Small White Plane Followed Flight 93 as it Crashed

The evidence is overwhelming that a small white plane was following Flight 93. And there is evidence that it was, in fact, following Flight 93 while it was still ariborne or, at least, as it crashed.

A second plane, described “as a small, white jet with rear engines and no discernible markings,” is seen by at least ten witnesses flying low and in erratic patterns, not much above treetop level, over the crash site within minutes of United Flight 93 crashing. Independent, August 13, 2002.

• Lee Purbaugh: “I didn’t get a good look but it was white and it circled the area about twice and then it flew off over the horizon.” Mirror, September 12, 2002

• Susan Mcelwain: Less than a minute before the Flight 93 crash rocked the countryside, she sees a small white jet with rear engines and no discernible markings swoop low over her minivan near an intersection and disappear over a hilltop, nearly clipping the tops of trees lining the ridge. She later adds, “There’s no way I imagined this plane—it was so low it was virtually on top of me. It was white with no markings but it was definitely military, it just had that look. It had two rear engines, a big fin on the back like a spoiler on the back of a car and with two upright fins at the side. I haven’t found one like it on the Internet. It definitely wasn’t one of those executive jets.

Mcelwain, who lives two miles from the Flight 93 crash site, had seen a small jet plane flying very low overhead as she was driving home. She later recalls that it had been “heading right to the point where Flight 93 crashed and must have been there at the very moment it came down.” But it was only later in the afternoon, after returning home and turning on the TV, that she’d realized what she’d seen was connected to the attacks in New York and Washington. While she was confused that a Boeing 757—not a small jet plane—was being reported as having gone down near where she’d been, she’d then realized that the small plane was flying in a different direction to that being described for Flight 93. So she got her husband to tell the police about what she’d witnessed. Consequently, late in the evening, the FBI turns up to talk to her about it. Yet, as Mcelwain later recalls, “They did not want my story.” They keep asking her how big the plane she’d seen was. When she tells them it was small, not much bigger than her van, one of the agents tells her, “You don’t know what a 757 looks like.” She retorts, “Don’t be condescending towards me. If you don’t want to believe me, that’s fine, but I thought I should report what I saw. You ought to know there was something else in the air at the same time this was going on. We want to make sure it was ours and not somebody else’s.” After this, she will recall, the agent “did seem to get a little nicer. Told me that it was a white Learjet. Somebody was taking pictures. And I said, ‘Before the crash?’ and he says, ‘Well, we’ve got to go,’ and that was the end of it.” September 14, 2001, Bergen Record;; Lappe and Marshall, True Lies (New York: Plume, 2004), pp. 38-40

• John Fleegle and two work colleagues arrive at the crash site “before any fireman or paramedics or anybody.” According to Fleegle, “When we got there, there was a plane flying up above and he was smart, he flew straight for the sun so you couldn’t look at it and see exactly what type of plane, if it was a fighter or what it was.” However, Fleegle claims the plane “was decent sized. It wasn’t just a little private jet or something like that, from what we could see.” True lies, 35-36.

• Dennis Decker and/or Rick Chaney, say: “As soon as we looked up [after hearing the Flight 93 crash], we saw a midsized jet flying low and fast. It appeared to make a loop or part of a circle, and then it turned fast and headed out.” Decker and Chaney described the plane as a Learjet type, with engines mounted near the tail and painted white with no identifying markings. “It was a jet plane, and it had to be flying real close when that 757 went down. If I was the FBI, I’d find out who was driving that plane.” Bergen Record, September 14, 2001

• Kathy Blades, who is staying about quarter of a mile from the impact site, runs outside after the crash and sees a jet, “with sleek back wings and an angled cockpit,” race overhead. Philadelphia Daily News, November 18, 2001.

• Anna Ruth Fisher says, “After the crash, another jet went near over to look.” Her mother, Anna B. Fisher, adds, “We were looking at the smoke cloud when we saw the jets circling up there.” Courage After the Crash: Flight 93 Aftermath--An Oral and Pictorial Chronicle (Somerset, PA: SAJ Publishing, 2002), 27.)

• Jim Brandt sees a small plane with no markings stay about one or two minutes over the crash site before leaving. Pittsburgh Channel, “Alleged Partial Flight 93 Cockpit Transcript Obtained,” September 12, 2001

• Bob Page sees a large plane circling the crash site for about two or three minutes, before climbing almost vertically into the sky. He cannot see what kind of plane it is or if there are any markings on it, but says, “It sure wasn’t no puddle jumper.” Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, “Homes, Neighbors Rattled By Crash,” September 12, 2001

• Tom Spinelli: “I saw the white plane. It was flying around all over the place like it was looking for something. I saw it before and after the crash.” Mirror, September 12, 2002

The FBI later claims this was a Fairchild Falcon 20 business jet, directed after the crash to fly from 37,000 feet to 5,000 feet and obtain the coordinates for the crash site to help rescuers. Pittsburgh Channel, “FBI Explains Other Planes At Flight 93 Crash,” September 15, 2001; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 16, 2001. The FBI also says there was a C-130 military cargo aircraft flying at 24,000 feet about 17 miles away (see 10:08 a.m. September 11, 2001), but that plane wasn’t armed and had no role in the crash. (Pittsburgh Channel, “FBI Explains Other Planes At Flight 93 Crash,” September 15, 2001; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, September 16, 2001). Note that this is the same C-130 that flies very close to Flight 77 right as that planes crashes into the Pentagon (see 9.36 a.m. September 11, 2001).

All of the information and most of the text comes from Cooperative Research's 9/11 Timeline. The 9/11 Timeline is a fantastic resource, although their links are coded in an odd format which it makes it very time-consuming to post links.

Please consider donating to Cooperative Research.

One of our tasks ought to be

One of our tasks ought to be to determine how the planes were piloted to their targets on 9/11. I strongly doubt there were humans in the cockpits-- neither Arab, nor anyone else. I also doubt the planes were piloted by some pre-programmed chip that had been inserted into the planes' Flight Management Systems. Such a scheme would be too inflexible and would not allow for last minute changes of plan, such as deciding to crash UAL93 into the ground instead of proceeding to a target building.

The planes could have been piloted by remote control, by a real pilot at the controls in a remote location, such as in a nearby plane. What is the range of communication of a remote control system that could have been used? I have no idea. But we should consider the possibility that the white jet(s) was a chase plane, which carrried the real pilot of UAL93.


When they loaded the plane with innocent civilians (I think there was a drop off point for FL11, FL73 to load onto FL93 or a drone 93, possibly at Hopkins in Cleveland), the passengers started to wonder what was behind the cockpit and where they were going. They rammed into the cabin, this was picked up by whatever evil entity was monitoring the flight, and the plane had to be destroyed before the passengers discovered/communicated an empty cabin. Maybe it was headed for WTC 7 for that final hit to destroy central command. Who knows.

Is it possible that bone fragments of passengers for all three flights are still in the fields of PA? Wouldn't it be amazing if personal belongings from a passenger on FL11 were found in Shanksville. OMG. We should be sweeping the fields. There have been so many glaring errors on their there still more evidence to be discovered?

Check out this interview....

.....with Susan McElwain obtained by CIT associate Domenick DiMaggio.

She saw a white "plane" all right.

More like a UAV all "molded" with no "rivets".

Government can't control witnesses

"A minimum of six witnesses claimed to have seen a small military-type plane in the vicinity shortly before UA93 crashed. Some spoke of a mysterious white jet which they had observed in the vicinity. The FBI stubbornly denied the presence of any other aircraft... Susan McElwain, 51, who lived two miles from the crash site, told a British reporter that she had seen a white aircraft pass directly over her head. ‘It came right over me, I reckon just 40 or 50ft above my mini-van,” she said. “It was so low I ducked instinctively. It was traveling real fast, but hardly made any sound. Then it disappeared behind some trees... A few days after the crash, the FBI tried to provide a plausible explanation for this embarrassing and mysterious white jet which the various witnesses had identified. The FBI now claimed that a private Falcon 20 jet bound for nearby Johnstown was in the vicinity and was asked by authorities to descend and help survey the crash site. But the authorities failed to provide the identify of the owner of the jet, and also could not justify why it was still flying some 40 minutes after the Federal Aviation Administration had ordered all planes to land at the nearest airport."

The government can't control eyewitnesses. It simply can't be done. Explosions in the World Trade Center, Blown up elevators, Explosions before plane hit, Witnesses hurt by explosions, witnesses thrown by explosions, Building 7 explosions, Flight 93 shot down, second plane by flight 93, Molten Steel at the WTC, explosives taken out of the Oklahoma City Building... and... the Pentagon.