On another note, Cliff stresses throughout these interviews how very important it was that 305 be kept within V23 (and as close to the center line as possible), precisely because of the chase plane intercepts and trailing that Cliff says began at the Toledo intersection, which he had to personally manage. He says things got hectic when he had to bring the T33 in, in addition to the F-106s covering with their narrow radar cones, crossing on the west side of PDX ...

Cliff is saying he and 305 were in a 'close working relationship'. And keeping 305 as close to the center line of V23 as possible was important - in order to facilitate the F106s intercept with 305 starting at Toledo. If 305 had strayed from V23 starting at Toledo, he (Cliff) would have known that and had to inform the F106's accordingly. Cliff says 305 did not start a 'straight line' path on its own starting at Toledo to Canby but was ordered to stay on V23 and never strayed from that instruction.   

As mentioned on the other page I don't see a bypass on anything. why would it only be Portland? I just posted that they flew over "heavy populated" area's in Reno/Sparks. no cross talk regarding any area's out of the question. they were given the sky to fly..

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The question is whether Ammerman was ARTCC or TRACON. he said he was at SEATAC. the ARTCC has been away from the airport since 1962.

TRACON handles flights coming in and flights taking off then it's handed off to ARTCC.

ARTCCs, usually referred to as "Centers," are established primarily to provide Air Traffic Service to aircraft operating on IFR flight plans within the controlled airspace, and principally during the en route phase of flight.

There are 21 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) in the United States.

Any aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) within the confines of an ARTCC's airspace is controlled by air traffic controllers at the Center. This includes all sorts of different types of aircraft: privately owned single engine aircraft, commuter airlines, military jets and commercial airlines.

Is the information I've provided inaccurate or is Ammerman going off second hand information? he sounds like he knows what he's talking about.

It is my understanding that the radar system for the Seattle area was physically located at McChord AFB.  It would probably be operated by USAF military and civilian personnel.  The FAA air traffic controllers may not have been directly involved in its operation.

There was probably a Memorandum of Understanding between the USAF and the FAA about the use of the radar data.  In any event, the Seattle air traffic controllers in Auburn would have displays from this radar at their work stations.  The Auburn controllers probably had displays from radar systems in the Spokane area as well as other areas for which they were responsible for air traffic control.

The approach and departure controllers at SEATAC would also have displays from the McChord radar and/or they might also have displays from lower powered radars located at SEATAC itself.  These controllers would probably be located in the SEATAC tower building very close to the tower controllers who were looking out the windows.  All of these people would work very closely together.

The NWA airliner was cleared for take-off on the ground control frequency and told to contact the Seattle ATC center directly on a specific frequency.  They therefore bypassed the tower controller and the departure controller.  Apparently there was some confusion between the SEATAC tower controllers and the ATC controllers in Auburn.  When the airliner contacted the Auburn controllers, they were apparently taken by surprise and had to ask the airliner for information.  This took a couple of minutes to clear up and I think it is discussed in the "FBI Notes" and other places.

In the Portland area, there was probably a low power radar station that provided coverage that was not available from the Seattle ATC radar system.  This station would probably be located on the PIA property (maybe on top of the tower cab).  Presumably it was just such a station that claimed to have tracked the airliner in the Portland area.  This station would be entirely separate from the enroute radar network at Auburn.  The mountains between Seattle and Portland would block the two radars.

Previous posts on this site have stated that the F-106s broke off their trailing of the airliner, climbed to 20,000 feet, and headed east while still north of the Columbia River.  Ammerman claims to have been the controller who worked the intercept problem between the T-33 (and also presumably the F-106s) and the airliner.  He would almost certainly have been at the Seattle ATC in Auburn.  Also, he would probably have been assisted by several other people.  And I imagine that the most senior managers at the Auburn facility were looking over his should (and that of the other controllers involved) as he worked the interception.  This hijacking was not a routine event so it would be an "all hands on deck" situation.

Ammerman has apparently told Georger that he was not looking at his radar display from some point where the airliner was north of the Columbia River until it was south of the Columbia River.  But you can rest assured that someone was looking at that display.  And it appears that the other people were giving the airliner instructions that Ammerman was not aware of while he was working on the interception matter.

During the hand off to the Oakland Center, at least four Oakland controllers were involved.  Only one Seattle Center controller was involved apparently.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The question is whether Ammerman was ARTCC or TRACON. he said he was at SEATAC. the ARTCC has been away from the airport since 1962.

TRACON handles flights coming in and flights taking off then it's handed off to ARTCC.

ARTCCs, usually referred to as "Centers," are established primarily to provide Air Traffic Service to aircraft operating on IFR flight plans within the controlled airspace, and principally during the en route phase of flight.

There are 21 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) in the United States.

Any aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) within the confines of an ARTCC's airspace is controlled by air traffic controllers at the Center. This includes all sorts of different types of aircraft: privately owned single engine aircraft, commuter airlines, military jets and commercial airlines.

Is the information I've provided inaccurate or is Ammerman going off second hand information? he sounds like he knows what he's talking about.

It is my understanding that the radar system for the Seattle area was physically located at McChord AFB.  It would probably be operated by USAF military and civilian personnel.  The FAA air traffic controllers may not have been directly involved in its operation.

There was probably a Memorandum of Understanding between the USAF and the FAA about the use of the radar data.  In any event, the Seattle air traffic controllers in Auburn would have displays from this radar at their work stations.  The Auburn controllers probably had displays from radar systems in the Spokane area as well as other areas for which they were responsible for air traffic control.

The approach and departure controllers at SEATAC would also have displays from the McChord radar and/or they might also have displays from lower powered radars located at SEATAC itself.  These controllers would probably be located in the SEATAC tower building very close to the tower controllers who were looking out the windows.  All of these people would work very closely together.

The NWA airliner was cleared for take-off on the ground control frequency and told to contact the Seattle ATC center directly on a specific frequency.  They therefore bypassed the tower controller and the departure controller.  Apparently there was some confusion between the SEATAC tower controllers and the ATC controllers in Auburn.  When the airliner contacted the Auburn controllers, they were apparently taken by surprise and had to ask the airliner for information.  This took a couple of minutes to clear up and I think it is discussed in the "FBI Notes" and other places.

In the Portland area, there was probably a low power radar station that provided coverage that was not available from the Seattle ATC radar system.  This station would probably be located on the PIA property (maybe on top of the tower cab).  Presumably it was just such a station that claimed to have tracked the airliner in the Portland area.  This station would be entirely separate from the enroute radar network at Auburn.  The mountains between Seattle and Portland would block the two radars.

Previous posts on this site have stated that the F-106s broke off their trailing of the airliner, climbed to 20,000 feet, and headed east while still north of the Columbia River.  Ammerman claims to have been the controller who worked the intercept problem between the T-33 (and also presumably the F-106s) and the airliner.  He would almost certainly have been at the Seattle ATC in Auburn.  Also, he would probably have been assisted by several other people.  And I imagine that the most senior managers at the Auburn facility were looking over his should (and that of the other controllers involved) as he worked the interception.  This hijacking was not a routine event so it would be an "all hands on deck" situation.

Ammerman has apparently told Georger that he was not looking at his radar display from some point where the airliner was north of the Columbia River until it was south of the Columbia River.  But you can rest assured that someone was looking at that display.  And it appears that the other people were giving the airliner instructions that Ammerman was not aware of while he was working on the interception matter.

During the hand off to the Oakland Center, at least four Oakland controllers were involved.  Only one Seattle Center controller was involved apparently.

I have a feeling this is going to get *very* complicated, due to hair splitting, the system Cliff was part of, etc - looking for anything that will nullify Ammerman's testimony ?

From my notes:

"Cliff was a controller located at Seattle Center who handled 305 all the way to PDX and slightly beyond PDX  on the evening of 11-24-71.  Cliff handed off to Eugene. Departure control gave over 305 to Cliff and Cliff handled 305. Cliff was not SEAR2 in the NWA transcript.  Cliff says whoever R2 was, R2 would have handed off to R4, who would have handed off to R5 etc.  Cliff was located at Seattle Center. Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centers at the time in the US.  Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC."

And: 'Cliff suggests we contact the FAA Northwest Region who he feels kept and still has ‘all the radar input and any controller transcripts and notes'  “if those were kept at all from that night”, he says.

This complexity is the whole reason I wanted R99 to talk to Cliff. Apparently that never happened!

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The question is whether Ammerman was ARTCC or TRACON. he said he was at SEATAC. the ARTCC has been away from the airport since 1962.

TRACON handles flights coming in and flights taking off then it's handed off to ARTCC.

ARTCCs, usually referred to as "Centers," are established primarily to provide Air Traffic Service to aircraft operating on IFR flight plans within the controlled airspace, and principally during the en route phase of flight.

There are 21 Air Route Traffic Control Centers (ARTCC) in the United States.

Any aircraft operating under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) within the confines of an ARTCC's airspace is controlled by air traffic controllers at the Center. This includes all sorts of different types of aircraft: privately owned single engine aircraft, commuter airlines, military jets and commercial airlines.

Is the information I've provided inaccurate or is Ammerman going off second hand information? he sounds like he knows what he's talking about.

It is my understanding that the radar system for the Seattle area was physically located at McChord AFB.  It would probably be operated by USAF military and civilian personnel.  The FAA air traffic controllers may not have been directly involved in its operation.

There was probably a Memorandum of Understanding between the USAF and the FAA about the use of the radar data.  In any event, the Seattle air traffic controllers in Auburn would have displays from this radar at their work stations.  The Auburn controllers probably had displays from radar systems in the Spokane area as well as other areas for which they were responsible for air traffic control.

The approach and departure controllers at SEATAC would also have displays from the McChord radar and/or they might also have displays from lower powered radars located at SEATAC itself.  These controllers would probably be located in the SEATAC tower building very close to the tower controllers who were looking out the windows.  All of these people would work very closely together.

The NWA airliner was cleared for take-off on the ground control frequency and told to contact the Seattle ATC center directly on a specific frequency.  They therefore bypassed the tower controller and the departure controller.  Apparently there was some confusion between the SEATAC tower controllers and the ATC controllers in Auburn.  When the airliner contacted the Auburn controllers, they were apparently taken by surprise and had to ask the airliner for information.  This took a couple of minutes to clear up and I think it is discussed in the "FBI Notes" and other places.

In the Portland area, there was probably a low power radar station that provided coverage that was not available from the Seattle ATC radar system.  This station would probably be located on the PIA property (maybe on top of the tower cab).  Presumably it was just such a station that claimed to have tracked the airliner in the Portland area.  This station would be entirely separate from the enroute radar network at Auburn.  The mountains between Seattle and Portland would block the two radars.

Previous posts on this site have stated that the F-106s broke off their trailing of the airliner, climbed to 20,000 feet, and headed east while still north of the Columbia River.  Ammerman claims to have been the controller who worked the intercept problem between the T-33 (and also presumably the F-106s) and the airliner.  He would almost certainly have been at the Seattle ATC in Auburn.  Also, he would probably have been assisted by several other people.  And I imagine that the most senior managers at the Auburn facility were looking over his should (and that of the other controllers involved) as he worked the interception.  This hijacking was not a routine event so it would be an "all hands on deck" situation.

Ammerman has apparently told Georger that he was not looking at his radar display from some point where the airliner was north of the Columbia River until it was south of the Columbia River.  But you can rest assured that someone was looking at that display.  And it appears that the other people were giving the airliner instructions that Ammerman was not aware of while he was working on the interception matter.

During the hand off to the Oakland Center, at least four Oakland controllers were involved.  Only one Seattle Center controller was involved apparently.

I have a feeling this is going to get *very* complicated, due to hair splitting, the system Cliff was part of, etc - looking for anything that will nullify Ammerman's testimony ?

From my notes:

"Cliff was a controller located at Seattle Center who handled 305 all the way to PDX and slightly beyond PDX  on the evening of 11-24-71.  Cliff handed off to Eugene. Departure control gave over 305 to Cliff and Cliff handled 305. Cliff was not SEAR2 in the NWA transcript.  Cliff says whoever R2 was, R2 would have handed off to R4, who would have handed off to R5 etc.  Cliff was located at Seattle Center. Seattle Center was one of 22-26 large air control centers at the time in the US.  Seattle Center was in a building below the tower at SEA-TAC."

And: 'Cliff suggests we contact the FAA Northwest Region who he feels kept and still has ‘all the radar input and any controller transcripts and notes'  “if those were kept at all from that night”, he says.

This complexity is the whole reason I wanted R99 to talk to Cliff. Apparently that never happened!

Georger, please read this post before replying.  There is no hair splitting here.

Here are the Seattle controllers listed on the front page of the Seattle ATC radio transcripts (note that an R4 is not listed):

  R2
  R5
  R6
  R10

The Seattle ATC radio transcripts are described as being a "true transcription" by Gerald H. Osterkamp, Chief, Seattle ARTCC.  He adds that the original transcripts are on file in his office.

Did you read Shutter's post about when the Seattle ATC was opened in Auburn?  If not, you might find it interesting compared to what you have written above.

The FAA does keep records of aircraft accidents and incidents such as this hijacking.  For the Seattle area, this records are eventually retired to the FAA Regional Office in the Seattle area.  If you remember, that FAA Regional Office is the one that I initially contacted several years ago in an effort to obtain the unredacted Seattle ATC radio transcripts.

That FAA Regional Office promptly replied to my inquiry with a full page of contact information for the FBI FOIA office in Winchester, Virginia.  And they replied by registered mail.

I contacted that FBI FOIA office and got a run-around, then I appealed to the DOJ and got another run-around.  After that I contacted my US Congresswoman, who is now a US Senator filling out the remainder of John McCain's term.  Three Congressional interventions later, I received exactly two pages of information but nothing on the radio transcripts.  Those two pages are posted here on Shutter's site.

All of the above has been discussed here and at DZ at great length over the last several years.

If you are interested in contacting Ammerman again, let me know and I can suggest some specific questions you might want to discuss with him.  This assumes that you have a working relationship with him.