An Additional Problem For My Flight 93 Scenarios: Cell Phones
Frequent commenter to this blog, Rob, makes an excellent point:
"I don't believe that ANY, ANY of the claimed "Cell phone" (note: NOT the hard-wired AirPhone...although they are VERY fishy in their own right as well) calls from the "Hijacked" planes are real, and/or were made in FLIGHT (as purported).
NOT ONE!
Wanna know why?
BECAUSE THEY ARE STILL IMPOSSIBLE TODAY, IN 2005, AS THE 'OFFICIAL' STORY CLAIMS THEY HAPPENED ON 9/11/01.
Don't believe me? I have now flow on NUMEROUS cross-country, and near cross-country US flights originating here in NYC since 9/11/01, and EVERY TIME I keep my cell phone on the whole flight...JUST to test out the preposterous claim that non-AirPhone , personal cell phone calls were placed from moving planes at altitude on 9/11.
EVERY TIME, ON EVERY ONE OF MY FLIGHTS (OVER 14 LARGE PLANE, COMMERCIAL FLIGHTS), MY CELL PHONE LOST THE ABILITY TO MAKE AND RECEIVE CALLS LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES AFTER WHEELS UP.
EVERY TIME, EVERY FLIGHT.
The ONLY TIME my phone worked, the ONLY TIMES, were when I was taxiing to and from the gate, while STILL on the ground.
Personal cell phone calls are just as impossible today, as they were on the morning of 9/11/01.
Try it sometime. ;-)
Cell calls from the hijacked planes (travelling at hundreds of miles per hour) on 9/11 ARE COMPLETE BULLSHIT."
I have also tried my cell phone a couple of times in flight and it just doesn't work-- there is no signal. The one caveat is that cell phones MIGHT work if the plane is flying close to the ground, and towards the end of flight 93, perhaps some calls got through this way. Although if the plane is flying very fast in a rural area, this would also be a problem for getting a cell phone to work. So I agree with Rob. This is a major problem that needs to be factored into my flight 93 scenarios. The cell phone problem is something I was aware of but forgot when I was putting my scenarios together. In fact, this does change the overall scheme quite a bit, and tends to favor the scenario where the calls are faked and the flight is faked.
Basically, in any flight 93 scenario, we need to account for the following:
1) planes coming from two different directions around Shanksville; the plane coming from the northwest was flying close to the ground and in a helter-skelter manner
2) quite a bit of debris falling over Indian Lake, east/southeast of the official crash site-- debris that must have originated from flight 93 and contains parts of airplane seats and some human remains
3) a crash site that cannot have come from the real flight 93-- either the crash site was faked or it was a special remote control drone
4) cell phone calls that cannot have been made from high in the air
5) phone calls made from passengers on the flights that do not tell the same story, they conflict badly with each other
6) if the hijacking was fake, a drill of some sort, how the passengers were allowed to make calls about a hijacking but didn't give away what was going on
7) the improbability of flight 93 being taken over by knife-wielding hijackers without the pilots being warned and alerting ground control
8) apparent take-off and radio transmissions from a real flight 93
9) what happened to the passengers
10) how the "real" flight 93 leaving late might have affected the planners plans
11) the "white plane" seen in the area around the time of the crash
12) a C-130 that was nearby, the same one that was also witnessed the Pentagon crash
13) an interceptor jet that at least one air traffic controller said must have witnessed what happened with flight 93
14) multiple reports that flight 93 was hit by a missile, a few witnesses support the idea that something exploded or hit a plane flying near the Shanksville crash site.
Here are some good maps of the area here flight 93 crashed: from a Popular Mechanics article debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories, this is still a nice map, and from a Democratic Underground post. The last link has some good info on eyewitnesses as well.
This needs MORE thought! Augghh! I hope this doesn't drive me insane!
"I don't believe that ANY, ANY of the claimed "Cell phone" (note: NOT the hard-wired AirPhone...although they are VERY fishy in their own right as well) calls from the "Hijacked" planes are real, and/or were made in FLIGHT (as purported).
NOT ONE!
Wanna know why?
BECAUSE THEY ARE STILL IMPOSSIBLE TODAY, IN 2005, AS THE 'OFFICIAL' STORY CLAIMS THEY HAPPENED ON 9/11/01.
Don't believe me? I have now flow on NUMEROUS cross-country, and near cross-country US flights originating here in NYC since 9/11/01, and EVERY TIME I keep my cell phone on the whole flight...JUST to test out the preposterous claim that non-AirPhone , personal cell phone calls were placed from moving planes at altitude on 9/11.
EVERY TIME, ON EVERY ONE OF MY FLIGHTS (OVER 14 LARGE PLANE, COMMERCIAL FLIGHTS), MY CELL PHONE LOST THE ABILITY TO MAKE AND RECEIVE CALLS LESS THAN FIVE MINUTES AFTER WHEELS UP.
EVERY TIME, EVERY FLIGHT.
The ONLY TIME my phone worked, the ONLY TIMES, were when I was taxiing to and from the gate, while STILL on the ground.
Personal cell phone calls are just as impossible today, as they were on the morning of 9/11/01.
Try it sometime. ;-)
Cell calls from the hijacked planes (travelling at hundreds of miles per hour) on 9/11 ARE COMPLETE BULLSHIT."
I have also tried my cell phone a couple of times in flight and it just doesn't work-- there is no signal. The one caveat is that cell phones MIGHT work if the plane is flying close to the ground, and towards the end of flight 93, perhaps some calls got through this way. Although if the plane is flying very fast in a rural area, this would also be a problem for getting a cell phone to work. So I agree with Rob. This is a major problem that needs to be factored into my flight 93 scenarios. The cell phone problem is something I was aware of but forgot when I was putting my scenarios together. In fact, this does change the overall scheme quite a bit, and tends to favor the scenario where the calls are faked and the flight is faked.
Basically, in any flight 93 scenario, we need to account for the following:
1) planes coming from two different directions around Shanksville; the plane coming from the northwest was flying close to the ground and in a helter-skelter manner
2) quite a bit of debris falling over Indian Lake, east/southeast of the official crash site-- debris that must have originated from flight 93 and contains parts of airplane seats and some human remains
3) a crash site that cannot have come from the real flight 93-- either the crash site was faked or it was a special remote control drone
4) cell phone calls that cannot have been made from high in the air
5) phone calls made from passengers on the flights that do not tell the same story, they conflict badly with each other
6) if the hijacking was fake, a drill of some sort, how the passengers were allowed to make calls about a hijacking but didn't give away what was going on
7) the improbability of flight 93 being taken over by knife-wielding hijackers without the pilots being warned and alerting ground control
8) apparent take-off and radio transmissions from a real flight 93
9) what happened to the passengers
10) how the "real" flight 93 leaving late might have affected the planners plans
11) the "white plane" seen in the area around the time of the crash
12) a C-130 that was nearby, the same one that was also witnessed the Pentagon crash
13) an interceptor jet that at least one air traffic controller said must have witnessed what happened with flight 93
14) multiple reports that flight 93 was hit by a missile, a few witnesses support the idea that something exploded or hit a plane flying near the Shanksville crash site.
Here are some good maps of the area here flight 93 crashed: from a Popular Mechanics article debunking 9/11 conspiracy theories, this is still a nice map, and from a Democratic Underground post. The last link has some good info on eyewitnesses as well.
This needs MORE thought! Augghh! I hope this doesn't drive me insane!
posted by spooked at 1:11 PM
1 Comments:
LOL These phantom calls are beginning to drive me nuts too! BTW, thanks for putting me up on the front page.
Another thing I forgot to mention to you in the other post that I have read online regarding the technological infeasibility of personal cell phone calls from commericial airplanes has to do with speed, not only altitude. I read a sort of technical anaylsis a while back as to why, even flying at relatively low altitudes the calls are extremely unlikely, if not impossible. Flying at the speeds modern jetlines have to fly to keep aloft (read: hundreds of MPH), your personal cell phone can not, and was never designed to or envisioned with this extreme speed in mind, can not make connections with and switch from cell tower to cell tower at the extremely rapid rate it would have to, flying at those extreme speeds. Your cell phone technology was designed to operate at walking...or at most, car-like speeds. Not Jets.
Post a Comment
<< Home