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.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
Here's the problem, as I see it.
When you say "almost all aircraft" I guess you mean to include only commercial passenger jets and business jets? BECAUSE, that is not how your phrase reads.
But, your misinformation is evident, in any regard, because you have taken what was linked regarding GPS, and the simple fact that there is ongoing design and testing to confirm the plausibility of relying on the GPS in lieu of the conventional ground-based systems that are currently in use.
That is ALL those articles are describing.
The FAA conducts extensive studies of this sort to confirm the reliability and safety of any new system, or method, or technology BEFORE writing legislation that approves their use in normal aviation operations.
Attacking me by claiming that what I contribute is "laughable" reflects very poorly on your credibility, not mine.
Because, I happen to know what I'm talking about.
I said that almost all planes have been fitted with SOME auto-pilot features for at least several decades.
These CAN, but not necessarilly, include the following controls: heading, speed, attitude, altitude, nav/gps hold, localiser/glidescope, etc. Yes smaller planes have fewer options available and normally NO AUTO-LAND but they are still very usefull.
How you came up with me saying that "only commercial planes and jets have AP" is really baffling the # out of me.
Further what you and I know about commercially available airplanes is almost immatterial BECAUSE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT *BLACK BUDGET* PLANES developed by the military-industrial complex for covert operations, such as OPERATION NORTHWOODS! Few people know what these airplanes look like or how they fly. Just because CNN, FOX, NBC, USA TODAY, NY TIMES, LA TIMES, etc doesn't report them DOES NOT MEAN THEY DO NOT EXIST! Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
You are incredibly wrong.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
OK, now it's just gone off the rails, here.
First, the claim was normal commercial jets, I.E. the B757/767, were "modified"...NOW it's some magically secret airplane that is "covert"...ones that, BTW, would be extremely valuable...
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Oh, and the Operation Northwoods reference, is....priceless!!!!!
Has no bearing, other than it vaguely resembles a "ruse" that was once cooked up to instigate an International incident with Cuba...a "ruse" that did NOT invlove the mass slaying of thousands of American citizens. People who try to use that scenario to compare with 9/11 are simply overly paranoid, and sometimes delusional. (I refer to the websites, and the authors of those sites, NOT to any ATS member, of course.)
You have demonstrated, by linking and showing what you THINK are supporting your claims and the OP's, that you clearly have no idea about, nor comprehension of, the material you cited.
It is sad, indeed, when laypeople try to interpret something they read after a quick "Google" search, and then act as if they understand it....
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by scott3x
The military, even WITH this imagined "cutting edge" technology would have already adapted to other uses, to include even more sophisticated UAVs, and the like. The ultimate goal would be a completely pilot-less fighter, since the Human body is the weak link in that airborne system.
But, I have seen nothing that resembles this sort of successful tech...oh, people will point to this or that that's currently declassified, and note how it had been around for a decade or so before being made public...and they'll say "See!" Still, the future need for ever-more-sophisticated fighters seems less likely, since there's no USSR anymore (well, China is a problem, but they'd be biting the hand that feeds them if they riled us up...perhaps another thread...)
The main reasons why this scenario is not plausible are the incredible complexities and breakthroughs that would have to have been developed, but completely not seen anywhere else. Not even a hint, a leak....nothing.
It's difficult enough to have pulled this off with ONE airplane....but FOUR? One would have been sufficient. Four (if this WERE as suggested) would just be asking for trouble, and increase the possiblity of "discovery".
Someone compared keeping the secret of the "Manhattan Project" to an 'operation' such as this...well, ummm....WAY different circumstances. WWII, and all that...common enemy, War Effort, loose lips sink ships, you know the deal.
The autopilots are designed with certain software that prevents a lot of what was seen, in the ways the airplanes behaved. ONLY a Human, in the cockpit, operating all of the controls (and not just the airlerons and elevators...ALL of the mode control selections that were made)....AND they showed a level of bare minimum knowledge and understanding...very basic.
Certainly, IF there were "remote pilots" they'd have a much better grasp of the systems, and how to use them, right?
Since we only have surviving Flight Recorders from two airplanes, we must infer from the other two. HOWEVER, we do have the existing ATC tapes --- radar data --- all to point to a timeline that makes perfect sense.
Subsequent plots to cause other air disasters, such as blowing up as many as a half-dozen Trans-Atlantic or Trans-Pacific passenger jets have come to light. The threat of such events is still real. Fortunately, the situation for U.S. Airlines and the unlikelihood of any more hijackings is less of a worry, now, for various reasons I won't go into here.
Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
Originally posted by weedwhacker
OK, now it's just gone off the rails, here.
First, the claim was normal commercial jets, I.E. the B757/767, were "modified"...NOW it's some magically secret airplane that is "covert"...ones that, BTW, would be extremely valuable...
Oh, I see your anology...
A vastly modified B767 plane does not qualify as secret/covert...funny though that it does qualify for others! Please tell me and everyone else who think that 9-11 was an inside job what you make of this picture. Pay special attention to what is circled. Could it possibly be some kind of remote control pod?
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a2fe82b69a85.jpg[/atsimg]
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Oh, and the Operation Northwoods reference, is....priceless!!!!!
Has no bearing, other than it vaguely resembles a "ruse" that was once cooked up to instigate an International incident with Cuba...
Right! I was certain you would give me that bs...
We give you so much evidence, yet you toss it out of the window...
You are sadly wrong, Your flight simulator skills and what little knowledge of aviation you have learned from your flight simulator dose not impress me or anyone else.
I posted facts not opinions I am sorry that the truth is disturbing to you and you have demonstrated that very well. Perhaps if you read real airplane Manuals instead of how to flightsim books you might learn something.
Your post to me was a personal attack...
...you should have demonstrated it with creditable sources to back your claim, however you fail to do so tells me that I am correct and the information that I have posted is correct.
It is sad indeed, when people who are not trained in aviation sadly prove wannabe pilots wrong.
Originally posted by impressme
Sorry to disappoint you but, there is.
The FAA announced on August 24, 2000 - just 13 months prior to the September 11, 2001 attacks - that the WAAS signal was available pending final approval by the FAA. Horizontal and vertical positional data accurate to between one to three meters and sufficient for Category I precision aircraft runway approaches, was now available throughout the contiguous United States.
Surprisingly to some, none of the four aircraft destroyed on September 11, 2001 are known to have entered unique transponder hijack notification codes...
In two cases, hijacker communications reportedly aimed at passengers on-board American Airlines flight 11 and United Airlines flight 93 on September 11, 2001 were heard instead by air traffic controllers, suggesting modified communication functions.
I wouldnt worry to much about what weed wacko thinks.
Originally posted by lycopersicum
reply to post by weedwhacker
No need to interview anyone LOL. It is called WAAS. DOD/DOT/FAA's global remote control system.
Originally posted by lycopersicum
Seamless Aviation: FAA's Wide Area Augmentation System.It was built for Boeing 727, 737, 757, an Aerocommander 680E and others easy retro with existing equipment on the air crafts at the time.completed in 2000.And it said it was easy to hack LOL.
Originally posted by lycopersicum
April 1995 GPS world magazine did an 8 page article on it ill locate and post it.President Clinton administration.came up with it in 1995.
This is a quote from the article .
["In one of the trials, a Boeing 737 was modified for remote control by the mere addition of three antennas (only two required for GPS-a third for two nearby temporary beacons for precision landing), and two personal computer cards designed to interface with Boeing's Flight Control System (FCS)."]
Originally posted by lycopersicum
edit to add. ill post more latter going out for dinner with the wife BBL.
Originally posted by lycopersicum
waas.stanford.edu...
This thread should have been closed after weedwhacker's first post. All that has ensued is typical stupidity from ignorant "twoofers" who have no clue about the subject matter. There is a cure, it's known as knowledge. Gain some and it will cure you of twooferism!
25 Tactics for Truth Suppression
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how "sensitive they are to criticism".
5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary attack the messenger ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as "kooks", "right-wing", "liberal", "left-wing", "terrorists", "conspiracy buffs", "radicals", "militia", "racists", "religious fanatics", "sexual deviates", and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
Otherwise, you'll continue to make a fool of yourself just as this poster has in confusing WAAS with remote control.
This has nothing to do with remote control.
It merely added an interface between the GPS Receiver and the Auto-Pilot allowing coupled navigation and/or a coupled approach.
I hope you know more about food than this subject or you might eat something poisonous. Don't bother to post more as you have no clue what you are even reading, let along trying to analyze it to discuss it.