Recommended Posts
georger 197
mrshutter45******Those missions would be declassified by now, if they even happened.
Use the FOIA and show us those missions, then we may be inclined to think along those lines.
Personally, the hijacker is not one of the three we keep bantering about here, no conclusive evidence so far.
I think the hijacker, had a small amount of ACTUAL military training, in the exit and jumping arena, and had a risk-reward plan in mind that made it so we are confused by some of his choices.
And, if he still lives, he laughs at this thread daily, as he twists his MACVSOG ring and enjoys a cold beer in Mexico .
Matt
These 727 missions in Southeast Asia did happen and have been written up by a fellow in Texas. I don't remember his name or the link but they have been on this thread for about the last three or four years.
Robert99
here is some info, scroll way down in the file
http://www.utdallas.edu/library/specialcollections/hac/cataam/Leeker/history/Tibet.pdf
the full video of which we always see can be found here
http://www.vietnam.ttu.edu/AirAmerica/FMFM/index.htm
Quote
nice find ...
Robert99 37
airtwardo*********The 727 was DESIGNED for small airports - DID you know that?
No, I didn't know that and I don't think your "source" knew that either.
The 727 was designed for routes shorter than the 707 routes and it was also designed to fit into the air traffic at airports that also handled the 707. Consequently, it was NOT designed for a small airport.
Perhaps you are confused by the 737 which was designed for secondary airports while its main competitor, the DC-9, was designed to fit into air traffic along with the 707, 727, etc..
Robert99
You better do YOUR fricking research.
The whole idea of using the aft stairs was to make it available to access the smaller airport without the ramps.
The Boeing 727 design was a compromise between United Airlines, American Airlines, and Eastern Air Lines requirements for a jet airliner to serve smaller cities with shorter runways and fewer passengers...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_727
Okay! So Airtwardo and Jo think the 727 was designed to serve "smaller cities with shorter runways and fewer passengers" and that the rear stairs were incorporated so that no ground stairs would be needed.
Let's consider some facts here based on my personal experiences and observations as having flown on 727s almost from the day they went into service.
I have boarded and deplaned from 727s using the rear stairs and the forward door which may have its own retractable stairs installed, may use stairs mounted on a truck, and used "jet ways" when they started coming into use. All of this was at "larger airports".
When using the rear stairs, the forward door was also in use without exception. I have never even seen a commercial airliner in the USA use only the rear stairs for boarding and deplaning.
I have visited "smaller airports" (and I do mean small in the sense of light traffic) on DC-9s, which also has a rear stairs, and all boarding/deplaning was done through the forward door. The rear stairs were never lowered.
The 707 was designed to be an "Intercontinental" aircraft and one version of it was named just that. But the 727 was designed to fill in the gaps between the east and west coasts. The passenger capacity of the original 707 and 727 was not particularly different. But as jets became the way to travel, various versions of these two aircraft evolved to serve specific market conditions.
If Boeing built an aircraft for the smaller markets, then it would have to be the 737. And the 737 has evolved a bit over the years that it has been in production.
I stand by my original statements.
Robert99
Thank you, Mr. Shutter.
Maybe the memories from when someone is 8 years old are off, but no one spends that much time with the FBI and undergoes a lie detector test when they make up a story unless they want to get into a heap of trouble.
Challenging Marla's story is fair game. But, the ad hominem attacks is why RobertMBlevins lacks credibility when he comments on Marla.
Jo, Marla and even RobertMBlevins himself all had things told to them (either directly or through non verbal responses like someone turning ashen when asked a question about the hijacking). It was a personal experience to each of them, so each of them believe it. Maybe one of them is correct, maybe none of them are. But I don't see any reason to think that any of them are lying about what they saw or heard.
(Bob Knoss - I'm not ready to commit on. I still think he might just be toying with us).
wow! very well put.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites