Breaking news!!

[Vulcan59]

Commercial pilots must carry a passport simply because they fly through international boundries and although most immigration officers never ask for the passport from a pilot, it is carried as a precaution. The uniform and an airport or company ID which must be prominently displayed usually suffices. On occasion, I have known of certain airports like Frankurt, where the immigration officers have stopped pilots in uniforms and ID's and require them to show thier passport and flying licences before been allowed to leave the airport.

So, it is curious indeed that someone on a domestic flight would carry his/her passport. On the FAA website, passports are a must for international flight crew but not domestic crew. I suppose there are other reasons why he had a passport with him but that stills doesn't answer it's "fire retardent" or "crash proof" properties. ;)

 

[Ryan]

The first thing that occurred to me was this snippet from session 020914:

Q: (A) I want really to know what kind of mechanism is behind this 911 number coming up in the NY lottery. (V) Yeah, me too, and it wasn't only that it was something with the...
A: Warning. It ain't over!!!
Q: (A) Who was warning?
A: Mass consciousness signals to self about clear and present danger.
Q: (A) Makes sense. (C) That we created it our own selves? (L) No, that mass consciousness is sending itself a signal about a clear and present danger...clear and present danger of what?
A: Wait and see.

With all the "hot poppers" going off recently, plus the North Korean nuke test, I've had a weird sense of helpless foreboding... like the brown stuff is going to hit the fan and there ain't nothin' I can do about it. Remains to be seen if this one is wrong like many of my other "forebodings" in the past.

 

[Windmill knight]

Hey, shouldn't the building have collapsed by now? (Lisa smiles innocently.)

No, cause it was piloted by a baseball player. If it had been piloted by a t'rrist, the evilness would have made it collapse!

 

[Anders]

What came to my mind was that in having the passport there of this guy, then those who might have been puzzled by Atta's passport being found on top of the rubble can just reason like this: " Oh well there can't have been anything wrong with that afterall since it is happening again." Strange indeed!

Another thing was something Laura once mentioned about hypnosis and how it was necessary to see how effective it is by testing it. If they all accept it without questioning then the hypnosis is still working. I think it has a special name in hypnosis lingo.

Someone mentioned that it could be a needed distraction while something of importance is going on elsewhere, out of the sight of the public radar. A worthwhile suggestion I thought and a reminder to keep our eyes and ears open ;)

Anders

 

[Quantumleon]

Well, here's a curious thing:

The plane crashed on 10/11/06

Write that on a piece of paper and turn it upside down and you get

9/11/01 (ignoring the 0 at after the 9).

And also, the same day's new episode of South Park was about 9/11 conspiracies!

Coincidence?

 

[PopHistorian]

I must admit, this incident is a stroke of pure, uncontaminated genius.
- What do the p'crats love to do? Remind people of 9/11. How about crashing a plane into a tower in NYC? Will that do it? How about on 10/11? But no "terror" so it's not our fault -- brilliant!
- When do the p'crats like most to remind people about 9/11? Just before an election. How about just a few weeks before? And put a famous person in the plane, just to be sure.
- How do the p'crats like to take attention away from something damaging like the lewd Foley scandal. Distract with another story, even one that's basically meaningless. How about crashing a plane into a tower in NYC?
- Did they really need that distraction? Well, a day after an MIT/JH study says they're lying about the death toll in Iraq, they sure as hell do!! Misson accomplished.

The shameful media has been blaring this story 24/7 -- a little, low-mortality, low-economic-impact plane crash blows away stories of gov't corruption and unimaginable bloodshed. As a bonus, tons of tons of sound bytes that contain the words "terror" and "9/11." All this and it doesn't spoil the perfect record of no terror attacks in the US since 9/11.

My only question last night was, "where's the video of it?" This morning, there it was on the web, caught by a government camera.

Genius!

 

[Mr. Premise]

Whoa! Good catch, Quantumleon.

Well, here's a curious thing:

The plane crashed on 10/11/06

Write that on a piece of paper and turn it upside down and you get

9/11/01 (ignoring the 0 at after the 9).

And also, the same day's new episode of South Park was about 9/11 conspiracies!

Coincidence?

 

[Vulcan59]

Well, here's a curious thing:

The plane crashed on 10/11/06

Write that on a piece of paper and turn it upside down and you get

9/11/01 (ignoring the 0 at after the 9).

And also, the same day's new episode of South Park was about 9/11 conspiracies!

Coincidence?

Great catch Quantumelon. I sent it off to a few people on my email list. Hopefully it will get them to start questioning things.

 

[vinny]

one possibility: it is a deliberate PTP 'keep the fear' manouvre, with a carefully chosen date to maximise psychic impact due to 911 connections etc.

For sure, it is being pushed by the news channels, at the same time as the other news story which is now being pushed here in the UK about the so called terrorist who was 'foiled' in his plans to blow up WTO and World Bank buildings in Washington, and has now 'pleaded guilty'.

 

[joeshmoe]

Actually, I find 10/11 interesting in varying ways as an echo of 9/11. I found that the nearly universal reaction to the event was this. Some people heard of the news first. Then, some one or some others hear about it later. When the latter tried to inform the former, there was always a misunderstanding: that this was a second plane attacking.
In some way, this had been a subtle but powerfull lesson to many on how programmed we are.

 

[joeshmoe]

Oh, another wierd thing: twins. Twin Tours -- the pitcher (never followed sports) was an identical twin.

 

[1/2Hawk]

No, no, no ... the wierest thing as yet unmentioned is that the DARPA program developed to take remote control of aircraft (as a defensive measure to prevent hijackings) is for no other apparent reason called "Home Run"... an obvious baseball reference. ;) Wonder from where/whom he acquired this plane?

 

[rs]

OK. Of note is the fact that the Cirrus CR20 and CR22 have some of the most advanced avionics available to general aviation today. Both have glass cockpit as a standard after 2003. If I remember correctly, Cory's model was a 2002 but supposedly had the glass cockpit option. These avionics have to be seen to be understood, they are on par with the latest and greatest stuff from Boeing or Airbus. You can integrate with GPS the needed information to avoid undesirable airspace (like where this plane was starting to fly into).

The plane is flown with a side-stick instead of the "normal" yoke. The yoke on an aircraft can be connected directly to the control surfaces with cables and wires. If you lose power you can still glide to a landing while retaining a large degree of control over the airplane. Worst case is you just "manhandle" the yoke. Since the yoke is usually rather big, you can really put some muscle into it if you really really have to.

On the Cirrus, with the side stick it is not likely that one's wrist has the torque necessary to simply force the plane into a specific attitude under extreme circumstances, and so it has an "all electric design". I could not figure out if this meant "fly-by-wire" (I don't think so) or if it means that the side stick is "electrically assisted" - think "power steering" in a car. The car analogy means that you really do control the wheels, but you have help from the power module. If the power module could be made to work against you, it is not likely that it could win that "tug of war", overpowering the machine. In this case if the side stick force is electrically amplified, given the sophistocation of the avionics, I am suspecting this is run by the computer (which is how the auto-pilot gets integrated).

This might explain the on-the-ground reports of the plane "flying erratically", perhaps the pilot realized that the plane was "flying itself" and was fighting the controlls with all his might, but since the side stick is not as easy to leverage, it proved to be a losing battle.

Can 1/2Hawk provide a web link to substantiate the "Home Run" name?

 

[rs]

Two more things. First the plane is the only commercial plane available with a built-in parachute system. This comes as a standard feature. Ironically, even with this extreme measure in the design, the aircraft has a 33% higher accident rate than other general aviation aircraft.

It could be the higher accident rate is because the people who can afford and who actually buy such a high performance plane have an inflated sense of their own flying ability or it could be that Cirrus Design realizes that there are some basic risk factors and failure modes in their design and wanted this option of last resort.

Curious.

 

[1/2Hawk]

Another standard feature per the Cirrus site is a TAWS (Terrain Awareness Warning System) unit straight off the larger airliners.

The optional eTAWS unit, at least that I've found, doesnt really specify what the E for "Enhanced" gains you ... other than an audible alarm. Although, the product description changes to "awareness and avoidance system" on some manufacturers websites. Wouldnt it make sense to have a system like this tied to the flight controls? Cant you already find this technology operational in cruise missiles? hrmm

Regarding the Home Run analogy, I was just thinking back to some of the conspiracies that were popular a few years ago and was chuckling to myself about the baseball theme to a name of one theory on remote flight control. A search for Home Run and DARPA will get you a few dozen sites on the topic although they all seem to quote the same source. It also mentions that Home Run was not the actual project title - so I wonder where that came about. A little deeper digging will lead you back to some work in Vietnam (553rd Recon Wing) with a Beechcraft QU-22 that was able to be flown with a pilot or remotely (designation YQU-22A). Here's a pic from the US Air Force Museum - tell me this doesnt look like an Cirrus SR22 btw? http://marvellouswings.com/Aircraft/Utility/U-22/U-22.html Similar theories to Home Run include either NORAD control of the flights transponders or control by an AWACS with Global Hawk capability, such as found here: http://www.newsgateway.ca/9_11_aircraft_remote_control_.htm