Flight 93

 

WTC            Pentagon            Flight 93            Hijackers            Other Claims                 Main Page

  • Claim: Flight 93 landed in Cleveland

Discussed here:

http://www.911myths.com/html/93_land...cleveland.html
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
http://www.freetimes.com/story/681
In Brief: Liz Foreman, whose name was attached to this story, tried to clear it up in February 2006: “The story in question, an Associated Press bulletin, was posted on WCPO.com during the morning of September 11, 2001. The story stated that Flight 93 landed in Cleveland. This was not true.
Once the AP issued a retraction a few minutes later, we removed the link. I only removed the link TO the story. We did not remove the story itself. This was my error probably due to the busy nature of the day.”

One plane landed in Cleveland, Delta Flight 1989, which was first misidentified as Flight 93. The other mystery plane, a KC-135, only returned to the hangar.

Vernon "Bill" Wessel, the director of safety and mission assurance at NASA Glenn reports the following:
“A KC-135 had to come back to the hangar," says Wessel, as if realizing for the first time that this aircraft may have caused some undue confusion. A team of scientists from the Johnson Space Center in Houston had flown to Cleveland on this KC-135 to conduct micro-gravity experiments. The visiting scientists could not return to Houston as scheduled on 9/11 once the FAA ordered all planes to land. "After the facility closed, we had to take those scientists to a hotel." The scientists, dressed as civilians, were boarded onto shuttle buses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: Seismology reports indicated a crash time 10:06, 3 minutes later than the official time.
Discussed here:
http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93_seismology.html
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
In Brief: The initial seismic report claiming the time 10:06 was from 2002. The Commission had this to say:

“The seismic data on which they based this estimate are far too weak in signal-to-noise ratio and far too speculative in terms of signal source to be used as a means of contradicting the impact time established by the very accurate combination of FDR, CVR, ATC, radar, and impact site data sets. These data sets constrain United 93's impact time to within 1 second, are airplane- and crash-site specific, and are based on time codes automatically recorded in the ATC audiotapes for the FAA centers and correlated with each data set in a process internationally accepted within the aviation accident investigation community. Furthermore, one of the study's principal authors now concedes that "seismic data is not definitive for the impact of UA 93.”

There are no reports of the authors of the original seismic report having disputed this conclusion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: Flight 93 was shot down. Debris was found miles from the crash site.
Discussed here:
http://www.911myths.com/html/missing_engine.html
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...42.html?page=7
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...42.html?page=8
http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence.../producer.html
http://www.debunk911myths.org/Indian_Lake
http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2001/US/09/13/penn.attack/

In Brief: There was a white jet in the vicinity of Flight 93--a Dassault Falcon 20 business jet owned by the VF Corp. of Greensboro, N.C. The FAA asked them to investigate and they did. They got down within 1500 ft. of the ground when they circled. They saw a hole in the ground with smoke coming out of it. They pinpointed the location and then continued on. The only military plane in the vicinity of the crash site was an unarmed C-130 cargo plane. The cargo plane was returning to Minnesota before Flight 93 crashed and was flying at 24,000 feet about 17 miles from the crash site.

A fan from one of the engines was recovered in a catchment basin, just over 300 yards south of the crash site, which means the fan landed in the direction the jet was travelling. "It's not unusual for an engine to move or tumble across the ground" says Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert.

Human remains were confined to a 70-acre area directly surrounding the crash site. Paper and tiny scraps of sheet metal landed in Indian lake. Indian Lake is less than 1.5 miles southeast of the impact crater, easily within range of debris blasted skyward by the heat of the explosion from the crash.

If a missile had hit Flight 93, there would have been more evidence of it and a much larger heavy debris area. It's worth noticing, that lighter debris was blown miles away by the winds. But it was only small pieces of paper, pages of magazines and thin nylon. The wind was blowing towards Indian Lake and New Baltimore at 9 knots.

This study by the NTSB shows, that flight 93 flew at heights below 12000ft in the last 10 minutes of its flying time.

It is also claimed, that the call by Ed Felt, where he described seeing some white smoke, is identification of a shot plane. Felt made the call at 9:58. At that time the plane was at 5000ft. What makes this claim very suspicious, though, is the fact that a couple of minutes later the plane once again climbed to 10000ft, before it crashed. Would a plane that was shot down climb another 5000ft for a few minutes after being shot, before crashing?

Also, if the plane was already shot at 9:58, it was still 5 minutes away from the crash scene. Even at the very low speed of 300mph a plane would fly a distance of 5 miles in one minute. In 5 minutes the distance would be 25 miles. And that is at the speed of 300mph. The plane was moving faster than that. If it was shot already at 9:58, we would see debris maybe tens of miles away from the scene, not just a few miles.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: The phone calls from Flight 93 were fake, cell phones could not have worked.
Discussed here:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/United_Airlines_Flight_93_-_Phone_calls
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/Cell_phones
http://www.911myths.com/html/the_9_1...en_t_real.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_93
In Brief: Ten passengers and two crew members were able to make calls that went through. All but two of them were airphone calls. Only two phone calls, one by Edward Felt and one by flight attendant CeeCee Lyles, came from cell phones — both at 9:58 a.m, shortly before the plane crashed. At this point, the aircraft was ~5,000 feet above sea level. They worked.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: There were no bodies.
Discussed here:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...42.html?page=8
http://www.freetimes.com/story/681
http://www.post-gazette.com/headline...ht931027p5.asp
http://www.dcmilitary.com/dcmilitary.../12279-1.shtml
In Brief: 102 DNA analysts took over the difficult chore of generating a DNA profile of the victims. Their work included not only the Pentagon crash victims, but the victims of the Somerset County crash as well.

Wallace Miller, Somerset County coroner, says human remains were confined to a 70-acre area directly surrounding the crash site.

He also states:
“There were pieces of people. Trust me. I cleaned it up. The plane hit the ground doing 575 miles per hour. The rest of the remains were vaporized on impact. But we did ID everyone onboard.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: The impact hole was way too small for an aircraft.
Discussed here:
http://www.flight93crash.com/flight93_eyewitness.html
http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93_photos.html
http://www.freetimes.com/story/681
In Brief: Multiple eyewitnesses saw an airplane. Everyone onboard was identified by DNA. Lots of plane debris and both black boxes were found. Is there any question anymore?

Again, as in the case of Pentagon, the speed of the plane was very high. One shouldn’t expect to see an almost intact fuselage. Everything breaks into small pieces with huge impact forces.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: The smoke plume in Val McClatchey's photo "End of Serenity" is from an explosion originating from a different location than the alleged crash spot of Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pa which would prove the official story is a fraud, or if her photo itself is a fraud.
Discussed here:
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=61633

In Brief: Some theorists claim the famous "End of Serenity" photo taken by Val McClatchey is either fake, or shows a plume originating from a location other than Flight 93 crash site. The evidence is discussed in the abovementioned thread.

All the other evidence discussed in this page places Flight 93 in that exact spot that exact time, so the photo analysis is of no significant importance. This topic is somewhat similar to the analysis of the 5 Pentagon frames trying to disprove the plane there. No photo/video analysis is going to change the massive amounts of other evidence directly proving the existence of those flights.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Claim: Mark Bingham called his mom and used his full name. That must be fake.
Discussed here:
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com...k-bingham.html
http://www.911myths.com/html/mom__th...k_bingham.html
In Brief: Mark’s mom says the following in a Discovery Channel “The Flight That Fought Back” documentary:
“Once in a while he would say that. He would call up, and he was, he was a young businessman, and used to, used to introduce himself on phone as Mark Bingham, and he was trying to be, uh, strong, and level-headed, and, and strictly business.”
http://www.911myths.com/Hoglan.avi



Recommended Flight 93 reading for the interested:
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf
http://www.911myths.com/
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics/United_Airlines_Flight_93
http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=64
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech.../1227842.html?