacked aircraft could be recovered and landed automatically at an airport of choice, with no more difficulty than flying a radio-controlled model plane. The engineers had no idea that almost thirty years after its initial design, Home Run’s top secret computer codes would be broken, and the system used to facilitate direct ground control of the four aircraft used in the high-profile attacks on New York and Washington on 11th September 2001


[edit on 26-12-2007 by IvanZana]



posted on Dec, 26 2007 @ 11:01 PM
link   
cool vid. i love ww2 history and this is the first time i heard of this. i still dont buy the 9/11 was an inside job though. just my thoughts though..



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Freaky_Animal
 



Whats wrong with you, it is so painfully obvious that you have no idea what your talking about. And that you are a ball faced liar. Being certified on windows flight sim does not make you cert to fly the real thing or even have an opinion.



posted on Dec, 27 2007 @ 04:39 PM
link   
The ignorance is too much to handle. Did you read that excerpt about DARPA and "home run"?

The codes to override the hijack recovery system were TOP SECRET! Somebody on the inside knew about it, and at the very least, gave those codes to Saudi terrorists.

The very fact that they intentionally ignored FBI/CIA intelligence reports for a year before the attacks, even urgent reports entitled "Bin Laden DETERMINED to attack US" with plans on hijacking planes and running them into buildings, and then still just let the whole Top Secret Hijack Recovery Codes go unchecked or unchanged, tells me that they AT LEAST were complicit, and that in itsself means this was coordinated at least in part by top levels of our government, which IN PART or IN WHOLE, is still an inside job! The ignorance of some of you people. It is not 9/11 Madness or whatever the mods have deemed this. It is people getting just overtly pissed off at the level of stupidity and apathy and IGNORANCE that too many people on this site display.... especially in a forum such as the 9/11 forum.
-------------------------------------------------------------
EDIT: The US in general... same problem. It is not right for the mods to deem frustration at ignorance 9/11 Madness. Deny ignorance, remember?
-------------------------------------------------------------

Bravo to the OP for bringing up this interesting tidbit. I like your hardcore avatar, too.... wait, do I see a kitty?

[edit on 27-12-2007 by indierockalien]



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 10:53 AM
link   

the level of stupidity


Indeed, looks like common sense is not that common anymore

[edit on 28-12-2007 by Freaky_Animal]



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by indierockalien
The ignorance is too much to handle. Did you read that excerpt about DARPA and "home run"?

The codes to override the hijack recovery system were TOP SECRET! Somebody on the inside knew about it, and at the very least, gave those codes to Saudi terrorists.




Whoever plotted 9/11 definitely viewed the FAA as an enemy that morning. Overriding FAA systems would be the most effective way to ensure the attacks were successful. To do this, the FAA needed an evolution of PROMIS software installed on their systems and Ptech was just that; the White House & Secret Service had the same software on their systems - likely a superior modified version capable of "surveillance and intervention" functions.
PTECH & 9/11



posted on Dec, 28 2007 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 
Did you notice that the link you posted says that the technology might be ready by 2011?

If the technology existed 30 years ago, then why are they still trying to develop it?

Do you have a link for the super secret DARPA FAA code quote that you posted? If not, it may as well have said that Boeing 757s were designed to turn into Super Ninja Transformers in case they were hijacked.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 05:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Freaky_Animal
You conspiracy guys have been repeating this lie for years.


You conspiracy guys? Pigeonholed and stereotyped already and all I did was post a quote from Boeing in reply to "there is no on board computer in the 757'


Did I mention 'fly-by-wire'?

Do you wish to retract your slander on my character now?



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana

Originally posted by indierockalien
The ignorance is too much to handle. Did you read that excerpt about DARPA and "home run"?





Whoever plotted 9/11 definitely viewed the FAA as an enemy that morning. Overriding FAA systems would be the most effective way to ensure the attacks were successful. To do this, the FAA needed an evolution of PROMIS software installed on their systems and Ptech was just that; the White House & Secret Service had the same software on their systems - likely a superior modified version capable of "surveillance and intervention" functions.
PTECH & 9/11


PTECH read all about it.



posted on Dec, 30 2007 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


joseph Kennedy was about to bail out of his plane when he set the remote detonation etc. is when it blew up over the English Channel, long after take off.

Yes remote tech di this 911 job. It was all I was reading about that night, and by the time I woke up on the 12th, all my bookmarked locations were gone then my system, which never had one crash before, went kaput.

The transponder radio channel is what was needed for the remote operator to see what the plane was doing.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join