Category Archives: Remotely controlled aircraft

Fly-by-wire technology in 2000

Unlike Airbus, Boeing lets aviator override fly-by-wire technology

Monday, March 20, 2000

By JAMES WALLACE

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER

MIAMI — As the Airbus A320 jetliner descended through 3,000 feet on its final approach to the airport, co-pilot Rudy Canto glanced off to the right and spotted a regional jetliner bearing down on the Airbus plane.

The regional jet also was descending, and the two planes were seconds away from a midair collision.

Canto barked a warning and the pilot immediately pushed the side-stick controller hard left and pulled back as far as it would go and held it there — anabrupt maneuver that should have resulted in the plane’s losing lift and stalling.

But one of seven flight-control computers on the A320 took over and the Airbus plane climbed sharply and turned away from the regional jet just in time to avoid a collision.

No report was filed on the near midair collision. The flight was actually a demonstration for a group of journalists earlier this month in one of the $12 million A320 flight simulators at the new Airbus Industrie training center in Miami.

What happened in the simulator, though, was no different from what would have occurred in the sky. And it is at the heart of an ongoing debate in aviation today:

Should pilots or a computer have the ultimate control authority over a commercial jetliner as the plane approaches its design limits in an emergency?

Airline passengers can’t see it, but this is the most significant difference between Boeing and Airbus planes.

Dramatic advancements in technology have made it possible for planes built by either manufacturer to be flown by computers from shortly after takeoff through the landing.

But Airbus has taken a much different philosophical approach to using computers than its rival. The European airplane maker designed its new fly-bywire jets such as the A320 with built-in hard limits, or “protections.”

The Boeing Co., on the other hand, believes pilots should have the ultimate say. On Boeing jets, the pilot can override onboard computers and their built-in soft limits.

“It’s not a lack of trust in technology,” said John Cashman, director of flightcrew operations for Boeing. “We certainly don’t have the feeling that we do not want to rely on technology. But the pilot in control of the aircraft should have the ultimate authority.”

On all Airbus planes other than the older A300 and A310, computers prevent the pilot from putting the plane into a climb of more than 30 degrees where it might lose lift and stall. The maximum bank or roll allowed is 67 degrees. The plane’s nose-down pitch is limited to 15 degrees. There are protections against overspeed.

And the computer won’t allow the plane to make any extreme maneuvers that would exceed 2.5 times the force of gravity.

Predator UAV Proves Its Worth

Predator UAV Proves Its Worth

from American Forces Information Service, Jun 15 2003

http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/afweapons/a/preditor.htm

The Air Force officer is a transport plane pilot, but these days his aircraft flies “solo,” and he doesn’t leave the ground.

Capt. Sam J. Vanzanten, 32, is an earthbound controller of the Predator unmanned aerial vehicle. The eight-year military veteran noted he’s been in the Predator program for the past two years.

Vanzanten, his armaments specialist, Air Force Tech. Sgt. George H. Russell, and their Predator were at Andrews Air Force Base, Md., May 16 for the kickoff ceremony at this year’s Joint Service Open House.

The C-17 transport pilot said he’d put his UAV expertise to the test overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

The Predator was first used exclusively for reconnaissance missions, Vanzanten observed.

He noted that unlike conventionally piloted aircraft, the UAV can remain airborne over a particular area for up to 20 hours.

Vanzanten also said that Hellfire-missile-packing Predators flew combat missions in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“People just started opening their eyes to the capability of the aircraft,” he explained, noting the Predator can play multifaceted roles over the battlefield.

Even if the Predator isn’t armed, “we at least have a camera and a radio to ‘talk’ to other aircraft in the area,” Vanzanten noted, to communicate target locations to pilots of conventional warplanes.

The Predator uses a lightweight, 4-cylinder snowmobile engine, Vanzanten explained, which powers a rear-mounted propeller, making the Predator a “pusher”-type aircraft.

Vanzanten said he watches a television monitor that displays images transmitted from the Predator’s nose-mounted camera in remotely piloting the 2,250-pound UAV. The craft, he noted, “flies quite a bit like a glider, or a light aircraft.”

Piloting the Predator takes some getting used to, Vanzanten acknowledged – learning how to land the UAV “is a little difficult for everybody, I think.”

While other military aircraft braved the rainy weather outside at the Open House, the remote-controlled plane, which was fitted with two wing-mounted, laser-guided Army Hellfire missiles, was ensconced inside Hanger 3.

Weapons specialist Russell noted those Hellfires can penetrate enemy armor and “were originally used on the Apache and the Cobra” Army helicopters.

“It’s really an effective missile. I’ve seen it in action – it’s very impressive,” Russell declared, noting he’s worked with Predators for about a year.

“The whole idea of an unmanned aerial vehicle — keeping people out of harm’s way — is a phenomenal idea,” the 28-year-old noncommissioned officer remarked. The Predator’s composite airframe, he added, is easy to work on.

The employment of Predators in the war against global terrorism “offers a lot of different capabilities,” Vanzanten explained, pointing out the UAV’s “laser- ball” device that’s used to guide the Hellfires to target.

And the Predator has been used in joint-combined operations, he continued, noting that during recent overseas deployments U.S. Air Force Predator crews worked with members of the other armed services, as well as British coalition forces.

Maj. Mark Valentine, 33, an F-16 fighter pilot with the 113th Operations Group, 121st Fighter Squadron, District of Columbia Air National Guard, was also at the May 16 Andrews Open House kickoff. Valentine, who’d recently returned stateside after flying combat missions during Operation Iraqi Freedom, praised the Predator.

The integration between conventionally piloted aircraft and UAVs “was outstanding” during the Iraq war, the major emphasized.

Predator pilots “would identify a target and we would drop (ordnance) on the target – that would happen quite often,” Valentine remarked. He said that UAVs “obviously have the endurance to stay in an area a lot longer than we have, because they use less gas.”

Missile and remote control systems added to small jets before 9-11

Missile & remote control systems added to small jets before 9-11; same parts found at Pentagon

Two civilian defense contractor employees–told to remain silent–say other workers quietly retro-fitted missile and remote control systems onto A-3 jets at Colorado public airport prior to September 11 when similar A-3 parts much smaller than a Boeing 757 were found at Pentagon

Presidential candidate says scores of retired and active military and intelligence officials would testify before current grand jury probing government involvement in 9/11 attacks

by Tom Flocco

Fort Collins, Colorado — May 26, 2005 — TomFlocco.com

According to two civilian defense contractor employees working at commercial corporate facilities at Fort Collins-Loveland Municipal Airport (left), in the months before the September 11 attacks U.S. Air Force defense contractors brought in A-3 Sky Warrior aircraft under cover of darkness to be completely refitted and modified at the small civilian airport in Colorado.

The revelations are important evidence for a reportedly ongoing secret 9/11 probe because widely available Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) photographs taken during the attacks clearly show that the few aircraft parts found at the Pentagon belonged to a small jet very similar to a modified A-3 Sky Warrior–not the American Airlines Boeing 757.

It is not known whether all members of Congress are aware of the under-the-radar-screen grand jury proceedings, who has already testified, and whether the probe is purposefully being kept from public knowledge, according to government intelligence sources. 

quarter view  The two witnesses say that separate military contractor teams–working independently at different times–refitted Douglas A-3 Sky Warriors (above) with updated missiles, Raytheon’s Global Hawk unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) remote control systems, fire control systems, engines, transponders, and radio-radar-navigation systems–a total makeover, seemingly for an operation more important than use as a simple missile testing platform for defense contractor Hughes-Raytheon.

  The employees asked not to be identified for personal safety reasons and fear of job retaliation; but both told 2008 independent presidential candidate Karl Schwarz (left) “the Air Force brought in separate teams to do top-secret military work unrelated to commercial aviation at our airport, and we were told by our bosses not to discuss what we had seen with anyone.”

The witnesses were quite fearful about several recent “suicides, car wrecks–mysterious deaths–directly related to the aviation experts” working on the systems that were installed on the A-3?s at Fort Collins-Loveland–having breached the government-blocked information flow at great personal risk, according to Schwarz–but providing more evidence for a New York 9/11 investigation.

Schwarz, a former Republican from Arkansas now living in Georgia and running as an independent to clean up government corruption and crime told TomFlocco.com that he met with the employees for about an hour in February to discuss the issue.

The witnesses told Schwarz that each jet was placed in a hanger just big enough for a work crew and one A-3 Sky Warrior; and “we were under strict orders not to discuss what the military teams were doing or what we saw.” 

The presidential candidate told us “there are about 150 retired and active U.S. military and federal intelligence officers who will come forward and testify regarding government involvement in the September 11 attacks–but only if there is a serious criminal grand jury.”

Small plane evidence moved at Pentagon

The approximate 16-foot entry hole at the outside facade of the Pentagon on 9/11 has been the subject of countless questions by those who say the hole was caused by an air-to-ground missile (AGM) fired from a small military jet rather than an impact from a Boeing 757.

Interestingly, the Hughes division manufactures the AGMs; and the Raytheon division maintains the last few A-3 Sky Warriors in operation save 2-4 Air Force jets–while also manufacturing the Global Hawk UAV remote control systems.

Some reasons cited to support a missile hole include evidence that a) the wings and rear stabilizer caused virtually no damage to the outside walls and windows at point of impact, b) no 757 interior or exterior parts were found at the scene,  c) the soft nose of a 757 would have had difficulty piercing through three Pentagon wall rings, and d) three aircraft parts found were similar to the somewhat outdated but still serviceable Douglas A-3 Sky Warrior military attack jet rather than the much larger Boeing 757.

Air-traffic controllers from the Washington, DC sector originally said the incoming plane was a military jet according to reports; but no grand jury has called them to testify and they have been strangely gagged from speaking out.

One air traffic controller from another Northeast sector revealed to a 9-11 widow that FBI threats were made of both a personal and career nature: “You are ordered never to speak about what you saw on your screen during the attacks; and if you do, things will not go well for you and your family.”

Curiously, a large piece of wreckage was found in the entry hole; but the public was kept from closely observing what appears to be a sheared-off piece of wing from a much smaller jet than a Boeing 757. 

A group of military personnel and federal officials in suits tightly covered the piece of wreckage with a blue tarp and carried it away to a waiting truck. No reporters or independent aircraft experts have been permitted to examine any of the recovered aircraft parts and no subpoenas have been issued to hear public grand jury testimony from the “movers.”

Other government officials who looked more like FBI agents than rescue workers were also photographed moving evidence around immediately after the crash; but none have been subpoenaed to publicly testify as to whether they were bringing evidence to or removing it from a mass murder crime scene. 

As if they had prior knowledge, within minutes after the Pentagon crashFBI agents quickly confiscated a) video tape from a gas station security camera aimed directly at the exact point of impact while recording the size of the plane and/or missile, b) security camera video film from a nearby Sheraton hotel and c) film from a Virginia Transportation Department freeway overpass camera.

This, raising significant questions about obstruction of justice since no reporter, independent crime scene expert or grand jury has been able to view and analyze the film since it was confiscated or certify that it was not tampered with–and those surrendering the film were again told not to discuss the matter.

It is not known whether the FBI has invoked immunity from prosecution regarding this evidence–or cited “National State Secrets” in a manner similar to FBI linguist Sibel Edmonds’ case linked to financing the 9-11 attacks, drug money laundering and political campaign contributions. 

The explosive evidence raises questions as to whether the grand jury will subpoena all Pentagon wreckage to determine whether it was a section from an A-3 Sky Warrior as many knowledgeable sources believe but also whether the recovered parts do not match a Boeing 757 as asserted by many.

Schwarz told us military officials will likely say the A-3?s were being fitted with system platforms to test-fire missiles; but the time-line of secret refitting prior to the attacks and recovered parts consistent with an A-3 attack jet found at the Pentagon provide credible evidence that an unregistered Sky Warrior was diverted to be used on September 11 to fire a missile into the Pentagon. The Defense Secretary spilled the beans at least once in a national interview.

One month after the attacks on October 12, 2001 Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told Parade Magazine, “Here we’re talking about plastic knives, and using an American Airlines flight filled with our citizens, and the missile to damage this building, and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center [para. #12].” 

Schwarz also indicated that New York City District Attorney Robert Morgenthau (left) has more than enough evidence for a 9-11 NYC criminal case, and that prosecutors should investigate who authorized the refitting of the A-3 Sky Warriors with remote control and air-to-ground missiles at the civilian airport, given the A-3 jet parts found at the Pentagon.

A-3 Sky Warrior parts found–not Boeing 757 parts

A-3’s are smaller than a Boeing 737 with a wing-span of about 72.6 feet as opposed to the 737 which has a wing span of between 93 ft and 112.6 ft depending upon the manufacturer version–a twin engine jet with the engines mounted under the wing like a 737.

“The Air Force has four to six A-3s in current operation and Hughes-Raytheon has about 12-14 operational Sky Warriors according to available records,” said Schwarz.

The candidate added, “the plane used at the Pentagon on 9/11 may have been brought in from Tucson, Arizona from Davis-Monthan Air Force Base which has numerous decommissioned planes taken out of service and stored there in an arid environment–using an out-of-service plane would diffuse the paper trail identifying the actual jet.”

“Whoever did this had about a billion dollars to work with, according to my intelligence sources who have come forward,” said Schwarz, adding “one crew came in to fit the jet for remote-UAV systems, another crew put in the fire control systems and another installed the new jet engines, another the AGMs, etc., and all at different times to spread out the information flow on who did what.”

The part here at the left–recovered after the Pentagon impact–is a “diffuser case,” a component from the types of “dual chamber” turbojets represented by the Allison J33, J71, Pratt & Whitney J57 and JT8D. “It is not part of a Boeing 757 engine,” said Schwarz, adding, we even inspected a 757 engine in a jet maintenance shop.”

The part sheet at left shows a diffuser case design for the 757 jet engines and it’s quite different from the one found at the Pentagon (left). Schwarz said “the difference is between  the “duel-chamber turbojet” versus the newer “high bypass jet fan” designs found on the 757 and 767 jets.

The key difference between the diffuser case found at the Pentagon and a Boeing 757 diffuser case (left & below) is the triangular bezels around the openings. [The triangular bezel reinforcments can more easily be observed near the top of the photo below.] Note that the Pentagon diffuser case has no such opening or reinforcing points–no triangular bezels.

According to Schwarz, the diffuser is built into a much larger component, not a separate component in the newer 757 type jet engines–and not a single one of these was found at the Pentagon. “This is not a component that would have melted or evaporated in any manner at all,” said Schwarz, the chief executive of a corporation specializing in military remote control warfare systems.

Another component found at the Pentagon was a wheel hub–a type made by B.F.Goodrich’s aerospace division. Here, Schwarz gets very specific: “They also made the wheels for the 757 but a simple proportional check of width versus diameter will easily show that the photo (left) is not a wheel hub from a 757, which has a much larger radius than width. This radius is about the same as the width of the wheel hub, and is another clue that the ‘ 757-crashed-into-the-Pentagon’ story is a Bush lie,” he said.

“If one looks very closely at the diameter versus width of the tire that was found at the Pentagon,” said Schwarz, “this is the type of tire used for aircraft carrier-based and general rear wheels of smaller military planes–not commercial airlines.” [The now somewhat outdated Douglas A-3 Sky Warrior “Whale” served as an aircraft carrier attack plane, capable of supporting missile platforms.] 

Schwarz told us he had much difficulty identifying and acquiring photos to compare the Pentagon recovered parts consistent with the A-3 with the size of the Boeing 757 parts due to what he called “intentional internet content blocking,” which criminal prosecutors would call obstruction of justice.

Ultimately Schwarz found the A-3 Sky Warrior part photos and numbers on the websites for Praxair and Evergreen International Airlines, the latter of which is a Central Intelligence Administration (CIA) cutout airline, referred to in award-winning author Pete Brewton’s book as:

“…a company that was formed from the assets of a CIA proprietary, Intermountain Aviation, after its cover was blown in the mid-1970s. In fact, Evergreen is listed on Global Airlines? creditor list directly after [infamous] Southern Air Transport…Evergreen operates the giant air base at Marana, Arizona, northwest of Tucson, which Intermountain Aviation had owned. Evergreen’s founder and principal owner, Delford Smith, told the Portland Oregonian that his company had one contract with the CIA to assist foreign nationals that the CIA wanted removed from other countries or brought into the United States. Smith told the Oregonian that he believes in the CIA?s cause. “And we don’t know when we supported them and when we didn’t as a contract carrier,” he said. News reports in July 1984 stated that the CIA was using Southern Air Transport and the Du Ponts Summit Aviation, as well as Evergreen Air, to transport weapons to the Iran-Contras.” (The Mafia, CIA and George Bush: Corruption, greed and abuse of power in the nation’s highest office, by Pete Brewton, SPI Books/Shapolsky Publishers, Inc.,1992, pp. 206-207)

“Only the Raytheon executives and the Air Force would have known which team installed a particular system on the A-3 and who was involved in the operation,” said Schwarz.

Coincidentally, five key Raytheon executives died on 9-11: Stanley Hall–Director of Electronic warfare program management (American 77), Peter Gay–VP of Electronic Systems on special assignment at the El Segundo, CA division office where the Global Hawk UAV remote control system is made (American 11), Kenneth Waldie–Senior Quality Control Engineer for Electronic Systems (American 11), David Kovalcin–Senior Mechanical Engineer for Electronic Systems (American 11), and Herbert Homer–Corporate Executive working with the Department of Defense (United 175).

Curiously, the five Raytheon executives chose three of the four doomed jets and all happened to fly on September 11. Have their family members been interviewed? Other co-workers? Defense Department officials?

Raytheon’s top people tied to the Global Hawk remote control UAV aircraft systems all died on 9/11 without a grand jury probing their memos, electronic messages, phone records, meeting calendars, visits or calls to Ft. Collins-Loveland airport and testimony linked to related matters.

Weekend warrior narcotics traffickers & U.S. banks

The two witnesses also said they ware suspicious about drug smuggling at Colorado’s Fort Collins-Loveland airport, according to Schwarz.

This revelation offers a close link to what FBI translator Sibel Edmonds told TomFlocco.com three weeks ago regarding what she heard during FBI intercept translations, telling us she personally identified ten well-known Americans who are politicians and heads of federal agencies linked to drug-money laundering in the federal banking system which was used for political campaigns–but also linked to financing the World Trade Center/Pentagon 9-11 attacks. She has yet to divulge the names, however.

Recent widespread reports also revealed that a large shipment of the drug ecstasy was intercepted aboard an incoming Air National Guard flight at Stewart Air Force Base in Newburgh, New York–just 40 miles from downtown Manhattan and the World Trade Center.

This, while elected congressmen and senators wink, nod and look the other way as drug profits are laundered into election campaign war-chests and to finance the 9-11 attacks, if you believe former FBI contract linguist Sibel Edmonds–gagged by Federal District and Appellate Courts as she seeks appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

The two civilian aviation contractors at Fort Collins thought it strange that top-secret military aviation work was being conducted at their civilian airport, that they were being told not to tell anyone what they saw and that there was talk of drug smuggling and money laundering in the banking system.

Sibel Edmonds (left) has faced fierce judicial pressure to keep quiet about what she heard while translating electronic intercepts, having had her case about drug money ties to U.S. political campaigns–and which ten prominent American politicians and officials she identified on the intelligence intercepts as linked to the 9/11 attacks–dismissed by District Court and Appellate Circuit judges for rarely used and arcane “National State Secrets.” Who is protecting whom?

Questions remain whether New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, New York City District Attorney Robert Morganthau and a federal grand jury will attempt to overturn the Edmonds ruling in a criminal probe regarding money laundering in the U.S. banking system, narcotics trafficking for political benefit, and obstruction of justice to cover-up treason in the September 11 attacks. 

Spitzer and Morgenthau have faced very little pressure from American citizens to pursue a criminal probe, even from the September 11 victim families–many of whom have moved on with their lives.

This, despite convincing Pentagon findings and devastating criminal evidence found in actual television news coverage on the day of the attacks in the form of interviews, footage of Twin Tower implosions and planes impacting the buildings while evidence indicates they were taken down simultaneously by controlled demolition charges.

Notwithstanding the Pentagon findings, most Americans are not aware of meritorious evidence that the WTC towers were imploded by controlled demolition which should subject all insurance companies making payouts on the towers to intensive litigation via shareholder lawsuits–which do not seem forthcoming despite strong evidence of massive insurance fraud.

Many 9/11 citizen researchers have privately felt that insurance fraud litigation would ultimately be the “Al Capone income tax evasion” charge that could ultimately hang the September 11 perpetrators–drawing more evidence out into the public eye to refute the “19 wily and cunning Arabs did it” conspiracy. Patsies? Probably. But no one has publicly testified to seeing them actually enter the planes. Their names were not even on the flight manifests.

Warehouses & remote control flying machines

Also of critical importance to a 9/11 criminal investigation is the fact that Fort Collins-Loveland Regional Airport was being used as a final testing site for remote control UAVs, and that is what originally drew the attention of Karl Schwarz.

Schwarz is the CEO of a company which designs remote control/UAVs for the U.S. Army and had a $392 million dollar Defense Department order for 32 UAVs canceled “because they would see too much over in Iraq, and because we could put in a fleet of them for what our competition was paying for a couple.” 

Lockheed-Martin’s Missiles and Fire Control Systems UAV used in Iraq is called the Predator, which costs $45 million for each unit, has three sensors and requires a crew of 55 individuals to operate one of them, according to Schwarz.

“Our Project Medusa has 11 high-powered sensors that can all operate simultaneously, can stay aloft at least 24 hours, has the world’s most advanced hyper-spectral system augmented by two technologies to speed up pixel analysis and detect minute anomalies in the field of view (FOV) if the operator is paying attention or not, or if his human eyes cannot even see the detail that the software detects and highlights for the operator to zoom in on,” said the UAV corporate CEO.

“A crew of 55 is required to operate 5 Medusa Skypods simultaneously. A single pilot operator flies them from a single laptop or personal computer. In short, 55 operators running 55 high powered sensors with far more processing and pixel engine detection power versus 55 operators running a single Predator and only one sensor capable of running at a time. The five Medusas cost about $65 million each but have far more technology capabilities and at any given time cover a far larger area with more visual assets, ” said Schwarz.

“In short, they are not toys. They even have AIM 100 lasing devices and can light up targets up to 30 miles in all directions for air strikes, artillery, mortar, or helicopters to dispose of problems…The combined area of coverage, and the number of troops they could possibly protect if all of the pet [Defense Department] aerostats were airborne at the same time, or not riddled full of machine gun holes, is about the area that a single Medusa Skypod covers…we are at least one to two years ahead of Lockheed in HAA technology…To my group it was an honor to have been asked and we proved we could deliver only to get jerked around by for months by bureaucrats protecting pet projects [like the vastly inferior Lockheed Predator]. (One-Way Ticket to Crawford, Texas: A Conservative Republican Speaks Out, by Karl W. B. Schwarz, Reichenbach Publishing Company, 2004, p. 379 [821 pages]) 

karl_exculsive113 (12K) Karl Schwarz is concerned that the Defense Department is protecting favorite pet projects instead of seeking the very best equipment to provide air security and support for Americ young warriors: “We also turned down some business to have the priority slot available, for we surely thought someone in our Army would care about saving more lives.”

“They didn’t want civilians involved because the army would have to hire us to show them how to operate the UAVs, he said, offering further that “they had a fellow named John Geddes who was totally unable to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of our Medusa system versus the Predator system made by Lockheed-Martin–one of their pet projects group.”

Schwarz added, “and all this remote control/UAV testing was being done at Fort Collins-Loveland Airport around the same time the A-3 Sky Warriors were being refitted before September 11!”

“They were watching every move I made when I was at Fort Collins,” said Schwarz, adding “they also had a lot of freight hangers and warehouses–a lot of regular warehousing, which I thought strange for a small civilian airport.”

Retired U.S. Navy Lt. Commander and former Office of Naval Intelligence officer and Iran-Contra insider Al Martin would not have thought it strange. He said in his book:

“Marty [Greenberg–Denver, Colorado’s Atlantis Securities syndicator] used to syndicate real estate deals, principally small airport developments and secure warehouse facilities around airports…Jeb Bush was on the Board of Directors of a West Palm Beach Airport development deal where all those supposedly ultra-secure warehouses were going to be built around West Palm Airfield, way out in the western section which the military still controls…what those warehouses were going to be used for was the storage of narcotics. That was the intent. And Oliver North was directly involved in that West Palm Beach Airport deal (The Conspirators: Secrets of an Iran-Contra Insider, by Alexander Martin, National Liberty Press, 2002, pp. 238-239)

“Many of the hanger doors were too small to fit a plane; but Raytheon and Boeing are there–a small civilian regional airport with lots of defense contractors according to intelligence sources who told me,” said Schwarz. 

“The people I met with at Fort Collins–the two witnesses–told me they were afraid for their lives. Everyone seemed paranoid and afraid of their shadow. Both witnesses said they heard and saw too much about A-3s being brought in at night to be fitted for missiles–and all this was before the 9/11 attacks,” he said.

“Moser”: one who prosecutes 9-11 criminals

Deborah Simon, one of this site’s 9-11 researchers who was married into a very prominent Jewish family, told us about something she called the “moser” issue–indicating that Eliot Spitzer and Robert Morganthau are both of Jewish extraction. Moser is a Jewish word for “rat-fink” or informer–punishable by death according to historical culture.

According to many polls, Eliot Spitzer (left) garners much support from Americans for making real progress in rooting out corruption in the national securities markets and prosecuting criminal fraud in the insurance industry.

But Simon provided us with some insight into the grave, potentially life or death predicament the two are facing. Both are likely experiencing intense internal pressure to tread lightly regarding the prosecution of wealthy Jewish bankers and other corporate executives for potential capital offenses linked to financing the September 11 attacks via money laundering in the federal banking system, according to Simon.

Intelligence sources have come forward to speak off-the-record to Schwarz and others about drug money laundering to finance the 9-11 attacks; moreover, FBI linguist Sibel Edmonds has intimated similar information, linking it to a group of well-known politicians and heads of federal agencies.

Given astonishing physical, visual and audio evidence of government involvement in the September 11 attacks, the glare of a public probe will undoubtedly force Americans to observe Spitzer and Morgenthau closely to ascertain the placement of loyalties regarding thoroughness, rigor and intensity of the ongoing but secret 9/11 grand jury criminal investigation.

9-11 was the supposed justification for a) invading Afghanistan and Iraq, b) formation of the Department of Homeland Security, c) the controversial Patriot Act, and d) many more years of a “War on Terror;” but not one person has been held accountable or prosecuted.

Schwarz and others have already hand-delivered the above evidence and much more to both Spitzer and Morgenthau; unfortunately however, Morgenthau’s track-record regarding past prosecutions involving the Iran-Contra arms/drugs and the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) scandals went a little farther than nowhere regarding justice for corrupt U.S. officials.

We have heard reports indicating that the New York federal grand jury in Albany is so displeased with Spitzer and Morgenthau’s paucity of action and lack of subpoenas or indictments over 9/11 (given the evidence already handed over) that it has assumed its own independent constitutional and federal authority to take control of the criminal proceedings.

We were also told that Spitzer was dismissed from the grand jury hearing room at least once so that jurors could privately consider evidence of possible U.S. government treason, leaving questions as to whether the moser issue–or Spitzer’s upcoming race for New York governor and his need for campaign contributions from the wealthy elite–may be holding back 9-11 criminal subpoenas and indictments.

No matter how high the federal officials or elected representatives implicated, or which print and electronic media executives committed obstruction of justice to cover up criminal evidence, or which military and government officials supervised the two-hour Air Force stand-down during the attacks, New Yorkers who elected Spitzer and Morgenthau (and all Americans who trust them with their personal safety and protection in their jurisdiction over 9-11 criminal proceedings) have a right to expect the two to proceed full bore with obvious, credible, and prosecutable evidence that the U.S. government played a part in the September 11 attacks. This includes the above Pentagon-related evidence.

If Spitzer and Morgenthau decline to do their duty to the fullest extent possible as elected officials because, as Deborah Simon implies, they fear being branded “moser-ratfink-informers” who betrayed wealthy Jewish bankers, associated other financial tycoons or Zionist moving van and art student spies reportedly following the “hijackers” around the United States before 9-11–then Americans may call for their resignations so that someone else can quickly and effectively seek indictments and prosecution by independent, non-political, career prosecutors trained in criminal entrapment.

The United States cannot permit mass murder to go unpunished with zero accountability–especially when the evidence is staring the country in the face and New York’s two most prominent elected law enforcement officials are prosecuting soft investigations out of the public eye.

Deborah Simon contributed additional research for this story. 

Remotely controlled aircraft (1)

Technical feasibility of using a remote controlled jet to fly into buildings

Remote Recovery of Aircraft Technology

A diagram illustrating the Future Air Navigation System
Although this comes from an overseas source, it illustrates the concept well.
Testing

    GLOBAL POSITIONING SYSTEM (GPS) USE FOR ALL-WEATHER LANDINGS
    The aviation industry is investigating the use of differential GPS concepts for precision landings in bad weather to improve the safety and reliability of air travel. The GPS is a constellation of 24 satellites used to determine aircraft position anywhere on or near the Earth. When a ground-based GPS receiver is used to provide a ‘differential’ correction signal, an aircraft’s position can be determined within a foot or two. Boeing partnered with NASA to examine GPS Landing System concepts and evaluate their accuracy, integrity, and continuity of function in automatic landings of airplanes. The team tested several prototype GPS Landing System concepts using NASA 557 during 226 automatic approaches and landings. The data obtained is being used to validate GPS Landing System simulations and to define system certification requirements. (NASA Boeing 757)

    * 757_Glider_Kit.pdf : Local Archive
    * Boeing Evaluates GPS Landing 1995
    * Raytheon to Develop Joint Precision Approach and Landing System REMOVED

Implementation

    The 757-200 flight deck, designed for two-crew member operation, pioneered the use of digital electronics and advanced displays. Those offer increased reliability and advanced features compared to older electro-mechanical instruments. A fully integrated flight management computer system (FMCS) provides for automatic guidance and control of the 757-200 from immediately after takeoff to final approach and landing. Linking together digital processors controlling navigation, guidance and engine thrust, the flight management system assures that the aircraft flies the most efficient route and flight profile for reduced fuel consumption, flight time and crew workload. The precision of global positioning satellite (GPS) system navigation, automated air traffic control functions, and advanced guidance and communications features are now available as part of the new Future Air Navigation System (FANS) flight management computer. The captain and the first officer each have a pair of electronic displays for primary flight instrumentation. The electronic attitude director indicator displays airplane attitude and autopilot guidance cues. The electronic horizontal situation indicator displays a video map of navigation aids, airports, and the planned airplane route and can display a weather-radar image over these ground features. The engine indicating and crew alerting system, often called EICAS, monitors and displays engine performance and airplane system status before takeoff. It also provides caution and warning alerts to the flight crew if necessary. EICAS monitoring also aids ground crews by providing maintenance information. The 757-200 is available with a wind shear detection system that alerts flight crews and provides flight-path guidance to cope with it. Wind shear, caused by a violent down-burst of air that changes speed and direction as it strikes the ground, can interfere with a normal takeoff and landing. Flight decks of the 757 and 767 are nearly identical and both aircraft have a common type-rating. Pilots qualified to fly one of the aircraft also can fly the other with only minimal additional familiarization. Built-in test equipment helps ground crews troubleshoot avionics and airplane systems quickly for easier maintenance than on earlier aircraft. Structural maintenance needs are reduced, owing to new methods of corrosion protection including application of special sealants and enameling of major portions of the fuselage. (Boeing 757-200 Flight Deck)

If the pilot is not in direct control and another mechanism is controlling (not just receiving passive signals or sensing) the craft, especially from GPS, it is effectively ‘remotely’ controlled. The link between ground crews, GPS and aircraft have been established. It’s not a cruise control and it’s not a radio controlled toy car. We’re talking FULL avionics AND navigation from take-off to touch down controlled and guided by a known and documented satellite link. "A fully integrated flight management computer system (FMCS) provides for automatic guidance and control of the 757-200 from immediately after takeoff to final approach and landing. Linking together digital processors controlling navigation, guidance and engine thrust, the flight management system assures that the aircraft flies the most efficient route and flight profile for reduced fuel consumption, flight time and crew workload. The precision of global positioning satellite (GPS) system navigation, automated air traffic control functions, and advanced guidance and communications features are now available as part of the new Future Air Navigation System (FANS) flight management computer." This technology could effectively PREVENT the hijack of aircraft. Any deviation from the course would trigger the system and someone would know about it. We’re working to verify if American Airlines does have this technology installed in any of its fleet. Suppose they do have this technology installed… Why not key in a coordinate or code to have a hijacked aircraft automatically land at a predesignated, properly prepared airfield prepped for such eventualities. I can only assume that our "planners" do indeed think in terms of hostile contingencies and have this scenario worked out. This all begs the questions: why wasn’t this critical technology used, or was it abused?

    System Planning Corporation offers the Command Transmitter System (CTS) which provides "remote control and flight termination functions through a fully-redundant sef-contained solid-state system." It is interesting to note that Dov Zakheim, a dual Israeli-American citizen, was not only the VP of System Planning Corporation, but also is currently the Comptroller and Chief Financial Officer for the Department of Defense, sworn in on 4 May 2001. (DoD Bio)

    * Home Run Technology – electronic, remote control of commercial aircraft

Demonstrated Unmanned Technology

GLOBAL HAWK

    * Global Hawk Unveiled 1997 but research indicates that it was in operation in Australia at least as far back as 1995
    * Air Force Fact Sheet on Global Hawk unmanned aircraft technology
    * FAS information on Global Hawk unmanned aircraft technology
    * Northrup Grumman: Global Hawk

Boeing Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (X-45A UCAV)

    A new era in aviation was initiated on May 22, 2002, as the X-45A Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle (UCAV) technology demonstrator made its first flight at Edwards AFB, Calif. During the 14-minute flight, which was termed a complete success, the X-45A reached a speed of 195 knots and an altitude of 7,500 feet. Flight characteristics and basic aspects of aircraft operations, particularly the command and control link between the aircraft and the mission-control station, were successfully demonstrated. This historic step marks the beginning of flight testing of the first unmanned system designed from inception for combat. Boeing Phantom Works

    * S-aircraft

Source: http://www.humanunderground.com/11september/pent-feasible.html (28 Apr. 2005). a page maintained by Agent Fescado (pseudonym)