portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article creative united states

9.11 investigation

flight 93 (or was it) backtracking tail #'s the 2 591's

On Sept 10th 2001, Flight 0078 (=N591UA) arrived in Newark from SFO (San Fransisco) at 6:54 wheel on time. However, Flight 0507, with the same tail number, 591UA departed Boston Logan for ORD (Chicago) at 7:39 wheel off time. It left from Chicago airport 45 mins after it touched down in Newark.
Sept 10th 2001
Flight 0078 (591UA) arrives in Newark from SFO (San Fransisco) at 6:54 wheel on time
Flight 0507 (591UA) departs Boston Logan for ORD (Chicago) at 7:39 wheel off time.

Boston does not have records of it arriving at Logan that day?
Newark only has it departing once at 19:40?
Anyone see a problem here ?
It had 45 mins from touchdown in San Fran before it left IN ANTOHER CITY ?
 http://911bts.brad.com/2-591s.html

Also, later that day...
591UA departed ORD to EWR 10:43 (no arrival time in EWR diverted as flight 0640)
departed Newark to SFO 19:40 (5 hours late, 14:30 scheduled, as flight 0075)

Question: How can it depart Newark if it was diverted?

There are no records of it arriving in Newark.
If it did arrive in Newark why was it 5 hours late?
 http://disc.server.com/discussion.cgi?disc=149495;article=68089;title=APFN

From what I understand, BTS.gov uses UTC time. so it is not a time zone problem. I checked other flights and they do not have this problem.

Since the BTS data has become a big issue, i went to an ATC web board and started chatting with the guys.
I mentioned this stuff, and here is the response...

The data in that data base is not recorded by the government, it is recorded by the individual airlines and (eventually) reported to the government... I would imagine that every airline has a different procedure. ...and I suspect that there is no oversight over the quality of the database, nor any penalty for errors -- so there would be very little motivation for any airline to spend a lot of money to ensure that the absolutely correct information is being reported.
My only point is that it would be a mistake to read too much into the data just because it is being reported on a government web site.

regards,
xxxxx

OK , so this is not really new to me, all its saying is that the BTS may not be accurate, and its the airlines data. An earlier response from this board from the webmaster is below...

The FAA keeps pretty good records when it comes to aircraft registry, I don't think this is possible. Flt 93 was a B-757. NTSB confirmed it. The duplicate tail number could be as simple as a pilot screw up. He may have flown the 73 the day or hour before and now is the seat of the 75 and files the wrong tail number. I don't know, just guessing.
 http://bbs.natca.net/default.asp?fid=67

So this guy says it is a coincidence. Somehow i doubt that.
Ive looked at dozens (at least) of BTS records, and the only anomalies like this i found were for 591UA and 594UA ( for 594UA see url)
www.rense.com/general56/flfight.htm
-------------------------------

Also interesting is that flight 175 changed its transponder code twice (911 commission-paraphrased). according to officials at Flight Explorer, it is unusual to change a transponder code in flight.

"Also overheard was a request for a flight path to Kennedy - but
the controller, who was not controlling the plane himself, is unsure
whether the pilot or hijacker made the request."
(Source:  http://www.csmonitor.com/earlyed/earlyUSA5.html)

now, related to this on flight 93. it filed a new flight plan. Now the media reported that it filed a new plan at 9:35. but a flight explorer official said that it filed a new plan AFTER 10:00 am.
The only explanation i can figure is that the data for the new flight plan did not appear in real time, somehow it was delayed. I dont know enough to comment. Anyone want to look into this?
 http://airgames.bravehost.com/flight93.html

Ive got to wonder why a hijacker would file a new flight plan, and turn a transpoder code back on. In the case of flight 175, it was done twice.

Below , snips from the article at globalfreepress.
I only included the pertinent info....
Brad

----------------------

"Twin tails" of pre-Flight 93 and other "phantom
flights"
 http://inn.globalfreepress.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=901

The official timeline of Sep11th is breaking apart.

Atta's Portland flight did not exist; various flights
of the official flights or the tail numbers of their
precursors existed twice; new, recently unknown terror
drills show, that the scenario of 9/11 was well known;
the new "flight plans" and meeting points of the
alleged hijacked flights included too many
coincidences; the planners of the "hijack" must have
had inside knowledge about other flights and their
cancellations as well.

n September 11th, 2001, "Flight93" was officially
listed by the FAA with Tail Number N591UA.
The latest findings of Brad M, ewing2001, Frank Levi,
and others, show that something appears to be fishy
with the history of this tail number, which suggests a
possible swap scenario of this Flight, for whatever
reasons.

The question is, if it really was this Flight, who
departed Newark on that morning, and if this tail was
still around after Sep11th

Currently, a new hunt within the BTS database, shows
clearly, that something is irregular in the Timeline
of N591UA...

On Sept 10th 2001, Flight 0078 (=N591UA) arrived in
Newark from SFO (San Fransisco) at 6:54 wheel on time.
However, Flight 0507, with the same tail number, 591UA
departed Boston Logan for ORD (Chicago) at 7:39 wheel
off time, as current screenshots show. How is this
possible?...

Currently, a new hunt within the BTS database, shows clearly, that something is irregular in the Timeline of N591UA...

On Sept 10th 2001, Flight 0078 (=N591UA) arrived in Newark from SFO (San Fransisco) at 6:54 wheel on time. However, Flight 0507, with the same tail number, 591UA departed Boston Logan for ORD (Chicago) at 7:39 wheel off time, as current screenshots show. How is this possible?

Also, Boston does not have records of N591UA arriving at Logan that day and Newark only has it departing once at 19:40 PM EST.

There seems to be a problem here. It had 45 mins from touchdown in San Francisco before it left in another city.

Recently reestablished, the "official Flight 93" began as a scheduled service from EWR (Newark) to SFO on September 5th 2001, but the first Tuesday flight in 2001, was on 9-11; there was no Newark to SF flight before.

On September 11th, BTS shows 591UA for "Flight93" with a Wheels-off Time at 08:28 AM EST, but which tail departed?
And did it really reach Shanksville?



I also followed N591UA and found the same irregularities:

1) San Francisco International (SFO)

Scheduled Arrival Time: UA 09/10/2001 0075 N591UA EWR 17:29 PM EST

with almost 3 hours delay:
Wheels on Time: UA 09/10/2001 0075 N591UA EWR 22:07
Actual Arrival Time: UA 09/10/2001 0075 N591UA EWR 22:15
Scheduled Departure Time: UA 09/10/2001 0078 N591UA EWR 22:05 PM EST
Wheels off time: UA 09/10/2001 0078 N591UA EWR 23:15

2) Newark (EWR)

Scheduled Arrival Time: UA 09/10/2001 0078 N591UA SFO 6:22
Actual Arrival Time: UA 09/10/2001 0078 N591UA SFO 7:01
Wheels-on Time: UA 09/10/2001 0078 N591UA SFO 6:54 <----!!!
Scheduled Departure Time: UA 09/10/2001 0075 N591UA SFO 14:30
Actual Departure Time: UA 09/10/2001 0075 N591UA SFO 18:30
Wheels-off-Time: UA 09/10/2001 0075 N591UA SFO 19:40

A look to Chicago and Boston:

3) O'Hare International (ORD, Chicago)

Wheels-on Time: UA 09/10/2001 0507 N591UA BOS 8:39
Actual Arrival Time UA 09/10/2001 0507 N591UA BOS 8:48
Scheduled Arrival Time: UA 09/10/2001 0507 N591UA BOS 9:07 AM EST
Wheels off time: UA 09/10/2001 0642 N591UA EWR 10:43 AM EST <----!!
Scheduled Departure Time: UA 09/10/2001 0642 N591UA EWR 10:30 AM EST

4) Boston (BOS)
Scheduled Arrival Time: UA 09/10/2001 N591UA NONE
Actual Arrival Time: UA 09/10/2001 N591UA NONE
Wheels-on Time: UA 09/10/2001 N591UA NONE

however...
Actual Departure Time: UA 09/10/2001 0507 N591UA ORD 7:26
Scheduled Departure Time: UA 09/10/2001 0507 N591UA ORD 7:30
Wheels of Time: UA 09/10/2001 0507 N591UA ORD 7:39 <---!!!!

2) New "flight plans" of Flight93

More oddities have been recognised by researcher Frank Levi.
The estimated arrival times of "Flight 93" (aka N591UA) starting at 2:15 PM, then it changes SOUTH of Pittsburgh, well after it was hijacked and a new flight plan was filed to 10:28.

Also another close researcher pointed out to me, that all flights were being diverted by the time 93 was officially hijacked. And yet the transcripts give the impression that it was still on its way to San Francisco at the time.

According to some hobby plane spotters, N591UA was still flying in 2003.
Some researchers also indicated that this original UA-flight is "masked" as N594UA.
There is a website, which shows 23 Boeing 757s, which were ordered, but never built.
What happened with them?

info from ...
 http://www.bts.gov/

reading...
 http://airgames.bravehost.com/Flight93.html
 http://airgames.bravehost.com/air_oddities.html
 http://airgames.bravehost.com/

Flights AA11 and AA77 on Sep.11 2001 did not exist!
 http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=74017

Brad
www.911index.batcave.net