Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot System

http://cryptogon(dot)com/?p=470

This is the technology that made the 9/11 spectacles possible in the first place. But now, Boeing is going to peddle those same black boxes to make aircraft "hijack-proof."

As usual, I couldn’t make it up if I tried.

Via: Evening Standard (link at above site):

A hijack-proof piloting system for airliners is being developed to prevent terrorists repeating the 9/11 outrages.

The mechanism is designed to make it impossible to crash the aircraft into air or land targets - and enable the plane to be flown by remote control from the ground in the event of an emergency.

Scientists at aircraft giant Boeing are testing the tamper-proof autopilot system which uses state-of-the-art computer and satellite technology.

It will be activated by the pilot flicking a simple switch or by pressure sensors fitted to the cockpit door that will respond to any excessive force as terrorists try to break into the flight deck.

Once triggered, no one on board will be able to deactivate the system. Currently, all autopilots are manually switched on and off at the discretion of pilots.

The so-called ‘uninterruptible autopilot system’ - patented secretly by Boeing in the US last week - will connect ground controllers and security services with the aircraft using radio waves and global satellite positioning systems.

After it has been activated, the aircraft will be capable of remote digital control from the ground, enabling operators to fly it like a sophisticated model plane, manoeuvring it vertically and laterally. (emph. PoLT)

A threatened airliner could be flown to a secure military base or a commercial airport, where it would touch down using existing landing aids known as ‘autoland function’.

After it had landed, the aircraft’s built-in autobrake would bring the plane safely to a halt on the runway.

Boeing insiders say the new anti-hijack kit could be fitted to airliners all over the world, including those in the UK, within the next three years.

The latest move to combat airline terrorists follows The Mail on Sunday’s disclosure three weeks ago that scientists in Britain and Germany are developing a passenger-monitoring device.

This will use tiny cameras linked to specialist computers to record every twitch, blink, facial expression or suspicious movement made on board flights in order to identify potential terrorists.

A Boeing spokesman said : “We are constantly studying ways we can enhance the safety, security and efficiency of the world’s airline fleet.

“There is a need in the industry for a technique that conclusively prevents unauthorised persons gaining access to the controls and threatening the safety of passengers.

“Once this system is initiated, no one on board is capable of controlling the flight, making it useless for anyone to threaten violence in order to gain control."
A cynical, suspicious person (Who? Me?) might well wonder if this technology has been around for quite some time.
 
Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot System

And a paranoid one (who? me?) might even respond: Of course! They set satellites in orbit and they can't remote control an airplane? :P
 
Or they would say it is hijacked but actually it is diverted to a military base 'safely'. Or used for kidnapping important people.
 
Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot System

This technology has certainly existed for some time. Have a look here where the airplane was "controlled crashed" for research purposes. Note the date = 1984.

In the late 70's there was talk about installing this system on commercial airplanes after a series of hijackings. One of the arguments against it was that sooner or later, some undesirables would figure a way to hijack the "uninterruptible autopilot system".

But today, it would be much easier to install this system especially on newer airplanes which are being made "fly-by-wire" rather than by conventional cables.
 
Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot System

From 'Adventures' chapter 8:

The Cs said:
A: Assumptions. Awareness needs to be increased. And, we must tell you that "secret world government" technologies are approximately 150 years in advance of anything that you have access to.
Q: (Laura) Why is it pointless for me to try to communicate any of this to him? Why did you reply 'pointless' to that?
A: Not what we said. It is not pointless to warn him to smarten up on the vigilance and caution scales. Just pointless to try to direct him with details, or practice "subterfuge." After all, when your mind can be read like the morning newspaper, what is the point?
 
Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot System

'uninteruptable' autopilot??

sigh, surely these people have seen 'The Terminator'? surely they must know that the next logical step is Skynet taking over the world.
 
Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot System

I'm sure whoever is 'inspiring' these people knows that, and stop calling us Shirley.


:lol:
 
is it not easy to hijack the ground control station rather than the airplane ? If one do that whether govt. or so called terrorists, in one stroke one can destroy all the planes not one. This is all for public consumption , if one knows the truth else it is the improvement to the security.
 
Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot System

Petey of Lone Tree said:
http://cryptogon(dot)com/?p=470

This is the technology that made the 9/11 spectacles possible in the first place. But now, Boeing is going to peddle those same black boxes to make aircraft "hijack-proof."

As usual, I couldn’t make it up if I tried.

Via: Evening Standard (link at above site):

A hijack-proof piloting system for airliners is being developed to prevent terrorists repeating the 9/11 outrages.

“Once this system is initiated, no one on board is capable of controlling the flight, making it useless for anyone to threaten violence in order to gain control."
A cynical, suspicious person (Who? Me?) might well wonder if this technology has been around for quite some time.
Boeing 747's are already fly by wire and can be taken over and flown from the ground. 757's and 767's have "hydraulic over hydraulic" servo controls. Their autopilots are integrated with the navigation system and calibrated with a precision that an "add on" system cannot duplicate easily. As was posted in this thread, the remote control of that type of Boeing was done in 1984, but it was a one time thing.
 
Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot System

I don’t think it was a one time thing.

All Boeings were provided with remote control possibility. The argument was that such enabled overruling in case a plane got high jacked, so that it could still be landed safely by remote control.

Europe refused to implement the system, precisely because such remote control could also be misused when handled by the wrong fingers and transform the planes into remote controlled missiles. Maybe this is precisely what happened.

Now here is another interesting titbit.

From:
http://www(dot)viewzone.com/911revisited.html

Jim Heikkila said:
The Boeing 757 and 767 are equipped with fully autonomous flight capability, they are the only two Boeing commuter aircraft capable of fully autonomous flight. They can be programmed to take off, fly to a destination and land, completely without a pilot at the controls.
They are intelligent planes, and have software limits pre set so that pilot error cannot cause passenger injury. Though they are physically capable of high g maneuvers, the software in their flight control systems prevents high g maneuvers from being performed via the cockpit controls. They are limited to approximately 1.5 g's , I repeat, one and one half g's. This is so that a pilot mistake cannot end up breaking grandma's neck.
No matter what the pilot wants, he cannot override this feature.
The plane that hit the Pentagon approached or reached its actual physical limits, military personnel have calculated that the Pentagon plane pulled between five and seven g's in its final turn.
( that is if it WAS a Boeing at all)
The same is true for the second aircraft to impact the WTC.
There is only one way this can happen.
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.
 
Even Robert Ayling, former boss of British Airways, got in on the act and "... suggested in the Financial Times this week that aircraft could be commandeered from the ground and controlled remotely in the event of a hijack... "
[The Economist, September 20, 2001]



According to Andreas von Bülow, the former German Secretary of Defence, it seems that, already back in the nineties, "a major European flag carrier" was so alarmed when it discovered that the flight control systems on its aircraft could be taken over electronically from the ground, that it "completely stripped the American flight control computers out of its entire fleet, and replaced them with a home grown version".
[Tagesspiegel, Berlin, January 13th 2002].

It appears that this "major European flag carrier" was none other than Lufthansa, the German national airline.



One fine day in 2002, it just so happens that a group of military and civilian US pilots, under the chairmanship of Colonel Donn de Grand Pré, set up an independent inquiry into the events of September 11th, and came to the conclusion that "the flight crews of the four passenger airliners, involved in the September 11th tragedy, had no control over their aircraft." (...) An expert witness confirmed that "airliners could be controlled by electro-magnetic pulse or radio frequency instrumentation from command and control platforms based either in the air or at ground level."
 
Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot System

Charles said:
I don’t think it was a one time thing.

All Boeings were provided with remote control possibility. The argument was that such enabled overruling in case a plane got high jacked, so that it could still be landed safely by remote control.

Europe refused to implement the system, precisely because such remote control could also be misused when handled by the wrong fingers and transform the planes into remote controlled missiles. Maybe this is precisely what happened.

Now here is another interesting titbit.

From:
http://www(dot)viewzone.com/911revisited.html

Jim Heikkila said:
The Boeing 757 and 767 are equipped with fully autonomous flight capability, they are the only two Boeing commuter aircraft capable of fully autonomous flight. They can be programmed to take off, fly to a destination and land, completely without a pilot at the controls.
They are intelligent planes, and have software limits pre set so that pilot error cannot cause passenger injury. Though they are physically capable of high g maneuvers, the software in their flight control systems prevents high g maneuvers from being performed via the cockpit controls. They are limited to approximately 1.5 g's , I repeat, one and one half g's. This is so that a pilot mistake cannot end up breaking grandma's neck.
No matter what the pilot wants, he cannot override this feature.
The plane that hit the Pentagon approached or reached its actual physical limits, military personnel have calculated that the Pentagon plane pulled between five and seven g's in its final turn.
( that is if it WAS a Boeing at all)
The same is true for the second aircraft to impact the WTC.
There is only one way this can happen.
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.
Consider that this,

"They are intelligent planes, and have software limits pre set so that pilot error cannot cause passenger injury."

was not even a phrase concieved of when the 757 and 767 were built. The limiters on g forces are eletromechanical analog devices and have nothing to do with software. They are very diffificult to interface to digital control with the precission required. This is why the 747 was created.
 
Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot System

Charles said:
Now here is another interesting titbit.

From:
http://www(dot)viewzone.com/911revisited.html
Reading further on the page one can find at least 2 comments from pilots that support the fact that the 757 and the 767 cannot be remote controlled.

A Dissenting View:

I am a retired Airline Captain, currently flying Business Jets. I have an Airline Transport Pilot Rating qualifying me to fly Captain on Boeing 707/720/727/747-400/757/767/777, Lockheed 382 and L-1011, and Dassault 20 and 2000 Aircraft. I have over 28,000 hours, several thousand of which were in command of 757/767's.

There is no provision for a 757/767 to be flown remotely. It can't be done. Period. Nothing disables the Flight or Voice Recorders, etc., except for the pulling of circuit breakers in the cockpit.

The 1.5 G limit built into the flight control system isn't there. The 757/767 does not have electronic flight controls- "fly by wire" and I don't know of any way to design these limits into the system without fly by wire. Some fly by wire aircraft- the Airbus 319/320/330/340 series and some military aircraft, for example- do have these artificial limits. The limits on the 'Busses is about 2.5 G's. Since the airplane is pulling 1 G in straight and level flight there would only be 1/2 G left for manuvering- not much.

The 757/767 cannot- repeat cannot be "programmed" to fly without a Pilot. It has a very good autopilot, capable of manipulating the controls as directed by the ON BOARD Crew in climb, cruise, descent, and- in some cases- landing. It must be disconnected for takeoff.

The 757/767 is hardly a Commuter aircraft. These are the small jets such as the Canadair and Embraer Jets and Turboprops used by Regional Airlines.

Herb Fischer


Herb Fischer is right on as to the capabilities of the auto pilot. He has not discussed WHY the autopilot is limited. I have stated that. It is because the plane has "hydraulic over hydraulic" servos which are controlled by electromechanical systems having analog circuitry.
 
Boeing’s Uninterruptible Autopilot System

I wouldn't say "it can't be done". After all the video of the 707 controlled crash did require it to be rigged. And the 707 was a conventional aircraft(non fly by wire).

Assuming that the PTB science is way ahead of what is generally acknowledged, anything is possible. If indeed the aircraft were rigged to be commandeered remotely, then those airplanes involved would have to be on the ground for sometime. It would be helpful if we could find out whether the airplanes involved were in the hanger prior to the event. If the airplanes were in the hanger, then it's maintenance log would have to record why, for how long and who were the people that worked on it, assuming that the records are still available.
 
Back
Top Bottom