- 1 Summary
-
- It is possible to produce the appearance of a terrorist
attack on the United States by means that do not employ terrorists, as
such, but by the simple substitution of one aircraft for another, particularly
when the transponders of the aircraft involved are turned off. The only
people who need to be deceived by such an operation are the radar operators
at air traffic control (ATC) centers.
-
- The scenario explored here, called Operation Pearl (after
Pearl Harbor), has been described in sufficient operational detail that
sound judgments can be made about a) feasibility and b) consistency with
evidence on the ground. At the time of this writing it is probably the
best available description of what probably took place on September 11,
2001.
-
- Under the Operation Pearl scenario, the passengers of
all four flights died in an aerial explosion over Shanksville, PA and the
remaining three airliners are at the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean.
-
-
-
-
- 2 Introduction Since March of 2002, persons probing the
web for further information about the 9/11 attacks could not fail to encounter,
sooner or later, a scenario advanced by Carol Valentine. Called the "Flight
of the Bumble Planes" (Valentine 2002), it allegedly came from an
informant who would only identify himself as "Snake Plisskin,"
the name of the hero of the movie, Escape from New York (footnote 1)
-
- The informant outlined the basic hijacking method in
an email message to Carol Valentine, comparing it to a flight of bumble
bees. Watching bees as they buzz around among flowers, it is very difficult
to follow individual bees, since they are always passing close to one another.
-
- This metaphor translates into the flight of two aircraft
in a confined locale of airspace. If the separation between them is small
enough, radar operators will see not two aircraft, but one. On the morning
of September 11, 2001, according to this scenario, all four "hijacked"
aircraft landed at a single airport or air base, transferring their passengers
to a single aircraft, the one that crashed in Pennsylvania. Meanwhile,
remotely controlled aircraft of various types carried out the actual attacks.
The scenario, as presented by Valentine, consists of little more than I
have presented here.
-
- Of course, there is a vast difference between an outline
and a detailed operational plan. It may turn out, for example, that any
attempt to imagine how a specific scheme is implemented runs into snags,
as in the attempt by Spencer (2003) to get all four aircraft to one air
base long enough for the combined list of over 200 passengers to board
a single aircraft, take off and crash near Shanksville, Pennsylvania. Spencer,
however, assumed that the takedown of aircraft coincided with the turning
off of transponders. In the present paper the scenario is modified to allow
takedown prior to the turning off of transponders, assuming that takedown
occurred at the first deviation of each aircraft from its flight plan.
The refurbished scenario has now been completed to a level of detail that
makes it possible to evaluate its feasibility, as well as its consistency
with the evidence, as presently acquired and developed.
-
- A scenario named Ghost Riders in the Sky was previously
constructed by the author (Dewdney 2002). The purpose of that scenario
was simply to demonstrate that alternate scenarios that fitted all the
facts (as then understood by the author) could be constructed. The scenario
involved killing all the passengers and flight crew with a fast-acting
nerve agent, then triggering a software patch in the aircraft flight control
systems to direct the aircraft to their various destinations. However,
when it became evident that no Boeing 757 had actually struck the Pentagon
(see The Pentagon Evidence, also on this website), the scenario was rendered
invalid. The Ghost Riders scenario, like the Bush-Cheney scenario, required
that the aircraft that struck their respective targets were as advertised,
two 767s and two 757s.
-
- The fact that the Ghost Riders scenario must now be rejected
illustrates the nature of this inquiry. As in science, hypotheses must
be formulated, then tested against the available evidence. If found wanting
in the light of that evidence, they must be rejected. It is normal in any
scientific inquiry to formulate and analyze more than one hypothesis before
one is found that actually works. The same remark also applies to criminal
investigations.
-
- 3 The Evidence Filter Any scenario constructed to account
for the events of September 11 2001 must pass a graduated test, as embodied
in the following items. These fall into three classes:
-
- Suspicious circumstances 1.. Four of the named hijackers
were not in the United States. 2.. The WTC towers collapsed without adequate
heat stress. 3.. Smaller aircraft accompanied Flights 77 and 93. 4.. Most
of the alleged hijackers were rather poor pilots. 5.. Evidence of the alleged
hijackers developed too quickly. 6.. Westward excursion of Flights UA93
and AA77 are inexplicable as terrorists hurrying to targets." Anomalies
1.. The US Air Force failed to intercept any of the flights. 2.. The hijackers'
names did not show up on passenger lists. 3.. The hijackers' faces did
not appear on boarding gate videos. 4.. Black boxes were missing from all
but one flight. Contradictions 1.. The Pentagon was not struck by a large
passenger aircraft. 2.. Cellphone calls alleged to have been made by passengers
were essentially impossible. A successful scenario must at least explain
the contradictions and account for a majority of the anomalies. It is of
course desirable that it also account for the suspicious circumstances,
but no scenario need stand or fall in this regard.
-
- It must be remarked that the only scenario ever supplied
to the public via the official media was the Bush-Cheney scenario, that
Arab hijackers seized control of the four aircraft and proceeded to pilot
them into national landmarks, killing both themselves and their passengers.
Clearly, the Bush-Cheney scenario, considered in detail, explains none
of the suspicious circumstances, none of the anomalies and is directly
contradicted by the facts adduced in the third category. As scenarios go,
it is a distinct failure.
-
- 4 Technical Elements The two major technical aspects
of the Operation Pearl scenario involve radar and remote control. Radar
technology has been with us since World War Two, some 60 years ago. Remote
control technology has been around in various forms for at least twenty
years. With a basic understanding of both radar and remote control in relation
to 9/11, it becomes possible for the average citizen to think for himself
or herself.
-
- 4.1 Radar Substitution A radar screen is essentially
a circular CRT (cathode ray tube - like a television screen) that displays
aircraft within the circular airspace represented on the screen. Radar
operators are the only people who can be aware of what planes are in the
sky and where they are going. The vast majority of people are completely
unaware of what is going on in any large volume of airspace and, when an
aircraft passes overhead, can usually not tell one type from another, let
alone what airline or aviation company may own it. This observation, while
something of a commonplace, has important implications. If an organization
wishes to substitute one aircraft for another without anyone knowing it,
the only people it has to deceive are the radar operators.
-
- The resolution of a radar screen is the size of the smallest
point that can appear there, approximately two millimeters in diameter
- a "blip." A typical radar screen, less than a meter in diameter,
could therefore be described as less than 500 "blips" wide. If
the airspace represented on the screen were 500 kilometers in diameter
(approximately 300 miles, a not atypical size), each blip would represent
a piece of airspace that is more than 500/500 = 1 kilometer wide.
-
- In other words, as soon as two aircraft get within a
kilometer of one another, there would be a tendency for their respective
blips to merge. With half a kilometer separation or less, the two aircraft
could easily appear as one.
-
- Of course, two aircraft that are that close together
run a distinct risk of collision - unless they are at different altitudes.
Radar screens are two-dimensional in that they represent airspace in the
same way as a map, with the vertical dimension of altitude suppressed.
Thus, without additional information in the form of a displayed altitude
number, it is impossible for a radar operator to tell whether two merged
blips represent a potential collision or not. Altitude information is displayed
if an aircraft's transponder is turned on, otherwise, the radar operator
has no idea of the altitude at which an aircraft happens to be flying.
-
- If one aircraft happens to be within a half kilometer
of another, whether above that aircraft or below it, the radar operator
will see only one aircraft, as long as the two maintain a horizontal separation
that is no greater than half a kilometer (about 500 yards).
-
- Imagine now two aircraft, both headed for the same approximate
point on the radar screen, both with their transponders turned off. One
is well above the other but, as the blips merge, both planes swerve, each
taking the other's former direction. The operator would simply see the
aircraft cross and would have no way to realize that a swap had taken place.
-
- There are many other swapping patterns available. For
example, one plane could apparently catch up and "pass" another
when, in fact, it slowed after the blips merged, even as the other speeded
up.
-
- Another method involves the replacement aircraft climbing
out of a valley where it would be invisible to distant radars, even as
the other aircraft descended into the valley. Again, a radar operator would
see a more or less seamless flight without realizing that he or she had
been momentarily seeing not one, but two aircraft on the radar screen.
-
- Of course, if the transponders are turned on, as explained
in the next section, such confusion is less likely to occur. Even in this
case, however, the deception can be complete if the aircraft switch transponder
codes.
-
- 4.2 Aircraft transponders Every commercial passenger
jet carries a transponder, a device that emits a special radio message
whenever it senses an incoming radar wave. The signal carries the transponder
code, a multi-digit number that serves to identify the particular aircraft
to radar operators at air traffic control centers. The purpose of the code
is to make it clear to ATC operators which plane is which. Other information
sent by the transponder includes the altitude at which the aircraft is
flying. Transponders were implemented many years ago precisely for the
reason that radar blips are otherwise easily confused. Transponders make
the radar operator's job much easier.
-
- The pilot of an airliner can turn the transponder on
or off in the cockpit. He or she can also change the code by keying in
a new number.
-
- Transponder codes for all aircraft departing from a given
air traffic control region are assigned by the ATC authority more or less
arbitrarily. The only important criterion for the numbers so assigned is
that they all be different. It sometimes happens that an aircraft entering
the control area carries the same transponder code as another aircraft
that is already in the area. In such a case, one of the pilots is requested
to change his or her code to avoid confusion.
-
- 4.3 Remote Control A remote control system of the type
used in this scenario uses a signal interface that does two things: It
reads signals from a ground station and sends signals back to it. Both
sets of signals must pass through the aircraft's antenna system. In the
Boeing 757 and 767 the antenna system is located in the forward belly of
the aircraft.
-
- The outgoing signal from the aircraft would include a
video signal from a camera located in the nose or other forward portion
of the aircraft. Flight data such as control positions, airspeed and other
instrument readings are also included in the outgoing signal. The incoming
signal from the ground station would include the position of a virtual
control yoke (governing direction of aircraft), thrust, trim, and other
essential flight parameters.
-
- The virtual pilot would sit in front of a reduced instrument
panel and a video monitor. A simplified control yoke or "joystick"
control would also be part of the operator's equipment. The remote pilot
would watch the instruments, as well as the video image, making continuing
adjustments in the aircraft's flight path, just as if he or she sat in
the cockpit of the actual aircraft.
-
- Many claims of the attacking aircraft being under "remote
control" have appeared on the web since 9/11, but typically with little
or no supporting documentation. The claim of a pre-installed anti-hijacking
system (Vialls 2001) has proved impossible to verify. Similarly, claims
that Global Hawk technology (USAF 98) was used are rampant, but do not
quite fit the specific version of Operation Pearl presented here. For one
thing, the Global Hawk system does not use remote visual guidance, but
onboard navigation electronics that bypass the need for direct, minute-by-minute
human control.
-
- The system invoked for the attacks in Operation Pearl
is based on the Predator unmanned surveillance vehicle (USAF undated),
a modularized aircraft that can be broken into components for ease of shipping
and rapid deployment. One of the components includes a remote guidance
module which could be refitted to another aircraft (with appropriate modifications)
without the need to strip a predator vehicle. The predator operates under
remote human guidance from a ground station that, once deployed, would
require as few as two human operators during a "secure" operation.
-
- A second possibility involves a system known as a "flight
termination system," manufactured by the System Planning Corporation.
(SPC 2000) This system permits hands-on control of a nearly endless variety
of aircraft, the control interface being to a large degree customizable.
For the purposes of the Operation Pearl scenario, either of these systems
might well be adaptable to the remote operations of nonmilitary jet aircraft.
-
- Without question, however, the basic technology for the
remote guidance of aircraft has been on hand for many years. For a large
intelligence organization it would be a straightforward technical operation
to install a remote control system in virtually any type of aircraft, whether
a large commercial airliner or anything smaller. The aircraft carrying
the installation would be available and prepared in advance, then substituted
for the passenger aircraft it was meant to replace.
-
- 4.4 Electronic towing An interesting but different form
of remote control is invoked by the Operation Pearl scenario in the "cleanup"
phase, namely the disposal of the three aircraft that did not crash in
Pennsylvania or anywhere else. I call this facility "electronic towing,"
It consists of two "black boxes" that pick up signals from an
aircraft's data bus, a shared electronic pathway travelled by all electronic
signals that control the aircraft. (Spitzer 2000) Each black box can read
the bus through the data bus monitor, as well as insert information into
the bus. Because the connections are already available, installation of
the boxes could be completed in a matter of hours on any aircraft. In this
relatively simple form of remote control, one aircraft would be called
the "slave," the other the "master." In addition, two
2-way radios allow the black boxes to communicate, specifically for the
master box to send its signals to the slave box. Under identical conditions,
the slave aircraft will do precisely what the master aircraft does. Such
control signals could also be taped and replayed later to invoke in the
slave aircraft exactly the same behavior as the master.
-
- To initiate towing, the master aircraft takes off first,
while the slave aircraft remains on the runway, completely unoccupied.
As soon (or as late) as the pilot of the slave aircraft wishes to, a recording
of the master signals is played over the radio to the slave aircraft, which
then takes off precisely as the master aircraft did. The slave will then
follow the master wherever the pilot of the master wishes to go. With a
short time delay in the control loop, the slave aircraft would appear literally
to be towed by the master, always maintaining the same distance and position
behind it. If the pilot of the master aircraft wished to "unhitch"
the slave, he could simply cut the control signal. Over the ocean, the
unhitched aircraft might fly until it runs out of fuel or it might be blown
up by implanted explosives.
-
- 5 Operation Pearl In the detailed scenario to follow,
Harrisburg International Airport was selected as the base of operations.
However, any airport, airbase or landing strip of suitable length within,
say, 50 km of Harrisburg might work just as well. The following table displays
the takeoff times of the respective aircraft from Boston's logan Airport,
Newark International, and Washington's Dulles Airport on the morning of
September 11, 2001. Assuming a takedown at the first deviation, the flying
times to Harrisburg International Airport are calculated and the arrival
times of the respective aircraft at Harrisburg are displayed. All flying
times are based on the assumption of an average airspeed of 805 km/h (500
mph). In each case, 5 minutes is added at either end of the flight to allow
for takeoffs and landings.
-
- Flight Take-down Distance to Harrisburg Flying Time Arrival
AA11 8:16 am 420 km 32 + 5 min. 8:53 am UA175 8:42 am 200 km 15 + 5 min.
9:02 am UA93 8:42 am 260 km 20 + 5 min. 9:07 am AA77 8:46 am 240 km 18
+ 5 min. 9:09 am
-
- As a convenience, the takedown of Flight UA93 has been
made simultaneous with the aircraft's takeoff. Since the flight path was
directed toward Harrisburg, the takedown time is not relevant to the calculation
as it could have taken place anywhere along the route, yielding the same
result for arrival in Harrisburg.
-
- As a feasibility check, we may now calculate whether
there was adequate time on the ground in Harrisburg to deplane three of
the aircraft, loading their passengers onto Flight UA93. Working backwards,
the flight of UA93 from Harrisburg to Shanksville involved a distance of
144 km for a flight time of 18 minutes. Thus, to "crash" at 10:06
am, it had to leave Harrisburg no later than 9:45 am. This would give the
agents of Operation Pearl (see Appendix C) some 36 minutes to board the
passengers from the other flights onto Flight UA93.
-
- A master timetable for the entire operation has been
provided at the end of this article. Readers may wish to consult this table,
along with the accompanying map, in order to obtain a birdseye view of
all four flights.
-
- We will now examine key elements of the scenario in the
form of mini-dramatizations that place the reader in the scene, as it were.
The following sketches supply enough detail to provide a secondary check
on feasibility. I have used a compact notation to refer to the four replacement
flights, simply appending an "X" to the flight number. Thus "UA175X"
refers to the replacement aircraft for flight UA175.
-
- 5.1 The takedown The morning of September 11 dawned bright
and clear over Boston's Logan Airport as crews arrived for the first flights
of the day. The departure lounge for American Airlines Flight 11 was already
filling with passengers when John Ogonowski, the pilot, and Thomas McGuinness,
the second officer, arrived to board their Boeing 767 and begin the preflight
check.
-
- As passengers slowly filed past the check-in counter
and onto the boarding ramp, the flight officers proceeded through the cockpit
checklist. The weather would be perfect for flying. Only one little detail
soured Ogonowski's day. He had been informed that an FBI antiterrorism
agent would be aboard the aircraft. Among the incoming passengers, a nondescript
gentleman in a business suit settled into a seat in first class. Just as
the giant turbofan engines began their warmup, a stewardess reminded the
gentleman, now scribbling on a piece of paper, to fasten his lap belt.
-
- "Certainly. Er, would you mind giving this note
to the captain?"
-
- She took the note forward, handing it to Ogonowski, who
read it with more than passing interest.
-
- "Hmmm. I guess it's real. Take a look at this, Tom."
-
- McGuinness read the note.
-
- My name is Bill Proctor, FBI anti-hijacking team. We
have information that hijackers may be aboard the aircraft today. I repeat,
may. My partner and I are on this flight to prevent such a happening. We
wish our presence on board to be kept confidential. I am in seat 7A. Thank
you for your cooperation.
-
- "I'd better take a look at this guy," said
Ogonowski. Take her out while I go back for some coffee."
-
- The engines roared to life and the aircraft began to
taxi out to the runway. Ogonowski spotted the gentleman and pulled the
note from his breast pocket. The gentleman nodded and smiled back.
-
- "I'm sorry. I still have to ask to see your ID."
-
- "Certainly." The man handed Ogonowski a small
wallet, flipped open to reveal the famous logo.
-
- On his way to the galley, Ogonowski scrutinized the passengers
from the corner of his eyes. Instinctively, he looked for swarthy, middle
eastern types, somewhat reassured to see none.
-
- The takeoff was smooth and the 767 climbed into clear
blue skies, with several wisps of cirrus off to the west. About 15 minutes
into the flight, just as the flight officers were relaxing and thinking
a hijacking rather unlikely, another note arrived via the stewardess.
-
- We have spotted two terrorists on board. I must come
forward to discuss the situation with you. Bill
-
- "What the hell! Is this guy serious?"
-
- "Jeez. I guess so."
-
- Inside the cockpit, the gentleman wore a serious frown.
-
- "We'll have to land at Harrisburg, where we have
facilities to deal with this problem. Use the 80.7 kHz frequency and do
not engage in any other radio activity at this time, please. Identify yourself
as American Flight 380 and tell them you have a faulty fuel pump in Number
Two engine."
-
- "Where are the terrorists?"
-
- "Don't worry, they're here. By the way, you must
also turn off your transponder. Now."
-
- Ogonowski turned on the PA system.
-
- "Ladies and gentlemen, we have experienced a slight
difficulty with one of our fuel pumps and must land to have it checked.
American is sorry for the delay. We'll have alternate transportation ready
for you as soon as possible."
-
- The gentleman smiled, nodding approvingly. A murmur of
groans and complaints filtered into the cabin.
-
- "One more thing. As soon as we touch down, proceed
immediately to the military hangars at the north end of the airport. We
have a team of agents there who will board the aircraft as soon as you
can get the doors open."
-
- Although Ogonowski sent no messages to New York ATC,
he could hear the chatter and knew something was up. About seven minutes
before they would land at Harrisburg, he heard that one of the World Trade
Center towers was on fire, having been hit by a "commuter aircraft,"
as the rumor had it. Ahead of him the layout of Harrisburg Airport, faintly
discernible in the distance, grew slowly in size. The aircraft banked and
made its final approach. Unknown to Ogonowski, another Boeing 757 shadowed
flight AA11, below and slightly behind them. It climbed, even as flight
AA11 descended. More radio chatter revealed that aircraft had been ordered
down all over the United States. Ogonowski would be the first of many emergency
landings at Harrisburg International that day.
-
- The 767 glided smoothly to touchdown, its air brakes
howling. The aircraft slowly rolled to a crawl, then turned onto a taxiway
that led to an Air National Guard hangar, where a man with orange batons
waved them in. As soon as the flight crew got the doors open, one of the
group of waiting officials rolled a large gangway to the open door and
three agents dashed up the stairs. One of them had a bullhorn.
-
- "Ladies and gentlemen. We must ask that you leave
the aircraft immediately. Leave all personal belongings and carryon bags
aboard the aircraft. This includes cellphones. Do not attempt any cellphone
calls, as they could trigger any explosives on board. We'll begin evacuation
from the front of the aircraft."
-
- Dutifully, the passengers streamed from the aircraft
in orderly fashion, making their way down the steep gangplank and joining
a crowd that had formed around another official.
-
- "Ladies and gentlemen. It is now safe to tell you
that you have just escaped being hijacked by Arab terrorists. We will apprehend
the suspects and search the aircraft for bombs and other dangers to public
safety. Unfortunately, this procedure may take some time and we have no
facilities for you here. We'll have to put you on another flight, as soon
as it arrives. I realize that this is very inconvenient and we apologize.
However, you can think of yourselves as among the luckiest people in America
today."
-
- As he spoke, two officials led a disheveled man in handcuffs
down the gangplank. He had olive-colored skin and a dark beard. A murmur
went up from the crowd.
-
- "Where the hell did he come from?" muttered
McGuinness. He had a feeling of unreality in the pit of his stomach. He
felt nauseous.
-
- By then, another aircraft, flight UA175, had landed and
was now taxiing toward the same hangar. The officials herded the passengers
into the hanger, where they were told to wait. Then they went to greet
the second aircraft, where they repeated the procedure.
-
- Tower personnel were of course aware of the two flights
parked at the Air National Guard hangar. They were aware that the aircraft
were being inspected by some kind of security team but, beyond that, they
paid little heed to the operation. They were too busy coordinating some
very busy airspace.
-
- 5.2 Swapping aircraft At the New York air traffic control
center rows of radar operators "pushing tin," as they call it,
monitored flights into and out of New York airspace, talking to the pilots
occasionally on their throat mikes. Each operator had several flights to
monitor, a job that guaranteed one of the highest stress levels of any
occupation in the travel industry.
-
- The time was 8:37 in the morning. Operators were about
to become aware that something was amiss in their airspace. We pick up
the conversation between one of them (bold face) and the aircraft under
his responsibility. (NYT 2001) My commentary within the transcript has
been placed in square brackets.
-
- "USA583 checking in at FL350."
-
- "USA583 Roger."
-
- "42-39 see the 823 FL350 reference that guy on left."
-
- "I gave the FDX turns. Do what you want, reference
the FDX."
-
- " R49 310."
-
- "FDX226 contact New York Center on 133.47. Good
day."
-
- "33.4 FDX3226 heavy."
-
- "New York UAL 457."
-
- "Sector 10 point out west of LRP 712 at FL410."
-
- "Point out approved."
-
- "UAL175 at FL310."
-
- [The time was 8:40 am. United Airlines Flight 175 came
on the air with some information to report.]
-
- "UAL 175 New York center. Roger."
-
- "New York do a favor. Were you asked to look for
an aircraft, an American flight about about 8 or 9 o'clock 10 miles south
bound last altitude 290? No one is sure where he is."
-
- "Yeah, we talked about him on the last frequency.
We spotted him when he was at our 3 o'clock position. He did appear to
us to be at 29,000 feet. We're not picking him up on TCAS. I'll look again
and see if we can spot him at 24."
-
- "No, it looks like they shut off their transponder.
That's why the question about it."
-
- "New York UAL175 heavy."
-
- "UAL 175 go ahead."
-
- "We figured we'd wait to go to your center. We heard
a suspicious transmission on our departure from BOS. Sounds like someone
keyed the mike and said, 'Everyone stay in your seats.'"
-
- O.K. I'll pass that along.
-
- "It cut out." (UAL 175)
-
- "IGN 93 line."
-
- "Go ahead."
-
- "UAL 175 just came on my frequency and he said he
heard a suspicious transmission when they were leaving BOS: 'Everybody
stay in your seats.' That's what he heard as the suspicious transmission,
just to let you know." (See Note 4.)
-
- [Then US Air Flight 583 called in.]
-
- "Center, where do you place him in relation to 583
now?"
-
- "He's off about 9 o'clock and about 20 miles. Looks
like he's heading southbound but there's no transponder, no nothing, and
no one's talking to him."
-
- "Hello New York good morning DAL2315 passing 239
for 280."
-
- "DAL2315 New York Center. Roger."
-
- "New York center DAL2433 310."
-
- "DAL2433 New York Center. Roger."
-
- [Four minutes later the time was 8:46 and the mystery
had not been solved. Flight 11 was flying an angular route south, then
east. Other flights continued to converse with New York ATC.]
-
- "Direct PTW DAL 1489 heavy."
-
- "Roger."
-
- "DAL2315 contact the New York Center on 134.6. Have
a nice day."
-
- "134.6 DAL2315."
-
- "34.6 3-4-point 6."
-
- "USA429 leveling off at 350."
-
- I'm sorry, who was that?
-
- "USA429 leveling at 350."
-
- "USA429, New York Center roger."
-
- [As we will shortly see, the radar operator lost track
of Flight AA11, as evidenced by his queries of pilots in the area, as well
as his failure to make any connection between the World Trade Center fire
(about to be reported) and Flight AA11. It appears that the flight had
simply been lost in the swarm of blips that crowded every screen at the
New York ATC.]
-
- "Anybody know what that smoke is in lower Manhattan?"
-
- "I'm sorry, say again."
-
- "A lot of smoke in lower manhattan."
-
- "A lot of smoke in lower Manhattan?"
-
|