Reply #18: Yes, I'm an air traffic controller. I know how our scopes work. [View All]

[MercutioATC]

Both scenarios you mention would require the active cooperation of both aircraft. If you're claiming "replacement" you have to believe that the flight crew of the real flight was in collusion with the government and both they and all of the passengers have been killed or are being held incommunicado. You'd also have to believe that, although 3 other flights were hijacked and the "real" aircraft really did crash in THOSE scenarios, this ONE flight was "replaced". Does that make any sense?

The target merge you describe is a real phenomenon and does work much as you explained. The range of the scope would not be 500km...probably more like 150km...but otherwise relatively accurate. The issue is that it's a known phenomenon. If ANY target (transponder return or just a primary) had crossed that flight's path in the way you described, it would have been investigated, or at least mentioned by the controller(s) involved.

Look, I really believe that the signs were there and this administration dropped the ball in a big way. I might go so far as to entertain the idea that they intentionally didn't look to closely, because an attack of this magnitude would help their goals in the Middle East. The talk of substitution and replacement is beyond reasonable, though. There would be too many possible failure points. It's just a bad plan...which makes it unreasonable as a theory of what really happened.