Slashdot Mirror


Warflying: San Diego

geogeek6_7 writes: "WarFlying over SanDiego reveals hundreds of WAPs, and some very interesting statistics. There is a second write up of the same adventure at the pilot's personal website. All this of course should not be confused with that 1500ft 'WarDriving' effort in Australia."

5 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. Warflying "American" Style by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Two of the aircraft exceeded their software limits on 9/11.

    The Boeing 757 and 767 are equipped with fully autonomous flight capability, they are the only two Boeing commuter aircraft capable of fully autonomous flight. They can be programmed to take off, fly to a destination and land, completely without a pilot at the controls.

    They are intelligent planes, and have software limits pre set so that pilot error cannot cause passenger injury. Though they are physically capable of high g maneuvers, the software in their flight control systems prevents high g maneuvers from being performed via the cockpit controls. They are limited to approximately 1.5 g's, I repeat, one and one half g's. This is so that a pilot mistake cannot end up breaking grandma's neck.

    No matter what the pilot wants, he cannot override this feature.

    The plane that hit the Pentagon approached or reached its actual physical limits, military personnel have calculated that the Pentagon plane pulled between five and seven g's in its final turn.

    The same is true for the second aircraft to impact the WTC.

    There is only one way this can happen.

    As well as fully autonomous flight capability, the 767 and 757 are the ONLY COMMUTER PLANES MADE BY BOEING THAT CAN BE FLOWN VIA REMOTE CONTROL. It is a feature that is standard to all of them, all 757's and 767's can do it. The purpose for this is if there is a problem with the pilots, Norad can fly the planes to safe destinations via remote. Only in this flight mode can those craft exceed their software limits and perform to their actual physical limits because a pre existing emergency situation is assumed if this mode of flight is used.

    Terrorists in fact did not fly those planes, it is totally and completely impossible for those planes to have been flown in such a manner from the cockpit. Those are commuter aircraft, not F-16's and their software knows it.

    Another piece of critical evidence: the voice recorders came up blank.

    The flight recorders that were recovered had tape that was undamaged inside, but it was blank. There is only one way this can happen on a 757 or 767. When the aircraft are commandeered via remote control, the microphones that go to the cockpit voice recorder are re routed to the people doing the remote controlling, so that the recording of what happened in the cockpit gets made in a presumably safer place. But due to a glitch in the system on a 757/767, rather than shutting off when the mic is redirected the voice recorder keeps running. The voice recorders use what is called a continuous loop tape, which automatically re passes itself past the erase and record heads once every half hour, so after a half hour of running with the microphones redirected, the tape will be blank. Just like the recovered tapes were. Yet more proof that no pilot flew those planes in the last half hour.

    Eight of the hijackers who were on those planes called up complaining that they were still alive. I'd bet you never heard about our foreign minister flying to Morocco and issuing an official apology to the accused, did you? No, terrorists did not fly those planes, plastic knives and box cutters were in fact too ridiculous to be true. Any of the remaining accused have certainly been sought out and killed by now.

    Our information IS controlled

    The cell phone calls from the aircraft could not have happened. I am a National Security Agency trained Electronic Warfare specialist, and am qualified to say this. My official title: MOS33Q10, Electronic Warfare Intercept Strategic Signal Processing/Storage Systems Specialist, a highly skilled MOS which requires advanced knowledge of many communications methods and circuits to the most minute level. I am officially qualified to place severe doubt that ordinary cell phone calls were ever made from the aircraft.

    It was impossible for that to have happened, especially in a rural area for a number of reasons.

    When you make a cell phone call, the first thing that happens is that your cell phone needs to contact a transponder. Your cell phone has a max transmit power of five watts, three watts is actually the norm. If an aircraft is going five hundred miles an hour, your cell phone will not be able to 1. Contact a tower, 2. Tell the tower who you are, and who your provider is, 3. Tell the tower what mode it wants to communicate with, and 4. Establish that it is in a roaming area before it passes out of a five watt range. This procedure, called an electronic handshake, takes approximately 45 seconds for a cell phone to complete upon initial power up in a roaming area because neither the cell phone or cell transponder knows where that phone is and what mode it uses when it is turned on. At 500 miles an hour, the aircraft will travel three times the range of a cell phone's five watt transmitter before this handshaking can occur. Though it is sometimes possible to connect during takeoff and landing, under the situation that was claimed the calls were impossible. The calls from the airplane were faked, no if's or buts.

    I hope I made sense, if you have questions I will respond if possible. If I do not respond, please research this out yourself, search the boeing site, search the DARPA site, search were you have not searched before. Some of the information is classified and leaked by individuals, and it is also being scoured from the net. I have all of the original documents on my computer to safeguard against this.

    Please do not ignore this, because only Norad has the flight codes for those aircraft, we did 911 to ourselves. Hitler had the Reichstag, we have 911. If 911 proves to not be enough to make the US citizenry set aside its rights for safety, the people who did 911 most certainly have access to nuclear material. 911 must be exposed for what it was before that material is used.

  2. whoa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    g to the scrotum
    r to the goatse.cx
    fo shizzle my penis bird did i mess this one up

  3. hypocrisy rears its head... by stubear · · Score: 1, Troll

    ...over /. once again. Many here decry the government's attempts at gaining access to information through laws and other legal avenues yet you also have no problems poking your noses in other people's networks without permission or through legal means. Regardless of how open these networks might be you have no right to acces them nor use their bandwidth for your own personal enjoyment. One might get the that many /.'ers are self-centered narcissists.

  4. Wot utan ze fok, apparently bin laden!~!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    why is this on slashdot

    gg retarded editors

    WOW U'RE WARFLYING! lo!l O1LO1Â"óÂ"

  5. Re:Obsessive by Hemos+(editor) · · Score: -1, Troll

    Depending on gas prices and engine sizes of geeks' vehicles, it may be cheaper to drive around all day finding insecure WLANs than to pay the monthly access fees for such services ;-)

    monolinux :: Guess Who's Back? Back Again. Mono's back. Tell a friend.