OH… BY THE WAY: IT’S OFFICIAL: AIRPLANES CAN BE REMOTELY ...November 19, 2017
Mr. F.L.M. and Mr. M.B. found this story and passed it along, and it's worth pausing to ponder the implications of this one for a while. It seems a U.S. government hacker working for the Reichsicherheithauptamt....er.... the Department of Homeland (In)security hacked into a Boeing 757 on the runway:
Now, why is this story worth mentioning at all?
Well, for one thing, there is the strange case of the missing Malaysia Air Flight 370, which still remains very strange. For one thing, in spite of years of searches for the missing aircraft, the crash site has still not been found, and the "debris" that has been washing up in the western Indian Ocean has been, at best, suspect, as a number of readers here who are pilots have informed me. In any case, one theory that was advanced quite early on after Flight 370's disappearance is that the airplane was taken over remotely and flown - or crashed - to "wherever." This hack is, of course, being spun in the usual and predictable way:
Mr Hickey said that following testing, experts advised that “it was no big deal”.
But in March 2017 he was shocked to learn that seven airline pilot captains from American Airlines and Delta Air Lines had no idea that their aircraft could be hacked.
A Boeing spokesman said: “The Boeing Company has worked closely for many years with DHS, the FAA, other government agencies, our suppliers and customers to ensure the cybersecurity of our aircraft and will continue to do so.
“Boeing observed the test referenced in the Aviation Today article, and we were briefed on the results. We firmly believe that the test did not identify any cyber vulnerabilities in the 757, or any other Boeing aircraft.”
Reading between the lines a bit, what appears to be being said here is "don't worry, nothing to see here; the pilots remained in control of the aircraft, move along." But if my memory serves me correctly, a number of years ago, after 9/11, Lufthansa did an overhaul of their fleet for precisely the purpose of removing potential backdoors that would allow their aircraft to be "hacked' and presumably flown from "outside the aircraft." But whether my memory on this score is the case or not, the potential of this article is rather obvious, for the implication is that control of the planes could be wrestled away from the cockpit crew and done remotely.
Which brings us of course to 9/11. Many 9/11 researchers, myself among them, have pointed out the difficulty of Hani Hanjour's maneuver of allegedly flying a Boeing commercial aircraft into the Pentagon, after having executed a difficult down-ward spiraling turn. As many 9/11 researchers have pointed out, Hanjour's flight instructors indicated that he could barely fly a Cessna, much less a commercial airliner in such a difficult maneuver through the high-rises of Arlington Virgnia, which one former pilot described as "an obstacle course."
That former pilot, incidentally, was former Egyptian President Hosni Moubarek, a former pilot for Egypt's commercial airline and former military pilot. Moubarek made his statements shortly after the events of 9.11 during interviews on American television.
All these considerations led some individuals to propose that Hanjour's flight was coopted remotely, and that narrative was extended to the hijackers who allegedly flew the planes into the Twin Towers of the World Trade center.
Then, of course, the theory was denounced as a "conspiracy theory" and experts were duly produced to contest the idea.
Now, however, it appears that hacking an airliner is possible, and with that possibility, the potential of commandeering the control of the craft reenters the picture.
The real questions are, why would the Reichsicherheithauptamt be conducting such a study in the first place? And why would it be admitted now? What has changed?
See you on the flip side...