AAL77 Tracked By Washington Center At 9:05?

[BCR]

I've been working this particular angle for several months now and I've debated whether or not to post it here. Some people will take the information out-of-context and come up with some not-so-well-thought-out CT, but I am at the stage where I need feedback. I am NOT going to list witnesses and source names at this time because my research is still on-going and I don't want crazy people harassing them and drying up the 'well'.

During my review of the Indianapolis (ZID) ARTCC materials, I came across an email from a ZID employee which was essentially a copied AP news story. In the story, it asserted that Washington (ZDC) was tracking an unknown primary target over West Virginia at 9:05 am. A review of the radar files indicates that indeed, the AAL77 primary was in the ZDC system at that time and this is the same time that it came back up in ZID's system as well. However, at 9:05 the plane was directly over Charleston, WV which is in the ZID Cincinnati sector. I do not have the audio files for that particular sector.

When I started digging deeper, I learned that the 911 Commission staff had seen the same ZID document and it had generated some degree of concern with them as well.

Team 7 Miles Kara Email

I located and interviewed one of the reporters who wrote the 9/24/2001 article and he informed me that all that he recalled was that they had hard documentation of the time. He further stated that they expected push-back from the FAA after the articles release, but it never happened.

As many familiar with the AAL77 original loss on radar are already aware, ZID had information of smoke in the Charleston area. I made numerous inquiries with the WV State Police and local authorities, but this reply pretty much sums up that effort.

I’ve researched your request with the information provided. My system shows no such calls during the time frame you provided. I also made an inquiry with another employee who explained they remember no such calls on 09-11-01. There were extra precautions taken during that time and all suspicious calls were on a heightened alert, but nothing similar to what you’ve described is in our records.

You may wish to go back to your source and determine which agency they are referring to as “responding” to “smoke” in our area.

After generating more local contacts in the Charleston area, I learned something even more interesting. On the morning of 9/11, Yeager airport in Charleston was closed to air traffic due to low fog on the runway from the river. That has been confirmed via the ZID TMU tapes. It did not reopen until around the time of the Pentagon event. At some point after the 2nd WTC hit and before the Pentagon hit, the Yeager traffic control tower was evacuated due to an 'unidentified aircraft (primary) in their airspace'.

Bottomline: There was no smoke observed or reported in the Charleston, WV area by local emergency or airport authorities. At 9:05, AAL77's primary was in the ZID and ZDC systems and reported by the AP to have been tracked over WV at that time by ZDC. During this time, Yeager airport was closed due to fog and was monitoring the situation in NYC on CNN when an 'unidentified aircraft' entered their airspace resulting in the tower being evacuated.

Interesting stuff.

ETA: This image should help. The Bedford, VA radar (QBE) are plotted in GE along with the Warren RO positions. QBE feeds into both the ZID and ZDC systems.

 

[beachnut]

ATC would keep other traffic away from a target for safety. Not sure why ATC would evacuate for a target on radar. Did I read that right?

ATC if they had traffic would work it and keep participating aircraft clear of the idiot or UFO.

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Damn, John... now that's tracking info down!

I wonder if Gumboot's seen this; maybe a PM to him and the pilots on the board (Reheat, Beechnut, etc.) will get some real informed commentary going (I don't count; I don't recall the claim of smoke around Charleston).

ETA: And Beechnut posts while I'm composing. Oh well...

 

[BCR]

ATC would keep other traffic away from a target for safety. Not sure why ATC would evacuate for a target on radar. Did I read that right?

ATC if they had traffic would work it and keep participating aircraft clear of the idiot or UFO.

Beach, I can't give you an answer. However, it happened and has been verified (I'll be happy to give you further via email to protect sources).

By the way, as you may recall, Pittsburg did something similar when UAL93 headed their way.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Beach, I can't give you an answer. However, it happened and has been verified (I'll be happy to give you further via email to protect sources).

By the way, as you may recall, Pittsburg did something similar when UAL93 headed their way.

And Boston Center was similarly evacuated when an unknown aircraft was coming its way. (Cold Plays interview with Gravy).

 

[gumboot]

There's some misconceptions in this discussion. Firstly, there's only one LRR site that feeds both Indianapolis ARTCC and Washington ARTCC - the ARSR-3/ATCBI-5 site at Bedford, Virginia (which also feeds Atlanta ARTCC). This site is some 124mi from where AA77 was at 0905.

Now, to get a better handle on this, you have to understand how radar works. Just because their centre was receiving radar data doesn't mean the centre was "tracking" the aircraft.

Centres receive data from all of their sites every twelve seconds, however a computer called a RDP (Radar Data Processor) sorts this data and discards most of it - for a given "sort box" of 12nmix12nmi of airspace, only one radar site will be assigned preferred coverage. Other radars may also cover this particular sort box, but they'll only be used as back up if the preferred site has problems. The preferred site is the closest, which in the case of AA77 was a secondary-only site at Harmony, West Virginia that only feeds into Indianapolis ARTCC.

Every single piece of data fed to the RDP is recorded, and its these complete records that were used to reconstruct AA77s flight path, and yes the Bedford site would have sent primary data on AA77 to Washington ARTCC, however no one at Washington ARTCC ever could have seen that data, and this is confirmed by a conversation NEADS had with the Operations Manager of Washington ARTCC at 09:33 on the morning of 9/11 when he said:

"Okay, now let me tell you this; I- I'll- We'll be looking, we've also lost American 77."

A minute later he said:

"...however they lost radar with him, they lost contact with him, they lost everything, and they don't have any idea where he is or what happened. So what we've done at the surrounding centers here is to tell everyone to look out for limited codes, primary targets, or whatever the case may be."

And finally:

"And that was the last time- that was about fifteen minutes ago, since I talked to the Indianapolis Center Operations Manager."

Clearly Washington ARTCC and Indianapolis ARTCC had no idea where AA77 was at 0905.

 

[beachnut]

Beach, I can't give you an answer. However, it happened and has been verified (I'll be happy to give you further via email to protect sources).

By the way, as you may recall, Pittsburg did something similar when UAL93 headed their way.

I believe you, I was trying to get more information of what you are thinking and skimmed the post; sorry I am doing too many computer things at once and was watching some Olympics on the other window from last night; do not eject me from class yet. Give me; wait, kick me out...

Tall tale time .... The tower guys in Desert Storm. American's were backing up the Saudi tower personnel. We would get 8 minutes warning of a SCUD attack, the local guys would evacuate the tower on first notice (not sure where they went we had no real bomb shelter and the SCUD has an error of 5 miles ) the USAF guys would stay until the darn SCUD was a minute out. ur post reminded me of ATC working the extra minute.

... if some idiots were flying into buildings and an unknown is on my screen, why not pick a lesser target to hide in. I would if there was a safer place.

And a manned vehicle can be very accurate unless Balsamo is flying it.

The OP grew, I will have to do homework, but this could be (as i see above) a job for gumboot and cheapshot. If you want a pilot I will be at the bar.

I think New Zealand is going to take over the world and Gumboot is their airspace expert; they are going to do it with those blue guys they have with the dragons...

 

[BCR]

There's some misconceptions in this discussion. Firstly, there's only one LRR site that feeds both Indianapolis ARTCC and Washington ARTCC - the ARSR-3/ATCBI-5 site at Bedford, Virginia (which also feeds Atlanta ARTCC). This site is some 124mi from where AA77 was at 0905.

Now, to get a better handle on this, you have to understand how radar works. Just because their centre was receiving radar data doesn't mean the centre was "tracking" the aircraft.

Centres receive data from all of their sites every twelve seconds, however a computer called a RDP (Radar Data Processor) sorts this data and discards most of it - for a given "sort box" of 12nmix12nmi of airspace, only one radar site will be assigned preferred coverage. Other radars may also cover this particular sort box, but they'll only be used as back up if the preferred site has problems. The preferred site is the closest, which in the case of AA77 was a secondary-only site at Harmony, West Virginia that only feeds into Indianapolis ARTCC.

Every single piece of data fed to the RDP is recorded, and its these complete records that were used to reconstruct AA77s flight path, and yes the Bedford site would have sent primary data on AA77 to Washington ARTCC, however no one at Washington ARTCC ever could have seen that data, and this is confirmed by a conversation NEADS had with the Operations Manager of Washington ARTCC at 09:33 on the morning of 9/11 when he said:

"Okay, now let me tell you this; I- I'll- We'll be looking, we've also lost American 77."

A minute later he said:

"...however they lost radar with him, they lost contact with him, they lost everything, and they don't have any idea where he is or what happened. So what we've done at the surrounding centers here is to tell everyone to look out for limited codes, primary targets, or whatever the case may be."

And finally:

"And that was the last time- that was about fifteen minutes ago, since I talked to the Indianapolis Center Operations Manager."

Clearly Washington ARTCC and Indianapolis ARTCC had no idea where AA77 was at 0905.

Sorry Gum, but I have to disagree with you. I have the data for the raw data being fed and the data being displayed in the system. The screens at ZDC did have the AAL77 primary at 9:05. Whether anyone saw it or not is another question entirely. To quote the expert on the issue, Tom Lusch,

Out of 197 possible target symbols displayed from 12:58:44, 59 (30%) were Long Run Length Primary, 129 (65%) were Short Run Length Primary, and 9 (5%) had no symbols (missed hits?)." The fact that 70% of the time AAL77 appeared on the ZDC display like" clutter" or "anomalous propagation" would certainly explain why any ZDC Low-Altitude controller looking at their ZDC display would have not readily noticed a B757 with its transponder turned off, rapidly moving east towards Washington D.C.

ZDC high sectors did not have primary filters on, but low sectors always operate with them on. What you are missing is that we don't know what the low sectors at ZDC saw because the FAA will not release those records. We also don't have the details of what was going on with Yeager because those records are unavailable. For you to be dogmatic in what ZDC controllers saw or did not see is not based on evidence but your opinion, since the FAA has not released those records.

Did Yeager alert ZDC and their low sector? I don't know.

 

[gumboot]

Regarding the evacuation of Yeager airport, this in all probability was AA77 - the aircraft was only ~4 miles away at the time. Airport Traffic Control Towers (ATCTs) receive feeds from short range radars called Airport Surveillance Radars, while the ARTCC facilities receive feeds from long range radars called Air Route Surveillance Radars.

Except in one or two exceptional cases, there's no cross-over so ARTCCs don't have access to data fed to ATCTs and ATCTs don't have access to data fed to ARTCCs. TRACON facilities sometimes do receive feeds from the ARSRs as well as the ASRs.

As such while Yeager Tower very likely received primary returns on AA77 passing by 4 miles away at 26,000ft (at which altitude there should be no primary-only returns), no ARTCC facilities would know.

Also, while ARTCCs generally only used secondary, because TRACON and ATCT also deal with low flying private aircraft (which might not have transponders) they quite possibly operate normally with primary on, thus making it more likely they'd see AA77.

 

[gumboot]

For you to be dogmatic in what ZDC controllers saw or did not see is not based on evidence but your opinion, since the FAA has not released those records.

It's not opinion. The way the data is processed is well established - in fact it's Tom Lusch's entire issue with the way the system works. He takes major issue with the way the RDP automatically bins as much as 90% of the radar data being fed to it.

Also factual are the feeds. The feed data I have is from the FAA's NAS Architecture which details every single radar site, what sort of arrays were located there, when they were established, and what centres they feed to.

Tom Lusch himself has explained in many of his papers what the limits of radar coverage are, and I draw attention to the fact that centres only receive data for two sort boxes outside their airspace. Given that AA77 was further than this from Washington ARTCC airspace at 0905, this would further suggest that Washington ARTCC could not have displayed that data.

Basically, given the facts and data I have at my disposal, I aren't able to accept your word that you have display data confirming AA77 was displayed on Washington ARTCC scopes at 0905 as a primary return.

You'll have to provide evidence for me to accept it, as it contradicts the information I currently have.

A low altitude scope would seem irrelevant given that AA77 was in excess of FL240 at the time.

 

[BCR]

It's not opinion. The way the data is processed is well established - in fact it's Tom Lusch's entire issue with the way the system works. He takes major issue with the way the RDP automatically bins as much as 90% of the radar data being fed to it.

Also factual are the feeds. The feed data I have is from the FAA's NAS Architecture which details every single radar site, what sort of arrays were located there, when they were established, and what centres they feed to.

Tom Lusch himself has explained in many of his papers what the limits of radar coverage are, and I draw attention to the fact that centres only receive data for two sort boxes outside their airspace. Given that AA77 was further than this from Washington ARTCC airspace at 0905, this would further suggest that Washington ARTCC could not have displayed that data.

Basically, given the facts and data I have at my disposal, I aren't able to accept your word that you have display data confirming AA77 was displayed on Washington ARTCC scopes at 0905 as a primary return.

You'll have to provide evidence for me to accept it, as it contradicts the information I currently have.

A low altitude scope would seem irrelevant given that AA77 was in excess of FL240 at the time.

The information has been on AAL77.com for years now Gum, and I just posted Tom's analysis of it, so I'm not asking anyone to my word for anything. I just hear a bunch of opinion from you and not much else. I posted Tom's, and if the two of you disagree, then fine. I know, the government is wonderful and would not lie or conceal information from us, so no worries that they claim they don't have the low sector recordings and have released everything they have from ZDC.

Kinda like ZID claims there was a report of smoke in Charleston pre-9:05 and John Thomas called around to verify it with the State Police. Strange that no one has a record of that.

 

[gumboot]

The information has been on AAL77.com for years now Gum, and I just posted Tom's analysis of it

It's "Gumboot", not "Gum". I'd like to know how you determined which data was and wasn't actually displayed, and at which centre. Also, you posted a snippet of Lusch's analysis, which doesn't directly support your contention. All he does is talk of AA77 primary returns to Washington ARTCC from 08:58EDT. We know AA77 eventually entered Washington ARTCC coverage, and I don't dispute that. I dispute your claim (unsupported by the quote you provided from Lusch) that AA77's primary return was displayed on any Washington ARTCC scope at 0905.

I know, the government is wonderful and would not lie or conceal information from us, so no worries that they claim they don't have the low sector recordings and have released everything they have from ZDC.

You're not doing yourself any favour by making comments like this.

Kinda like ZID claims there was a report of smoke in Charleston pre-9:05 and John Thomas called around to verify it with the State Police. Strange that no one has a record of that.

I've never come across this claim from any even vaguely reputable source. At 09:08 Indianapolis contact the USAF Search and Rescue Coordination Centre and the only reason they gave for the alert was simultaneous loss of radar and radio contact with the aircraft. No mention was made of smoke.

Further, even assuming Indianapolis ARTCC did receive reports of smoke, why assume emergency services would know of it? ARTCCs receive reports from pilots all the time. You seem to be making a pretty unwarranted assumption that this report came from police or similar.

 

[BCR]

You're not doing yourself any favour by making comments like this.

Well Gum, I was not trying to do myself any favors. You came along as the 'expert' know-it-all claiming your opinion as fact. Not here to argue with you about it. You were invited long ago to participate with team of people who have spent the past year going over the FAA data in great detail. You have declined to participate in that due to your superior knowledge or lack of interest. Please excuse me if I don't take you seriously now.

 

[T.A.M.]

I think civility should rule the day here. Gumboot prefers to be called by his full username, and out of respect that should be followed. BCR, while having doubts about the official story, does attempt from what I have seen to do honest research.

I hope civility is the path chosen from here on in.

TAM

 

[BCR]

Just a tech note on the ZDC radar data.

The NTAP data is exactly what the FAA controllers have presented on their displays. It is considerably filtered. As for "various algorithms," it isn't all that complicated. Each radar sort box, which has a dimension of 16 by 16 nautical miles, may have up to four radar sites assigned. For a "tracked target" (i.e. an aircraft being provided service by ATC), if the first assigned radar site loses the target, the second assigned radar site will take over (assuming it detects the target). The 3rd and 4th sites (and any other radar sites that may have overlapping coverage in the area) are not utilized whatsoever in the display and/or tracking.

In the case of AAL77 we do have the NTAP data for which a team of high-qualified individuals have gone through in great detail. Below is the segment under discussion currently from the "1 ZDC 68 AAL77A1" file provided by the FAA.

0PLOT TIME X Y PLOT TIME X Y
SYM CODE ALT HHMM SS COORD. COORD. LATITUDE LONGITUDE SYM CODE ALT HHMM SS COORD. COORD. LATITUDE LONGITUDE
@ F01 39.1250 500.3125 38 21 14N 081 51 24W . 1305 20 57.1875 499.1250 38 21 15N 081 28 32W
. 1305 20 59.3125 508.5625 38 30 45N 081 26 35W . 1305 31 46.5625 482.6875 38 04 09N 081 40 39W
. 1305 32 58.9375 499.3125 38 21 30N 081 26 20W . 1305 43 60.2500 499.0625 38 21 20N 081 24 33W
+ 1305 55 46.8750 483.5000 38 05 02N 081 40 13W . 1305 55 61.5625 498.8125 38 21 10N 081 22 58W

The 13:05:32 return in this particular NTAP pull is actually one second removed from the QBE 13:05:31 return which indicates that QBE was not the antenna polled for that particular sort box as a primary source. The "'" indicates a "SHORT RUN LENGTH PRIMARY" which simply means it was a weak return in this case.

So yes, ZDC did have a primary return for AAL77 at 9:05 am on controller's screens. Which screens actually had the primary filter on is certainly open to debate. The ZDC low sectors as a general rule have the primary filter on so they can monitor air traffic in the vicinity of smaller airports with no TRACON. Whether anyone actually noticed the AAL77 primary is another issue entirely, but it was certainly available to ZDC controllers as asserted.

 

[BCR]

A background summary of MFR's for the Charleston, WV 'smoke' incident.

Linda Povinelli, received a page while in the supervisors office stating, “think we lost an aircraft.” Linda, thinking that it was possible the aircraft had crashed called the state police to request a search of the area where AAL77 had vanished from the radar . At some point, Dave Boone, the air traffic manager recalls hearing from someone at ZID that the state police reported something burning on the ground in Charleston, WV . John Thomas, the ZID manager was hearing rumors of a crash somewhere near the West Virginia and Kentucky border, so he began calling state and local police in the area (near Charleston, WV) to see if they had any reports . At 9:08 the traffic management coordinator contacted Scott AFB to request search and rescue support in the event a crash location could be determined .

The MFR's of these individuals are on file at the NARA site. The focus of this thread is on the initial Charleston report and attempting to verify it. I was unable to.

 

[George 152]

snip
I think New Zealand is going to take over the world and Gumboot is their airspace expert; they are going to do it with those blue guys they have with the dragons...

Dammit. Now we're going to have to take away your lollypop.

 

[gumboot]

Thanks BCR for the additional information. It's very interesting. (That wasn't so hard was it?) I'll ignore your other rude and uncalled for post, and remind you that modifying a poster's name is a violation of the user agreement here.

I haven't had anything to offer to our discussion group but I have read and followed the emails. 9/11 Doesn't overly interest me any more; the information I've picked up so far is sufficient to satisfy my interest in the basics of what happened and I have more more important and interesting things to spend my time on. That's why I haven't been contributing. Don't assume I'm ignoring the information.

Keep up the good work!

 

[beachnut]

... I have more more important and interesting things to spend my time on. ...
Keep up the good work!

More important... its called summer