It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


passengers on all flights

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 11:26 AM
reply to post by SPreston

Not to mention, I seem to remember hearing that they have flown fullsize passenger airliners via remote --landed, took off and zipped around a few times if I am remembering correctly.

If anyone wants me to, I will find the link when I get home from work tonight.

ata: And I have also seen a remote controlled passenger airliner get remote controlled straight into a forest and blow am not really sure. Hell, I am not sure on where I fall as far as how the planes were taken to their targets.

...especially if it was a plane that hit the pentagon.


[edit on 4/15/0909 by spines]

posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 04:26 PM
Posting a tribute to not only Captain Burlingame, and First Officer Charlesbois, but to the four F/As and the passengers (including a group of inner-city school children on their first airplane flight) and, of course, the victims from inside the building....


Please remember to shed a tear....

posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 05:12 PM

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by mblahnikluver

Here's an example of how difficult it is to convert an airline passenger jet to remote control. This was conducted to intentionally rip open the wing tanks, and test a fuel additive intended to (hopefully) suppress jet fuel fires.

As you can see, the pilot began to lose control in the last few seconds, but at least he hit the target....because they had set up a localizer and G/S (basically an Instrument Landing System) for him to follow to point-of-impact.

It is absolutely incredulous to think that there was anysort of similar electronic guidance into the Towers or the Pentagon....especially considering the reaction times needed at the speeds iinvolved.

As you can see, the Boeing in the video is at about 140-150 knots, tops.

Modern Military-grade UACVs are slow fliers too....and specifically designed from scratch for radio control.

[edit on 4/14/0909 by weedwhacker]

so you mean that you do accept the possibility that two guys with a plastic knifes from afghanistan cave was able to direct the planes the way they did? and especially to hit pentagon in some unbeliveable mysterious path? it would be much more possible to use computer instead for sure.

posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 05:48 PM
reply to post by czacza1


Boxcutters....those things that grocery store workers use....small, about 3 1/2 inches long. The blades snap extend it, use it, snap off when dull, re-extend. They are thin, easily concealed.

As distraction, others had fake bombs for 'crowd control'...pure fear and manipulation technique.

(A little logical thinking and you'd realize that the explosives would never have cleared security...but, fear intimidates).

Commando techniques, storm and invade, element of surprise....

THIS is what we're guarding against, now. Forewarned is to be prepared. Shame we didn't get enough forewarning from the Daily Presidential Briefing of August, 2001....

EDIT....and no, the AutoPilot is designed to be smooth, has parameters and limitations. The monkeys at the controls can yank and bank to their heart's content...well, up to a point, of course....ever seen just how much a modern jet airframe can take? Look for video of how they test (on the ground) the breaking point of the wings, for example....part of the certification of new designs.

and, yes....was on topic....

[edit on 4/15/0909 by weedwhacker]

posted on Apr, 15 2009 @ 06:09 PM
If there were passengers transported it would have most likely been done underground and passengers would most likely awaite their fates as detainees in a secret prison. New World Airport cough cough, I mean, Denver International Airport. That would be my guess.

posted on Apr, 19 2009 @ 05:39 AM
I have heard and read a few things about the passengers. Of course there are some people who are missing from back then, on 9/11. One of the planes was supposed to be headed to LA. The government sent a team to the airport to do grief counseling for all the family members who would show up looking for their loved ones from the lost plane. Nobody ever showed up to look for their people. (from a guest on Coast to Coast AM)
The phone calls supposedly made from the planes were pretty much proven to be fake.
I read a while back an article by someone who analyzed the passenger list of at least one of the flights and all the names were people who worked for one defense contractor or another. What this means is you have at least one plane full of "people" who were all names that could have been fabricated and well covered up as to their real identities or could have been all members of fake front companies made up by the CIA to hide black operations. What I mean is that the "intelligence" organizations maintain a large population of people who only exist on paper.
As for a remote controlled plane, you can program it into the auto pilot to make turns to point to certain beacons. In normal usage, the only problem is in elevation changes. They do not normally make smooth transitions. So, theoretically, all you would have to have in the way of external input would be someone controlling the rate of descent.

[edit on 19-4-2009 by jmdewey60]

posted on Apr, 19 2009 @ 12:02 PM

Originally posted by jmdewey60
The government sent a team to the airport to do grief counseling for all the family members who would show up looking for their loved ones from the lost plane.

Nobody ever showed up to look for their people.
[edit on 19-4-2009 by jmdewey60]

I heard this story too but not sure where.

I have a feeling it could have been the Loose Change "documentary". Unfortunately lots of stuff on Loose Change is fabricated or exaggerated.

I would like to read more about missing families of the victims though - do you (or any other users reading this) have any links or sources?

posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 09:19 AM
I have a printed off newspaper article that a co-worker gave me back in '04, I tried finding the original story in the website archives but alas it seems to have disappeared. so I will post a few excerpts that may be relevant to this thread.

The story examines the claims of Col. Donn de Grand Pre, former Pentagon arms salesman under Ford and Carter, top dealer to the Middle East.
American Free Press, March 15th 2004-The September 11 Conspiracies
Headline-No Highjackers?

A few points of interest, Grand Pre alleges...

-The trigger for 9/11 activity was the imminent economic collapse which can only be temp. prevented by a major war.

-The cochairman of the Joint Chiefs himself has agreed that there were no hijackers or cell phone calls, and everyone on the plane (pilots/crew) were unconscious 8-18 mins into flight.

-The planes were remote controlled, probably using an AWACS aircraft, enabling 5-8 GForce manuevers not withstandable by human pilots.

-There were no hijackers on any of the 9/11 killer jets.

-The 9/11 planes are now at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean, and I'm telling you we are knowledably speculating, those aircraft went over the Atlantic and that was all she wrote.

-9/11 was an administrative(cold) coup de'tat, and a military coup to take back our govt. has been simmering since Kosovo.

-9/11 was meant to trigger a psychological and patriotic response to pave the way for combined UN activity for striking targets inthe Middle East and elsewhere.

-A commercial aircraft did not hit the Pentagon, it was most likely a cruise missle or drone.

-Flight 93 was shot down by the North Dakota Air Guard, and Grand Pre knows personally the man who fired the 2 intercept missles.

-Dick Cheney is the one man who knows the most about 9/11 of the majority in the administration.

There is some other stuff covered in the article but I don't want to go too off topic, I do want to point out that Grand Pre has written several books on this subject matter and while I wont necessarily discredit him for that, some will, take this info however you want.

[edit on 4/20/2009 by JKersteJr]

posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 04:42 PM

Originally posted by JKersteJr
-The planes were remote controlled, probably using an AWACS aircraft, enabling 5-8 GForce manuevers not withstandable by human pilots.

-There were no hijackers on any of the 9/11 killer jets.

-The 9/11 planes are now at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean, and I'm telling you we are knowledably speculating, those aircraft went over the Atlantic and that was all she wrote.

[edit on 4/20/2009 by JKersteJr]

Nice find, shame the article is not available on the net

Does seem to contradict itself though that the planes were remote controlled AND are also at the bottom of the ocean

Unless it means that all the planes were remote controlled without hijackers and flown into the sea and then cruise missiles or decoy aircraft were used to strike WTC and the Pentagon?

posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 05:18 PM
reply to post by alienanderson

You mean this article?

This gentleman (and I use it in the loosest sense of the word) alleges that it was "Major Rick Gibney" that shot down Flight 93. He even talks about the awards ceremony where Col Gibney was decorated for his actions on 9/11.

Problem is, its a bunch of hogwash. There is absolutely no evidence that Flight 93 was shot down. Neither the witnesses, nor the data recorders, nor the location of the wreckage support anything other than Flight 93 being intact at the time of impact with the ground.

Now, about Col Gibney, he was decorated for his actions on 9/11...

According to Air National Guard spokesman Master Sgt. David Somdahl, Gibney flew an F-16 that morning--but nowhere near Shanksville. He took off from Fargo, N.D., and flew to Bozeman, Mont., to pick up Ed Jacoby Jr., the director of the New York State Emergency Management Office. Gibney then flew Jacoby from Montana to Albany, N.Y., so Jacoby could coordinate 17,000 rescue workers engaged in the state's response to 9/11. Jacoby confirms the day's events. "I was in Big Sky for an emergency managers meeting. Someone called to say an F-16 was landing in Bozeman. From there we flew to Albany." Jacoby is outraged by the claim that Gibney shot down Flight 93. "I summarily dismiss that because Lt. Col. Gibney was with me at that time. It disgusts me to see this because the public is being misled. More than anything else it disgusts me because it brings up fears. It brings up hopes--it brings up all sorts of feelings, not only to the victims' families but to all the individuals throughout the country, and the world for that matter. I get angry at the misinformation out there."

Looks like he didnt shoot down Flight 93....

As for Donn R Grand Pre, at various times, he was an Army Colonel, an Air Force Colonel, and a Marine Corps Colonel...problem is, that appears to be hogwash too. A couple veterans sites were actively investigating him and at one point he was listed as a phony. No matter, he died in Feb 2009.

posted on Apr, 20 2009 @ 10:18 PM
reply to post by jmdewey60're repeating information that is skewed and mostly hearsay and 'he said/she said' or...."I heard this" somewhere....all with no basis in facts.

The 'government' doesn't send grief counselors, the Airlines do it. Three flights were destined for LAX, one for SFO. Compared to some airline flights, all four were very lightly loaded. Likely a high percentage of Business Travellers. I group of children from an inner-city DC school.

The Los Angeles airport was evacuated, due to a bomb threat (look it up).

Grief counselling in that instance would have been disrupted, anyway.

As to 'all' of the names being on some government list of employees....not true. Two producers from the TV show 'Frasier' were onboard AAL 11 out of BOS.

Please, don't believe everything you hear.....

posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 02:00 AM

Originally posted by jmdewey60
As for a remote controlled plane, you can program it into the auto pilot to make turns to point to certain beacons.


The WTC towers used to be a waypoint on all commercial autopilot software used in commercial planes.

*By lowering the altitude to less that the height of the towers and engaging the auto-pilot with the two towers as a designated waypoint, you have effectively rendered the plane a missile-with-target.

This could be done remotely with a set of programmed commands, or perhaps another mechanism was used to engage the required course and altitude changes. It was an inside job.
(This can be tested on any flight simulator with autopilot functions. Even flight-sim 95 has the towers as a waypoint.)

In an interview with the German newspaper Tagesspeigel on January 13, 2002, Andreas von Buelow, Minister of Technology for the united Germany in the early 1990s told about a technology by which airliners can be commanded through remote control.

The former Minister of Technology said: '"The Americans had developed a method in the 1970s, whereby they could rescue hijacked planes by intervening into the computer piloting."'

Naw, it was all just coincidence. Especially the Wargames playing out that day; the wargames where imaginary hijacked planes were flown into buildings. In this modern age, a 'hijacker' could even be a computer program - or even a Global Hawk pilot taking control of a plane long enough to switch it on autopilot, lower the altitude and point it at the WTC...

...The 'pilot' might not have known what has was involved with until later that morning - to him it would likely have just been an aspect of the wargames Global Guardian and Northern Guardian. (google them)

[edit on 22-4-2009 by Exuberant1]

posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 02:01 AM
I think this part of this video :

at the 47:30 minutes mark (nearly at the end of September Clues Part II), will differ from the above opinion of Weedwhacker.

Around noon, there were only TWO people (relatives?) at LA Airport arriving according to that reporter from CNN, asking about the 221 passengers and crew aboard the three planes destined for LA.

Those planes crashed between 08:45 hrs and 10:08 that morning !!!
Btw, no names given, it is just a remark from that reporter.

Directly after airing that news piece, a bomb thread was phoned in, and the whole airport was sealed off and emptied.
The evacuation order was already given btw, 20 minutes earlier before this interview went on air. It was ordered from "above".....

Quite conveniently, ain't it so?

[edit on 22/4/09 by LaBTop]

posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 10:48 AM
reply to post by LaBTop

This CNN broadcast at noon on 9-11 can be viewed at THE SEPTEMBER 11 TELEVISION ARCHIVE MIRROR at the following link. Choose the CNN clip for 12:16 - 12-58 and the LAX portion starts at 1:35 on the clip.

TV archive

The alleged families of the alleged Flt 11 and 175 passengers had over three hours to show up at the airport. Any alleged family and friends of the alleged Flt 77 passengers had 2 1/2 hours to show up. Where were they? Why wouldn't the alleged families bother to drive to the airport their missing family members were supposed to land at?

If I had a family member on one of those flights, and I lived in LA, I would have headed for the airport lickety split, arriving there hours before it was evacuated. I would want questions answered such as 'Did my family board the aircraft?' or 'Were there any survivors?' or 'Why are you forcing me to leave the airport when I still need my questions answered?' In fact when I lived in California and I had friends or family flying in; I arrived at SFO hours early just so I could monitor their flights on the monitors. I hate being late and airport terminals are big confusing models of conjestion.

So why did they evacuate Los Angeles airport (LAX) at 12:15 EDT (9:15 in LA) if all flights had been grounded hours ago? How could LAX be attacked from the air if all US civilian aircraft had been grounded hours ago when the FAA ordered a National Groundstop at 9:45 EDT?

Was it because the 9-11 perps did not want the American people to see that the alleged passengers of the three flights had no grieving family members to show up at the airport? Incidentally San Francisco Airport (SFO) the destination of Flt 93 was also evacuated; most likely for the very same reason. Are the alleged passengers of the four flights really CIA phantoms with no real families to miss them?

So to answer the question posed in the OP; it appears there were no passengers. It was a complete military psyops campaign with passengers with faked identities (with perhaps a few thrown in like Barbara Olson and the flight attendents to add reality and they would have been disposed of) and faked hijackers with stolen identities and staged scenarios and planted parts and demolitions with faked whitewash research and investigations and a whole bunch of lies with the government loyalists still lying and denying over and over and over.

posted by mblahnikluver
I have read on here and many other places that people think the planes were remote controlled and there were no passengers on the planes and such. Now if people really think there were no real people on these planes, then where did they go?

posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 12:00 PM
reply to post by Exuberant1


The WTC Towers were a waypoint in the computer??? (I assume you mean in the FMS database???)

Why? Prove this.

posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 12:33 PM

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Exuberant1
The WTC Towers were a waypoint in the computer??? (I assume you mean in the FMS database???)

Why? Prove this.

I'm not an aircraft pilot but just a few minutes googling gave me the answers to this question.

Why? Because WTC was a prominent tall landmark and perfect as a waypoint

Check through this though; it sounds convincing to me but I'd prefer some expert opinion on it

Plausibility Of 9/11 Aircraft Attacks Generated By GPS-Guided Aircraft Autopilot Systems

Some relevant text from the document:

The Global Positioning System (GPS) is a space-based radio-navigation system that generates accurate positioning, navigation and timing information for civil use at no cost. The information signal can be obtained through the use of GPS signal receiving equipment

The president of the "Naverus" company that now designs the Required Navigation Performance" (RNP) procedures that utilize technology available prior to September 11, 2001, described a complex RNP test flight performed by a Boeing 757 auto-pilot system, utilizing waypoint coordinate information contained within the aircraft's Flight Management Computer (FMC), that included a descent from a 38,000 foot altitude.

For U.S. aviation purposes utilizing GPS navigation, a waypoint is a three dimensional location within the National Air Space, comprised of longitude, latitude and altitude coordinates. RNP-like flight paths and runway approach procedures are comprised of a series of waypoints. The WTC towers themselves occupied waypoint coordinates. Aircraft Flight Management System (FMS) facilitated precision instrument approach procedures involve the interception of waypoint coordinates. By substitution of World Trade Center tower and Pentagon building waypoint coordinates for flight leg terminating waypoint coordinates, a RNP-like waypoint intercept procedure under autopilot control performed by three of the four aircraft destroyed on September 11, 2001, could theoretically accomplish the aircraft attacks observed.

posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 12:43 PM

Originally posted by alienanderson
The WTC towers themselves occupied waypoint coordinates.

*Thanks alienAnderson. You beat me to it.

Weedwhacker claims to be a pilot, he should know this.

I'm not a pilot, but I know more about waypoints than an alleged pilot?

That's not right....

posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 01:03 PM
reply to post by alienanderson

Well, alien. What we have in that piece is a smattering of actual technology, as in the GPS for navigation, looks like someone 'applied' for a patent to 'remote control' a jet...but notice the patent was applied for in October, response to the 9/11 events.

Then, cleverly woven in, is rampant and ridiculous speculation. Problem with a board such as this, it is necessary sit down and refute sentence by sentence just when and where the 'theory' goes off-track.

Here's a little problem for these 'remote control' notions: In 2001 AAL and UAL did NOT have GPS updating to their FMS. (oops...acronyms...FMS is Flight Management System).

The article correctly defines 'RNP' (required navigational performance) which is merely a standard that should be met, and will vary depending on the nature of the airspace. But, in the example I read, they showed RNP of 0.2. That is 2/10 of a nautical mile, or 1,212 feet. Note that the RNP is 0.2 EITHER SIDE of the we have an acceptable margin of 2,242 feet. Hardly accurate enough to hit the WTC Towers.

Back to the jets...neither of them had GPS installed. My airline didn't even have them in 2001...and we were one of the fist to equip the entire fleet (not just the International "ETOPS"-equipped jets) with GPS updating, starting around 2003.

Let me explain the navigation systems...we start with the IRS (Inertial Reference System) which is the platform with three laser-ring gyros to sense velocity and direction of motion. There are three IRSs, and they all feed what each 'thinks' its position is to form an average, which is fed to the FMC (Flight Management Computer). There is the CDU (control display unit) in the cockpit, which is where the pilots interact, program routes, pull up information (such as current RNP), etc, etc.

ANY input requires an action by a human being in order to 'execute' make it 'active'. That's why there is a button labeled 'EXEC'.

Further, the AutoPilot(s) require the push of a button (older models have a lever) in order to engage. Once engaged, the A/P is very easy to disconnect...simply 'fighting' the control wheel, opposite to what the A/P is doing, will cause an immediate disconnect.

As to the IRS....remember that, by themselves, they are quite accurate. But, in order to improve accuracy, they are constantly updated by (before GPS) what's called 'radio' updating. This can be a combination of VOR/VOR, VOR/DME, LOC/DME, DME/DME, etc....triangulation from two sources, to further refine position accuracy. The addition of GPS is even better...for 'enroute' operations I've seen RNP down to .07 -- so that's about 424 feet, either side, which is 848 feet. Still hoping to hit the WTC???? Nah....need a human, and his eyesight and hand on the controls.

posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 03:13 PM
reply to post by weedwhacker

Thanks for the in depth reply

I gotta go now but before taking your stance at face value I had a quick google

You state that GPS was not common on commercial airlines in 2001 but an article I found states:

Since the mid 1990s the GPS system has become incredibly important for pilots and all airplanes are now outfitted with this device. It helps pilots stay on course and if something happens the system lets them know how to get back on the right path.

Is the article incorrect or does it refer to non-commercial aircraft do you think?

posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 03:18 PM
Weedwacker, there existed technology pre-2001 which used laser pointed targeting.

And you surely read some threads aboard about the laserpointer-like seconds long golden "flash" to the right of the nose of the incoming plane at the second strike.

And there was an unknown airplane sighted above the towers when the second plane hit :

Perfect candidate to take the steering over from the raw remote program and steer the plane visually or guided by a ground or airborne laser pointer exactly into the designated floor, the one with that mother load of acid lead batteries in its reinforced double spaced WTC 1 floor space.

How convenient that the first plane hit such an identically batteries loaded floor in the second tower, WTC 2.

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in