Flight 93 landed at Reagan Intl at 10:28EST

Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

Pages:
1
2

Flight 93 landed at Reagan Intl at 10:28EST
Topic Started: Sep 30 2008, 06:06 PM (1,581 Views)
Domenick DiMaggio	Sep 30 2008, 06:06 PM Post #1
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08	http://www.orbitfiles.com/download/id3314169481.html Edited by Domenick DiMaggio, Sep 30 2008, 06:09 PM.
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


Domenick DiMaggio	Sep 30 2008, 11:37 PM Post #2
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08	This file provided to Brian Stark via FOIA 2008-3195. It is an Excel sheet recording the DCA departures/arrivals for 9/11/2001 http://aal77.com/faa/FOIA%202008-3195%20(Stark).xls DCA is Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport. http://www.airportcodes.us/us-airports.htm getting it yet?
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


SPreston	Oct 1 2008, 11:17 AM Post #3
Patriotic American Posts: 1,229 Group: Members Member #122 Joined: 01/18/08	Amazing. http://aal77.com/faa/FOIA%202008-3195%20(Stark).xls Apparently Flight 93 took off from EWR Newark International NJ at 8:43 (EDT) and landed at DCA Reagan National at 10:28 AM (EDT) on 9-11-2001. Now why would Ziad Jarrah, Ahmed al-Nami, Ahmed al-Haznawi, and Saeed al-Ghamdi want to land at Reagan instead of carrying out their orders? Have we been lied to? Surprisingly, the 911 Whitewash Commission only missed the takeoff time from Newark by one minute and the landing at Reagan by 5 minutes. Maybe it ran into headwinds. 911 Commission United 93 took off from Newark at 8:42. It was more than 40 minutes late. Had it not crashed in Pennsylvania at 10:03, we estimate that United 93 could not have reached Washington, DC any earlier than 10:13, and most probably would have arrived before 10:23. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5233007



streetcar304	Oct 2 2008, 08:05 AM Post #4
Posts: 21 Group: BANNED! Member #788 Joined: 08/06/08	SPreston Oct 1 2008, 11:17 AM Apparently Flight 93 took off from EWR Newark International NJ at 8:43 (EDT) and landed at DCA Reagan National at 10:28 AM (EDT) on 9-11-2001. Actually, your interpretation of the data is wrong. That spreadsheet came from fligh PLAN data, not actual landing data. That information came from the FOIA request. Check out the Bureau of Transportation Statistics web site and see what actually landed at DCA the morning of 9/11. UA 93 was not one of them since it crashed in Shanksville. For further proof, examine the projected take off times of American Airlines aircraft on the spreadsheet and cross check that with the ground-stop/stop-flying order issued by American corporate HQ between 0900 and 0910 that morning. Re-read up on what the ATC system controllers did regarding UA 93's in-flight plan and how they changed it to DCA from its original destination of SFO, resulting in the data on the spreadsheet showing DCA as its destination with a projected landing time.' Consider for a moment how, at that time of day, a 757 (UA 93) could have flown over or under or through a gaggle of hyped-up trigger-happy F-16s and land at a closed airport a couple of miles from the White House with a vacated tower nearly 50 minutes after DC went into major general quarters because of the Pentagon attack, all without being noticed. Edited by streetcar304, Oct 2 2008, 12:08 PM.
Posts: 21 Group: BANNED! Member #788 Joined: 08/06/08


Shopnut	Oct 5 2008, 01:40 PM Post #5
Posts: 222 Group: BANNED! Member #767 Joined: 07/26/08	It is bad enough that someone chooses only that evidence that supports their theory. Worse when it is manipulated to support their theory.
Posts: 222 Group: BANNED! Member #767 Joined: 07/26/08


22205	Oct 7 2008, 03:54 AM Post #6
Arlingtonian Posts: 444 Group: Members Member #24 Joined: 01/14/08	Shopnut Oct 5 2008, 01:40 PM It is bad enough that someone chooses only that evidence that supports their theory. Worse when it is manipulated to support their theory. please state how evidence was "manipulated to support their theory". misinterpreted - POSSIBLY yes (though the jury is still out as to the accuracy of streetcar/pinch's proposed explanation). but no one intentionally or unintentionally manipulated the data to fit anything. besides - as far as i know, as a result of dom's interviews with shanksville residents, he leans towards a shoot-down of U93 (though im not sure if he has changed or ammended that belief recently). so for him to say that U93 landed in dc, does NOT "support his theory". so he has no reason to lie or manipulate data to support a dc landing, in spite of your accusations to the contrary.



Domenick DiMaggio	Oct 7 2008, 03:58 AM Post #7
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08	streetcar304 Oct 2 2008, 08:05 AM Re-read up on what the ATC system controllers did regarding UA 93's in-flight plan and how they changed it to DCA from its original destination of SFO, resulting in the data on the spreadsheet showing DCA as its destination with a projected landing time.' Consider for a moment how, at that time of day, a 757 (UA 93) could have flown over or under or through a gaggle of hyped-up trigger-happy F-16s and land at a closed airport a couple of miles from the White House with a vacated tower nearly 50 minutes after DC went into major general quarters because of the Pentagon attack, all without being noticed. According to the 9/11 Commission, less than a minute after Flight 93 acknowledged a routine radio transmission from the FAA’s Cleveland Center (see 9:27 a.m. September 11, 2001), John Werth—the controller handling the flight—and pilots of other aircraft in the vicinity of Flight 93 hear “a radio transmission of unintelligible sounds of possible screaming or a struggle from an unknown origin.” [Federal Aviation Administration, 9/11/2001; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004; CBS News, 9/10/2006] Someone, presumably Flight 93’s pilot Jason Dahl, is overheard by controllers as he shouts, “Mayday!” [New York Times, 7/22/2004] Seconds later, the controller responds, “Somebody call Cleveland?” Then there are more sounds of screaming and someone yelling, “Get out of here, get out of here.” [Toronto Sun, 9/16/2001; Newsweek, 9/22/2001; Observer, 12/2/2001; MSNBC, 7/30/2002; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] Then the voices of the hijackers can be heard talking in Arabic. The words are later translated to show they are talking to each other, saying, “Everything is fine.” [Newsweek, 12/3/2001] Shortly before Flight 93 reverses direction and heads east, someone in its cockpit radios in and asks the FAA for a new flight plan, with a final destination of Washington, DC. [ABC News, 9/11/2001; ABC News, 9/14/2001] Jeff Krawczyk, the chief operating officer of a company that tracks aircraft movements, later comments, “We hardly ever get a flight plan change. Very unusual.” [Washington Business Journal, 9/11/2001] Who it is that makes this request is unclear. The hijacker takeover of Flight 93 occurred around 9:28 a.m. (see (9:28 a.m.) September 11, 2001) [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 11] , so it is presumably made by one of the hijackers. Twenty-five minutes later the pilot hijacker will also program a new destination into the plane’s navigational system (see 9:55 a.m. September 11, 2001). so this shows up as an arrival at dca because al qaeda [after being heard hijacking a plane on a day when 2 other hijacked planes have already been slammed into the wtc] contacted faa and made a highly unusual request for a flight path change to help them reach their target which is approved. is that what you're claim is?
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


Shopnut	Oct 7 2008, 01:47 PM Post #8
Posts: 222 Group: BANNED! Member #767 Joined: 07/26/08	22205 Oct 7 2008, 03:54 AM please state how evidence was "manipulated to support their theory". misinterpreted - POSSIBLY yes (though the jury is still out as to the accuracy of streetcar/pinch's proposed explanation). but no one intentionally or unintentionally manipulated the data to fit anything. The thread title is “Flight 93 landed at Reagan Intl at 10:28EST”. The link provided does not show an actual landing time. There is no reason to believe it is anything but a scheduled landing time. The thread title is misleading; probably due to the bias of the poster. If it was a mistake, then ample time has passed to edit the title or delete the thread, but this has not happened.
Posts: 222 Group: BANNED! Member #767 Joined: 07/26/08


JFK	Oct 7 2008, 02:01 PM Post #9
Posts: 4,218 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	Shopnut Oct 7 2008, 01:47 PM 22205 Oct 7 2008, 03:54 AM please state how evidence was "manipulated to support their theory". misinterpreted - POSSIBLY yes (though the jury is still out as to the accuracy of streetcar/pinch's proposed explanation). but no one intentionally or unintentionally manipulated the data to fit anything. The thread title is “Flight 93 landed at Reagan Intl at 10:28EST”. The link provided does not show an actual landing time. There is no reason to believe it is anything but a scheduled landing time. The thread title is misleading; probably due to the bias of the poster. If it was a mistake, then ample time has passed to edit the title or delete the thread, but this has not happened. I guess the excel spreadsheet does not count in your world, eh Shopnut ? Column M is "Arrival time ( EDT )". http://img238.imageshack.us/img238/5168/ual93bj2.jpg Edited by JFK, Oct 7 2008, 02:02 PM.
Posts: 4,218 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


Shopnut	Oct 7 2008, 03:25 PM Post #10
Posts: 222 Group: BANNED! Member #767 Joined: 07/26/08	You are correct, it does not list an actual landing time.
Posts: 222 Group: BANNED! Member #767 Joined: 07/26/08


Domenick DiMaggio	Oct 7 2008, 03:38 PM Post #11
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08	Shopnut Oct 7 2008, 03:25 PM You are correct, it does not list an actual landing time. you are correct, as long as we all ignore where it says 10:28.
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


JFK	Oct 7 2008, 03:53 PM Post #12
Posts: 4,218 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	Shopnut Oct 7 2008, 03:25 PM You are correct, it does not list an actual landing time. That's it. See you in 14 days.
Posts: 4,218 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


Domenick DiMaggio	Oct 7 2008, 06:14 PM Post #13
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08	Domenick DiMaggio Oct 7 2008, 03:58 AM According to the 9/11 Commission, less than a minute after Flight 93 acknowledged a routine radio transmission from the FAA’s Cleveland Center (see 9:27 a.m. September 11, 2001), John Werth—the controller handling the flight—and pilots of other aircraft in the vicinity of Flight 93 hear “a radio transmission of unintelligible sounds of possible screaming or a struggle from an unknown origin.” [Federal Aviation Administration, 9/11/2001; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004; CBS News, 9/10/2006] Someone, presumably Flight 93’s pilot Jason Dahl, is overheard by controllers as he shouts, “Mayday!” [New York Times, 7/22/2004] Seconds later, the controller responds, “Somebody call Cleveland?” Then there are more sounds of screaming and someone yelling, “Get out of here, get out of here.” [Toronto Sun, 9/16/2001; Newsweek, 9/22/2001; Observer, 12/2/2001; MSNBC, 7/30/2002; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] Then the voices of the hijackers can be heard talking in Arabic. The words are later translated to show they are talking to each other, saying, “Everything is fine.” [Newsweek, 12/3/2001] Shortly before Flight 93 reverses direction and heads east, someone in its cockpit radios in and asks the FAA for a new flight plan, with a final destination of Washington, DC. [ABC News, 9/11/2001; ABC News, 9/14/2001] Jeff Krawczyk, the chief operating officer of a company that tracks aircraft movements, later comments, “We hardly ever get a flight plan change. Very unusual.” [Washington Business Journal, 9/11/2001] Who it is that makes this request is unclear. The hijacker takeover of Flight 93 occurred around 9:28 a.m. (see (9:28 a.m.) September 11, 2001) [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 11] , so it is presumably made by one of the hijackers. Twenty-five minutes later the pilot hijacker will also program a new destination into the plane’s navigational system (see 9:55 a.m. September 11, 2001). so this shows up as an arrival at dca because al qaeda [after being heard hijacking a plane on a day when 2 other hijacked planes have already been slammed into the wtc] contacted faa and made a highly unusual request for a flight path change to help them reach their target which is approved. is that what you're claim is? streetcar you like to run your mouth. wanna take a shot at this?
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


Domenick DiMaggio	Oct 9 2008, 05:32 AM Post #14
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08	Domenick DiMaggio Oct 7 2008, 06:14 PM Domenick DiMaggio Oct 7 2008, 03:58 AM According to the 9/11 Commission, less than a minute after Flight 93 acknowledged a routine radio transmission from the FAA’s Cleveland Center (see 9:27 a.m. September 11, 2001), John Werth—the controller handling the flight—and pilots of other aircraft in the vicinity of Flight 93 hear “a radio transmission of unintelligible sounds of possible screaming or a struggle from an unknown origin.” [Federal Aviation Administration, 9/11/2001; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004; CBS News, 9/10/2006] Someone, presumably Flight 93’s pilot Jason Dahl, is overheard by controllers as he shouts, “Mayday!” [New York Times, 7/22/2004] Seconds later, the controller responds, “Somebody call Cleveland?” Then there are more sounds of screaming and someone yelling, “Get out of here, get out of here.” [Toronto Sun, 9/16/2001; Newsweek, 9/22/2001; Observer, 12/2/2001; MSNBC, 7/30/2002; 9/11 Commission, 6/17/2004] Then the voices of the hijackers can be heard talking in Arabic. The words are later translated to show they are talking to each other, saying, “Everything is fine.” [Newsweek, 12/3/2001] Shortly before Flight 93 reverses direction and heads east, someone in its cockpit radios in and asks the FAA for a new flight plan, with a final destination of Washington, DC. [ABC News, 9/11/2001; ABC News, 9/14/2001] Jeff Krawczyk, the chief operating officer of a company that tracks aircraft movements, later comments, “We hardly ever get a flight plan change. Very unusual.” [Washington Business Journal, 9/11/2001] Who it is that makes this request is unclear. The hijacker takeover of Flight 93 occurred around 9:28 a.m. (see (9:28 a.m.) September 11, 2001) [9/11 Commission, 7/24/2004, pp. 11] , so it is presumably made by one of the hijackers. Twenty-five minutes later the pilot hijacker will also program a new destination into the plane’s navigational system (see 9:55 a.m. September 11, 2001). so this shows up as an arrival at dca because al qaeda [after being heard hijacking a plane on a day when 2 other hijacked planes have already been slammed into the wtc] contacted faa and made a highly unusual request for a flight path change to help them reach their target which is approved. is that what you're claim is? streetcar you like to run your mouth. wanna take a shot at this?
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


Shopnut	Oct 22 2008, 12:34 AM Post #15
Posts: 222 Group: BANNED! Member #767 Joined: 07/26/08	JFK Oct 7 2008, 03:53 PM Shopnut Oct 7 2008, 03:25 PM You are correct, it does not list an actual landing time. That's it. See you in 14 days. Did I miss something or is stating something that is not in total agreement with JFK grounds for being banned? Did you notice that it said landing time. It did not say scheduled landing time or actual landing time.
Posts: 222 Group: BANNED! Member #767 Joined: 07/26/08


Domenick DiMaggio	Oct 22 2008, 02:12 AM Post #16
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08	sweet maybe you can address my post now?
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


JFK	Oct 22 2008, 07:57 AM Post #17
Posts: 4,218 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	Shopnut Oct 22 2008, 12:34 AM JFK Oct 7 2008, 03:53 PM Shopnut Oct 7 2008, 03:25 PM You are correct, it does not list an actual landing time. That's it. See you in 14 days. Did I miss something or is stating something that is not in total agreement with JFK grounds for being banned? Did you notice that it said landing time. It did not say scheduled landing time or actual landing time. No, you may disagree with me all you want shopnut. In case you haven't noticed there are in fact many members here which I am not in total agreement with which have never been banned or suspended. But when you begin deliberately ignoring official documentation and distorting facts and general trolling as you have done in this and other threads here, that is when you have worn out your welcome. Consider this your final warning before being permanantly banned. BTW, you are now restricted to the skeptics forum, and no longer have access to PM's. Edit - Shopnut has been banned and will no longer be able to respond to your questions. Edited by JFK, Oct 22 2008, 09:43 AM.
Posts: 4,218 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


Domenick DiMaggio	Oct 22 2008, 11:03 PM Post #18
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08	JFK Oct 22 2008, 07:57 AM Edit - Shopnut has been banned and will no longer be able to respond to your questions. thats alright he really wasn't going to respond to it anyways....
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


jonlukasc	Nov 10 2008, 06:52 AM Post #19
Posts: 2 Group: Members Member #929 Joined: 11/10/08	don't you think before you say that flight 93 landed in Cleveland you should have actual proof besides a bad news report?
Posts: 2 Group: Members Member #929 Joined: 11/10/08


JFK	Nov 10 2008, 07:02 AM Post #20
Posts: 4,218 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08	jonlukasc Nov 10 2008, 06:52 AM don't you think before you say that flight 93 landed in Cleveland you should have actual proof besides a bad news report? Don't you yhink you should read the thread before responding ? Or are you simply trolling here ? Edit to add - This isn't you per chance, is it ? - http://www.youtube.com/user/jonLukasC Edited by JFK, Nov 10 2008, 07:36 AM.
Posts: 4,218 Group: Admins Member #108 Joined: 01/17/08


BoneZ	Nov 10 2008, 05:13 PM Post #21
Posts: 723 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08	There's no record of FL93 landing at DCA according to BTS: The only 2 UA flights that did land at DCA, according to BTS, are also on the .xls document. There's no reason to trust the .xls document until there's more proof of FL93 actually having landed at DCA and .xls documents can easily be faked. So, with the info we have so far, either FL93 was edited out of BTS, or FL93 was edited into this .xls document. Also, wherever this document came from, that organization needs to be contacted as to why it says FL93 landed at DCA on 9/11. Edited by BoneZ, Nov 10 2008, 05:26 PM.
Posts: 723 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08


Domenick DiMaggio	Nov 10 2008, 08:56 PM Post #22
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08	did u click the "arrivals" tab?
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


BoneZ	Nov 11 2008, 03:15 PM Post #23
Posts: 723 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08	Domenick DiMaggio Nov 10 2008, 08:56 PM did u click the "arrivals" tab? Do you see what it says right under "Detailed Statistics"? I'm pretty sure it says "Arrivals". I could be wrong though.... Edited by BoneZ, Nov 11 2008, 07:25 PM.
Posts: 723 Group: Members Member #269 Joined: 02/03/08


Domenick DiMaggio	Nov 17 2008, 01:06 AM Post #24
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08	so you're claiming that the spreadsheet obtained through a foia is a fake?
Posts: 2,004 Group: Members Member #22 Joined: 01/14/08


Frank Spinatra	Oct 20 2009, 04:33 PM Post #25
Posts: 9 Group: Members Member #1,428 Joined: 10/13/09	JFK Oct 7 2008, 02:01 PM Shopnut Oct 7 2008, 01:47 PM 22205 Oct 7 2008, 03:54 AM please state how evidence was "manipulated to support their theory". misinterpreted - POSSIBLY yes (though the jury is still out as to the accuracy of streetcar/pinch's proposed explanation). but no one intentionally or unintentionally manipulated the data to fit anything. The thread title is “Flight 93 landed at Reagan Intl at 10:28EST”. The link provided does not show an actual landing time. There is no reason to believe it is anything but a scheduled landing time. The thread title is misleading; probably due to the bias of the poster. If it was a mistake, then ample time has passed to edit the title or delete the thread, but this has not happened. I guess the excel spreadsheet does not count in your world, eh Shopnut ? Column M is "Arrival time ( EDT )". http://img238.imageshack.us/img238/5168/ual93bj2.jpg JFK, are the other times on that spreadsheet GMT? There are 2 sets of times that are all 4 hours later than the other sets. Just curious.
Posts: 9 Group: Members Member #1,428 Joined: 10/13/09


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)


Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Shanksville · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2