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.

 

RARE VIDEO - Proof TV Blacked Out During Flight 175 Crash.

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 02:21 AM
link   
A couple of friends in New York mentioned their tv's went to static at the moment flight 175's impact into the WTC.

I thought it was localized till i found this video.



What do you all think caused this and why?

(tv going to static)



[edit on 13-1-2008 by IvanZana]

[edit on 13-1-2008 by IvanZana]




posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 05:04 AM
link   
Interesting. I can think of a few things that could do this, RF interference being the main one, but no doubt switching channels on a certain type of set can do this as well.. Or switching to a non tuned channel.

I suppose knowing what television it was might help. I think it warrants further investigation, but this is wrought with difficulty.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 05:30 AM
link   
My connection is hopeless for viewing video so question or 2 to those who watched it:
When does the blackout occur in relation to the WTC2 impact?

And how long does it last?

I have may have a couple of ideas depending on that info



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 05:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Pilgrum
 


The static is on the audio channel only; the camera keeps recording video uninterrupted. It lasts at least two seconds. The classic hiss. The audio reopens with the end of the impact boom.

Very interested in your thoughts as to why...



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 06:44 AM
link   
I'd go for it being electrical interference caused by the fault currents in WTC2 until fuses or circuit breakers cut those circuits but I would have expected some interference in the video as well like 'snow' at the same time.

What I would have expected is a temporary complete blackout due to the voltage dip on the feeders in that area (fault currents on a busbar affect the adjacent unfaulted feeders until the fault is cleared by protection).

Was the normal source of TV transmission WTC1?
If so, the TV networks would have been transmitting from a secondary backup location after the WTC1 strike which would most likely have a lower signal strength or at least be further away/lower in height making signal/noise ratio a bit worse so arcing interference would be more significant.

There still should have been visible picture interference as analog TV video is AM but the audio is FM which is a bit more immune to such electrical interference.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 06:54 AM
link   
There's also the possibly of it coming from the auto volume control in the camera itself reacting to the loud noise.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pilgrum
I'd go for it being electrical interference caused by the fault currents in WTC2 until fuses or circuit breakers cut those circuits but I would have expected some interference in the video as well like 'snow' at the same time.


Naw Pilgrum, the lights didnt flicker, the tv didnt shut off, Tv's went to static 1 second before and during the crash of 175.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 11:57 AM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


I was on satellite connection. As I recall, it was CNN. I did not see anything but a huge black cloud on WTC 2 wall. Not even a plane actually coming directly in. I saw a plane shape going behind WTC 2. And then nothing of any significance before the huge black cloud appeared on the wall of WTC 2. When people place photographs of 2 on the Internet, I viewed none of that hairpin turn and sharp angle back. That would drastically cut speed doing that manuever, particularly in a Boeing 767. If it could even be done, and that is a mighty big if.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 12:45 PM
link   
THe main demolition charges were bown at the moment of impacts to obscure them.

In clips of the 2nd hit you can clearly hear 2 seperate booms.

Mabey they cut tv to ensure nobody sees the charges?

In Shanksville, residents complained of lights flikering "BEFORE" impact.

[edit on 13-1-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 01:10 PM
link   
One theory could be:-



The 110th Floor of 1 WTC (North Tower) housed commercial and public service radio & television transmission equipment. The roof of 1 WTC contained a vast array of transmission antennas, including the 360 ft (approx 110m) center antenna mast, which was rebuilt in 1999 by Dielectric Inc. to accommodate DTV.

The center mast contained the television signals for almost all NYC television broadcasters: WCBS-TV 2, WNBC-TV 4, WNYW 5, WABC-TV 7, WWOR-TV 9 Secaucus, WPIX 11, WNET 13 Newark, WPXN-TV 31, and WNJU 47. It also had four NYC FM broadcasters on it as well: WPAT-FM 93.1, WNYC 93.9, WKCR 89.9, and WKTU 103.5


Source

Its possible that the plane crash temporarily effected the TV signal enough to lose audio for the 1-2 seconds. The plane would have had a lot of static electricity surrounding it and as it flew close to the antenna's it could have effect the tv signals..

Another theory could be from the effects of the underground charges that had to be huge to blow the main support columns. I'm sure there are more theory's out there but which one to choose without concrete proof?.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 01:30 PM
link   
The tower is on WTC 1, WTC 2 is what is being hit during the static tv blackout.

The planes didnt even knock out the electricity to the towers.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


I agree, and several ear witnesses said they heard explosions at the top of the buildings and bottom of WTC 1. I heard the explosions at the tops on audio, but saw no planes actually flying into AND impacting, much less penetrating, either building. I saw no plane flying at WTC 2, except in photos across the Internet. Even those are placing their planes at different angles flying at WTC 1 and 2, until fireballs and flames appearances block any impact and penetration from visibility of everyone.

Same happened at the Pentagon and Shanksville. That is the reason for so many inconsistencies from eye and ear witnesses in all three locations. The rest of us, or at least a goodly number of us, are at the mercy of video not actually being on the sites during occurrences.

We live in the days of highly sophisticated imagery and deliberate illusion using same. In the past, we did not have that problem. Either we were there, or we got it hearsay. Photos may or may not be reliable as "evidence". Depended on the reputation of any photographer in those days. It went to the issue of credibility in personal integrity.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


Not if PBS was still able to broadcast right up until the building collapsed. We can agree on that.

If the fire doors or any other doors were on key card or key pad, the electric was not out.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 01:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Freelancer
 


What would that have to do with satellite, or any other stations in the greater NYC area broadcasting from their own towers? Are you saying everyone was broadcasting off that one antenna? I am not clear on what you are saying is why I am asking.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 01:58 PM
link   
Oh you mean these on WTC2.



DIELECTRIC COMMUNICATIONS AWARDED
WORLD TRADE CENTER (NYC) DESIGN CONTRACT
FOR HDTV/NTSC ANTENNAS

RAYMOND, MAINE - January 5, 1996 - New York City's Television Broadcasters have awarded Dielectric Communications a contract for two antenna system designs to be installed on the World Trade Center involving nine stations.

One design involving World Trade Center 2 (WTC2) consists of a new mast specifically for HDTV broadcasting. A second design will interweave new HDTV antennas with existing NTSC stations on the World Trade Center 1 (WTC1) Building.


Source


And this:-



When the Twin Towers collapsed on Sept. 11, New York lost what was arguably the best antenna sites in North America.

At 1,368 feet above street level, 1 WTC (the North Tower) was the tallest building on the eastern seaboard. This is why its 207-square-foot rooftop was dotted with antennas at five-foot intervals. At 1,362 feet, 2 WTC's rooftop was also home to several antenna sites, including the New York State Police's primary transmitter site for its Metro-21 800MHz EDACS trunking system. So the loss of the Twin Towers was a serious blow to public safety operators.


Source




As for non-broadcast applications, the rooftops of 1 WTC and its twin, 2 WTC, were home to a veritable forest of antennas—98 in all. These served a wide range of networks, including the Port Authority’s 800MHz Ericsson EDACS trunking system, which was lost in the fire and building collapse. One of the federal government’s 400MHz Motorola Smartnet trunking systems was destroyed as well, said Larry Van Horn, an editor with Monitoring Times, a magazine for scanner enthusiasts.


Source



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 02:06 PM
link   
My friends in New York have cable tv and the had the same phenomena.

They were watching that ""Psshhhhhh" then the signal came back on and all they saw was fireball.

Be fair to say no one saw the plane hit the second tower LIVE on TV.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Well ask the question "What else happened right before the plane hit the building?" Explosions at the base of each tower right before the planes hit, according to William Rodriguez, could have caused some sort of electrical short in the power lines. Maybe the signal to detonate the bombs was sent through a cable line!!



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Freelancer
 



There was only one antenna. It sat at the top of WTC 1. It weighed well over 100 tons, securely stabilized by tons of hat trusses running from the 107th floor to the 110th floor roof of WTC 1.

Hat trusses tied together the perimeter exterior walls and the core supports to stabilize them, and secure them in vertical position from the 107th floor on up to the roof.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


I will agree. I have yet to see anyone insist he or she actually saw any plane hitting any building. If anyone did, he or she better have valid physical evidence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 04:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Trauma
 


That would mean every cable line in the US was connected into the WTC 1 antenna. They were not filming from inside the WTC buildings. They were networking back to their own towers or satellite dishes, and using video cameras with their own batteries to film, for those using wireless VCR to film.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join