2 civilian airliners down south of Moscow

In article ,
(running with scissors) wrote:

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 ?

Note that I did not make the statement about presence of mind. While I
don't have the procedure in front of me, those are not the words said by
ATC. Those words specifically are confirming a squawk of 7500.

Consistent with controller workload, occasional random squawk
verification requests might be a decent idea, to decrease suspicion. Of
the recent crop of hijackers, their English was imperfect, and a routine
query just might get by -- it might not.

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:

I certainly did not suggest that was the procedure, which indeed would
be asinine.


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.

And a simple confirmation request doesn't draw attention to 7500.



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.

You seem to be making quite a few assumptions about tangents.

[snip explanations of tangents]

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.


Were the words what you suggested, I would have less concern. Specific
confirmation of 7500, for exactly the reasons you mention below, do not
make sense from a human factors standpoint.

While terrorists may not be courteous enough to be repetitive, any 7500
is sufficient to alert NORAD. Fighters always can be recalled, but if
the hijacking is real and a suicide attack is a real possibility, time
is urgent. I can easily see a pilot's last living act to be changing the
squawk before a hostile takes his life, and control of the aircraft.

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

Pete wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe...ash/index.html

Within 4 minutes of each other. Both took off from Domodedovo

Coincidence, or...?


Explosives Found in Both Crashed Russian Jets

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...toryID=6094456


Use of the Explosive Hexogen at a Glance

A Look at Cases Where the Powerful Explosive Hexogen Was Found


November 1999: In St. Petersburg, Russia, police arrest a man found
with four sections of a missile warhead carrying high explosives.
ITAR-Tass said the segments contained hexogen.

September 1999: In Moscow, apartment bombings killed some 300 people.
Authorities blame Chechen separatists for the explosions, which
involved hexogen.


http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20040827_1071.html



Probe Into Russian Plane Crashes Centers on 2 Female Passengers

In particular, officials are seeking more information on two female
passengers with Chechen surnames. No relatives have come forward to
claim the women's remains, as happened with all the other victims.

http://www.voanews.com/article.cfm?o...20Passen gers


Chechnya 'Black Widows' linked to sabotage of Russian jets

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...ixnewstop.html


'Black widows' link to air crashes

http://www.guardian.co.uk/russia/art...293205,00.html

....

What might the Russians do?

Two 100 MT solutions for Grozny a

1 Lo-tech -- drop a huge iron ball on the city that strikes it at 1
km/sec.


Distance from Impact: 0.00 km = 0.00 miles

Projectile Diameter: 585.00 m = 1918.80 ft = 0.36 miles
Projectile Density: 8000 kg/m3

Impact Velocity: 1.00 km/s = 0.62 miles/s

Energy before atmospheric entry:
4.19 x 1017 Joules = 1.00 x 102 [megatons] TNT


http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/impacteffects/


2 Hi-tech -- resurrect two big things for a sub-orbital 100-MT
mission.

(Ground burst is chosen if winds take the fallout toward terrorist
refuges or toward "uncooperative" neighboring nations of Russia.)


"We can build the full-power version of THIS:"

http://www.astronautix.com/lvs/vulkan.htm

http://k26.com/buran/Info/Hercules/vulkan.html

http://www.friends-partners.org/part...v/vulkanlv.gif


"to launch the full strength version of THIS!"

http://www.vniief.ru/museum/photo_08_e.html

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Russia/Tsarbmb.jpg



Thermal radiation radius (3rd degree burns) 77.1 kilometres

Air blast radius (widespread destruction) 33.0 kilometres
Air blast radius (near-total fatalities) 12.5 kilometres

Ionizing radiation radius (500 rem) 7.5 kilometres


Fireball radius (minimum) 2.7 kilometres
Fireball radius (airburst) 3.3 kilometres
Fireball radius (ground-contact airburst) 4.4 kilometres

Fireball duration 35.7 seconds


http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Science/Nuke.html

From: "Dave Kearton"
Date: 8/28/2004 7:03 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

"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

I read about it in a book.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

nt (Krztalizer) wrote in message ...
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.

not for those damn conspirowhcko's it isnt.

Its inevitable that the other impact site will
reveal some similar agent at work. We're counting angels on the head of a
pin

i dont know what that means ?

while Islamist 'soldiers' strike civilians the world over - I have no doubt
they will be found to be the culprits in this case.

claimed responsibility included the basis of russian acts against the
chechen muslims.

During the Yugoslav wars
of succession, I supported the hard-pressed Muslim civilians and I still do.

i supported no side and still dont, all made claims against the other
side for doing the same thing as they were doing.

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.

thats hardly a sound basis to work on is it, concluding that everyone
from a geographical region is an islamic fundamentalist.

That this alienates me from a
billion of my fellow men bothers me,

i shouldnt think it's that alone that alienates you

however I understand we are at war.

really! at war with who? what is the capabilities of this state, of
whom we are at war with, tell me about their air force, their navy, or
army. what's the history of their military forces and previous
involvements.

These airliners were downed by enemy action.

really! with technology able to provide guided weapons from a
distance, their military forces must be a little underfunded if guided
weaponry has to be hand carried, their ground forces wont serve too
well will they? whats the political basis of this state we are at war
with ? can their forces lobby for increased military spending, you
would think they would have thought about that before getting into a
war.

personally speaking, it has the representation of an act of terrorism.

(B2431) wrote in message ...
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

damn ! you know i think i read about that.. it had an 8-track
installed by tarver engineering of tehachapi, ca. and had a structure
using negative cabin pressure, also by tarver engineering. i cant
remember though it it used splaps amid its control surfaces though!

(B2431) wrote in message ...
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

damn ! you know i think i read about that.. it had an 8-track
installed by tarver engineering of tehachapi, ca. and had a structure
using negative cabin pressure, also by tarver engineering. i cant
remember though if it used splaps amid its control surfaces though!

Howard Berkowitz wrote in message ...
In article ,
(running with scissors) wrote:

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 ?

Note that I did not make the statement about presence of mind. While I
don't have the procedure in front of me, those are not the words said by
ATC. Those words specifically are confirming a squawk of 7500.

if you note, i wasnt responding to your post, but rather the one that
made a comment as to the berk, that thought up the basis of a
confirmation.

and i have had those words said to me on using an incorrect xpndr
code.


Consistent with controller workload, occasional random squawk
verification requests might be a decent idea, to decrease suspicion.

suspicion of what ? if the aircraft hasnt deviated from its flight
plan or any vectored deviations, what is the concern?

Of
the recent crop of hijackers, their English was imperfect, and a routine
query just might get by -- it might not.

what recent crop of hijackers ? do you think if a controller during an
interchange with a flight crew suddenly has unusual voice to deal
with, with an unusual request or statement and a deviation from
altitude or heading its not going to be considered as perhaps a little
unusual?


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:

I certainly did not suggest that was the procedure, which indeed would
be asinine.

i didnt say you did.



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.

And a simple confirmation request doesn't draw attention to 7500.

umm so you are saying that a controller asking for a confirmation of
the code you are squawking is not going to lead a pilot to think "umm,
why is he asking me that, perhaps i sould turn my head a little and
see what i am squawking, then again, naah! i really cant be bothered!"
do you think if a pilot is asked to confirm his altitude or heading
he carries on blindly? when a controller is asking you to 'confirm'
something, its because something needs attention.




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.

You seem to be making quite a few assumptions about tangents.

hardly assumptions.


[snip explanations of tangents]

gee thanks!


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.


Were the words what you suggested, I would have less concern. Specific
confirmation of 7500, for exactly the reasons you mention below, do not
make sense from a human factors standpoint.

huh ! what ? so from a human factors aspect, you suggest that a full
scale alert and conatinment situation should be initiated, with no
confirmation that a threat exists.

from a human factors standpoint, the situation the flight crew, the
controllers, the military pilots, the chain of command, everyone
between and connected are going to have a lot more human factors to
deal with in going into a full scale alert and containment situation
instead of saying seven words. confirming the validity of a situation
before taking repercussive action is part of human factors. aww ****,
you know what, next time i get an odd indication, **** it, i am going
to squawk 7700, divert, hit an emergency descent and get the runway
foamed and land gear up, wether its on the MEL or not. thats so much
better huh!


While terrorists may not be courteous enough to be repetitive, any 7500
is sufficient to alert NORAD. Fighters always can be recalled, but if
the hijacking is real and a suicide attack is a real possibility, time
is urgent. I can easily see a pilot's last living act to be changing the
squawk before a hostile takes his life, and control of the aircraft.

well then you cant see very well at all then.


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: "Dave Kearton"
Date: 8/28/2004 7:03 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

"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

I read about it in a book.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

The Tarvernautics guide to Injuneering by chance?

(running with scissors)
Date: 8/30/2004 4:38 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

(B2431) wrote in message
...
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

damn ! you know i think i read about that.. it had an 8-track
installed by tarver engineering of tehachapi, ca. and had a structure
using negative cabin pressure, also by tarver engineering. i cant
remember though it it used splaps amid its control surfaces though!


Have you noticed there is no longer a tarver engineering web site or such a
company in California anymore? Then again tarver has been very quiet lately.
Coincidence?

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

(running with scissors)
Date: 8/30/2004 6:11 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

(B2431) wrote in message
...
From: "Dave Kearton"
Date: 8/28/2004 7:03 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

"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

I read about it in a book.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

The Tarvernautics guide to Injuneering by chance?

That was a technical tome discussing pitot ports, splaps, optical nukes,mud
wasps....etc, too far over my head, y'know.

I read it in his updated autobiography "My Life As An Expert On Everything." It
seems the Russians immediately contacted him for his services. You should read
the section where he says he was authorized the SEA Service Medal even though
he didn't go. He actually did say that in this NG.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired