|
| |
http://geocities.com/mknemesis/printer.html
"Home Run"
Electronically Hijacking the World Trade Center Attack Aircraft
Copyright Joe Vialls, October 2001, Updated
20 January 2002
|
Pentagon Strike
Boeing 757 x 1
About 230,000# |
World Trade Center
Strike
Boeing 767 x 2
About 420,000# each |
Click here to view approach and attack
profile video of United Flight 175 (World Trade Center #2)
In the mid-seventies America faced a new and escalating crisis,
with US commercial jets being hijacked for geopolitical purposes. Determined to gain the
upper hand in this new form of aerial warfare, two American multinationals collaborated
with the Defense Advanced Projects Agency (DARPA) on a project designed to facilitate the
remote recovery of hijacked American aircraft. Brilliant both in concept and operation,
Home Run [not its real code name] allowed specialist ground controllers to
listen in to cockpit conversations on the target aircraft, then take absolute control of
its computerized flight control system by remote means.
From that point onwards, regardless of the wishes of the
hijackers or flight deck crew, the hijacked aircraft could be recovered and landed
automatically at an airport of choice, with no more difficulty than flying a
radio-controlled model plane. The engineers had no idea that almost thirty years after its
initial design, Home Runs top secret computer codes would be broken, and the system
used to facilitate direct ground control of the four aircraft used in the high-profile
attacks on New York and Washington on 11th September 2001.
Before moving on to the New York and Washington attacks, we first
need to look at the ways in which an aircraft is normally controlled by its pilot, because
without this basic knowledge, Home Run would make no sense. In order to control an
aircraft in three-dimensional space, the pilot uses the control yoke (joystick) in front
of him, rudder pedals under his feet, and a bank of engine throttles located at his side.
Without engine thrust the aircraft would not fly at all, so the throttles are largely self
explanatory: For more speed or altitude increase throttle, for less speed or altitude
decrease throttle.
In order to raise or lower the nose of the aircraft, the pilot
pulls or pushes on the control yoke, which in turn raises or lowers the elevators on the
horizontal tailplane. To bank the aircraft left or right, the pilot moves the control yoke
to the left or right, which in turn operates the ailerons on the outer wings. Lastly, to
turn left or right at low speed or balance turns at high speed, the pilot
presses the left or right rudder pedals as required, which in turn move the rudder on the
vertical stabilizer.
Back in the early days of flight, the control yoke and rudder
pedals were connected to the various flight control surfaces by thin cables, meaning the
pilot had direct physical control over every movement the aircraft made. This was no great
problem for an average man flying a small biplane, but as aircraft grew ever bigger,
heavier and faster over the years, the loadings on the control yoke and rudder pedals
became huge, certainly well beyond the ability of a single pilot to handle unaided.
By the late fifties we were well into the age of hydraulics,
where just like the power steering on your automobile, hydraulic rams were placed in line
between the pilots control cables and each individual control surface. Now when the
pilot moved the control yoke, the cables activated sensors, which in turn activated one or
more hydraulic rams, which in turn moved one or more control surfaces. For the first time
since Bleriot and the Wright brothers, pilots were of necessity being steadily distanced
from direct control of their own aircraft.
When the multinationals and DARPA finally came on the scene in
the mid-seventies, aircraft systems were even more advanced, with computers controlling
onboard autopilots, which in turn were capable of controlling all of the onboard
hydraulics. In combination these multiple different functions were now known as the Flight
Control System or FCS, in turn integrated with sophisticated avionics capable of
automatically landing the aircraft in zero visibility conditions. In summary, by the
mid-seventies most of the large jets were capable of effectively navigating hundreds of
miles and then making automatic landings at a selected airport in zero-zero fog
conditions. All of this could be accomplished unaided, but in theory at least, still under
the watchful eyes of the flight deck crews.
In order to make Home Run truly effective, it had to be
completely integrated with all onboard systems, and this could only be accomplished with a
new aircraft design, several of which were on the drawing boards at that time. Under cover
of extreme secrecy, the multinationals and DARPA went ahead on this basis and built back
doors into the new computer designs. There were two very obvious hard requirements
at this stage, the first a primary control channel for use in taking over the flight
control system and flying the aircraft back to an airfield of choice, and secondly a
covert audio channel for monitoring flight deck conversations. Once the primary channel
was activated, all aircraft functions came under direct ground control, permanently
removing the hijackers and pilots from the control loop.
Remember here, this was not a system designed to undermine
the authority of the flight crews, but was put in place as a doomsday device
in the event the hijackers started to shoot passengers or crew members, possibly including
the pilots. Using the perfectly reasonable assumption that hijackers only carry a limited
number of bullets, and many aircraft nowadays carry in excess of 300 passengers, Home Run
could be used to fly all of the survivors to a friendly airport for a safe auto landing.
So the system started out in life for the very best of reasons, but finally fell prey to
security leaks, and eventually to compromised computer codes. In light of recent
high-profile CIA and FBI spying trials, these leaks and compromised codes should come as
no great surprise to anyone.
Activating the primary Home Run channel proved to be easy.
Most readers will have heard of a transponder, prominent in most news reports
immediately following the attacks on New York and Washington. Technically a transponder is
a combined radio transmitter and receiver which operates automatically, in this case
relaying data between the four aircraft and air traffic control on the ground. The signals
sent provide a unique identity for each aircraft, essential in crowded
airspace to avoid mid-air collisions, and equally essential for Home Run controllers
trying to lock onto the correct aircraft. Once it has located the correct aircraft, Home
Run piggy backs a data transmission onto the transponder channel and takes
direct control from the ground. This explains why none of the aircraft sent a special
I have been hijacked transponder code, despite multiple activation points on
all four aircraft. Because the transponder frequency had already been piggy backed by Home
Run, transmission of the special hijack code was rendered impossible. This was the first
hard proof that the target aircraft had been hijacked electronically from the ground,
rather than by [FBI-inspired] motley crews of Arabs toting penknives.
The Home Run listening device on the flight deck utilizes the
cockpit microphones that normally feed the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR), one of two black
boxes armored to withstand heavy impact and thereby later give investigators significant
clues to why the aircraft crashed. However, once hooked into Home Run, the CVRs are
bypassed and voice transmissions are no longer recorded on the 30-minute endless loop
recording tape. If Home Run is active for more than thirty minutes, there will therefore
be no audible data on the Cockpit Voice Recorders. To date, crash investigators have
recovered the CVRs from the Pentagon and Pittsburg aircraft, and publicly confirmed that
both are completely blank. The only possible reason for this, is data capture by Home Run,
providing the final hard proof that the attack aircraft were hijacked electronically from
the ground, rather than by Arab terrorists.
Many readers might by now be indignant; convinced this is
incorrect or misleading information because of those telephone calls from the
hijacked aircraft. Which telephone calls exactly? There are no records of any such
calls, and the emotional claptrap the media fed you in the aftermath of the attack was in
all cases third-person. We had the medias invisible contact at an
airline who said a hostess called to report a hijacking, and we had a priest
(?) who said he received a call from a man asking him in turn to call his wife
and tell her he loved her.
Presumably this man would have had his wifes name filed in
his cellphone, and faced with imminent death would have called her direct. The FAA helped
out by claiming that it had overheard a heated argument from a cockpit where
the radio transmit switch had been left in the on position. When push came to
shove, the FAA was forced to retract, and admit that the mythical argument was not on the
tapes at all.
Critically, the passenger manifests for all four aircraft
serve as the final (independent) proof that no alleged hijackers or anyone of Arabic name
boarded any of the four aircraft used in the attacks. As Laurence T. May points out:
"On September 11, airline check-in counters were the only places in the United
States that required travellers to present a photo ID in order to travel. A photo ID meant
(and still means) a card issued by some branch of civil government. Years ago, the United
States government took the first step toward a national ID card when it mandated the
requirement that all passengers present a photo ID card before being allowed to get on a
commercial airplane.
"This means that the tightest security that the typical
American ever confronts is airport security. This is the
model for all other security systems governing the general public. Let's go through the
check-in routine together.
Pretend that it's September 11, and you are a check-in agent at either a United Airlines
counter or an American
Airlines counter. It is your job to ask the standard questions. "Did you pack your
own luggage? Have you had
it in your possession at all times?" Then you ask for a photo ID. The name on the ID
must match the name on the
ticket. The photo must match the person presenting the card." .. And, you guessed
it, the name on the ID must match that on the passenger manifest held by the airline
ground staff! It seems highly likely that these revealing passenger manifests will
magically disappear when the American Government realizes the dangers of allowing the
public access to such incriminating documents. For that reason I have listed the full
manifests on a separate page. To visit that page and copy the lists, click here.
Whether more information will be forthcoming about Home Run is
unknown, but nowadays there are large numbers of people apart from the author privy
to the basic data. As long ago as the early nineties, a major European flag carrier
acquired the information and was seriously alarmed that one of its own aircraft might be
rescued by the Americans without its authority. Accordingly, this flag carrier
completely stripped the American flight control computers out of its entire fleet, and
replaced them with a home grown version. These aircraft are now effectively impregnable to
penetration by Home Run, but that is more than can be said for the American aircraft
fleet.
A casual count indicates that more than 600 aircraft in the USA
and elsewhere are still vulnerable and could be used in further attacks at any time,
which might help explain why America has been bombing the Afghans primarily with bags of
wheat. For the first time in US history, American officials appear to be genuinely fearful
of future reprisals, and justifiably so with 600 giant bombs parked on the wrong side of
their missile defence shield.
It is a Catch 22 situation. In order to make all of
the aircraft safe, the flight control systems would have to be stripped out and replaced,
at a cost of billions of dollars the airlines cannot afford because they are going broke.
Nor is there enough time. The most innovative anti-hijacking tool in the American arsenal,
has now become the biggest known threat to American national security.
For the purpose of public reassurance I would like to publish a
complete list of aircraft which cannot be affected by Home Run, but I cannot do so for
legal reasons. Any aircraft manufacturer not on the list might feel inclined to sue me for
defamation and I cant afford that. However, there is nothing to stop me publishing
my personal choice of aircraft for a flight from, say, Atlanta to Singapore via JFK,
Frankfurt, and Kuala Lumpur.
From Atlanta to JFK I would probably travel on a Boeing 737, and
connect with a Boeing 777 for the onward flight to Frankfurt. At Frankfurt I would
probably board an Airbus A340 for Kuala Lumpur, and finish the journey on a DC9 or a
Fokker 100. Naturally I might be unlucky and pick an aircraft with an intoxicated pilot,
or an unrelated mechanical problem, but apart from those minor risks Id feel pretty
safe.
15 October 2001
After this page had been hit on by more than 10,000 curious
visitors, the current issue of "Business Week" (22 September)
decided to publish an unusual letter, suggesting that the events of the 11th of September
would have ended rather differently if there was a capability for Ground Tower Control to
"take over the controls of a hijacked plane" (issue still available at any US
newsagent).
Remember, the American Federal Government kept Reagan
National airport in downtown Washington, DC shut, despite the fact that none of the
"hijacked" planes came from there. However, if it were possible to "take
over the controls" of a plane, then it would take less than a minute for planes close
to DCA airport to be diverted to a target anywhere in the capital. There were just two
aircraft types involved on the 11th of September.
Eventually, after much reluctance, the government has now
opened up Reagan National airport again, but ONLY for planes with less than 156 seats. Now
what kind of planes previously operating happily out of Reagan National will this new
"seating" restriction exclude? Hint: Among a few others, the Boeing 757 and 767.
Cynics might be tempted to conclude that, as usual,
"important" politicians and bureaucrats are being provided with discreet special
protection from Home Run, while everyday Americans are left to take their chances as best
they can, and run the continual risk of being shot down by one of their own F16 fighters.
Ignorance may be bliss for some folk, but not for those who have studied this page and
realized the implications.
18 October 2001
Suddenly, more than five weeks after the attack
and for no apparent reason, the most powerful newspaper in the western world published a
major article "reinforcing" the myth that physical hijackers were responsible
for the attacks on 11 September. No hard facts of course, no corroboration at all,
just the usual pathetic series of media "sources", all of them far too
"secret" to reveal.
Within hours of this newspaper going to press,
television reporters across the entire western world repeated the fiction to their own
viewing publics. From London in England to Sydney in Australia, everone woke to this
new "proof" that Arabs were the real culprits. Never mind public safety, please
believe what we, your trusted and experienced news peddlers, are telling you. To read the
propaganda, click here.
19 October 2001
During the past few days I have received
many emails asking for a written explanation of who was behind the attacks on 11
September, and why. As an investigator I can prove how the attack was carried out,
but I cannot prove why or by whom. Of all the work I have seen on the
Internet, the closest to the truth is probably this imspired report called
"Orient Express" written by journalist Israel Shamir. To read "Orient
Express", click here.
20 January 2002
Former
German Minister Von Buelow Already Knew About Remote Control!
In his interview with the German daily
"Tagesspiegel" on January 13th, former German Secretary of Defence Andreas Von
Buelow made the following statement:-
"There is also the theory of one British flight
engineer: according to this, the steering of the planes was perhaps taken out of the
pilots' hands, from outside. The Americans had developed a method in the 1970s, whereby
they could rescue hijacked planes by intervening into the computer piloting [automatic
pilot system]. This theory says, this technique was abused in this case..."
Not quite so much a theory as might first appear. When I
released the above report about "Home Run" remote control in October 2001, I
mentioned that one European flag carrier was aware of the technology, though at that
precise point in time I thought it prudent not to name the actual airline:-
"As long ago as the early nineties, a major European
flag carrier acquired the information and was seriously alarmed that one of its own
aircraft might be "rescued" by the Americans without its authority. Accordingly,
this flag carrier completely stripped the American flight control computers out of its
entire fleet, and replaced them with a home grown version. These aircraft are now
effectively impregnable to penetration by Home Run, but that is more than can be said for
the American aircraft fleet..."
The European flag carrier which completely stripped
the American flight computers out of its aircraft was Lufthansa, the German national
airline. Bearing in mind his former posts as Secretary of Defence and Minister of Science
and Technology, Herr Von Buelow would have known all about this mammoth but secretive
task.
How very clever (and discreet) of Von Buelow to sort
of "drop the information" into the middle of an interview about the 9/11
attacks!
The author is a former member of the Society of Licenced
Aeronautical Engineers & Technologist, London
This report may be republished unedited for non-commercial
reasons in the interests of public safety |
| United Flight 175,
South Tower |
| |
|