| Online: | |
| Visits: | |
| Stories: |
Flight Termination System Brought Down Flight 370 And Others
So, how many of you ever heard of a FTS ???
(Flight Termination System)
A Flight Termination System was in use by NASA
as far back as the 1980′s. Remeber the Challenger
Shuttle accident ?? Not an accident, the flight
was terminated intentionally and 8 Astronauts
were murdered because the shuttle flew outside
of it’s safety range. It was intentionally
destroyed to prevent loss of life and property
on the ground.
During the 1990′s this technology took off
with the US Military as a means to remotely
terminate aircraft or ballistic missiles in
flight after launch. It became a fail safe
mechanism or self destruct for all of America’s
ICBM’s in case of a recall in flight.
The program expanded early in 2000 and became part
of military exercises to seek out and destroy
hijacked aircraft and was used as part of Operation
Vigilant Guardian on Sept. 11, 2001 and the commercial
airplanes that crashed into the towers were armed with
a Flight Termination System and flown remotely by
the US Military out of NORAD. These aircraft were
the actual boogies of the operation when the
exercise lost it’s satellite feed and the airplanes
lost contact with their remote hosts and flew their
intended courses right into buildings in Manhattan
before NORAD could regain control of the aircraft.
After 9/11, the war on terror allowed the Flight
Termination System to be implemented on every US
Carrier Commercial Airplane in flight. Yes, when
you fly an American commercial airplane, there
are already explosive devices on board to keep
any potential hijackers from flying airplanes
into buildings in the future. But they do not
want you to know this or you might stop flying
if you knew you had dynamite strapped to your
passenger seat.
from the link:
“Engine failure outside the launch corridor may cause
the rocket to fall on people or property. Therefore
if the rocket is about to exit the launch corridor,
the RSO will terminate powered flight to ensure that
no debris falls outside the launch corridor. This
involves sending coded messages (typically sequences
of audio tones, kept secret before launch) to special
redundant UHF receivers in the various stages or
components of the launch vehicle. On receipt of an
‘arm’ command, liquid-fueled rocket engines are shut
down. A separate ‘fire’ command detonates explosives,
typically linear shaped charges, to cut the propellant
tanks open and disperse their contents.”
This Flight Termination System allows any commercial
airplane to be remotely controlled by the US Government
at any given time in the air or on the ground.
The FTS works on an alternating set of UHF Frequencies
(tones) that is accepted by a UHF receiver onboard
the airplane that even the pilots cannot access.
This Flight Termination System Module can do anything
to the plane that a pilot can do from the cockpit,
from dumping fuel, to landing the plane. It can also
preset the auto-pilot to ignore pilot actions within
the cockpit just in case a hijacker shoots a pilot,
the plane can still land.
In case of a military shootdown, a pilot can eject
an the FTS can destruct the plane so the enemy
cannot get intel from the crashed plane.
In 2006, the FTS was changed over from a UHF signal
to a Satellite signal. So, intercontinental flights
crossing oceans could be controlled if they were
hijacked and nowhere near a land based UHF transmitter.
This FTS is how the government knew so much about
Malaysia Flight 370 after it deviated from it’s
intended flight path. The plane was still recieving
that signal from the FTS Satellite.
Now, let’s talk about who makes these FTS Systems and
the Satellite Company who helps the process.
System Planning Corporation
SPC is under contract with the US DOD to make these
systems for most all US Military and Commercial Jets.
SPC also hires FTS Engineers whose only job is to
implement, install and monitor these modules on
both commercial and military aircraft.
The owner of SPC is none other than Dov Zakheim, whose
name you might remember from the PNAC Document with
the claim of a a New Pearl Harbor. He was a signor
of that PNAC Document, Progress for a New American
Century.
some links for you:
[link to en.wikipedia.org]
[link to www.sysplan.com]
Now, the Satellite Company is also owned by SPC up til
10 days after the Malaysia Flight disappeared. Then it was sold
to ORBCOMM. The system is known as GlobalTrak. And it is
the GlobalTrak Satellite feed to Malaysia Flight 370
which brought the jet down. ORBCOMM was so impressed
with the Malaysian take down, they bought the Sat Division
from SPC.
[link to www.m2mevolution.com]
Now, how did SPC get it’s GlobalTrak FTS Equipment on
a Malaysian Commercial Airplane ??
Malaysia has a contract with the US Government and the FAA
to install safety equipment on an as needed basis for safety
and security reasons. That document is here:
better get it quick before they delete it.
GlobalTrak’s FTS System allows any hijacked aircraft
with the systen onboard to be diverted, terminated
or flown to an airport of choice or dumping fuel.
So now you know what happened with Flight Termination
Systems that go all the way back to the Challenger
explosion live on TV up to the disappearance of Malaysian
Flight 370.
If the hijackers don’t kill you, you can damn well bet
the US Government will to keep the plane you are on
from being a missile to harm others.
your safest form of travel is the ground.
best wishes
Source: http://nesaranews.blogspot.com/2014/03/flight-termination-system-brought-down.html
I agree that large commercial aircraft, in particular Boeing, have flight directors that can be taken over from the ground. This technology has existed for at least a couple of decades and has no doubt been improved over this time.
I doubt that there are flight termination systems on board commercial aircraft. The reason is that there are many thousands of airframe and power plant mechanics (A&Ps), and avionics technicians who service these airplanes every day. It’s their job to sign off that every nut and bolt and hydraulic connection and wire is as it should be, every few hundred hours of operation. They’re an intelligent and inquisitive lot by nature. It seems unlikely to me that many thousands of them could be so silenced or lied to that nobody ever heard of this.
Um NO! The anti-hijack remote control systems were in place BEFORE 9-11.
And they are not “flight termination systems.”
From Janes: “The fully digital FCS-700 triplex autopilot and flight director system, with fail-operational automatic landing capability, was designed for Boeing 767 and 757 transports.”
There were two 757s and two 767s involved in 911.
And since then several remote-control systems have been patented.
But how many do we need, when we already HAD this: ” A data link interface between an aircraft Flight Management System (FMS) and the Management Unit for the Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS), was developed during the early 1990s. This communication system allows for the update an aircraft FMS in mid-flight.”
We do NOT have “flight termination systems” in passenger planes. The 757 went into service in 1983, with an AUTOMATIC LANDING CAPABILITY built into its computer.
And since the 1990s, we’ve had the data communications links to alter the Flight Management System from the GROUND. The Flight Management System controls the course of the plane.
The autopilot on most planes works by moving the physical control stick with electric motors.The pilot can easily overpower the autopilot system with force on the stick. Most planes have a very mechanical control system no place electronics could override any thing between the control stick and control surfaces.
This is not news, it is an old tired rumor that won’t pan out. Flight 850 was supposedly destroyed the same way. I design flight termination equipment for one of SPCs competitors, who has installations at most US bases and several foreign ones, so I should know what I am talking about.
The primary use for flight termination systems is rocket launching. They are also used with unmanned aircraft. The key here is vehicles that are either unmanned or operate in a manner that cannot be controlled by the occupants. The main example of the latter would be the space shuttle. During launch the SRB could not be stopped by anyone or anything–that was a primary criticism of choosing a solid fuel rocket. So during those first few minutes after launch, while there was a crew aboard the shuttle, they could do nothing to avert problems that might occur, and a flight termination system was active with the ability to destroy the whole thing if necessary.
No Flight Termination did not destroy Challenger! A bad decision to launch in cold weather, backed up by a wrong temperature reading taken by using an infrared thermometer outside of its specified operating conditions caused an O ring on the SRB to fail. That is what blew up Challenger. That is a well documented fact, and consistent with the video which shows the flames coming out from where that O ring was supposed to seal.
The range safety officers did order Challenger destroyed and used Flight Termination to do so. They gave that order because it was malfunctioning. Basically it was already destroyed. Whether or not the ground based command had any effect is questionable. At most it destroyed what was left of the SBRs, preventing possible damage if it were to crash in a populated area.
No commercial airliner has or ever has had a Flight Termination system installed. Remember I design these things. There have never been enough of them built to equip the commercial airline fleet. Nor is there a need for such. An airliner has two pilots and human control over its operation. And they often do an incredible job, such as the pilot who safely landed a damaged plane on the Hudson River.
If you are inclined to believe the reckless speculation of the original article, do a Google search. You will quickly learn who makes these things, who buys them, and why. Even the fact that the article dates the history back to about 1960 should tell any intelligent person something. That was when we first started flying rockets into space. I have a copy of the safety manuals for rocket launching (close to 1000 pages). These guys take their jobs very seriously. They recognize inherent dangers both before and during launch and have created an extensive set of rules to thwart Murphy at every possible turn (not to mention terrorists and others). This is not about blowing up commercial aircraft. This is about protecting ordinary citizens, as well as employees against accidents in an expensive and high risk industry.