Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Superior Augmented GPS Service Avail. to WTC 9/11
Common Ground Common Sense > Issues that Affect Our Lives > 9/11: Theories, etc.
Magmak1
Leading GPS Software Suggests Superior Augmented GPS Service At WTC During 9/11 Attacks

http://www.911blogger.com/node/21445

Submitted by Aidan Monaghan on Thu, 09/24/2009 - 10:25am.

As the aircraft attacks of September 11, 2001 unfolded at the World Trade Center, virtually maximum augmented GPS positioning quality for the entire daylight period was provided to the geographic coordinates for the World Trade Center.

GPS position quality is strongly affected by the number of GPS satellites visible to a GPS receiver and the orbital geometry of GPS satellites with respect to a GPS receiver. Augmented GPS signal receivers and Flight Management Systems that utilize augmented GPS signals for navigation and positioning purposes were scheduled to be contained by American and United airlines Boeing 757s and 767s by 2000.

Much much more (along with colored charts, references, circles and arrows and pdf ...) here:

http://www.911blogger.com/node/21445
Magmak1
Isn't it interesting that a former member of the Board of Directors from the company that had remote fly-by-wire technology and PROmis software -- and which now may be given a no-bid contract to build two new high-altitude spy satellites under a no-bid contract -- sat (having been brought there by the Secret Service) in the White House command bunker with her husband the war games maestro at the same time as the National Reconaissance Office was evacuated and three aircraft were guided into precise locations in three separate impacts?

"The flight paths of the September 11, 2001 attack aircraft bear characteristics common to the capabilities provided by precision automated flight control systems and related technology that emerged just prior to these attacks. The clandestine use of precise augmented GPS guided auto-pilot aircraft systems in order to perform the said aircraft attacks is hypothesized."

"Because the Flight Data Recorders (FDRs) for American Airlines flight 11 and United Airlines flight 175 were not recovered, details regarding the operation of each aircraft are not known. The FDRs for American Airlines flight 77 and United Airlines flight 93 were recovered and indicate pilot control of each aircraft. However, the FDR readout file for American Airlines flight 77 was completed four hours and fifteen minutes before the said FDR was recovered, suggesting false or altered FDR information.[43] And the FDRs for American Airlines flight 77 and United Airlines flight 93 are virtually the only ones during the previous 20 years of major National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) U.S. aviation mishap investigations, for which unique inventory control serial numbers were not published.[44] Such serial numbers are required to facilitate FDR data readouts.[45] In fact the NTSB possesses no records pertaining to the positive identification of the FDRs for American Airlines flight 77 and United Airlines flight 93.[46]

Isn't that interesting..


Isn’t it interesting that, at about 10:23 a.m on 9/11/01 “Counterterrorism “tsar” Richard Clarke hears reports [of other terrorism attacks in D.C.] at this time and asks Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage in the State Department to see if the building he’s in has been hit. Armitage goes outside the building, finds out there’s no bomb, and calls his colleagues to inform them that the reports are false.”

There was no one else at the State Department who could go outside and see?
No security systems, camera coverage, or anything else?

Isn’t it interesting that one of the most highly decorated “spooks” in the American toolkit, a former covert operative and Navy Seal and a man with deep connections to Pakistani intelligence (as well as a role in the Iran-Contra affair), is detailed to go outside and see if a car bomb detonated?

Isn’t it interesting that the man who was Deputy Secretary of State while Colin Powell was out of the country and therefore “out of the [OODA] loop” and thus Acting Secretary of State, was asked by the chief crisis manager on 9/11 to go outdoors and see if a car bomb had gone off outside the State Department?

This is the man who held seats in many prominent corporate boardrooms, including Raytheon and Mantech International. His company's clients have included multimillion-dollar defense contractors such as Boeing, Science Application International Corporation, and Halliburton subsidiary Brown & Root, as well as financial powerhouses Goldman Sachs and Chase Manhattan, and has personally invested millions in companies such as Pfizer, Chase Manhattan and American International Group.

As noted above… as well as in Aidan Monaghan’s recently-released hypothesis
(Plausibility Of 9/11 Aircraft Attacks Generated By GPS-Guided Aircraft Autopilot Systems
http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2008...emsMonaghan.pdf ), Raytheon was involved in 9/11.

According to Monaghan, “Raytheon's director of satellite navigation systems even reported that rescue personnel utilized the newly activated WAAS signal, in order to precisely survey the Ground Zero site following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.[7] WAAS: Back in Step, Avionics Magazine, February 1, 2002 http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/categories...cial/12571.html

Raytheon also produces the FIRSTplus Air Traffic Control Simulator. Raytheon also produces and runs the ABACUS (Advanced BAttlefield CompUter Simulation). More specifically, in communications, Raytheon’s Universal Control System (UCS) is "an unmanned aerial system (UAS) "cockpit" that improves operator awareness and efficiency, while providing the ability to control multiple unmanned aircraft".... The company also makes several software radio and digital communication systems for military applications such as Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC), is participating in Navy-Marine Corps Intranet (NMCI), ECHELON and the Joint Tactical Terminal (JTT) programs.
jeffmoskin
Believe it or not, most airliners still do not have GPS navigation systems. Private planes have only had IFR approved, autopilot coupled units for a few years. Definitely not in 2001.

Besides, as I have posted before, the only way a 767 could hit a narrow target like that at 500mph would be via a homing beacon (easily placed in the window of a vacant office) coupled to the autopilot, or a hot-shot fighter pilot at the controls.

Most certainly NOT the bumblers at US flight schools who didn't want to "learn how to land."

The first lesson in landing is learning how to keep on a constant line toward a fixed target (the runway) at 60 mph.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2009 Invision Power Services, Inc.