youcanhandlethetruth

Just asking a question.

I haven't got any other information about the phone conversation between the Fire Commander and Silverstein so I can't comment.

But whether he spoke to him or not, it does not prove the Fire Commander was in on anything, maybe he was, maybe he wasn't, but who knows ?

Roland

Who was flying this plane.

Mikeuk

Well if it never took place you conspiracy nuts lose the 'crown jewels' of your theory.

How should I know? You tell me.

youcanhandlethetruth

How do come to that conclusion ?

Roland

Well it obviously was not a kamikaze pilot giving his life for research into plane crashes. It's remote control.

Mikeuk

Because if the conversation never took place, your claim that Silverstein and the Fire Department blew up the building falls flat on its face.

Not that it had any substance in the first place.

youcanhandlethetruth

Ok, lets put it another way.......
WAS someone flying that plane or not ?

youcanhandlethetruth

There you go again, misquoting me.

I've never said the Fire Department had anything to do with it - please find where I said that.......

Unless you find it and show it to me, I'm going to report your post.

youcanhandlethetruth

Friends of Liberty - Planes of 911 Exceeded Their Software Limits

"As well as fully autonomous flight capability, the 767 and 757 are the ONLY COMMUTER PLANES MADE BY BOEING THAT CAN BE FLOWN VIA REMOTE CONTROL. It is a feature that is standard to all of them, all 757's and 767's can do it. The purpose for this is if there is a problem with the pilots, Norad can fly the planes to safe destinations via remote. Only in this flight mode can those craft exceed their software limits and perform to their actual physical limits because a pre existing emergency situation is assumed if this mode of flight is used.

Terrorists in fact did not fly those planes, it is totally and completely impossible for those planes to have been flown in such a manner from the cockpit. Those are commuter aircraft, not F-16's and their software knows it."

youcanhandlethetruth

I thought I had read that, but I can't find any evidence right now, so I'll withdraw that statement and agree with you, for now at least.

In my experience, I have never been able to make a phone call when sat on a commercial airliner ? Has anybody ? I bet Mike has !

But you might be interested to read the above article where the author says:

"I am officially qualified to place severe doubt that ordinary cell phone calls were ever made from the aircraft.

It was impossible for that to have happened, especially in a rural area for a number of reasons.

When you make a cell phone call, the first thing that happens is that your cell phone needs to contact a transponder. Your cell phone has a max transmit power of five watts, three watts is actually the norm. If an aircraft is going five hundred miles an hour, your cell phone will not be able to
1. Contact a tower, 2. Tell the tower who you are, and who your provider is, 3. Tell the tower what mode it wants to communicate with, and
4. Establish that it is in a roaming area before it passes out of a five watt range.
This procedure, called an electronic handshake, takes approximately 45 seconds for a cell phone to complete upon initial power up in a roaming area because neither the cell phone or cell transponder knows where that phone is and what mode it uses when it is turned on. At 500 miles an hour, the aircraft will travel three times the range of a cell phone's five watt transmitter before this handshaking can occur. Though it is sometimes possible to connect during takeoff and landing, under the situation that was claimed the calls were impossible. The calls from the airplane were faked, no if's or buts."

In addition, the following article talks amongst other thing, the supposed call made by one of the crew for Flight 11.

911 Redux: American Airlines Flight 11, Reexamined