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.

 

flight UAL175 tracked on flight explorer AFTER crashes

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   


flight ual175 is flying at 30, 000 feet at 10:26, a half asn hour after it supposedly hit the tower. yet, there is another flight, N175F, that is at 700 feet at where the towers are.
let the games begin.....

[edit on 29-7-2009 by billybob]




posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 12:31 PM
link   
This is very interesting. How accurate is that graphic display? I am wondering if anyone will just conclude that it was "an error" or "glitch." Thanks for this, never seen this before.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by talisman
How accurate is that graphic display?


it's supposed to be pretty accurate. it gets it's data directly from transponders, i believe.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by talisman
 


It can't be a glitch with identifying information and an altitude. The flight tracking system gets that information from the flights transponder. It is sent from the actual aircraft to the tracking center/FAA/tower, etc.

A glitch would show two identical flights, or a 'ghost' blip on radar that was unidentified.

This had to be an actual plane! Still does not mean it is an airliner. A newscopter could have N175F as its identifier. I don't think military aircraft start with N, so that is ruled out.

This is a very interesting find, but a decoy aircraft would surely not turn on a transponder, so I think it will be explained away pretty quickly!



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by billybob
 


No, I've gone 'round and 'round with the YT poster on this.

Flight Explorer uses Radar data from the FAA, of course, but it's routed through a company which also provides Airline Reservation services, among other computer needs. Look up the owner of Flight Explorer, you'll see it's 'Sabre'.

A much more accurate way to track live flights is 'FlightAware'. No third party interference, except for the site that brings it. Don't know if they have historic info, though. Would be worth a check.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 



A newscopter could have N175F as its identifier.


Yes, I thought of that already, and looked it up (because in my experience I often see news helicopters 'N' numbers ending in 'F'...not sure why)

Anyway, the current registration belongs to a guy in California, on his Cessna 175 (an antique). BUT, he was issued the 'N' number in 2004. (edit: 2003!)

SO....the original aircraft that had that 'N' number? Either it was changed by the owner (you can do that, especially when you want a 'personal' number, much like car licenses...except 'N' numbers MUST start with 'N', and be from three to six characters in length).

Or, the aircraft was retired, scrapped, or destroyed. Its regitration goes back into the 'available' pool...

[edit on 29 July 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Yes, this has come up often over the years. I have used Flight Explorer since before 9/11 and captured the same image.

The way Flight Explorer worked then was to update the screen data every minute. This did not mean EVERY flight was updated with real-time data; sometimes data for any particular flight was not updated for several minutes. Also, sometimes there were data communication glitches. Also, the data was in real time, not delayed 5 minutes as it is now as a result of 9/11.

Flight Explorer was programmed to "fill in the gaps" by using a simple algorithm that used each flight's last known position, speed, direction of travel, and altitude to project a flight's next position IF real data was not present at a particular update. In this way, Flight Explorer was compensating for data dropouts and the lack of regular minute-to-minute real time data.

The last real position and data for UA 175 was after it turned in New Jersey and was pointing to WTC 2. Of course, it hit WTC 2 and no real data existed after that. But, based on that last data in New Jersey, Flight Explorer projected UA175's next position as being over southeastern Connecticut, given the speed and direction it was flying at the time of the last real data received.

The direction of that projected path (when you see a closeup) put it going right through the location of WTC 2. See :www.911myths.com... for the flight path.

9/11 Truthers keep bringing this subject up and it keeps getting explained. Nonetheless Truthers can't let go. It's funny that Flight Explorer released the data originally and Truthers think they FE "slipped up."

So, Truthers, let go. This has been explained to death for years.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


a decoy might not have shut off it's transponder. i mean, UAL175's was SUPPOSED to be off, yet it shows up a half hour later. planes take off and land every 30 seconds at some airports, don't they? that demands up to the second accuracy tracking flights.

weedwhacker, are you suggesting that flight explorer could put a blip where there was none, and call it anything they like?



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by billybob
 



planes take off and land every 30 seconds at some airports, don't they?


No, not passenger airplanes. About 1/12 to two minutes, three if after a 'heavy'.


...that demands up to the second accuracy tracking flights.


No. Horizontal separation is based on distance between targets. Depending on the Radar, and the environment, the minimum distabce varies. In the Terminal (TRACON) it is three miles (five 'in trail' of a heavy). Higher altitudes, faster speeds, farther from the antenna and less radar accuracy, it goes to ten miles.


weedwhacker, are you suggesting that flight explorer could put a blip where there was none, and call it anything they like?


NO. FE is NOT what an Air Traffic Controller sees, not even close. FE just provides info as to general location. People can use it to track a flight of interest, if you know someone on a flight, and the Airline Dispatch can also see where any of their flights are. It's useful for the Airline, especially in bad weather situations where they have a lot of diverts to alternates. ALSO, in a Medical Emergency, we can contact the medical facility, get patched in a three-way call to Dispatch, and decide if an immediate divert is needed for the sick person. Dispatch can, at a glance, know where we are, and consider plans.

ALSO, if Dispatch needs to send a text message, to amend the Dispatch Release due to weather changes, or advise of anything, knowing where we are helps them choose what facility to use to contact us through.



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Here's a good example of how inaccurate FE is.

CAL 15, EWR-HNL Flown this many times, it's scheduled push time is 1315. It's now 1604 as I type. It's off the gate, so shows as "In Flight", but typical summer in Newark, there's a delay:



COA15 Flight Information
Operated by: Continental Airlines, Inc (COA15) Aircraft Type: Boeing 767-400
Flight ID: COA15 Ground Speed: 0 mph
Status: In Flight Altitude: 0 feet


That's why it says "0 feet" altitude. Thing about FE, compared to FlightAware, is...FE has the 'OUT' time, (1557) fromthe airline data, but FlightAware won't 'see' the flight until it actually takes off, because 'FA' looks at actual FAA data from the flight plan, and the Radar.


Time remaining: 9h 49m (estimated) Bearing:
Distance remaining: 12,267 miles (10,659 NM or 19,741 km)

COA15 Departure Information
Airport: EWR (Newark Liberty Intl)
Temp:
75° F
Wind: SE
at 9 mph
City: Newark, New Jersey, USA
Departure Time: 7/29/2009 3:57pm (actual)
Current Local Time: 7/29/2009 4:01pm
FAA Airport Status: Ground stop


EDIT:

OK, I wrote the above after looking at FE at 1604, it posted a few minutes later, as I was finishing it.

NOW, here's the 'FA' data, I looked at it at 1612:


Boeing 767-400 (twin-jet) (H/B764/Q)
Origin Newark Liberty Intl (KEWR - track or info)
Destination Honolulu Intl (PHNL - track or info)

Route ELIOT J80 ETX RAV J64 BDF MCW J16 DPR J16 PDT ONP C1419 HEMLO A332 AUNTI R463 APACK MAGGI3 (Decode)
Date Wednesday, Jul 29, 2009
Duration 9 hours 36 minutes
Progress 9 hours 23 minutes left
13 minutes
Status En Route (40 miles down; 4919 miles to go)


Bit of a mileage difference...

Scheduled Actual/Estimated:

Departure 01:49PM EDT 03:58PM EDT
Arrival 05:42PM HST 07:32PM HST
Speed 484 kts 357 kts
Altitude 30000 feet 15300 feet



Just to point something else out, look at the departure time above. THAT is the time filed with FAA as the expected time 'OFF' the ground, taking into account the average taxi time from push at 1315 to 'OFF' at 1349 --- 34 minutes.



[edit on 29 July 2009 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jul, 29 2009 @ 04:45 PM
link   
Jthomas already explained it above and we already had this discussion before. You can read about it in my original thread here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join