"We Know in 2001 Cell Phones Worked Up To 50,000 Feet and..."

[CurveLight]

No joke. Perhaps you should do a little research next time before you embarrass yourself...like you've done twice in this thread already.

If that's the best you can do then.....thanks for stopping by. The op link has much more verifiable information showing in flight calls at cruising altitude would have been nearly impossible.

and the point of all this is what, exactly?

are you claiming that Renee May never called her parents? Her parents never called american airlines on the numbers renee may gave them?

are the May's lying?

The point is simple: there is no hard evidence proving calls from 77 were made. That is an indisputable fact. I don't know why you think so little of the Mays you would suggest they are lying but I don't care.

 

[Fizz]

If that's the best you can do then.....thanks for stopping by. The op link has much more verifiable information showing in flight calls at cruising altitude would have been nearly impossible.

and the point of all this is what, exactly?

are you claiming that Renee May never called her parents? Her parents never called american airlines on the numbers renee may gave them?

are the May's lying?

The point is simple: there is no hard evidence proving calls from 77 were made. That is an indisputable fact. I don't know why you think so little of the Mays you would suggest they are lying but I don't care.

fact #1
Renee May called her parents.

fact #2
May's parents called american airlines on the number provided by renee.

sir, that is hard evidence unless you are claiming the Mays did not receive the phone call and they did not call american airlines. i am not the one suggesting they are lying. by claiming there is no evidence of phone calls you are the one claiming they are lying.

 

[Ravi]

Are you fucking serious? Please tell me you posted that azz a joke.

No joke. Perhaps you should do a little research next time before you embarrass yourself...like you've done twice in this thread already.

If that's the best you can do then.....thanks for stopping by. The op link has much more verifiable information showing in flight calls at cruising altitude would have been nearly impossible.

Of course it does...if you're a troofer. If you are capable of rationality, not so much.

 

[candycorn]

and the point of all this is what, exactly?

are you claiming that Renee May never called her parents? Her parents never called american airlines on the numbers renee may gave them?

are the May's lying?

The point is simple: there is no hard evidence proving calls from 77 were made. That is an indisputable fact. I don't know why you think so little of the Mays you would suggest they are lying but I don't care.

fact #1
Renee May called her parents.

fact #2
May's parents called american airlines on the number provided by renee.

sir, that is hard evidence unless you are claiming the Mays did not receive the phone call and they did not call american airlines. i am not the one suggesting they are lying. by claiming there is no evidence of phone calls you are the one claiming they are lying.

Amazingly the same question was being asked of him weeks ago. He didn't answer then; not answering now. Speaks volumes for his "command" of the subject.

 

[CurveLight]

and the point of all this is what, exactly?

are you claiming that Renee May never called her parents? Her parents never called american airlines on the numbers renee may gave them?

are the May's lying?

The point is simple: there is no hard evidence proving calls from 77 were made. That is an indisputable fact. I don't know why you think so little of the Mays you would suggest they are lying but I don't care.

fact #1
Renee May called her parents.

fact #2
May's parents called american airlines on the number provided by renee.

sir, that is hard evidence unless you are claiming the Mays did not receive the phone call and they did not call american airlines. i am not the one suggesting they are lying. by claiming there is no evidence of phone calls you are the one claiming they are lying.

You're so fucking stoopid you don't realize your "#1" fact is taking a #2 all over your inability to analyze and you clearly don't know what hard evidence means.

You're also such a lying shitbag you accuse me of saying there were no phone calls. I never made that claim so is this another case of you being dishonest or is your stoopidity rising to the surface? You trying to pull another pathetic fdr move?

 

[CurveLight]

The point is simple: there is no hard evidence proving calls from 77 were made. That is an indisputable fact. I don't know why you think so little of the Mays you would suggest they are lying but I don't care.

fact #1
Renee May called her parents.

fact #2
May's parents called american airlines on the number provided by renee.

sir, that is hard evidence unless you are claiming the Mays did not receive the phone call and they did not call american airlines. i am not the one suggesting they are lying. by claiming there is no evidence of phone calls you are the one claiming they are lying.

Amazingly the same question was being asked of him weeks ago. He didn't answer then; not answering now. Speaks volumes for his "command" of the subject.

Keep lying you whiny bitch. Every time you do it reminds me why assholes like you are a waste of time.

 

[CurveLight]

No joke. Perhaps you should do a little research next time before you embarrass yourself...like you've done twice in this thread already.

If that's the best you can do then.....thanks for stopping by. The op link has much more verifiable information showing in flight calls at cruising altitude would have been nearly impossible.

Of course it does...if you're a troofer. If you are capable of rationality, not so much.

The only evidence you presented was the opinion of one college professor. I've provided info from the phone companies themselves as well as airlines. But you keep on repeating the claim cell calls would have worked at 30,000 feet on 9E. It's more evidence your camp will hold on for dear life to the most ridiculous claims to maintain your denial.

 

[Gamolon]

If that's the best you can do then.....thanks for stopping by. The op link has much more verifiable information showing in flight calls at cruising altitude would have been nearly impossible.

Of course it does...if you're a troofer. If you are capable of rationality, not so much.

The only evidence you presented was the opinion of one college professor. I've provided info from the phone companies themselves as well as airlines. But you keep on repeating the claim cell calls would have worked at 30,000 feet on 9E. It's more evidence your camp will hold on for dear life to the most ridiculous claims to maintain your denial.

Curve,

You are arguing two points here.

The first being the statement made by Coburn from Popular Mechanics that "in 2001 cell phone technology would work at 50,000 feet".

Your second claim is that cell phones would not work at 50,000 feet. These two claims may be totally unrelated as I can find only two VERIFIED instances of "cell phone" calls that were made. The others are not specified and may have been made from Airfones which were located in the seat backs of many seats. Some actually verify Airfone.

One cell phone call was made by Edward Felt at 9:58 am. The plane elevation at that point was between 7000 and 6400 feet. Well below that 50,000 foot ceiling in your first claim making it quite likely that he could have connected to a cell tower.

Another call from CeeCee Lyles waa also made at 9:58 am when the plane was at an altitude between 7000 and 6400 feet.

Here is a link to calls made, some with descriptions 9-11 Research: Phone Call Detail

So what other calls do you have information on that were validated as being from cell phones that you are arguing about not being able to be made at 30,000 or 50,000 foot altitudes?

 

[Gamolon]

Further information.

From what I can gather (I am no expert and anyone can correct me if I am wrong), indicated altitude of a plane is determined from sea level. Actual height above is the altitude minus the elevation of ground a that particular point. The ground elevation in the area of the plane was about 980 feet above sea level.

That makes the actual height of the plane between 6020 and 5420.

Can anyone verify the above?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I hate to break it to you but your premise is wrong.

• A NASA report from 2001[6] summarizes "14 years of incidents reported by pilots to the ASRS" of interference caused, or suspected to be caused, by passenger electronic devices. Mobile phones were the most frequently identified source of interference, with laptop computers a close second. In no cases were the affected avionics found to be defective upon later testing. Degrees of correlation or confidence were not among the data summarized in the report.

Mobile phones on aircraft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

wiki is hardly a reliable source for information,they can type in anything they want to there.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

What range do cell towers have? Anyone have any links?

Depends on who owns the tower, what type of technology it supports (ie, iDen, CDMA, GSM, WiMax, etc).

Generally speaking, you need to understand the basic way these towers work. They "ping" from one tower to another, so to speak. You place a call and it hits the nearest tower, when you reach that tower's end range, it automatically hands you off to the next closest tower, and you "ping" that tower, and so on and so forth as you travel (normally this is terrestrial travel, not air travel, at least until the technology became available to use cell phones from the air, which IIRC was not until well after 2001).

-------------------
WiMax towers cover an entire city, they transmit data traffic only and provide 4G access to the internet that is lightyears faster than cable, satellite or DSL. It can be used from a moving car with a mobile device and laptop, from a park with a laptop, from home, or just about any other place you can think of.

iDen would tend to have a fairly long reach with PTT (push to talk), ranging over most metropolitan areas of larger cities.

GSM has shorter range (a mile or maybe two per tower), but broad reach (in terms of being able to use your handset here and abroad).

CDMA would have the longest reach, but would still only be a few miles (3-5 miles per tower).

These are just estimates I recall off the top of my head. Could do some research, but I'm not a big conspiracy nut.

I just have a Telecom background and find it terribly difficult to believe that in *2001* cell phones were in use on *any* aircraft AND able to place and hold calls on the terresterial network without a repeater or other specialized equipment installed on the aircraft to facilitate handling the voice traffic.

As a Telecom specialist, as far as I am concerned, it was NOT possible in 2001.

Ya'll can take my word for it, or not. I don't care.

thank you for your valuable imput.great to hear this coming from someone objective such as yourself who is obviously not into conspiracys and knows what they are talking about..

 

[LA RAM FAN]

There are NO analog cell phone networks currently in operation. The last analog networks were taken down several years ago.

Just FYI.

Really? hahahahaha! You silly twit, they existed on 9/11.

I am aware of that you stupid dolt.

I was simply pointing out that they no longer exist for the chronically stupid in this thread.

Some of the stupidity I've seen here in this thread is bordering on comic book material.

MSE for civilians. ROFLMAOPIMP!

Oh. My. Gawd.

thats how these DOD agents that have penetrated these boards like Gomer Pyle Ollie post. Great point you made earlier.just because the MILITARY had it available,doesnt mean it was available to the general public back then.

 

[uscitizen]

Another point is that airborne cell phone signals confuse the cell phone system. the cell phone companies do not want airborne cell phone use.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Another point is that airborne cell phone signals confuse the cell phone system. the cell phone companies do not want airborne cell phone use.

yeah thats a very good point.Here this link puts to rest that it was impossible to use cell phones at 30,000 feet back then.As it says in that link,to make a cell phone call at altitudes of just 20,000 feet you barely had a one in a hundred chance of succeeding,same today.

Of course ollie,fizz and candy corn troll boy will blatantly ignore this and post the most absurd crap like they always do to try and save face in their posts.Their posts are so ignorant and stupid even Jeny said so and she never even visits the conspiracy section so she hardly has an interest in conspiracys.Even people like her can see what stupid morons these trolls here are.lol.

Physics911, by Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven, 9/11/2001

 

[Gamolon]

What range do cell towers have? Anyone have any links?

Depends on who owns the tower, what type of technology it supports (ie, iDen, CDMA, GSM, WiMax, etc).

Generally speaking, you need to understand the basic way these towers work. They "ping" from one tower to another, so to speak. You place a call and it hits the nearest tower, when you reach that tower's end range, it automatically hands you off to the next closest tower, and you "ping" that tower, and so on and so forth as you travel (normally this is terrestrial travel, not air travel, at least until the technology became available to use cell phones from the air, which IIRC was not until well after 2001).

-------------------
WiMax towers cover an entire city, they transmit data traffic only and provide 4G access to the internet that is lightyears faster than cable, satellite or DSL. It can be used from a moving car with a mobile device and laptop, from a park with a laptop, from home, or just about any other place you can think of.

iDen would tend to have a fairly long reach with PTT (push to talk), ranging over most metropolitan areas of larger cities.

GSM has shorter range (a mile or maybe two per tower), but broad reach (in terms of being able to use your handset here and abroad).

CDMA would have the longest reach, but would still only be a few miles (3-5 miles per tower).

These are just estimates I recall off the top of my head. Could do some research, but I'm not a big conspiracy nut.

I just have a Telecom background and find it terribly difficult to believe that in *2001* cell phones were in use on *any* aircraft AND able to place and hold calls on the terresterial network without a repeater or other specialized equipment installed on the aircraft to facilitate handling the voice traffic.

As a Telecom specialist, as far as I am concerned, it was NOT possible in 2001.

Ya'll can take my word for it, or not. I don't care.

So, even if you were just over a mile out from a tower in an airplane, there is no possible way a cell phone would connect to your knowledge?

 

[Gamolon]

yeah thats a very good point.Here this link puts to rest that it was impossible to use cell phones at 30,000 feet back then.As it says in that link,to make a cell phone call at altitudes of just 20,000 feet you barely had a one in a hundred chance of succeeding,same today.

So there's a chance at 20,000 feet? Not impossible?

What about at about 6,000 feet?

 

[Fizz]

Another point is that airborne cell phone signals confuse the cell phone system. the cell phone companies do not want airborne cell phone use.

yeah thats a very good point.Here this link puts to rest that it was impossible to use cell phones at 30,000 feet back then.Of course ollie,fizz and candy corn troll boy will blatantly ignore this and post the most absurd crap like they always do to try and save face in their posts.

Physics911, by Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven, 9/11/2001

listen, you dumbfuck. dont accuse me of saying things i dont say.

my point is that it doesnt matter what anyone's opinion of whether cell phones worked on flight 77 or not.

Renee May called her parents and they called American Airlines at her request. it doesnt matter if that was by an airphone or a cell phone (and whether that cell phone worked or not). the call clearly happened. i'm not arguing whether cell phones worked one way or the other because it is pointless.

you may as well be arguing what color the phone was. it obviously doesnt matter what color the phone was as long as the phone call was made.

 

[Ravi]

I hate to break it to you but your premise is wrong.

• A NASA report from 2001[6] summarizes "14 years of incidents reported by pilots to the ASRS" of interference caused, or suspected to be caused, by passenger electronic devices. Mobile phones were the most frequently identified source of interference, with laptop computers a close second. In no cases were the affected avionics found to be defective upon later testing. Degrees of correlation or confidence were not among the data summarized in the report.

Mobile phones on aircraft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

wiki is hardly a reliable source for information,they can type in anything they want to there.

Even a link to a NASA report. Oh, wait...I forgot NASA was in on the conspiracy.

 

[Ravi]

Really? hahahahaha! You silly twit, they existed on 9/11.

I am aware of that you stupid dolt.

I was simply pointing out that they no longer exist for the chronically stupid in this thread.

Some of the stupidity I've seen here in this thread is bordering on comic book material.

MSE for civilians. ROFLMAOPIMP!

Oh. My. Gawd.

thats how these DOD agents that have penetrated these boards like Gomer Pyle Ollie post. Great point you made earlier.just because the MILITARY had it available,doesnt mean it was available to the general public back then.

You're applauding her for not knowing analog systems were in wide use on 9/11? Funny.

 

[Ravi]

Another point is that airborne cell phone signals confuse the cell phone system. the cell phone companies do not want airborne cell phone use.

Exactly. It was never that cell phones weren't usable aboard flights...it was that they caused too many problems.

The FCC bans in-flight use because cell phones can communicate with more than one cell tower when in the air. This could lead to disruption of service for cell phones on the ground, which use only one tower at a time.

But the commission thinks cell phone technology has advanced far enough in recent years to minimize such disruption of ground service. Yesterday, the FCC voted to consider lifting its ban, and it will begin taking comments from businesses and travelers over the next few months.

FCC Considers Cell Phone Use On Airplanes (washingtonpost.com)