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.


Why DIDN'T the military take over the hijacked planes remotely?

page: 1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 03:25 AM
I had a discussion recently that I think members here will be interested in. It's a subject I've never seen addressed in all my time reading about 9/11, and if true, it points inextricably to one horrific conclusion. So my question to all you is -- have you heard of this before?

If I gave any specific background information, it would be very easy for someone determined enough to trace it back to the individual who told me this story. So I'm going to leave the personal details nebulous.

I was at an event with a business acquaintance of mine who, in the years I've known him, has never shown any interest in deep politics or conspiracies. But he's a very interesting guy, with an extensive background as an engineer, before quitting and moving into this completely unrelated field over a decade ago. He used to work on things relating to aviation, but now our business together couldn't be farther removed from that -- think of the exact opposite of science and you might be close. In all of my experiences, this is a very smart guy, and a very honest guy.

Anyway, at this event we notice some 9/11 Truthers with signs nearby, and so start talking about 9/11. He was surprised to know that I have my own skepticisms about the official story, and then he tells me this, a little nervously, as if it makes him sick:

Back in the '70s, as many will remember, terrorist hijackings of commercial airlines was a big fear. Planes were being hijacked all the time and flown to Cuba or the Middle East. As a solution, the Israelis designed blast-proof cockpit doors, and gave their pilots strict protocols, so that even if they were hijacked, the terrorists couldn't actually take control of the planes.

Our military leaders thought this solution was too crude. We could come up with something better. So DARPA contracted the company my friend was working for to design a different solution. They wanted to put a system in place that would allow ALL commercial planes to be controlled remotely by the Air Force. The plan was that, if terrorist did overpower the pilots and take control of the cockpit, the military could just flip a switch, and fly the planes from the ground -- the terrorists could press buttons and wiggle the yokes all they wanted, and it wouldn't make a difference.

My friend told me that they completed the project successfully, and within a few years, all domestic commercial airplanes were fitted with this remote control "black box". And as far as he knows, they're still there.

Then he turns to me with this look on his face like he's going to throw up. And he says, "So if the planes really were hijacked by al-Qaeda, why didn't NORAD turn on the remote control?"

Obviously, if this technology was in place, there may have been hijackings on 9/11, but there would have been no way to turn the planes into missiles.

And we've all seen video and heard the story of the jumbo jet being flown remotely, taking off and landing 48 times or whatever it was. The technology was there. And if the technology was there, why WOULDN'T you have those remote control boxes on every plane, like my friend says?

The only way you can believe this story, and still think al-Qaeda hit us on 9/11, is to say that this program is classified -- the terrorists must have somehow known about the remote controls, and found some way to disable them -- and since it's classified, those facts were omitted from the 9/11 Commission Report.

But if these remote control boxes were such a big secret, how did the terrorists know that they were there, let alone know how to override them? Even then, it still points to a massive and negligent security breach. And for this remote control system to work, you'd have to make it really hard to override it, so even that theoretical task wouldn't have been easy.

My question for ATS -- has anyone heard of this? Can all commercial planes really be flown remotely? I believe my friend, but I wonder what you think.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 03:54 AM
Isn't this called the Home Run system? And I can't believe I never thought of it that way. I remember reading about them using the Home Run system to crash the planes, possibly. But it never dawned on me as to why they wouldn't have used them to safely land the planes.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 11:37 AM
Answer is no - you cant remotely fly a commercial airliner except by
extensive modifaction. The planes are privately owned and the maker
(Boeing) and airlines would object to someone outside tampering
with planes. To convert a 757/767 to remote control requires installing
linkages to operate the flight controls way pilot would.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 11:42 AM

Originally posted by thedman
Answer is no - you cant remotely fly a commercial airliner except by
extensive modifaction.

You might want to tell that to the British who have a system that can take over remote control of an airliner.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 11:45 AM
Well who said they didn't used it? There is some evidence that they did...

Like the Lone Gunmen episode written by the CIA, confirmed by Chris Carter, the writter of the show.

And the exercises of remote controlled planes by the pentagon in july 01.

[edit on 10-8-2008 by Vitchilo]

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 12:15 PM
reply to post by thedman

A fully integrated flight management computer system (FMCS) provides for automatic guidance and control of the 757-200 from immediately after takeoff to final approach and landing. Linking together digital processors controlling navigation, guidance and engine thrust, the flight management system ensures that the aircraft flies the most efficient route and flight profile for reduced fuel consumption, flight time and crew workload. The precision of global positioning satellite system (GPS) navigation, automated air traffic control functions, and advanced guidance and communications features are now available as part of the new Future Air Navigation System (FANS) flight management computer. 1


posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 12:50 PM
This is interesting. Can we get any verification of this? If it can be shown that something like this possibly exists, then the question would be....Why was it never brought up? Why was it not used? If none of the Planes were fitted, then why? Corporations have worked with Gov agencies many times in the past so the excuse of it being "privately owned" doesn't fly AT ALL.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 01:49 PM
Well, the 'government' (whoever that was on 9/11) did not need to take control of the hijacked planes for the simple reason that it was flying them by remote control from the very outset....

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 01:50 PM

Like the Lone Gunmen episode written by the CIA, confirmed by Chris Carter, the writter of the show.

Ah - that is work of FICTION aka not true! Someone imagined it.

So what CIA plot are you referencing? The tinfoil favorite "NORTHWOODS"
Which JFK rejected out of hand.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 01:56 PM
reply to post by Kr0nZ

The Flight Management System aka Autopilot is designed to fly the aircraft
to a pre determined location without human control. It works by
having the crew input destination and plane after reaching altitude
will fly to that point. It is not a remote control device in that external
forces are in control of aircraft. Crew must disconnect it before landing
as can not land an aircraft.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 02:06 PM

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Like the Lone Gunmen episode written by the CIA, confirmed by Chris Carter, the writter of the show.

Please show some proof for that, the most I ever read was that sometimes people consulted, not that they wrote the shows or even gave the plots.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 02:10 PM

Avionics Expert - A 911 Remote Control Lesson For Popular Mechanics From Jon Carlson

In response to the article on the photo showing odd shapes on the bottom of the airliner that struck the South Tower, an Avionics expert has a RC lesson for Popular Mechanics and all of us.

Excerpts from his emails:

I have 35 years experience in this area of Avionics on numerous military and commercial aircraft.

I took the first digital avionic system aircraft to the field in 1969 and have worked on numerous military aircraft, and studied the architecture on just about all commercial air carriers over the last 30 some years.

Instrumentation packages added to aircraft to augment control or take over automatic flight control are old hat.

The package shown on your photo is evidently a receiver and the associated electronics required to replace the AFCS package (Auto Pilot and Stability Control Unit).

The two blade antenna (CIRCLED IN YELLOW) are not normal (Their reflections makes it looks like a last minute add on.) for this type plane. They are VHF (too large for UHF) antennas used to control the replacement autopilot package.

This looks like a remote control package on this aircraft. What you are looking at is not the normal configuration of a commercial aircraft.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 02:17 PM

Originally posted by thedman
So what CIA plot are you referencing? The tinfoil favorite "NORTHWOODS"
Which JFK rejected out of hand.

And look what happened to JFK.

You forgot to mention that "Operation Northwoods" had been approved by every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, including Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer. Northwoods

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 02:39 PM

Originally posted by thedman
Answer is no - you cant remotely fly a commercial airliner except by
extensive modifaction. The planes are privately owned and the maker
(Boeing) and airlines would object to someone outside tampering
with planes. To convert a 757/767 to remote control requires installing
linkages to operate the flight controls way pilot would.

This reply doesn't hold water. I'll take the word of an aeronautical engineer over yours that it wouldn't take "extensive modification", especially since you give no specific information and demonstrate no special knowledge of the topic.

Secondly, it doesn't matter that Boeing is a private company. They make billions off of defense contracts -- if the military told them to install exploding urinal cakes they'd say, "Yes sir!" Besides, these remote control devices would be protecting against the loss of million dollar airplanes and bad PR for the industry. Not to mention how much they'd probably save in insurance premiums.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 03:12 PM
This subject was kicked around in another thread a while back. Some people believe that planes were remotely controlled by the military or other perps, Bush administration insiders and their minions or possibly Israelis, on 9/11. Here's a link to the thread where the subject comes up.

Here is a quote from the thread:

QRS-11 gyrochip

Between 2000 and 2003, Boeing exported commercial jets with a QRS-11 gyrochip in the instrument flight boxes, even though the chip was classified by the State Department as an export-restricted defense item because it can be used to stabilize and steer guided missile

Are Boeing fitting their aircraft with illegal devices that could enable terrorists to remotely hijack airliners and crash them into high profile targets? In light of what happened on 9/11, Boeing's blanket denial that this practice has taken place is both highly suspicious and a threat to national security . . .

People who have a lot of faith in Boeing's integrity might want to research some of their legal difficulties.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 07:27 PM
reply to post by timiathan

timiathon....the answer to the final question of your OP is...NO!!!

The average commercial jet CAN NOT be taken over and flown by remote control.

IN fact, NONE of them can.

I will hope you can ask your 'friend' again.....based on your OP....I just skimmed it, admittedly...but one thing that jumped out was a reference to hijackings to Cuba....these happened in the 1970's, dude!!!

Hence, now...the airport security, etc, etc, etc....

I flew for a major airline....and PRIOR to 1987, we jsut flashed our airline IDs and bypassed Security.

THEN, some yahoo, ( a worker on the ramp) who claimed he LOST his ID, got a new one, then was fired....and used the OLD one to bypass security...he had a grudge against his employer. He worked for the old PSA (Paciific Southwest Airlines) now, merged with USAirways. You can look it up, it was on a BAE 146 commuter jet, from LAX to SFO, in 1989 (approx....could have been 1988).

This bimbo took a gun, got onboard, and shot the pilots...thus going down in history as the worst 'murder-sucide' of all time, and making life difficult for every airline crew ever since!!

OH! AND, guess what? NOT every airline employee has to pass through the secruity screening, provided by the TSA!

See, here's the dirty secret. The pilots....the ones who KNOW how to crash an airplane, and the Flight Attendants, since we're a crew, have to be shown to go through 'security' make it look good.

It is just BS. Makes it look good. There are certain airports where this doesn't happen....but, of course, we know each other, we won't let a terrorist in our midst. Think we're that stupid???

The airline IDs don't get out to everyone....but, we have to be subjected to the front of the traveling is a travesty.

Just as it is a travesty for an eighty-year-old woman to get the full wand....

TSA is a joke!!! "Homeland Security" is a joke!!!!

I'm thinking.....this is how the Gestapo got their first footholds., I went back, and read your premise. NO! There is no way in HELL that these things could exist, without we pilots knowing, and the Mechanics knowing!!!

See, the mechanics would have told us.....even if we pilots didn't see something that didn't belong, because that's what we're trained to do.

Look....think about it for a few minutes....ever flown an R/C airplane? I have, it's one of my hobbies.

Let's simplify R/C car? Notice how, when the car is facing you, the controls seem reversed? It's not you, it's about perspective.

NOW, try to imagine HOW they could 'fly' a commercial would they see it? I saw no cameras in the cockpit in my over two decades of flying.

This concept fails on many, many levels, sorry....

[edit on 8/10/0808 by weedwhacker]

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 09:48 PM
reply to post by bobafett

Just listen to that.


posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 10:18 PM
reply to post by weedwhacker

Weedwhacker, you might be the biggest idiot I've ever encountered on ATS. How can you comment on a post without even reading it. Your biggest insight, that hijackings to Cuba took place in the '70s is EXACTLY WHAT I SAID.

Your other point is refuted by the fact that there already IS autopilot -- "OMG how does the plane fly without CAMERAS!!!" Obviously there's a computer that can fly the plane.

The long tangent about the TSA has no relevance.

And your comment about the mechanics not knowing might be just what I'm looking for, but you've already lost all credibility.

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 10:26 PM
reply to post by Vitchilo

More BS. I'm sorry....I got 30 seconds into it, and the idiot who was on 'the radio' didn't even know what the TransAmerica Buioldsing is, in SanFrancisco.

I can say, categorically.....there is NO WAY that any airplane I flew could be taken over from the ground.

Here's why....we have a bunch of circuit breakers, in the cockpit.

Guess what....??? We would pull every C/B, as needed, until we regained control of the airplane.

Of course, this is a silly discussion, since it's not possible anyway....but IF do you think the Airlines hire dummies??? Guess what. They don't. AND, hard to believe, pilots and mechanics are smart, and actually talk to each other.

So, this is a nonsense thread. Sorry to be so blunt, but there IS NO WAY TO REMOTELY CONTROL a commercial jet.

There is no camera in the cockpit....this is pivotal to my argument.

Also....A pilot who felt something was over-riding his control inputs would take action, and I mean IMMEDIATELY take action, and we have many things to do, only one of which I've mentioned, that's pulling C/Bs.

Here's something you may not know....a commercial jet could lose ALL ELECTRICAL power....even all the engines, and still be controllable.

See where I'm getting at? Pilots know this, and will NOT let some other force control them!!!!

posted on Aug, 10 2008 @ 10:33 PM
reply to post by timiathan

tim....I hope you read my latest post, before you make more of a fool of yourself.

The Autopilot....which you claim to know so much about....can only be engaged, by a switch, in the cockpit.

The B737 has two paddles, moved up from 'Off', to CWS', to 'CMD' Three positions.

The B757/767 has a 'engage' the A/P

AND, just in case you get all of your 'knowledge' from MS Flight.....I have to tell you, I have thousands of hours in the real airlplanes, the B737 and B757 and well as the MD-80/DC-9, and the DC-10, and the A-300.

So, let's talk airplanes.

Oh, I also have flown most Cessnas, a few Pipers....but that was over twenty years ago.......

EDIT...for one typo...."lartest" was corrected to 'latest'

[edit on 8/10/0808 by weedwhacker]

top topics

<<   2  3  4 >>

log in