You can get high flying success by using our 70-646 study guide, pass4sure microsoft dumps and pass4sure mcse study guide. Testking 70-620 exam guide and ccsp certification training resources are also very useful in the preparation of exams.

Planes of 911 Exceeded Their Software Limits

by Jim Heikkila

Two of the aircraft exceeded their software limits on 9/11.

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.

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.

[Google "Raytheon Global Hawk system"]

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.

Another piece of critical evidence: the voice recorders came up blank.

The flight recorders that were recovered had tape that was undamaged inside, but it was blank. There is only one way this can happen on a 757 or 767. When the aircraft are commandeered via remote control, the microphones that go to the cockpit voice recorder are re routed to the people doing the remote controlling, so that the recording of what happened in the cockpit gets made in a presumably safer place. But due to a glitch in the system on a 757/767, rather than shutting off when the mic is redirected the voice recorder keeps running. The voice recorders use what is called a continuous loop tape, which automatically re passes itself past the erase and record heads once every half hour, so after a half hour of running with the microphones redirected, the tape will be blank. Just like the recovered tapes were. Yet more proof that no pilot flew those planes in the last half hour.

Eight of the hijackers who were on those planes called up complaining that they were still alive. I'd bet you never heard about our foreign minister flying to Morocco and issuing an official apology to the accused, did you? No, terrorists did not fly those planes, plastic knives and box cutters were in fact too ridiculous to be true. Any of the remaining accused have certainly been sought out and killed by now.

Our information IS controlled

The cell phone calls from the aircraft could not have happened. I am a National Security Agency trained Electronic Warfare specialist, and am qualified to say this. My official title: MOS33Q10, Electronic Warfare Intercept Strategic Signal Processing/Storage Systems Specialist, a highly skilled MOS which requires advanced knowledge of many communications methods and circuits to the most minute level. 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.

I hope I made sense, if you have questions I will respond if possible. If I do not respond, please research this out yourself, search the Boeing site, search the DARPA site, search where you have not searched before. Some of the information is classified and leaked by individuals, and it is also being scoured from the net. I have all of the original documents on my computer to safeguard against this.

Please do not ignore this, because only Norad has the flight codes for those aircraft, we did 911 to ourselves. Hitler had the Reichstag, we have 911. If 911 proves to not be enough to make the US citizenry set aside its rights for safety, the people who did 911 most certainly have access to nuclear material. 911 must be exposed for what it was before that material is used.

CNN, Pentagon Videos Expose 9/11 White Jet & Helicopter

By Jon Carlson

The South Tower crash and the Pentagon crash used similar modes of operation: a white jet remote controlled an aircraft from afar and handed off closeup remote control guidance to a military helicopter hovering near the target. Unlike the MO used at the North Tower where the white jet flying immediately above the aircraft made a Bull's eye, the helicopter guidance MO resulted in 'OFF-TARGET' hits. An engine from the aircraft that struck the South Tower and landed in a NYC street has been identified as a CFM56 engine, the exclusive powerplant of the Boeing 737 NOT the Flight UA175 Boeing 967 claimed by the Federal Government. A A3 Skywarrior substituting for the Flight 77 Boeing 757 was the weapon of choice at the Pentagon.



Has anyone researched NASA's PROJECT: ARIES involving a 757? Or the Boeing feature, the Flight Management Computer System. The page for the 757-200 describes this as: "A fully integrated flight management computer system (FMCS) provides for automatic guidance and control of the 757-200 from immediately after takeoff to final approach and landing." And "The precision of global positioning satellite (GPS) system navigation, automated air traffic control functions, and advanced guidance and communications features are now available as part of the new Future Air Navigation System (FANS now called CNS/ATF [pdf file]) flight management computer."

According to Andreas von B¸low, 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 see article]. It appears that this "major European flag carrier" was none other than Lufthansa, the German national airline.

Doesn't prove the events of 9/11, just food for thought.

Cricket Kovach


You must be aware that the registration numbers for these 767's were not cancelled until 2002-2005. Also, it is possible that these 767s were actually military jets, since many were sold to the military and configured with the FMCS (Flight Management Computer System) which is capable of un-piloted flight navigation. A quick paint job was all that was needed to pull this off. That and a pilot who could take the plane in the air. Remember, the hijackers supposedly didn't want/need to know how to take off... Once in the air the automatic navigation takes over. Easy.


I, a Military Occupational Skill 68G, and a Federal Aviation Administration Certified "Privileged" Pilot, as well as an FAA Certified "Privileged" Mechanic, will witness to the overall accuracy of this letter by Jim Heikkila; A testimony, pertaining to equipment (parameter limits both governed and ungoverned), discussing capabilities/limitations of flight control systems and structural performance.

Additionally, MOS33Q10 describes wire and/or transmitted data interplay, consistent with PIC (Pilot In Command) responsibilities of flight safety, as PIC is expressly required to KNOW that:

FAA certified pilots, expressly embodies the PIC with full responsibilities of all flight safety explicit ALSO, as a Licensed Radio Operator in accordance with FCC communication rules, critical concerns of electronic interference with flight critical systems, and other capabilities/limitations of electronic devices [Original Equipment or not] as part of total onboard equipment.

To include such knowledge necessary, concerning functionality and limitations of hand-held, non-amplified, standard private cellular phones, un-repeated through nonexistent equipment, not installed aboard commercial aircraft of the time. These purportedly "private" cellular calls MUST therefore be considered a hoax (not real).

Of utmost importance, so please publish and disseminate to all concerned:

I hereby challenge all other pilots, those who have accepted the gift of wings and a duty to their trusting passengers, for remaining silent before the ears of humanity pertaining to a dangerous delusion, and thus allowed to permeate that same humanity, concerning the skies over the eastern region of North America, September 11, 2001.

Because of this general silence, I can no longer accept these people as MY true brethren, nor the FAA as a legitimate regulatory body who's utmost concern has been "human safety", or so declared. That because of this ongoing silence (licensing body intimidation?), I hereby deny the jurisdiction of the Federal Aviation Administration to "Privilege" my right to command and enjoy the apparatus of flight. None-the-less, I retain my natural duty and responsibility to the safety of my person and passengers, including those otherwise bound to Earth.

I so challenge other pilots to consider the appropriateness of allowing an administration to "License" them as well, while in conflict with this overriding duty to human safety.

I so retain the FAA issued paper "proof" of my pilot training, and formal recognition as competent airman, merely as historical artifact. The "authorizing" seal and signature displayed on these artifacts, is no longer considered by me as lawfully valid, nor am I bound by the terms outlined through such a charter.

The first implicit duty of Pilot In Command (that of safety), remains unchanged.

To be absolutely clear, I will hold in contempt, any man or woman who considers themselves' "Pilot" for taking to the controls of air worthy machines, yet does not vocalize a clear stand upon such an underlying principal, that of a pilot dependent upon truth.

I do not recognize the justice of liars "owning" the sky, for one can not retain their wings soaring upon an air of untruth. This will merely ground all of humankind, and THAT is not my destiny.

A pilot,
Erin Sebastian Myers

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


As an avionics engineer, I also would like to stress out that there are NO provisions on 757/767 aircraft to have it remote controlled. Also, the CVR itself only can be erased by having the parking brake set and the erase button actuated. Not something you can do in flight. You can before start and pull the CVR CB though.

Regarding turn control: there is a banklimiter but when flown by hand, it won't work. The automatic pilot is similar to the 747-400. It cannot do a complete start. It is able to engage lateral navigation and vertical navigation _after you have reached the radio altitude of 100 and 400 ft if I recall correct. So the AP functions are armed but will NOT be able to control the aircraft at the time you select Take-OFF.

I am pretty sure that there are big question marks about that the Govt of the USA showed and told us and I am pretty sure quite a bit is staged, just like some other past disasters. However, technically, the story "Planes of 911 Exceeded Their Software Limits" in this case, is just BS.


More ViewZone