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.

 

NTSB records: ATC waits 12 minutes to report AA 77 non-contact

page: 2
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 


By your phrasing of this:


... and the time that it was referred they put AA 77 on "guard" (9:15:15 am).


It seem painfully clear to me that you don't understand the terms. I see that another pilot has already mentioned it, but not sure if his description cleared it up for you.

Just to be certain, would like to know what your impression of that phrase meant??

(Because, if it is as I suspect, it once again shows that the ONLY reason any of this "9/11 conspiracy" baloney ever gets traction, is due to the complete lack of understanding of so many technical details, and the misconceptions that arise as a result).


"There are three types of 'truthers' (9/11 conspiracy believers): The confused; the paranoid; and, the profiteer."



edit on 10 March 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Reheat
 


When did ATC report they could not contack 77? ATC? Oops, ATC reported to ATC 77 did not answer... when... 77 did not answer. ATC is the man! It was known the second 77 did not talk! This was funny.

Nav, Pilot, Reheat1 did not answer!
Pilot, Nav, ask the Boom what he sees.
Boom, pilot, do you see Reheat1?
Pilot, boom, he is pre contack, be quiet...

Tanker 11 on guard, Reheat where are you??? Pooh Bear where are you? Tanker 11 on gurard OUT.
Did you already tell him what on "guard" is!!! that was funny


put AA 77 on "guard" (9:15:15 am).
... what is Guard?

Center had another plane call 77 on guard channel; on the radio. Center had another plane use the emergency frequency to call 77 when center failed to get a response. ATC has been trying.

Guard is a radio frequency. ATC figured out in 14 seconds 77 was not responding to radio calls. 14 seconds
roboe did it...

Originally posted by roboe

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
The 12 minutes I refer to is the time from the last call to AA 77 (at 9:03:06 am) and the time that it was refered they put AA 77 on "guard" (9:15:15 am). The last contact with AA 77 was at 8:50:51 am, making the amount of time about 25 minutes of non-contact before the called an issue.

I think you've misunderstood what "on guard" means. When the "Guard" frequency is used, every single aircraft in the given area will hear it, regardless of what radio frequency they are tuned to. For obvious reasons it's not used very often, and then only as a last ditch effort to try and contact an aircraft that is not responding on their assigned frequency.

FAA and American Airlines knew from around 8.56 AM that there was an issue with AA77, but it was not yet confirmed as a hijack.

edit on 10-3-2011 by iSunTzu because: already...



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by iSunTzu
What was ATC suppose to do? They keep trying to contact.


They should have notified their superiors sooner and used the guard frequency sooner.


Originally posted by iSunTzu
and the controllers did not know the USA was under attack - the controller knows 77 did not report back. Non issue... Then find an ATC manual or expert to help you out.


why would you assume air traffic controllers would not know? every OSer uses the same argument... air traffic controllers would know if there had been air traffic accidents.

Do you assume the ATC guidebook says wait 12 minutes before notifying a superior on the day there have been two airline crashes? I'm sure you ccan find some website or blog that says so
I prefer to go with common sense that given the situation they should have let someone know.



edit on 10-3-2011 by Thermo Klein because: fixed quote issue



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 


By your phrasing of this:


... and the time that it was referred they put AA 77 on "guard" (9:15:15 am).


It seem painfully clear to me that you don't understand the terms. I see that another pilot has already mentioned it, but not sure if his description cleared it up for you.


You're right, at the begining of this thread I did not know what "guard" meant, but it was very clear that no action had been taken in that 12 minutes, and THAT being the main point is what is in question. I now know what guard means - now you tell me why they didn't take action...



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 


You are not getting it....EVERY day, somewhere, an airplane stops responding to radio calls....for whatever reason. It was and is, very very common. Sometimes, it's simple....the pilots are talking, doing something else, distracted and just don't hear the radio. OR, accidentally have switched to the wrong frequency. OR, the radio can actually fail (rare, nowadays of course....but more common, many decades ago).

ATC does NOT immediately go into "panic mode" if an airplane doesn't answer right away! And, as you seem to not realize.....the people working at the Center had no idea , at all, of the events in New York. There just was not time to disseminate, nor to absorb, the full extent of the terrorists' ultimate plan....NOT in the heat of the moment.

Face it...this OP is dead-on-arrival......



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
If there was airplane wreckage and a hole in the Pentagon and damaged cement or lawn I would never have questioned it, but it's clear as day that no airplane crashed there, in my opinion, so I feel as an American I should question the information to get a clear answer. Obviously after 9 years this debate is still going quite strong - WHY? because some people made up their minds long ago and refuse to change (OSers) and some people keep searching for the real factual evidence.


It's only clear to those few deluded souls who think the Internet is the sole source for information and their uninformed incredulity actually have significance in the real world.

If you had read Firefight to save the Pentagon written by people who were THERE you'd have better information on the size of the hole and other FACTS that indicate you are WRONG.

Psssst - You're NEVER going to find the truth on Conspiracy Theory oriented sites on the Interwebz. Particularly, if you keep posting your incorrect, misinformed opinions on one that is perpetuated over and over again as if it's the twoof.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Reheat
 


just as a small point of comparison, I'm the author of the single most flagged thread concerning the Pentagon ruse in ATS history - I got 10 times more flags on that one thread than you have gotten on your current ATS account. When you can address pictures of the crash site and come with a decent battle instead of the constant character bashing then maybe we can have a conversation. All I see right now is a person who doesn't know how to deal with facts.

Tell me about the 12 minutes - please keep it to a few lines?



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
I prefer to go with common sense that given the situation they should have let someone know.


Read that sentence over again and again and again. You have just identified your problem with why you are making false accusations and posting misleading information instead of informing yourself FIRST.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 


You are not getting it....EVERY day, somewhere, an airplane stops responding to radio calls....for whatever reason. It was and is, very very common.


you're not getting it... 9/11 was NOT everyday.

if it were just some "everyday" I totally agree with you, but it wasn't - there had been two airline crashes into adjacent buildings! Someone ignoring a 12-minute non-contact on a day like 9/11 probably cost peoples' lives.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 


Which thread is your super Pentagon stuff in? Your not a 77 impact, which you now argue 77 lost radio contact. Your OP refutes your many flags fictional Pentagon thread. You showed proof of 77 impacting the Pentagon in your Pentagon thread, and now offer additional evidence, but in your Pentagon thread you produce fictional statements.


Pentagon ruse in ATS history - I got 10 times more flags
Your OP there was wrong, like this one. BTW, if you are going to say in one thread 77 did not impact the Pentagon, don't use evidence against your made up claim in another thread like this one. What happen to 77 in your fictional account of events?

Your OP makes no sense after you learn what guard was.

Did AIM help?
edit on 10-3-2011 by iSunTzu because: flags...



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
reply to post by Reheat
 


just as a small point of comparison, I'm the author of the single most flagged thread concerning the Pentagon ruse in ATS history - I got 10 times more flags on that one thread than you have gotten on your current ATS account. When you can address pictures of the crash site and come with a decent battle instead of the constant character bashing then maybe we can have a conversation. All I see right now is a person who doesn't know how to deal with facts.

Tell me about the 12 minutes - please keep it to a few lines?


An Argumentum ad populum fallacy on a Conspiracy Theory Web Site may impress YOU, but it is a logical fallacy in the real world. If you had ASKED about 12 minutes first instead of making misleading and false accusations you might have received better answers. However, it appears to me that you are like most truthers who have been asking questions and ignoring answers FOR over 9 freaking years.



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
I prefer to go with common sense that given the situation they should have let someone know.


Read that sentence over again and again and again. You have just identified your problem with why you are making false accusations and posting misleading information instead of informing yourself FIRST.


could you be more specific please. My statement says, common sense would dictate communication over lack of communication. How do you read it?



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by iSunTzu
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 


Which thread is your super Pentagon stuff in? Your OP makes no sense after you learn what guard was.

Did AIM help?



the point of my thread is WHY no one communicated something out of the ordinary: a 12-minute no-contact.

Absolute proof: A Pentagon picture montage from start to finish

I normally wouldn't bother bringing up a popular thread but with reheat's constant attempts at character assassination and portraying me as utterly ignorant to 9/11... so yeah, there ya go.



edit on 10-3-2011 by Thermo Klein because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 


You aren't understanding:


...if it were just some "everyday" I totally agree with you, but it wasn't - there had been two airline crashes into adjacent buildings! Someone ignoring a 12-minute non-contact on a day like 9/11 probably cost peoples' lives.


First, it wasn't "12 minutes".

Second, as was repeatedly mentioned, the controllers at Indy Center had NO IDEA of the happenings in New York. They were on duty, at their stations, and no one is going to run in and start yelling to everyone in the room that a "small plane" may have crashed into one of the Twin Towers (because, for at least the first 30 minutes, THAT was the belief...at first!!).

No one is going to rush up and interrupt them at work, and interrupt their concentration, with irrelevant information like that! There was noting, at all, to equate those events hundreds of miles away, with a "potential" hijacking of one of the airplanes they were working.

You are making a sort of "Texas sharpshooter's fallacy" here...otherwise known as "Monday Morning Quarterbacking".

Closing the barn door after the horse has bolted.....do you see?



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 04:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 

Someone ignoring a 12-minute non-contact on a day like 9/11 probably cost peoples' lives.


It very well may have (although people seem to take issue with it actually being 12 minutes). But that doesn't suggest something sinister.

As was pointed out, airliners fail to contact ATC radio calls. 9/11 was just the day where them not contacting was because of something very grave.

The problem is, you make assumptions that the ATC knew that the was a terrorist plot going and that they knew the plane was hijacked, and still waited to report anything.
edit on 10-3-2011 by Tosskey because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-3-2011 by Tosskey because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
as was repeatedly mentioned, the controllers at Indy Center had NO IDEA of the happenings in New York.


prove it. your answer is speculation.

As a lowly reservations agent I knew about a crash within a minute, yet you claim air traffic ops centers wouldn't know? It's a poor argument but apparently it's all you guys have because you just keep parroting the same thing over and over again...



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tosskey
The problem is, you make assumptions that the ATC knew that the was a terrorist plot going and that they knew the plane was hijacked, and still waited to report anything.


I'm not making that assumption. I'm stating that given the fact that two aircraft had crashed that day... or even if they knew of only one of those (with pretty odd circumstances: into a building in NYC), they should have said something sooner; all I'm saying,



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 05:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by iSunTzu
reply to post by Thermo Klein
 


Which thread is your super Pentagon stuff in? Your not a 77 impact, which you now argue 77 lost radio contact. Your OP refutes your many flags fictional Pentagon thread. You showed proof of 77 impacting the Pentagon in your Pentagon thread, and now offer additional evidence, but in your Pentagon thread you produce fictional statements.


Pentagon ruse in ATS history - I got 10 times more flags
Your OP there was wrong, like this one. BTW, if you are going to say in one thread 77 did not impact the Pentagon, don't use evidence against your made up claim in another thread like this one. What happen to 77 in your fictional account of events?

Your OP makes no sense after you learn what guard was.

Did AIM help?
edit on 10-3-2011 by iSunTzu because: flags...


The Pentagon montage thread shows no airplane hit the Pentagon (yes, my opinion with pictures, take it as you like.)

If you can comprehend subtle meanings and the word "alleged" you would know the point of this current thread is... they would NOT have waited 12 minutes, therefore we should question if this FAA (via NTSB) data actually belongs to the flight in question, or was it made up.

Ironically all the OSers are squabbling over saying it wasn't 12 minutes, even though when last I checked the time from 9:03 to 9:15 is 12 minutes.... that they totally missed the subtle meaning of the thread, save for one mention by reheat about my use of "alleged".



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thermo Klein

Originally posted by weedwhacker
as was repeatedly mentioned, the controllers at Indy Center had NO IDEA of the happenings in New York.


prove it. your answer is speculation.

As a lowly reservations agent I knew about a crash within a minute, yet you claim air traffic ops centers wouldn't know? It's a poor argument but apparently it's all you guys have because you just keep parroting the same thing over and over again...



Once they didn't respond ATC would assume that they had lost comm, and expect them to continue to destination.
edit on 10-3-2011 by Ivar_Karlsen because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2011 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ivar_Karlsen
Once they didn't respond ATC would assume that they had lost comm, and expect them to continue to destination.


I assume that's right, that on a normal day that would be true. Although I don't know the ATC protocols; this thread is about speculation that given the incidents which already occured, that ATC centers WOULD have known abiut. the 12-minutes would not have happened.



edit on 10-3-2011 by Thermo Klein because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
3
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join