Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Did UA 93 request the change of flight path to Washington?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-05 03:16 AM
Original message
Did UA 93 request the change of flight path to Washington?

Though the story seems to have dropped suspiciously out of the focus of the media there were accounts right after 911 that UA 93 indeed requested a change of flight path:

John Nance (ABC): By the same token, we have this as the only one of the four airplanes that made a sudden turn and requested a change in direction. The other three, according to Lisa, we don't have any information they made any request of air traffic control. The fourth one did, and that would indicate possibly, and it could have been one of the hijackers, but it indicates possibly that one of the pilots was allowed to stay functional long enough to agree to take the plane back to Washington. He would not have had any idea what they were going to do, or wherever it was headed, and that at some point in time that still remaining pilot or pilots got into a fight, and that could have led, very much as in Egypt Air, to a tussle in the cockpit, which lost control.
(ABC, 9/12/01)


But once it was over Cleveland, the plane suddenly veered south, according to Flight Tracker. It climbed above 40,000 feet, turned sharply toward the southeast and flew over Pittsburgh. It zig-zagged slightly north and east and then south again.
At 9:56 a.m., the destination code for the plane in FAA computers was changed from "SFO," the code for San Francisco, to "DCA," the code for Reagan National Airport in Washington. That indicates an air traffic controller probably changed the destination. Typically, that is done only when it is requested by the pilots.
For reasons still unknown, the plane crashed near Somerset, Pa., seven minutes later.

(St Petersburg Times, 9/12/01)

Questions:
How on earth can it be possible that at a moment when all plane were requested to land at the nearest airport a flight path change to DC could have been accepted?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Zaphod 36 Donating Member (38 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-05 05:10 AM
Response to Original message
1. Flight path change request or Home Run
Hi John Doe,

I think this request could have been a red herring of the real hijackers on board of UA 93. They want irritate NORAD and fly to the opposite direction after departing from Johnstown airport.
The plan of the hijackers probably implicates to land in Guadalajara and connect the flight with the hostages to Afghanistan(->Moussaouis statement) to press demands.
But shortly after the flight path change request the Home Run system works and the hijackers were hijacked.

But now I assume the flight path change was the Home Run system itself.
How does this system work accurately?
Is it possible that here Home Run was employed to hijack the hijackers and a flight path change request never existed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ladjf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-05 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Where are the radar tapes? They would answer many of the
important questions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Woody Box Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-05 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
3. Not to forget

that according to all known reports and statements UA 93 was not in contact with air controllers after 9:28.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-05 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. Wow, very strange. Good question.
I wonder if this has something to do with the hijackers saying "let the guys in now" at 9:45am. If this was a mock hijacking, perhaps the pilots were still alive and were brought back in to the cockpit to change the destination.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-05 05:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Yes
but the central question is:
How could it have been accepted?
I'm also wondering if it has anything to do with the transponder coming back at around 10:00 according to Stacey Taylor?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-20-05 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. How could the flight change have been accepted for DC?
Edited on Fri May-20-05 10:07 PM by spooked911
Maybe just confusion on the part of the ATCs? At that point the plane wasn't too far from DC was it?

Do you have a different idea?

But I think we're getting somewhere important here.

This suggests to me the hijacking WAS all a fake and the pilots came back to the cockpit and were trying to cancel the hijacking exercise. And maybe this is why the plane had to be shot down????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Doe II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 06:26 AM
Response to Original message
7. According to this the FAA accepted
At 9:56 a.m., Flight 93 asked the Federal Aviation Administration to change its destination to Reagan National Airport in Washington. A minute later, the FAA approved, according to Flight Explorer, a firm that tracks such communications.
(US News&World Report, 10/29/01)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-22-05 07:03 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. And then the plane crashed 10 minutes later
is there a connection?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Jan 20th 2020, 01:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC