Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sept 11, 2001...A different look
Sierra Times ^ | 1-1-2001 | author unknown

Posted on 10/01/2001 6:54:30 PM PDT by freddy

The Planes:
* American Airlines Flight 77 This Boeing 757 that was flown into the outside of the Pentagon could have carried up to 289 people, yet only 64 were aboard. Luckily 78% of the seats were empty.

* American Airlines Flight 11 This Boeing 767 could have had up to 351 people aboard, but only carried 92.
Thankfully 74% of the seats were unfilled.

* United Airlines Flight 175 Another Boeing 767 that could have sat 351 people only had 65 people on board.
Fortunately it was 81% empty.

* United Airlines Flight 93
This Boeing 757 was one of the most uplifting stories yet. The smallest flight to be hijacked with only 45 people aboard out of a possible 289 had 84% of its capacity unused. Yet these people stood up to the attackers and thwarted a fourth attempted destruction of a national landmark, saving untold numbers of lives in the process.


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS:
Does anyone know why the planes were NOT filled with passengers ?

I understand that those flights were almost always full on a constant basis.

Did the terrorists purchase all the empty seats..??

If you were the gate agent/s and those flights were always full, wouldn't a big red flag have gone up when noticing all the empty seats in the boarding area before boarding the plane when previously ALL seats were full on a daily basis...?

Can someone splain to me why this subject has not been brought up..??
1 posted on 10/01/2001 6:54:30 PM PDT by freddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: freddy
I don't know where I heard this from, so please don't ask me for a source, but I remember hearing once that airliners that crash rarely are full. I could be wrong, like I said, I have no source. I know that there have been planes with a full load crash before, but I do remember hearing that some place a few years ago.
2 posted on 10/01/2001 7:00:28 PM PDT by retrokitten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freddy
Reports I saw claimed that the terrorist DID NOT purchase blocks of unused seats.

But they did pick the lowest occupied flights from coast to coast, probably so they would have fewer passengers to subdue. One report claimed that the terrorists flew those flights many times to make practice runs and observe the crews behavior.

3 posted on 10/01/2001 7:06:54 PM PDT by 11th Earl of Mar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freddy
Does anyone know why the planes were NOT filled with passengers ?

Because it was Tuesday morning - the least busy time of the week for flying, in particular business flying. That's most likely why they chose Tuesday.

4 posted on 10/01/2001 7:10:22 PM PDT by jackbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freddy
Does anyone know why the planes were NOT filled with passengers ?

The question I might ask if this were of interest to me would be, "Were the airlines in serious financial trouble before the tragedy?"

Then, I would question the prudence of a bailout.

5 posted on 10/01/2001 7:12:42 PM PDT by Osinski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jackbill
I was under the impression that those flights were almost full all the time...Heard it on Fox or someplace when this all started back on the 11th or 12th.
Soooo many facts and nonfacts floating around in my brain...Duh..??
6 posted on 10/01/2001 7:14:14 PM PDT by freddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: freddy
1. Tuesday is always a low passenger traffic day.
2. Hijacking an empty plane is easier
3. It was full of fuel, which is what they wanted, that is why the big plane. They knew the death would come after.
7 posted on 10/01/2001 7:18:42 PM PDT by TheOtherOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freddy
Because x42(i),d ruined our country and people were finally realizing it and decided not to fly anymore!
8 posted on 10/01/2001 7:22:08 PM PDT by surfer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: freddy
1. Kids are all back in school, no families traveling.

2. As others mentioned - business fliers go on Monday.

Still a lot fewer passengers than I would expect.

10 posted on 10/01/2001 7:53:10 PM PDT by Western Phil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freddy;Osinski
I am an airline employee and happen to fly the particular aircraft mentioned (Boeing 757, 767). First of all, the author of the Sierra Times is incorrect as to load factors. The 757 capacity is 187; 767 capacity is 225 (including all jumpseats), give or take some depending on each airline's specs from factory. It is simply not true that "those flights were always full". In fact, the first flights of the morning are generally the easiest to obtain a seat on, especially for stand-by customers and employees.

Airline passenger loads HAVE been way down throughout the year due to lack of business travelers (i.e. especially DotComs going under), a challenge to be sure, but neither major airline was even close to going out of business (still hiring and aquiring). In addition, September and October are traditionally the slowest months of the year for airlines and the loads drop off dramatically at this time of year just prior to the Holiday rush. No gate agent or crewmembers would assume a low load factor to be a "red flag"; they would have simply felt blessed to have a break from the usual pressure. So, a depressed economy plus traditional low load factors = few passengers on those flights.

And Osinski, to insinuate that the "bailout" is suspect, think again. Most people have no conception of the huge $$ capital required to run a major airline for even one day; the "bailout" is barely a band-aid solution, I assure you. Thousands are still losing their jobs; what about them? For instance, the cost to train ONE flight attendant is at least $10,000 and pilots, considerably more. American/TWA/Eagle has laid off over 1,000 flight attendants already. It simply makes no sense to assume knowing complicity on the part of the Airlines' to create this horrible spectacle.

Like most of you perusing this forum, I have my antennas up for this latest in a long string of "terrorist" acts on American soil i.e. Waco, OKC, even Columbine. And now this latest horrific event. One of the questions I have, which was so glaringly obvious when I witnessed it, is the fact that the South Tower went down first even though it was the last one hit; also that the collapse of both were just too perfect. Some say explosives were planted throughout (see psyopnews.com for a chilling overview); the implications of this are simply unfathomable.

What Americans should be doing is asking some very tough questions to the US Govt. and if one is going to be angry, channel the anger into that arena.

I predict that before this is all said and done, there will be *millions* of incredibly angry Americans. Good citizens who will finally realize how ripped-off they have been, which will lead to mass uprisings within our own borders. This is just the beginning....

11 posted on 10/01/2001 8:56:43 PM PDT by Skygoddess
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Skygoddess
You bring up a very good point about asking questions. One that I have wondered about is: Why is it that the FBI knew Atta and others were in the country (via the CIA) and couldn't find them, but almost immediately after the WTC crash they knew where they had been living, where they trained, etc. Good grief! Atta even had a drivers license using HIS OWN NAME!
12 posted on 10/01/2001 9:28:15 PM PDT by 3ZZZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Skygoddess, All
I have been curious to know how many muslims didn't show up for work at the WTC the day of the bombing?
13 posted on 10/01/2001 9:33:43 PM PDT by Robert Lomax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 3ZZZ;Robert
Like you, I asked the very same question as soon as I heard they *knew* who the hijackers were. This is just par for the course.

Remember Oklahoma City? Timothy McVeigh was apprehended 90 MINUTES after the deed and they are telling us they didn't know about it beforehand? (And by the way, no Govt. ATF employees were in their offices on that day.) There is an EXCELLENT article in the September issue of Vanity Fair (the one with Penelope Cruz on the cover) by Gore Vidal which goes into detail about this conspiracy.

It is my understanding that the "government behind the Government" has an obligation to show the public exactly what they are doing. They are counting on the resulting trauma of these horrific events to bring the American public to it's knees so we will beg our Govt. to protect us. To quote David Icke, "Problem-Reaction-Solution".

The truth is out there for anyone with the eyes to see and the heart to listen...

14 posted on 10/02/2001 7:14:39 AM PDT by Skygoddess
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Skygoddess
What Americans should be doing is asking some very tough questions to the US Govt.

You are absolutely correct.

15 posted on 10/02/2001 6:31:32 PM PDT by Osinski
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Skygoddess
One of the questions I have, which was so glaringly obvious when I witnessed it, is the fact that the South Tower went down first even though it was the last one hit

Simple physics explains why that occured. It has been covered here completely. Several times, for that matter. Check the archives.

Some say explosives were planted throughout..

Who? Psyopnews.com? Please. I read their take on it. In a nutshell, they are wrong. Bigtime.

To sum it up, the second tower struck was the first to fall due simply to more weight above where the plane struck. Fire weakens the structure to the point it can no longer bear the weight above. More weight above the strike point than that of the first tower struck.

No bombs, simple physics.

Check those archives here. Very good and indisputable proof by very reliable sources.

16 posted on 10/02/2001 7:16:33 PM PDT by Hoosier Patriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson