Posted on 12/09/2005 5:08:08 PM PST by concretebob
Or... it could have another meaning, one which we'd all prefer not to believe.
You programmed PASSUR?
I did see that...but I also saw it at 12:49. General Aviation item shows up in that area then disappears...
I suppose I do. I fly out of LAX regularly, and my aircraft is a much bigger target than AA 612. If I thought there was a threat of being shot at, I'd want to know. I've got a wife and two kids and a lot to live for. Fortunately, I've got enough practical knowledge of this stuff to see right through the BS spread by the likes of Jack Cashill. The man is a conman who makes a living off of other people's fear and ignorance. He is a fraud.
"Do you believe beyond a reasonable doubt this cannot be a missle?"
I would bet everything I own that what you are looking at on the PASSUR display is not a missile. I have absolutely no doubt that it is not a missile.
"Do you deny that according to PASSUR this object appears in front of AAL612 when AAL612 is over 6000ft altitude?"
You still don't understand what you are looking at. PASSUR cannot display anything real that doesn't have a transponder. In other words, if there really was something there, it had to have an IFF transmitter on board that was sending exactly the same codes as AA612. The company that created this system explains exactly what you are seeing here. It is a ghost image. It is not real.
"Do you deny that PASSUR identifies this object as AAL612, but at an altitude of 1500ft, at this point in time?"
As I have stated earlier, PASSUR does not identify anything. It merely reports information it is sent.
"Do you deny that PASSUR has this NEW object actually becoming AAL612 a few seconds after what appears to be a cross-over (or a couple or 3 cross overs) and that the originally tracked AAL612 out of LAX is lost?"
That is because the "new" object actually is a ghost image of AA612. It doesn't exist.
"Do you believe this object seen by PASSUR is a ghost object as defined in your post 46?"
Not even a doubt in my mind.
Sorry pal but I read ALL of the info on the PASSUR web site. PASSUR uses the return information but is also fed info from the ASR. In the event that the ASR returns a signal (ghost or not) PASSUR thinks it has to assign a designation to it (I believe - computers doing what they think is correct). Clearly evident by clicking on the icon on the dual radar track from PASSUR - the FAA ATC tapes may not have designated the bogey as the AA flight. By your explanation the bogey return the same IFF codes as the AA flight at least as far as PASSUR was concerned. How could that be? TCAS is NOT implemented on ALL commercial aircraft. ONLY those with FAA oversight. Many foreign freighters and other aircraft do carry TCAS. Also, it is entirely possible that this was another aircraft that wandered into the airspace with it's IFF turned off. I can turn IFF off on my plane anytime I want. Is it also possible that there a drug runners who have IFF spoofing capability (unlikely a 13:00 in LA but if the money's right)? EA-6B's can do it with the flip of a switch and they can return the appropriate radar signature for any aircraft they want. Did the AA pilot report a TCAS warning? I have not heard that if he did then the whole thing is probably just one big snafu.
Jerry Doyle has a guest coming up right now to talk about it.
That's not entirely accurate. Transponders are transmitters. They don't add anything to a target's radar cross section. They emit an electronic signal providing a "secondary" contact for radars tuned to look for that signal. A "secondary" contact is not a raw radar return. It is simply a radio signature transmitted from the target aircraft. And while you are absolutely correct to say radar can track passive objects, the system everyone is viewing in this thread cannot. It can only see "secondaries".
http://64.62.253.55/ksev700
Try this, good show.
This is a good ref for talk shows.
http://radio.findanisp.com/radio-shows-on-air.php
Is there an actual report of a reflectivity return from this "bottle rocket" or are the conspiracy buffs relying only on transponder signals? Anyway, what do you think the pilots saw? Temperature layers causing refraction?
A good read for everyone.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7148187/
Thanks and Merry Christmas
Welcome and Merry Christmas back at ya!
The conversation I listened to had the pilot saying it looked like a rocket.
Apologies in advance if you have done so previously.
uh ... never mind ... answered own question. duh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.