9/11 Planes Research

Everyone interested in the truth about what happened on 9/11 should read the article above and see if what the author has written and revealed resonates with you, as it did with me.

I predict. There will be attempts by ICF911J to debunk the "official" ACARS data, which shows two of the aircrafts still airborne after the crash on 9/11. How can the aircraft possibly receive a message activating an audible signal in the aircraft at 14:10 (10:10am Eastern)?

@ARuffont How could it be from UA175, when UA175 was over Pittsburgh after the crash which the ACARS message prove. Also, the DCC radar showing UA175 was still airborne after the crash? Is this why this that debris was never put into evidence? Neither matched via serial number to UA175

KJ l'incohérent cède du terrain sans en démordre pour autant. Ex.1. Selon lui, 1 morceau du Boeing se trouve de l'autre côté du crash. Alors que rien ne pourrait sortir. Or il y a un trou à l'angle. Toutefois, il a faux, c'est une plaque (avec un trou en +) brûlée fixée à la tour

@_andrewsimon_ @911Gene You "think" Woody Box packed it in? You mean you do not know if he it pack it in for that reason, or else you would not have used that word. Just be honest and say you do not know.

@MarkConlonUK @911Gene We'll have to disagree on that one. I think Woody Box packed it in because he could no longer maintain his case. Someone dug out (paid for) the actual ARINC protocols and it was gave over after that.

This is Jeff Hill's phone call to Lesley Hazzard at Boeing, to enquire regarding a Boeing 767 aircraft's speed at sea level, and whether or not it could fly at that speed without breaking apart. youtu.be/6QEKKlBt9Yg?si…

@_andrewsimon_ @911Gene As I have already told you, a downlink does not prove the plane did or didn't receive a message from the ground station. Does that spell it out for you. The acknowledgement different.

@MarkConlonUK @911Gene Last thing then. Can you at least show us your claimed downlink messages? After all, it is you trying to prove your case, not me.

@_andrewsimon_ @911Gene You obviously know anything about me, or else you would not talk such crap like that. I made a whole data base available of 9/11 documents. What have you done to aid people to read them?

@MarkConlonUK @911Gene You obviously haven't got them then, have you?

@_andrewsimon_ @911Gene Stutt was left wanting, and he wasn't shouted down either. It was civil discussion. The same as I do not trust Stutt's work on FDR on AA77.

@MarkConlonUK @911Gene And was it him being debunked or was he simply shouted down by too many others who didn't want to understand properly?

@_andrewsimon_ @911Gene I have explained it, and I am not spending my night explaining it over and over again to you.

There is a distinction between sent to an aircraft and received by an aircraft. The aircraft was by then a long way from where it was supposed to be, and was simply out of range to receive them? The messages were still being routed along the expected route. How can you tell it has been received if there is no corresponding 'thanks, I got that'?

@_andrewsimon_ @911Gene Warren Stutt was completely debunked on the Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum. I followed that thread. Stutt was a no show when offered to debate the data. I have a good memory, and in fact I may still saved in my archives that forum thread somewhere.

@MarkConlonUK @911Gene Enough to debate with you I think. I've seen Warren Stutt's work, that is a good guide. Also the UM thread. How do you think the routing went then?

@_andrewsimon_ @911Gene It was not routed through the expected flight plan route. Not being rude, but I thought you knew about the ACARS system? (especially in 2001).

@MarkConlonUK @911Gene I'm not saying there are errors in the logs, I'm simply saying that the aircraft was not responding. Not everyone was in the same loop at exactly the same time. And it's perfectly feasible that messages were route along the previous expected track.

@_andrewsimon_ @911Gene FFS, the ACARS is routed through the nearest ground station, which as approximately 200 mile radius. I take it you read the expert paragraph I sent you in relation to the aircraft on 9/11?

@_andrewsimon_ A DLBLK (Downlink Block) is an entirely different process in the ACARS network. It indicates a segment of data originating from the aircraft—sent to the ground station. It has nothing to do with whether an uplink (ground-to-air) message was received by the aircraft.

Manually sending messages is different from the automatic resends after not getting return downlinks. Possibly because he was still hopeful that it was still in the air and just kept trying? Maybe because the aircraft had gone silent (no DLBLK acknowledgments), the network was still in retry mode. Dispatchers like Ballinger are trained to keep sending important messages (especially “land immediately” safety alerts) until they received clear confirmation that the aircraft was down or the system formally flagged up it as failed.

@_andrewsimon_ Go and read the reports by the experts, the ACARS message at 8:59 a.m. and 9:03 a.m. were received by the airplane. And if my memory serves me correct, as I cite this, it is also stated in the 9/11 Commission investigation documents.

@_andrewsimon_ @911Gene There's no errors with ACARS logs. Go and read it all, and all the other accompanying documents. I've spent years studying all the declassified documents.

@MarkConlonUK @911Gene Because it was most chaotic day any of them had ever seen, the situation wasn't clear, aircraft were being rerouted or brought in to land and a few errors were made along the way?

@_andrewsimon_ @911Gene The ARINC Expert was contacted in San Francisco and told about the ACARS message being routed through PIT after the airplane had already crashed into the South Tower "There is no way that message would be routed through Pittsburgh if the airplane crashed in New York City"

@_andrewsimon_ No, it was routed through the nearest ground station. Please go and study closely the routing stations in the ACARS for all 4 flights. It has a 200 mile approximate radius.

@MarkConlonUK These messages were routed based on where the ARINC network thought the plane was (or where it was predicted to be based on the original flight plan and last contact). Still no DLBLK returns though?

@_andrewsimon_ @911Gene If UAL 175 had crashed at 9:03a.m. why did the airplane still appear as "confirmed" in Barber's log at 9:20 a.m.?

@MarkConlonUK @911Gene Yes, re the audible sound it alerts the crew to the message being received. But how could this happen after the time of the crash??? The system automatically resends after a period of no response. Receipt is only acknowledged by the following downlink but there wasn't one.