Reply #57: Think Wargames

[Woody Box]

The 8:14 plane identified himself as "United 175" to the ground controllers. But there is no proof so far that it was N612UA (the tail number that is attached to the plane).

Conversely, N612UA sent an automatic ACARS message to the airline when it took off at 8:23. But there is no evidence that the pilot identified himself as "United 175". If he chose another call sign/flight number, ground controllers wouldn't have been confronted with two "United 175".

It is important to notice that neither the pilots nor the controllers, even if they were privy to the duplication, were "in on the crime". The maneuver might well have been part of one of the numerous exercises, be it "Vigilant Guardian", "Vigilant Warrior", or what else.
Taking part in an exercise is different from being involved in mass murder.

If you think that the "both" departures scenario has a plausibility somewhere near zero, you need to explain to me:

How big is the plausibility that the ATC/pilot transcript is faked or erroneous?

How big is the plausibility of an simultaneous ACARS malfunction on two planes, i.e. that both of the "wheels-off" sensors reacted ten minutes too late?

How big is the plausibility that the man who was in the best position to watch Flight 175's takeoff - sitting in the plane directly behind it - reports erroneously airline (United) and/or type (Boeing 767)?

I have encountered a duplicated Flight 11 at Logan, a duplicated Delta 1989 at Cleveland Hopkins, and a duplicated Flight 93 in the skies over Pennsylvania. Therefore, a duplicated Flight 175 doesn't surprise me at all and is certainly much more plausible than one of these three errors.