"Truthers" Lie about Remote Controlled Planes

      The 9-11 “Truth” Movement claims the planes on 911were flown by remote control as evidenced by the following quote from 911myths.com: “‘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… No matter what the pilot wants, he cannot override this feature…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. ‘”

     Of course, this isn’t quite true. The Boeing 757 and 767 DO have autopilot, which CAN be switched off, and their control systems are MECHANICAL. In point of fact, the ONLY plane that had the “fly-by-wire” ability at the time was the Boeing 777 and even that could be overridden by the pilot. (Source).

     Furthermore, it requires major modifications to the plane and control system such as “some form of feedback to show the “remote controller” what was going on, perhaps several cameras, then a transmission system to send that feedback, and receive commands,” not to mention the fact it would have to be done without anyone noticing (reference).

     There is, of course, another problem as well, as this quote from 911myths.com points out: “Consider this press conference reply from American General Ronald Keys:

Q: Referencing the E-10, if we can control a Predator from Nevada, why do we need to put a battle staff airborne in the E-10?

General Keys: Well, you can control them, but for example, we missed shooting down a MiG-25 during the war because of the latency in the system. We had the Hellfire-armed Predator up and the MiG-25 was coming in to intercept and we had him locked up, but by the time we had fired the missile, he had started his turn and so he broke lock. The reason was there’s about a several second delay in the latency.” Latency refers to the delay (reference).

     911myths.com  further states that, “To take an example of flying into the Pentagon, what would happen if you appear to be coming in too low? First, there would be a delay while the cameras on board the plane processed the image. There’s then a delay while the image is transmitted, and another while it’s displayed to the remote pilot. There’s a natural delay while he reacts to the situation, then another in transmitting his commands back to the plane, and another while it adjusts the control surfaces accordingly.”

     The delay is several seconds, and that was in 2005, so we can assume some improvements since 2001, but if you consider several to mean 3 ( it could be more), that means a plane doing 500 MPH would go about four-tenths of a mile before it could react to what the remote pilot sees. (Source).

     In short, 911myths.com correctly states that “This doesn’t seem the most reliable technology, a major issue if you’re looking to pull off a complex plot involving multiple airliners.”


Posted March 8, 2008 by Victor Chabala in Real 9/11 Facts

%d bloggers like this: