2 civilian airliners down south of Moscow

Hexogen explosive traces found in the Tu-154 wreck (confirmed/ reported from
Russia). One Chechenian women suspected since nobody asked for her
(speculation). Islambouli Brigades allegedly took responsibility.

Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA

Nele VII wrote:

Hexogen explosive traces found in the Tu-154 wreck (confirmed/ reported
from Russia). One Chechenian women suspected since nobody asked for her
(speculation). Islambouli Brigades allegedly took responsibility.

Widely disbelieved - they have taken responsability for a lot of other
things in the past, which were later proven to be bogus.

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA

....except for our patented, genetically modified ones! Never again need your
loved one moan "and if you prickle us don't we bleed?"
--
Mailman


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

BUFDRVR wrote:

Mailman wrote:

...which proves, yet again, how little journalists understand: setting the
transponder/IFF to emergency mode is done in a hijacking - or any other
emergency.

Uhhh...no. The ICAO transponder emergency distress code is 7700 while
hijacking is (I think??) 7200. There's also one for NORDO (No Radio) which
I think is 7600.

That would show or not, depending on the interrogator. I have no idea what
kind of coverage (and with what equipment) the Russians have. Even the
old(er) IFF on some Western military radars cannot always tell them apart.
--
Mailman


-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

In article ,
on 27 Aug 2004 07:23:04 GMT,
Krztalizer nt attempted to say .....


That *looks* like English, but...

It might be Texan.

Hey hey hey now. It might be from the Crawford area, but the rest of the
Republic isn't known for such classic blunders, such as getting into a land war
in Asia.

That's reserved for Presidents who hail from Massachusetts........


--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

Pooh Bear wrote in message ...
Howard Berkowitz wrote:

Hijack is 7500. For some reason I haven't fathomed, the FAA ATC
procedure is to contact the aircraft by radio and ask "Sir, please
confirm you are squawking 7500."

Oh great ! What presence of mind ! What berk thought that one up ?

someone has a good presence of mind. let look at this:

"'Aircraft X', confirm your squawk, 'Center X'". thats taken what 7
words, how long does it take to say ?

now consider the following:
1. when an emergency code is squawked, say for example a 7500 squawk,
the controller doesnt leap in his chair exclaiming "A Hijack! A
Hijack! what do i do?" for someone else say, "****! get the president
on the phone!" rather:

an emergency squawk initiates a set procedure, which will involve the
controller requiring radio silence from everyone else on that freq.
and will likely provide an alternate freq. for everyone else to change
to and other aircraft will be vectored from the vicinity. the
controllers will implement an action plan or rather set procedure
depending on what the situation requires.

2. transponders have a couple of different methods of entereing the
squawk code, some have numeric keypads, others have rotating dials.
some also have a feature to shortcut to a specific code.

accidental input of a specific code, has happened, does happen and
will happen. Personally speaking, durin the very first days of
instruction, a few moons ago now, i was advised to enter transponder
codes from the back first, to prevent any accidental emergency code
squwaks (with the rotational dial transponder its possible as you are
winding through the numbers to trigger an emergency code) and so set
off the alam bells at the handling control center.

3. controllers are pretty capable people, believe it or not, and their
familiarity with their daily profession enables them to make accurate
judgement calls on many situations.

A controller asking an aircraft transmitting an emergency squawk to
confirm, is going to get perhaps only a few alternative responses:

- the pilot responds with "'Center X', thats a negative on the 'x'
squawk, we're good here, please confirm correct squawk, thanks for
the heads up "aircraft x'"

- the controller gets no response, which is an indication as to a
problem.

- an unusual response occurs, which again is an indication as to a
problem.

now, just before people go off on a tangent that the pilot could have
a gun to his head and is lectured on how to respond, controllers are
pretty adept at working things out for themselves. a controller can
pretty much figure out if you have a problem with something from vocal
cues. furthermore pilot are pretty adept at dealing with problems,
there was one instance during a hijack that the pilots keyed the mic
during the hijackers vocal outbursts in the cockpit so not only could
the control center hear, but also it was on the tapes. thats not
mentioning the basic issue of has the aircraft deviated from the
flight plan, has it changed heading or altitude ?

listening to the tower tapes of an emergency situation, before all the
other pilots on the frequency changed off to the alternative assigned
frequency, there were a few blind transmissions from other pilots just
quickly and simply "good luck guys, god be with you" though i am not
particularly religious nor sentimental, it's something to give to a
flight crew in a ****ty situation.

as another side note, a friend of mine worked out rather rapidly
during flight that he lost the ability to transmit, could recieve
fine, but not transmit. which of course led him to input 7600
transponder code. the controller obviously came back to attempt to
make communication (bear in mind the controller only knows its lost
comms) and at the controllers call attempts, he hit ident. the
controller pretty much worked out rather rapidly, that the pilot could
hear and not talk, and so an easy day was had by all, as the
controller issued him with vectors, confirming by replying with the
ident.

so, after considering the above, is it more appropriate to say 7 words
and confirm the situation, or go all out into full blown emergency
situation. presence of mind yes. berk, no.


Has it occurred that just maybe, here and there, a hijacker just might
not notice the transponder code was changed?

which is irrelevant either way. if it hasnt been changed he will
continue with his plan, if it has, he will continue with his plan. but
the ability remains to provide a non verbal indication of an emergency
situation.


Mercuns just love to screw up the admin way.

hardly.



Graham

(B2431) wrote in message ...
From: "Kevin Brooks"
Date: 8/26/2004 2:24 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:


"B2431" wrote in message
...
From: "Vaughn"
Date: 8/26/2004 5:20 AM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:


"Pooh Bear" wrote in message
...


It would be *very* tricky to fuel just 2 a/c - and no others - with
contaminated fuel.

One inadvertantly (or purposly) contaminated fuel truck could manage
that
trick quite well. But I think we would know by now.

Vaughn

Assuming a truck on the scale of an R-5 and full fuel loads on both
aircraft it
is not likely both aircraft would be able to be refueled from the same
truck.
Of course it depends on initial fule levels in both aircraft

And the odds that both aircraft would then crash at about the same time,
even though one had been in the air quite a bit longer and covered a lot
more distance away from the departure point? The fuel bit has been a
long-shot from the get-go when you consider that fact, along with the
transponder signal reported to have been received from one aircraft. If the
latest reports indicating that no out-of-the-ordinary conversations were
heard on the CVR's proves to be true, then you can nail the coffin door shut
on "bad fuel".

Brooks


Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

There is absolutely no reason the crashes could be purely coincidental. The
odds of that being the case are extremely long however.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired


more than the unlikely odds of an aircraft crashing multiplied by two.
if the odds of being in an aircraft crash are in excess of 14 million
to one, the odds of two aircraft departing the same airport on the
same day, within 40 minutes of each other, both involving inflight
catastrophic loss.

i have no idea how many zero's the odds would involve !

nt (Krztalizer) wrote in message ...
Fearing it might be a
Russian 9/11 copy cat, they shotdown the firt Turpolev jetliner. Well,
somehow the Russian ATC radar showing the 'squack ident' from the
hijacked plane. Russian jetfighters shotdown the wrong plane. Then
they downed the hijacked plane.

The witnesses to the crash of one of the aircraft heard three booms, then a
falling airliner. Given the Russian government's penchant for avoiding the
truth in such events, I am surprised no one has yet suggested a US submarine
caused the tragedy.


oh just wait, there's still the conspirowhacko's to come up with
something. were there any US warships on excerise in the area ?
denial will lead to cover up theories i am sure.

f the odds of being in an aircraft crash are in excess of 14 million
to one, the odds of two aircraft departing the same airport on the
same day, within 40 minutes of each other, both involving inflight
catastrophic loss.

i have no idea how many zero's the odds would involve !

The odds have now become moot, with the announcement that explosive residue has
been found among the debris. Its inevitable that the other impact site will
reveal some similar agent at work. We're counting angels on the head of a pin
while Islamist 'soldiers' strike civilians the world over - I have no doubt
they will be found to be the culprits in this case. During the Yugoslav wars
of succession, I supported the hard-pressed Muslim civilians and I still do.
But when I pass a middle eastern man on the street, I see him now as a
potential enemy soldier, someone to be wary of. That this alienates me from a
billion of my fellow men bothers me, however I understand we are at war.
These airliners were downed by enemy action.

From: (running with scissors)
Date: 8/28/2004 5:43 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

(Krztalizer) wrote in message
...
Fearing it might be a
Russian 9/11 copy cat, they shotdown the firt Turpolev jetliner. Well,
somehow the Russian ATC radar showing the 'squack ident' from the
hijacked plane. Russian jetfighters shotdown the wrong plane. Then
they downed the hijacked plane.

The witnesses to the crash of one of the aircraft heard three booms, then a
falling airliner. Given the Russian government's penchant for avoiding the
truth in such events, I am surprised no one has yet suggested a US
submarine
caused the tragedy.


oh just wait, there's still the conspirowhacko's to come up with
something. were there any US warships on excerise in the area ?
denial will lead to cover up theories i am sure.

They were going to overfly the WW2 Nazi nuclear test sites denyev has been
telling us about and might have seen the disc aircraft teuton was telling us
about. These sites have been classified by the United States for 75 years and
only those two have been brave enough to speak up about it. As a result of this
a mercury powered disc shapped missile was fired from the secret Nazi
underground Antarctic base using tarver guidance (no pitot tubes) and released
two optical nukes in the .001 kt range to bring down the two airliners. In a
few days maron will tell us the USAF was involved in refueling the disc missile
in flight.

I defy anyone to provide proof this didn't happen.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

"B2431" wrote in message
...
|| They were going to overfly the WW2 Nazi nuclear test sites denyev has
been
| telling us about and might have seen the disc aircraft teuton was telling
us
| about. These sites have been classified by the United States for 75 years
and
| only those two have been brave enough to speak up about it. As a result of
this
| a mercury powered disc shapped missile was fired from the secret Nazi
| underground Antarctic base using tarver guidance (no pitot tubes) and
released
| two optical nukes in the .001 kt range to bring down the two airliners. In
a
| few days maron will tell us the USAF was involved in refueling the disc
missile
| in flight.
|
| I defy anyone to provide proof this didn't happen.
|
| Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired




Dan, you weren't there - you have no right to comment on it.





Cheers


Dave Kearton