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.

 

Choice of Aircraft

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 08:47 PM
link   
This has been skimmed around previously, but I don't think it has been looked at specifically.

Why didn't the hijackers choose heavier aircraft?

Instead of picking 767s on a Tuesday morning, (relatively) lightly loaded, why didn't they pick a nearly full 747?

The maximum weight of a 767 when it's fully loaded is 420,000 lbs, but a fully loaded 747 can weigh upwards of 800,000 lbs. Given what they wanted them for, they also carry far more fuel, too.

We know the WTC was designed to be hit by a "fully loaded 707" (the largest aircraft at that time), and a lot of focus was put on 767 vs. 707 etc.. but the obvious was missed - the 767s were *lighter* than the designs allowed for by a significant margin.

Why choose the flights/aircraft they did?

EDIT: One thing I just wondered was whether (if this was staged), that they picked the flights they did because:

1) It was afternoon in the UK
2) Morning in the USA
3) Most people would be up
4) Maximum psychological impact, having the event broadcast on *breakfast* TV (USA), during daylight hours

If they had chosen a heavier aircraft, it likely wouldn't be flying until later that day or even that night (West->East transatlantic crossings occur at night).

1) It's dark
2) Most people are asleep or otherwise doing other things
3) Psychological impact is reduced.

Thoughts?

[edit on 16-7-2008 by mirageofdeceit]




posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 09:59 PM
link   
because they had top notch scientists,,, that mathematically figured out they would do enuff damage----and besides they had a backup plan with explosives in the buildings

come on---i doubt terrorists did any figuring----a few smart scientists and experts probably did all the planning

am i being sarcastic or serious????? probably both at the same time



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit
This has been skimmed around previously, but I don't think it has been looked at specifically.

Why didn't the hijackers choose heavier aircraft?

Instead of picking 767s on a Tuesday morning, (relatively) lightly loaded, why didn't they pick a nearly full 747?


Well the 757/67 shares a common rating, easy to fly, easy to buy sim time, #loads of them around.

Would have been a significant greater risk for the hijackers to screw it up in a 47.

Very different bird, the classic's needs a 3 crew flightdeck, and the newer 47's together with most large fbw Airbusses are a lot more complicated to operate than the 76/57.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 02:47 AM
link   
I guess it wouldnt matter. If you can remotely fly a boeing 757 there is no diffrence in a 747.


We all know that the planes were remotely flown into their target.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 02:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by IvanZana
I guess it wouldnt matter. If you can remotely fly a boeing 757 there is no diffrence in a 747.


We all know that the planes were remotely flown into their target.



No one can remotely fly any airliner today.

Even if they could, do you seriously think it's like flying a 50 dollar model aircraft, that it takes away the requirement for a professional pilot and decent airmanship?



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 04:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Freaky_Animal
 


I understand you dont know anything about anything to do with technology especially in the aircract technology sector.

Here is a video from the 1940's
I am sure this technology has improved... duh!?

I recommend you research before making such blind assertions.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 06:26 AM
link   


EDIT: One thing I just wondered was whether (if this was staged), that they picked the flights they did because:

1) It was afternoon in the UK
2) Morning in the USA
3) Most people would be up
4) Maximum psychological impact, having the event broadcast on *breakfast* TV (USA), during daylight hours



Dr George Friedman of Stratfor private itelligence service outlined it
in his book "AMERICA"S SECRET WAR" . Reason picked these flights
were

1) Light passenger load - better chance to get prime seat near cockpit
Fewer passengers meant easier to watch and control with less chance
of confrontation. Witness what happened on Flight 93 when passenger
found out what was going on

2) All targets were on East coast of US - hijackers needed flights grouped
closely timewise. Morning "rush hour" for takeoffs is between 7-9am
in eastern time zone. Hijackers picked flights at 8am (flight 93 left
40 min late). As day progresses chances of flights being delayed
by mechanical problems/weather increase which would destroy
synchronization of attacks. The entire 9/11 plot took only 2 hours
from takeoff of 1st flight until Flight 93 crash. Tight timetable meant
less chance of discovery and action being taken - ground stops (no
takeoffs) just after 9 am when hijackings detected. As time span
stretched out more fighters would be launched and pilots warned of
hijackings allowing preventive actions.

Because of early hour WTC buildings were only half full - 1st plane hit
at 8:46, at that time many people still not at work. Also Sept was
primary election for mayor - many stopped to vote and other people
stopped to take children to schools



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
The entire 9/11 plot took only 2 hours from takeoff of 1st flight until Flight 93 crash. Tight timetable meant less chance of discovery and action being taken - ground stops (no takeoffs) just after 9 am when hijackings detected. As time span stretched out more fighters would be launched and pilots warned of hijackings allowing preventive actions.

Wait, let me read that again... "As time span stretched out more fighters would be launched and pilots warned of hijackings allowing preventive actions."

Flight 11 allegedly reported as being hijacked around 8.14am.
Flight 93, allegedly crashed around 10.03am.

That's a wide open window of 1 hour and 49 minutes!

How much longer did the USA military need to send jet interceptors to any of the four allegedly hijacked planes???

If the official story is to be believed, then what the hell were the US jets doing, if they couldn't intercept any plane in almost two hours???



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 09:46 AM
link   
Untrained "pilots" fly with exceptional skill
Untrained "navigators" pin point their targets
the "airplanes" preform beyond their capabilities
the reason NORAD sat on the ground
was
there were no planes to intercept



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 

The airforce were conducting live fly hijacking exercises. Some of these exercises had planes hijacked and ccrashing into the pentagon and Wtc.
The reason why nobody stopped it is because the good people in the FAA and flying those jets were 100 percent convinced that all the 10+ hijacked aircraft (some real and some simulated) were all part of the exercise.

What angency would have enough intelligence and the means to pull of this attack under the guise of anti-hijacking and terrorist attack training all on 911.

Wargames were used as cover to execute the false flag attack.



Here is a member from the Elite Israeli Anti terror team. These guess have been accuses as the executers of many elements of 911.

"That as a unit.... we execute" Missions like from the movies". So i tell everyone, the movies are still way far from the operations this unit performs and Spielberg has alot to learn"

How do we know that Sayeret Matkal didnt execute 911 as a double cross to blame it on Israel's enemies?



[edit on 18-7-2008 by IvanZana]



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by mirageofdeceit
 

Why didn't the hijackers choose heavier aircraft?


Zacharias Moussaoui intended to hijack a 747. He had 747 simulator time, 747 flight manuals, and 747 training videos in his apartment.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
747 flight manuals, and 747 training videos in his apartment.


How nice of him to leave all that evidence for us.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Ultima, I laugh at your posts sometime. You really think they needed that evidence? The idiot terrorist confessed!

Have you even looked at the evidence against him? If you have, you wold have never posted what you did.

(have you sent your credentials to the mods yet?)

[edit on 18-7-2008 by ThroatYogurt]



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
Have you even looked at the evidence against him? If you have, you wold have never posted what you did.


Have you even looked at all the evidence left behind by all the "terrorist"

Some terrorist even left the planes and left all their baggage behind, So nice of them to leave all that evidence behind for us.

But then you probably do not know all of that since you do not do much research



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


another laughable post.

Do you think they really gave a frogs fat a@@ if they figured out who they were??

You are so silly with your "do your research" posts.

you have shown a very limited amount of knowledge pertaining to 911.

that is why you echo the same posts over and over.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 08:02 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 

If the official story is to be believed, then what the hell were the US jets doing, if they couldn't intercept any plane in almost two hours???


Actually, tezzajw, the military wasn't alerted about Flight 11 until 8:38. That is 1 hour and 25 minutes between military notification and the last crash.

The military was notified about Flight 11 at 8:38 and it crashed at 8:46, that's 8 minutes prior knowledge.

The military was notified about Flight 175 at 9:03 and it crashed at 9:03, that's 0 minutes prior knowledge.

The military was notified about Flight 77 at 9:34 (that it was missing, not that it was hijacked) and it crashed at 9:38, that's 4 minutes prior knowledge.

The military was notified about Flight 93 at 10:07 and it crashed at 10:03, that's -4 minutes prior knowledge.

As you can see, the military was waiting for the FAA to inform them about what the hell was going on. It's pretty difficult for the military to do its job when they don't know what's going on, don't you agree?



(mod, if you feel this is off-topic let me know.)



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
It's pretty difficult for the military to do its job when they don't know what's going on, don't you agree?

No, I don't agree.

There was almost a two hour window of opportunity where anyone could have done whatever they liked in the US skies that morning, without any interceptors challenging them.

That's the facts, Boone 870.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 09:50 PM
link   
Come on people, theres a bit of thread drift trying to happen. Discuss the topic not each other.

Now back to our regularly scheduled programing. 9/11 Conspiracies » Choice of Aircraft Thank you.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
Do you think they really gave a frogs fat a@@ if they figured out who they


Do you really think they wouild have made all that planning and then just leave stuff behind?

Please post an adult answer.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
It's pretty difficult for the military to do its job when they don't know what's going on, don't you agree?


Would you agree that NORAD had a very good record for intercepting planes untill 9/11? I mean they missed 4 in one day.

How many have they ever missed?



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join