On flight 93, who called from airphones and who called from cell phones?

[readmoreoften]

Also, flight 77.

[KJF]

1. It's contradictory

At the Moussaoui trial the FBI summary witness said:

"Beginning at 9:30 a.m., passenger Tom Burnett, B-u-r-n-e-t-t, made several telephone calls to his wife from telephones in rows 24 and 25, even though he was assigned a seat in row 4 in the front of the plane."

"At 9:37 a.m., passenger Mark Bingham, B-i-n-g-h-a-m, who was assigned a seat in row 4 in the front of the plane, called his mother from a telephone in row 25, near the rear of the plane, and told her that the plane had been hijacked by three men who had said they have a bomb."

"At 9:37 a.m., passenger Jeremy Glick, G-l-i-c-k, who was assigned a seat in row 11, called his wife from a telephone in row 27 near the rear of the plane and told her that the plane had been hijacked by three men who looked like Iranians, with dark skin and bandanas on their heads, and who had knives."

"At 9:43, passenger Todd Beamer, B-e-a-m-e-r, who was assigned to a seat in row 10, tried to telephone his wife from a telephone in row 32 but was routed to a GTE operator. Mr. Beamer told the operator that the plane had been hijacked and that he saw two hijackers with knives and someone else enter the cockpit."

"At 9:49 a.m., passenger Marion Britton, B-r-i-t-t-o-n, who was assigned to a seat in row 12, called her friend from a telephone in row 33 in the rear of the plane and told her friend that the plane had been hijacked."

Link: http://cryptome.quintessenz.at/mirror/usa-v-zm-030706-02.htm

If memory serves there was a thread on cell phones or airphones about a year ago, maybe by JohnDoeII. It collected all the media references to the topic on United 93. Perhaps somebody could bring it back. If memory serves, there was some talk that the calls the FBI is now saying were from airphones were actually from cell phones. There was some sort of report into it that the 9/11 Commission cited, but it's not public yet. If you were really motivated, you could write a FOIA request for it (if somebody else hasn't already).

[readmoreoften]

2. I'm just wondering because airphones would clearly work.

Cell phones wouldn't. I'm friends with a lot of Mark Bingham's buddies so I can verify that he existed. He came in from San Francisco and helped them set up their rugby team in NYC. I'm going to be on the look out for that information.

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. A few coincidences about the phone calls

Almost all of the calls were made by people who were also the same people who tried to take over the plane. That's one busy bunch of guys. They all made fairly detailed phone calls to the outside, Beamer spoke to the operator for over 13 minutes with enough time to say the Lord's Prayer and a Psalm, and still had time left over to organize and attempt to take over the plane. Also the members of the take over the team were all very athletic, white, dark haired males who for the most part were also very religious. Something strange here?

Only one or two other people were able to make phone calls out. One was a very brief cell phone call from a woman on the plane. The other was a phone call from a passenger locked in a bathroom whose story doesn't match anyone else's on the plane that called out. I would assume the fellow in the bathroom was on a cell phone.

[readmoreoften]

6. Mark Bingham was not religious as far as I know. He was very gay, though.

He founded the first gay team in the NY rugby league just before he died. I'm friends with some members of that team.

[DoYouEverWonder]

12. Supposedly

he had a bookmark with the 'Our Father' with him on the plane.

I was surprised too, but I have read people describe him has 'religious'. Just being gay, doesn't exclude one from being a fundie or Repug I suppose?

[readmoreoften]

18. He wasn't a fundie repug. I've never heard anyone that knew him say he was

religious. The team he founded hangs out at a leather bar after events. How would anyone know what kind of BOOKMARK he had on the plane??? And everyone's parents describe them as religious or godfearing after they die. Why is someone a fundie repug because the MSM needs them to be for their propaganda machine.

They needed him to be a "hero". Can't have a gay hero.

[DoYouEverWonder]

21. I didn't say he was a repug

I said being gay doesn't exclude someone from being a fundie OR a Repug today.


I don't know if Bingham was one or the other or even both. However, my original point was that there was a religous connection based on the report that he was carry a bookmark with the "Lord's Prayer." Here is the citation from the Guardian that reports this little tidbit:


Mark Bingham was last to board the plane, having arrived late and nearly missed the flight. Bingham intrigues because he does not fit the image of the all-American hero quite as neatly as Todd Beamer, a family man from rural New Jersey with a Lord's Prayer bookmark in the Tom Clancy novel he had onboard. Bingham was gay.

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/waronterrorism/story/0,1373,610355,00.html">The Observer


However, upon re-reading this report, I realize that I misunderstood what was being reported.

I orignially thought the 'bookmark' belonged to Bingham, but I can see I was wrong and that they are referring to Todd Beamer.

My apologies for the error.

[KJF]

4. Both

The 9/11 Commission says both mobile phones and airphones were used.

Regarding the United 93:
Shortly after the cockpit was taken over "... the passengers and flight crew began a series of calls from GTE airphones and cellular phones."
p. 12

I guess there were about 40 or so calls from the various planes.

There's some dispute over whether cell phones work in planes or not.

[TheWraith]

7. Cell phones can work from planes.

Whether they do or not depends on the type of cell phone, the network it's connecting to, how that network is built, the construction of the plane, the altitude, the speed, where the plane is, etcetera.

[wildbilln864]

8. i don't think so.

cell phones don't work in planes over 2000 ft.

[TheWraith]

10. Cell phones on the ground have a range of up to 80,000 feet.

In the air, where there's no line-of-sight obstructions, the primary limitation on range is how much of the signal is directed upward by the ground towers, and whether the phone can hear it through the metal skin of the plane. I doubt it would work at cruising altitude, but lower, it is certainly possible.

[wildbilln864]

14. how bout some support...

for your unfounded assertion? link?

Oh wait, here's one;
http://www.networkworld.com/news/2003/0715newinfl.html

[TheWraith]

15. It's a fact, not an assertion.

A cell phone's range on the ground is around eight to twelve miles for a 1900 MHz signal, and 12 to 16 for an 850 MHz signal. Take 15 miles as a figure, and that's just shy of 80k feet. There are two main types of cellular antennas: ones that use panel antennas directed outward from the tower, usually in four banks of three, which produce a more or less pancake-like signal. And those which use omnidirectional antennas, usually a cluster of three, which produce a dome shaped signal. The latter can easily push a signal many thousands, even tens of thousands, of feet up.

Now, the main reason that cell phones aren't allowed on airplanes is because the FAA is afraid that they would interfere with the antique radio guidance systems used on most existing planes. It's also theoretically possible that a phone at high altitude could talk to more than one tower, causing difficulty for both the network and the phone. This is highly unlikely, particularly with modern phones, but it's still considered. The solutions offered by various companies usually rely on putting a small, low power cellular transmitter in the plane's cabin, so that service can be reliable and the phones don't transmit with so much power as to effect other systems.

[wildbilln864]

17. yes maybe so ...

they do work well enough on the ground. but the towers are only transmitting in sort of a donut shaped emmission. The signal doesn't reach high altitudes also a fast moving plane, the phone would need to be swapped from one tower to the next too fast for it to be stable.

[readmoreoften]

19. A professor just did a test on all major brands.

They have a .006 success rate at, I believe, it was 2000ft.

[Grateful for Hope]

9. Back in 2001?

I work for a cell phone company. Check your facts.

[TheWraith]

13. Certainly in 2001.

While the systems have been upgraded and new technologies introduced, overall tower coverage isn't that much different from five years ago.

[Grateful for Hope]

16. In speaking with some of the engineers I work with

Coverage was not as good five years ago, and, it was very difficult to get any coverage at all on aircraft.

[napi21]

11. There was some guy who did a test of cell phones on planes

using a private plane. I don't recall the exact numbers, but he found that the connection capability was reduced the higher the planes altitude was. By the time it hit 30,000 ft. the capability was down to -1%.

I just saw that info recently, but I can't recall where.

His conclusion was, that cell phones couldn't have been used on the planes involved in 9/11 because of the reported altitudes, and airspeeds.

[MarkyX]

20. Project Achilles

You're talking about Project Achilles. That experiment is invalid because he is using a different planes, different cell phones, in a highly populated area. London Ontario is full of people, while Shanksville wasn't, which is a big deal when trying to get a signal.

Do not use that report if you plan on having credibility.

[savemefromdumbya]

22. they were on the ground in Ohio

[Andre II]

5. See

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=48029&mesg_id=48029