พิมพ์หน้านี้ - RQ-4 Global Hawk unmanned aerial reconnaissance system

HYPOTHESIS: GLOBAL HAWK
The insuperable problems posed by the notion that the four misfits and patsies of the
official version actually flew the planes can, however, be satisfactorily explained with the
help of a hypothesis involving the application of a technology which is known to exist.
This is Global Hawk, a guidance system developed by the Defense Advanced Research
Projects Agency (DARPA) for the Pentagon. Global Hawk is a robot plane, the modern
form of remote control, which has been a familiar concept for decades – at the very least
since the 1950s, when Nike missiles and Skysweeper radar-controlled antiaircraft guns
used remote control drones for testing. Global Hawk is a somewhat more advanced and
sophisticated version of the guidance system of the Predator drone, which has been used
to attack supposed targets (and a wedding party) in Afghanistan. Predators were available
during the later years of the Clinton administration.
Global Hawk became widely know as a result of its first transpacific flight, which took place in
April 2001. The new weapons system was touted by the media in glowing terms:

The Global Hawk, a jet-powered aircraft with a wingspan equivalent to a
Boeing 737, flew from Edwards Air Force Base in California and landed
late on Monday at the Royal Australian Air Force base at Edinburgh, in
South Australia. The 8600 mile (13840 km) flight, at an altitude of almost
12.5 miles (20 km), took 22 hours and set a world record for the furthest a
robotic aircraft has flown between two points. The Global Hawk flies
along a pre-programmed flight path, but a pilot monitors the aircraft
during its flight via a sensor suite which provides infra-red and visual
images.

According to Rod Smith, who managed the Australian end of the Global Hawk project,
“The aircraft essentially flies itself, right from take-off, right through to landing, and even
taxiing off the runway.” The robot plane version of Global Hawk reportedly could fly
non-stop for 36 hours. “Emerging systems such as the Global Hawk offer Australia great
potential for surveillance, reconnaissance and ultimately the delivery of combat power,”
crowed Brendan Nelson, parliamentary secretary to the Australian defence minister. (ITN
Entertainment April 24, 2001)

The existence of this technology in a fully operational form raises the possibility that it
might have been installed in commercial airliners, and further that it may have been such
airliners under the control of a Global Hawk equivalent which crashed into the WTC and
the Pentagon. This entire matter is covered with secrecy, but it is clear that it is
technically quite feasible that commercial jets were equipped with remote control
systems capable of piloting them to landings (or to crashes) under the pretext of an antiterrorism
measure. The rationale would have been that, if terrorist had taken over the
plane, authorities on the ground would have been able to frustrate the terrorists by seizing
control of the hijacked airliners and flying them to safety. However, for such a system to
be effective, it would have to include the ability of ground controllers to deny the
personnel occupying the cockpit – the terrorists and the pilots under their control—any
ability to steer the plane. To be effective, Global Hawk would presuppose that activating
it would simultaneously de-activate the cockpit controls, making them useless.
Otherwise, the hijackers might find ways to override the commands to the
servomechanisms, flight surfaces and avionics being issued through Global Hawk from
the ground. Total control of the plane, in other words, would have to be on the ground.

The advantages of such a system against classical hijack scenarios are clear. If the
hijackers tell the pilot, “Fly to Cuba,” and threaten to kill him if he does not do so, the
plane can be landed in Miami no matter what the hijackers do or do not do, all thanks to
Global Hawk. But what happens if the Global Hawk ground control center falls into the
hands of a group of moles bent on insurrection and subversion, and determined to use
aircraft as missiles in support of their attempt to re-order world affairs along the lines of
the clash of civilizations doctrine? Here we can see that Global Hawk has an enormous
potential for abuse. There is every reason to believe that the events of 9/11 were rendered
possible, not by superhuman piloting skills on the part of the patsies, but by competent
professionals using Global Hawk and operating out of a ground control center or an
airborne command center such as AWACS.

There would be nothing new about any of this. Modern aircraft are equipped with a
“Flight Control System” or FCS, which is integrated with sophisticated avionics capable
of automatically landing the aircraft in zero visibility conditions. Even the takeoff and
landing of large jets in largely automated, and the role of the pilots is more and more that
of standing by for the unlikely eventuality that the guidance systems fail. To produce
events of the type seen on 9/11, it would only be necessary for the computer access codes
of an aircraft equipped with Global Hawk to fall into the hands of moles and professional
experts with treasonous designs.

As aeronautical engineer Joe Vialls has pointed out, the main prerequisite for the use of
Global Hawk in the manner suggested would be the installation of a back door on a
plane’s computer system so as to allow an interface with the Global Hawk command post
located elsewhere. Vialls says that DARPA has indeed provided these back doors on
certain aircraft. These aircraft came to be equipped with “a primary control channel for
use in taking over the flight control system and flying the aircraft back to an airfield of
choice, and secondly a covert audio channel for monitoring flight deck conversations.

Once the primary channel were activated, all aircraft functions came under direct ground
control, permanently removing the hijackers and pilots from the control loop.” Vialls is a
former member of the Society of Licenced Aeronautical Engineers and Technologists,
London.

The Global Hawk hypothesis also helps explain one of the singularities of 9/11, which is
that none of the transponders in the hijacked planes ever broadcast the coded message
telling ground controllers that the planes had been hijacked. The transponder is a
combined radio transmitter and radio receiver which sends out signals announcing each
flight’s airline name and flight number, and thus indicating the plane’s position. This is a
supplement to radar, and becomes more important than radar for flight controllers in busy
aviation corridors. Vialls’ hypothesis is that Global Hawk operated by taking over the
transponder channel and monopolizing it for the purpose of controlling the plane. So no
airliners signaled that they had been hijacked, because the transponder channel which
could have sent this code had been usurped for purposes of remote control. Vialls regards
the lack of such coded hijack warning signals as “the first hard proof that the target
aircraft had been hijacked electronically from the ground, rather than by motley crews of
Arabs toting penknives.”

According to Vialls, the remote control “listening device on the flight deck utilizes the
cockpit microphones that normally feed the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR), one of two
black boxes armored to withstand heavy impact and thereby later give investigators
significant clues to why the aircraft crashed.” But once the remote control protocol has
been activated, the “CVRs are bypassed and voice transmissions are no longer recorded
on the 30-minute endless loop recording tape.” In this case, after 30 minutes the CVR,
which is designed to record the last minutes before a crash, will end up totally blank. This
would explain the fact that the CVRs from the Pentagon and Pittsburgh aircraft were both
claimed by the FBI to have been blank. For Vialls, this would be an additional indication
that remote control had been employed.

It is not known if other US commercial aircraft have been equipped with back doors and
interfaces permitting remote control by means of a technology cognate with Global
Hawk. Vialls tells the story of a European carrier, possibly Lufthansa, which removed the
flight control computers which had come with its Boeings as original equipment, and
replaced them with computers impervious to Global Hawk, but this has yet to be
confirmed. He also speculates that up to 600 US aircraft may still be vulnerable to Global
Hawk. (www.pratyeka.org/wtc/wot/home_run.htm)

After 9/11, a special aviation radio was found in a safe in the Millennium Hilton Hotel near the
World Trade Center. The radio was a transceiver of the type used by pilots to communicate airto-
air and air-to-ground. The FBI detained Abdallah Higazy, the son of an Egyptian diplomat,
who was staying in the room in which the safe with the transceiver was located. Higazy was
released on January 17, 2002 when it was established that the transceiver belonged to another
hotel guest who was a private pilot. Since this pilot was neither Egyptian nor Arab, he was
automatically exempted from suspicion – another example of the racist incompetence of the FBI.
This transceiver might have been a radio beacon or a positioning or homing device of some kind.

During the 1999 bombing of Serbia, the government there had accused NATO agents of placing
radio beacons at key points in Belgrade to aid in the bombing campaign. (Associated Press,
January 17, 2002)

เว็บบอร์ดสนทนาภาษาปืน

สนทนาภาษาปืน => หลังแนวยิง => ข้อความที่เริ่มโดย: narongt ที่ พฤศจิกายน 13, 2006, 08:45:59 PM