Truthers - Let's talk U93 phone calls

[newton3376]

Which 2 cell calls precisely are you talking about? Can you be more specific?

On a website of something called the "Tom Burnett Family Foundation" (feel free to donate...)
They provide what they say are transcripts of the phonecalls
http://www.tomburnettfoundation.org/tomburnett_transcript.html
They say the first phone call was 9:27. Still at altitude I believe and impossible from a cell phone.

Yeah but you are not an Electrical Engineer or an RF expert by any means.....you aren't even capable of doing basic research.

You should have already researched the information in my posts about this topic and confirmed the technical accuracy of what I was saying.....you did not do that though and I doubt you would understand the technical arguments anyway.

No one cares what you "believe" little grey rabbit....no one. You are clueless...I have already schooled you not once or twice but three times on why it is not impossible.

So who are we going to believe? Little grey rabbit who has zero technical background.....or an Electrical Engineer with some RF experience who has asked RF experts, cellular experts, and antenna experts if the phone calls were possible. They agree with me and also with the majority of other industry experts.

So we have.....

"little grey rabbit" who doesn't bewieve it was possible cause his wittle bwain can't fathom it...

versus

Stated Opinion of the MAJORITY OF INDUSTRY EXPERTS
RF, ANTENNA, and WIRELESS EXPERTS I know in REAL LIFE
An ELECTRICAL ENGINEER with RF experience making TECHNICAL ARGUMENTS

I think I'll stick with the physics, math, and expert consensus versus your non technical, clueless, and confused "...but but I don't bewieve it..."

Are we saying that Tom Burnett started with an airfone and then switched to a cell phone when the altitude lowered?

So why do we believe Tom Burnett rang on a cell phone again?

Bizarre...

Confused, clueless truther is clueless and confused.

 

[twinstead]

So.

1. It is NOT impossible to make cell phone calls from a plane
2. There is NO evidence that any calls were faked

The calls are legitimate, and LGR is wrong. Now we can get on with life, and LGR can go wee wee wee all the way home.

 

[newton3376]

So.

1. It is NOT impossible to make cell phone calls from a plane
2. There is NO evidence that any calls were faked

The calls are legitimate, and LGR is wrong. Now we can get on with life, and LGR can go wee wee wee all the way home.

Yep....that pretty much sums it up.....

 

[little grey rabbit]

so help me out here. Is there a tendency for phone calls made on cell phones at cruising altitude not to appear on phone bills?

So the reception is good enough to make a call, but not good enough for the telco to bill it?

 

[newton3376]

so help me out here. Is there a tendency for phone calls made on cell phones at cruising altitude not to appear on phone bills?

So the reception is good enough to make a call, but not good enough for the telco to bill it?

It's possible for you to not get billed yes....which is something the phone companies obviously do not like.

But it isn't a reception/signal issue though....that is more of a Network issue and the way in which the Network handles things like billing and handoffs....

 

[little grey rabbit]

It's possible for you to not get billed yes....which is something the phone companies obviously do not like.

But it isn't a reception/signal issue though....that is more of a Network issue and the way in which the Network handles things like billing and handoffs....

So let me put it rather simply. Some one makes an impossible claim - a phone call at 10 000 meters and this phone call does not appear on any bill - surely a true sceptic, a top notch sceptic, might consider the possibility that the claim (whether from reasons of confusion or dishonesty) is incorrect?

I mean I am talking about your gold standard, nobel prize quality sceptic here.

 

[TJM]

so help me out here. Is there a tendency for phone calls made on cell phones at cruising altitude not to appear on phone bills?

So the reception is good enough to make a call, but not good enough for the telco to bill it?

Economic incentive
The airlines and telecommunications companies also have an economic incentive to keep cell phones turned off in the air. The carriers receive a cut of the revenues from the telephones installed onboard. The two main providers of this air-phone service, GTE Corp. and AT&T Corp., charge about $6 for a one-minute call, more than 20 times typical cell-phone rates.

These in-flight telephones also operate on cellular technology -- using a single airplane antenna to which the onboard phones are typically wired. AT&T and GTE, which recently agreed to sell its Airfone service, decline to discuss air-phone financial arrangements, as do several airlines. But Sheehan says airlines pocket about 15 percent of all air-phone revenue generated on their planes. GTE declines to discuss Airfone revenues, but analysts estimate the unit's annual revenues at $150 million.

Some airlines also restrict cell-phone use on the ground, which isn't covered by the FCC ban, and which the FAA leaves to the airlines' discretion. Sheehan says he believes air carriers have resisted allowing cell-phone use on the ground because it "detracts from the revenue they get from the air phone."

Airlines deny this, and say the bans are for the benefit of the passengers. "We don't believe it's a good safety issue" to allow normal cell phones, says Andy Plews, spokesman for UAL Corp.'s United Airlines. "We'd like people to use the air phones." The FCC's concern about air-to-ground cellular interference is real enough. From high in the sky, a cell phone acts like a sponge, sucking capacity out of the cellular sites that carry calls. For ground users, cell phones communicate by connecting to one cell site at a time; from the air, because of the height and speed of an aircraft, the phones often make contact with several sites at once. If allowed, this would limit call capacity, which would mean less revenue, says Howard Sherry, chief wireless scientist at Telcordia Technologies Inc., formerly the research arm of the Baby Bell telephone companies, in Morristown, N.J.

The cellular signal from the air is also especially strong, since it is unimpeded by buildings or other ground clutter. That often means it can jump on a frequency already in use on the ground, causing interruptions or hang-ups. And airborne cellular calls are sometimes free because the signal is moving so fast between cells that the software on the ground has difficulty recording the call, says Bentley Alexander, a senior engineer at AT&T's wireless unit.

http://www.zdnet.com/news/airlines-ban-cell-phones-but-why/95986

There you go.

 

[little grey rabbit]

http://www.zdnet.com/news/airlines-ban-cell-phones-but-why/95986

There you go.

Tell you what. Next time you take a flight, take a photo of you cell phone showing it's network/reception bars and the clouds through the window - and then I might believe it.

Every time I have turned on a phone on a plane I have got no reception - now I have only done that in Europe, perhaps it is different in America.

Someone who has tried it on a somewhat systematic basis found similar results.
http://web.archive.org/web/20060202091455/http://www.physics911.net/cellphoneairliners.htm

I agree that there might be possibility at descending altitude in the final minutes before a hypothetical crash (and since United 93 didnt descend anywhere near Shanksville, this completely moot).

Of course if anyone wants to believe that someone was placing a cell phone call at 30 000 feet, be my guest.

Sadly, no one in this thread truly believes that. In the end you have to feel a little sorry for such people.

 

[TJM]

Tell you what. Next time you take a flight, take a photo of you cell phone showing it's network/reception bars and the clouds through the window - and then I might believe it.

Every time I have turned on a phone on a plane I have got no reception - now I have only done that in Europe, perhaps it is different in America.

Someone who has tried it on a somewhat systematic basis found similar results..
http://web.archive.org/web/20060202091455/http://www.physics911.net/cellphoneairliners.htm

I agree that there might be possibility at descending altitude in the final minutes before a hypothetical crash (and since United 93 didnt descend anywhere near Shanksville, this completely moot).

Of course if anyone wants to believe that someone was placing a cell phone call at 30 000 feet, be my guest.

Sadly, no one in this thread truly believes that. In the end you have to feel a little sorry for such people.

You can't now because cellphone technology has changed since 2001. GSM and CDMA phones don't behave like analog phones did.

 

[little grey rabbit]

Fair enough, but the article I linked to was written July 2003.

And he seemed to get slightly better results than I did - with sporadic connection up to 6000 feet and no signal after that.

 

[newton3376]

So let me put it rather simply. Some one makes an impossible claim - a phone call at 10 000 meters and this phone call does not appear on any bill - surely a true sceptic, a top notch sceptic, might consider the possibility that the claim (whether from reasons of confusion or dishonesty) is incorrect?

I mean I am talking about your gold standard, nobel prize quality sceptic here.

It has to do with how the Network does it's billing.....the main issue isn't a signal strength issue...I am trying to get this through to your brain little grey rabbit.

If you want to get into things like Network topology, the nature of handoffs, or how the system records phone calls for billing purposes.....well I can't answer all of that off the cuff because I don't work on the cellular network.

I don't do a lot of technical reading outside of what is required for my actual career.......so I'm one of those Engineers who isn't a "tinkerer" sitting at home building circuits....I'm also not one of those Engineers who sits at home in his spare time reading technical articles or journals.

I might do it occasionally...but it is rare.

Most of the technical stuff I know is either because of school.....or directly related to work.....not much is from my "off time". The only time I really do serious technical stuff in my off time is if it will benefit my career as far as position or salary.

So with that background about me....

I don't work on cellular networks....so my knowledge of them is limited. If you want to discuss the issues I mentioned above...I recommed you either start doing some serious reading...or go talk to an Engineer that works in that field directly.

 

[newton3376]

You can't now because cellphone technology has changed since 2001. GSM and CDMA phones don't behave like analog phones did.

Yep....plus the Network topology (tower placement, network layout, etc) has also changed.

 

[aggle-rithm]

So let me put it rather simply. Some one makes an impossible claim - a phone call at 10 000 meters and this phone call does not appear on any bill - surely a true sceptic, a top notch sceptic, might consider the possibility that the claim (whether from reasons of confusion or dishonesty) is incorrect?

I mean I am talking about your gold standard, nobel prize quality sceptic here.

Even if it is unlikely, it is more likely than a vast conspiracy that fakes the voices and mannerisms of loved ones and is completely invisible to everyone but Scooby and the gang.

 

[aggle-rithm]

so help me out here.

If I thought it would do any good...or that you actually wanted help...

 

[little grey rabbit]

Incidentally, it is the "official" story that Tom Burnett did make his first phone call on his cell phone and all subsequent phone calls (at lower altitude) from airfones

Courtesy of 911myths

This raises the question that since the airfone records have almost certainly been manipulated, why they didnt include the supposed first phone call at cruising altitude. My guess is that Deena Burnett had gone out on such a limb insisting on a cell phone that they decided not to manufacture a record for this first call.


You really have to wonder about the large majority of the passengers who didn't make a phone call. Perhaps these are the decent ones....

 

[VonKleist]

Every time I have turned on a phone on a plane I have got no reception - now I have only done that in Europe, perhaps it is different in America.

No you didn't. Couldn't you find something else to hang this on?

 

[aggle-rithm]

You really have to wonder about the large majority of the passengers who didn't make a phone call. Perhaps these are the decent ones....

Why do we have to wonder? If it's unlikely to make a connection in flight, then wouldn't you expect only a handful of people being able to connect?

Your thinking apparently goes like this: "If anyone was able to connect, then it must be easy to connect. So why wasn't everyone able to connect?"

 

[little grey rabbit]

Another curious feature is that there appears to have been no sustained call to an emergency air medic support service, or an emergency airline help desk or police.

Of course there is one of sword damocles phone call to police that did get recorded - but I think if anyone traces that call they will find it was from Terra Firma and from a phone which did not belong to any one on the plane. Which is probably why it has disappeared down the memory hole

 

[newton3376]

This raises the question that since the airfone records have almost certainly been manipulated,

Statements like these make debating with you a waste of time...

You can't get around your paranoid delusions of dark and sinister forces that are so powerful they control virtually everything.....yet there are the noble, brave truthers...DARING to stand against them and expose 9/11.

Any day now you will bust the lid on this global conspiracy.....

Any day now the sheeple will "wake" up and the truth movement will hit that seemingly unreachable goal of 1%....and after that...who knows how far the truth will spread?

Any day now you will finally be able to move out from your Mom's basement and post unproven, insane, paranoid assumptions on obscure internet discussion forums where the battle for mankinds future is taking place...

Any day now people will stop ignoring and mocking you for your paranoid delusions and will realize that it was YOU.....you the truthers that had things figured out all along and the worlds technical experts in engineering, science, forensics, aviation, etc will be contacting you and seeking your great wisdom and knowledge....

Yes little grey rabbit.....any day now......

 

[newton3376]

Why do we have to wonder? If it's unlikely to make a connection in flight, then wouldn't you expect only a handful of people being able to connect?

Your thinking apparently goes like this: "If anyone was able to connect, then it must be easy to connect. So why wasn't everyone able to connect?"

Why is it that aggle-rithm (and other normal people) is able to understand this but truthers are not capable?

I don't get it.....am I not communicating the technical issues well enough?

How else can I possibly word it?