Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * - 3 votes

9/11: The Flight 77 Eyewitnesses


  • Please log in to reply
1810 replies to this topic

#1651    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 07 June 2012 - 06:15 PM

Sorry gents, I guess I was too vague.

The load factor I was referring to was passenger load factor, 100% being all seats filled, the most profitable situation for the airline.

There is a passenger load that is break-even, and anything above is profit, anything below a loss.

About 200 passenger seats on the 75/76 series.  The flights in question carried about 50, so the loads were light.  My bet is that below 50% is a loss of revenue.

Today the airlines have it honed to quite a fine art, with most flights being full, and some overbooked.  Even back in 2001 it was rare to have such a light load, especially for transcontinental flights.


#1652    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,139 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Wayne, IN

Posted 07 June 2012 - 10:12 PM

Passenger seats aren't the only source of revenue on comercial flights. They often carry mail as well.

Even with a break even point (which you've only blindly speculated about where it is) it doesn't mean they won't fly the plane if they have less.  These were Tuesday flights and one would think the majority of transcontinental flights would be used by businessmen and those would be on late Sunday, Early Monday with return flights later in the week.  Light loads  are also a sign of an industry in trouble which was seen in the bad news the airlines had BEFORE 911 which can explain the put options.  Airlines in general weren't doing all that well and American and United had both recently had bad news.  Both companies' share price was already dropping.
http://www.911myths....php/Put_Options

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law

#1653    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 08 June 2012 - 12:40 AM

View Postskyeagle409, on 07 June 2012 - 01:23 AM, said:

Thanks!! :tu:


Welcome, Skipper! :tu:

And maybe, just maybe, it will be explained what the point  is to this stuff.
Maybe the planes were well under gross, but so what?
That's certainly not a total rarity.

I was just wondering if it could be explained where we're going here?

:whistle:


#1654    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,560 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 08 June 2012 - 12:42 AM

View PostMID, on 08 June 2012 - 12:40 AM, said:

Welcome, Skipper! :tu:

And maybe, just maybe, it will be explained what the point  is to this stuff.
Maybe the planes were well under gross, but so what?
That's certainly not a total rarity.

I was just wondering if it could be explained where we're going here?

:whistle:

I don't really know, but the 9/11 CT folks have been pulling things out of thin air lately.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1655    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 08 June 2012 - 12:13 PM

I agree gents, in and of itself, the passenger load factor is rather meaningless.  Over the years, but not lately, I have flown on several flights that were less than half full.  However the airlines work very hard, obviously, to have all flights as loaded as possible.  Hence the phenomenon of over booking.

The curious point is that all 4 of the flights were considerably under booked.  Not 1 of 4, not 2 of 4, but all 4.  Just a curious irregularity so typical of the events of the day.  Irregular events and details are the hallmark of 11 September.

There was a story early on that the bad guys had actually bought a bunch of seats in fake names, but that story never gained any traction and was quickly abandoned, apparently.


#1656    MID

MID

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 14,490 posts
  • Joined:06 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Male

  • ...The greatest error is not to have tried and failed, but that in trying, we did not give it our best effort.

Posted 11 June 2012 - 11:20 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 08 June 2012 - 12:13 PM, said:

The curious point is that all 4 of the flights were considerably under booked.  Not 1 of 4, not 2 of 4, but all 4.  Just a curious irregularity so typical of the events of the day.  Irregular events and details are the hallmark of 11 September.



Yes, agreed, the events of 9-11-01 were mighty irregular...so irregular that they spawned an irregular mindset, which has been voluminously illustrated on this board!


Quote

There was a story early on that the bad guys had actually bought a bunch of seats in fake names, but that story never gained any traction and was quickly abandoned, apparently.

Maybe becauise they didn't, and we klnow everyone who had a seat on all those airplanes that day?

The real mystery here...which no one seems to want to address...is:

How could we have allowed this to happen?

Jack Kennedy once wrote a book called, "Why England Slept".

One day, someone will write a book called, "Why The United States Slept,"  and will answer my question...

Edited by MID, 11 June 2012 - 11:22 PM.


#1657    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 12 June 2012 - 01:01 PM

Well there have been a number of books written about it MID.  Perhaps one day you will avail yourself of them.  I think my favorite is Crossing The Rubicon by Michael Ruppert.

Yes, the events were so irregular that they have made otherwise curious men become morbidly UNcurious.  They accept the official story with no questions at all.  A complete lack of critical thinking, resulting in an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable.

"We" allowed this to happen in the same way that "we" allowed Bernie Madoff do what he did, or what Wall Street did with TARP.

Which is to say that with the exception of our utter credulity, "we" were completely powerless.


#1658    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,560 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 12 June 2012 - 07:13 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 12 June 2012 - 01:01 PM, said:

Well there have been a number of books written about it MID.  Perhaps one day you will avail yourself of them.  I think my favorite is Crossing The Rubicon by Michael Ruppert.

Is that how you conceive what  you perceived as evidence? I could write a fictional book implicating the airlines in the 9/11 attacks and watch as the 9/11 CT post that false information all over the Internet. After all, we have watched certain people  present false information on the Internet that was later taken up by the 9/11 CT folks.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1659    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,560 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 12 June 2012 - 11:12 PM



KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1660    Babe Ruth

Babe Ruth

    Non-Corporeal Being

  • Closed
  • 8,732 posts
  • Joined:23 Dec 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:27North 80West

Posted 13 June 2012 - 01:05 PM

Sky

Perhaps you forgot to take your Ginkgo Biloba today, but it was me that you fooled with your 'simulated' video of the F-18 crashing into a building.  You fooled me once sir, but you won't fool me again.

If I need to find examples of a person playing fast and loose with the evidence, I always come back to you.

You can poke fun at Michael Ruppert to your heart's content, but I will consider the source.....


#1661    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 32,560 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 13 June 2012 - 02:29 PM

View PostBabe Ruth, on 13 June 2012 - 01:05 PM, said:

Sky

Perhaps you forgot to take your Ginkgo Biloba today, but it was me that you fooled with your 'simulated' video of the F-18 crashing into a building.  You fooled me once sir, but you won't fool me again.

How amusing when I told you about that building that had nothing to do with that F-18. Seems you forgot.

Edited by skyeagle409, 13 June 2012 - 02:30 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1662    chezarelli

chezarelli

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 112 posts
  • Joined:17 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 21 June 2012 - 09:32 AM

N.O.R.A.D was  asleep  that  day  the anti aircraft system on the  pentagon roof did not activate surface to air missiles
would easily be seen .Mid air explosions would easily be seen what anyone who believed they saw an aircraft saw was a
remote controlled drone(with wings) impact the pentagon .As the experts and undeniable evidence reveals titanium built
engines on commercial aircraft never disintegrate or completely vanish .Their is no trace of these massive engines in
any media directly after the crash or any pentagon security cameras which also failed to capture the aircraft approach
it the most protected airspace in the world has no footage of what hit it


#1663    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,139 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Wayne, IN

Posted 21 June 2012 - 11:55 AM

Please post proof that The Pentagon even has anti-aircraft missiles on the roof.  Or that it is the most protected airspace.  You did know the Pentagon is directly UNDER the flight path for an internation airport right?

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law

#1664    chezarelli

chezarelli

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 112 posts
  • Joined:17 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:30 PM

You don't  think its protected air space? or they have the ability to destroy a threat what the hell
has a international airport have to do with protected airspace .Its not a no fly zone it has many
military protocols associated with its existence as a primary command center.The white house
has similar defenses the fact they are in built up areas does not deter the government from
protecting national land marks.All aircraft have transponders that tell them exactly where they
should be hence an airport can exist in close proximity.The pentagon wont send me the
schematics sorry .The preferred plan of attack is interception by fighters which also seemed
to of failed on that day


#1665    frenat

frenat

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,139 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Fort Wayne, IN

Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:36 PM

View Postchezarelli, on 21 June 2012 - 12:30 PM, said:

You don't  think its protected air space? or they have the ability to destroy a threat what the hell
has a international airport have to do with protected airspace .Its not a no fly zone it has many
military protocols associated with its existence as a primary command center.The white house
has similar defenses the fact they are in built up areas does not deter the government from
protecting national land marks.All aircraft have transponders that tell them exactly where they
should be hence an airport can exist in close proximity.The pentagon wont send me the
schematics sorry .The preferred plan of attack is interception by fighters which also seemed
to of failed on that day
I don't think you have proof that it is.  Has anybody EVER seen these defenses?  Since it is in the direct landing and takeoff path of  major airport, surely somebody has seen them.  Or taken a picture.  What about planes that have failed transponders?  Protected airspace works best if people flying actually know it is there so they can avoid it if necessary.  Unlike over the White House (where there is a prohibited airspace) there is no special airspace over the Pentagon.
Yes, it is a command center but it far more so an office building.  The secure sections are far underground.

Edited by frenat, 21 June 2012 - 12:53 PM.

-Reality is not determined by your lack of comprehension.
-Never let facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory.
-If I wanted to pay for commercials I couldn't skip I'd sign up for Hulu Plus.
-There are no bad ideas, just great ideas that go horribly wrong.
If you have to insist that you've won an Internet argument, you've probably lost badly. - Danth's Law




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users