911 - A Silence sELTomly Heard
Everyone knows the images of September 11, 2001. The airplanes crashing into the Twin Towers, the skyscrapers collapsing, the chaos in New York. It is a day etched into our collective memory. Millions of people watched the disaster live on television, and to this day the footage is replayed endlessly.
Yet there are things many people do not know. Details that may not look as spectacular as falling towers, but are all the more important for understanding what really happened. One of those details revolves around a small device that is present on every airplane: the ELT, the Emergency Locator Transmitter.
This device is designed to activate in the most dramatic of circumstances: when an aircraft crashes. The moment a hard impact occurs, it transmits a distress signal that can be picked up anywhere in the world. A kind of automatic beacon that cries out: “Here lies the wreckage, come find us!”
And here is the remarkable part. On 9/11, according to the official story, four airplanes crashed. Four large commercial aircraft, well maintained, belonging to some of the biggest airlines in the world. Four times a massive impact, right on land, under conditions where an ELT signal should have been unavoidable.
But: not a single ELT signal was recorded. Four times silence.
That silence is not just a technical footnote that can be brushed aside. It is an anomaly that raises serious questions. Because how is it possible that precisely on that day, with precisely those four flights, the distress signal that normally always sounds remained silent four times in a row?
That is the rare silence this article is about. A silence that may be very telling, but about which almost everyone has remained silent.
What is an ELT?
To understand why that silence on 9/11 is so strange, we first need to know what an ELT actually is. ELT stands for Emergency Locator Transmitter. In plain English: an emergency beacon that automatically transmits a signal the moment an aircraft crashes.
Every airplane has an ELT built in. The device is connected to a sensor that responds to sudden forces. When an aircraft experiences a hard impact (for example during an emergency landing or a crash), the ELT switches on automatically. It then transmits a distress signal on special frequencies that are used worldwide by rescue services.
That signal can be picked up by:
- other airplanes flying nearby,
- air traffic control,
- and since the 1980s also by satellites in the international COSPAS-SARSAT system.
Thanks to those satellites, it is possible to locate a crashed aircraft anywhere in the world, even in remote regions or on the open sea.
The ELT was made mandatory in the 1970s after several crashes in which wreckage was difficult or only very late to locate. Since then, the ELT has become a standard part of aviation safety. Almost every passenger aircraft, large or small, carries one on board.
In small aircraft the pilot can sometimes activate the ELT manually. But in large commercial airliners (such as the Boeing 757 and 767 involved in 9/11) the activation is fully automatic. Pilots have no switch for it in the cockpit. The device is specifically designed to work every single time it is needed.
No system is 100% perfect. Sometimes an ELT fails: the antenna may break off, the battery may be dead, or a crash into water may block the signal. But for large commercial airliners crashing on land, the ELT functions in 90 to 95% of cases.
In other words: if a large aircraft crashes, you can be almost certain that an ELT signal will be transmitted.
The Silent Riddle of 9/11
According to the official story, four large commercial airplanes crashed that day:
- American Airlines 11 into the North Tower of the World Trade Center in New York.
- United Airlines 175 into the South Tower.
- American Airlines 77 into the Pentagon in Washington.
- United Airlines 93 into a field near Shanksville, Pennsylvania.
Four planes, four massive impacts, all on land. If there is one certainty in aviation, it is that such crashes normally trigger an ELT signal.
But what was recorded that morning? Absolutely nothing.
Two unexplained signals, both too early
There were reports of ELT signals that morning, but both came too early to fit the official timeline.
The pilot of US Airways 583 reported:
- At 08:44: a brief ELT signal, two minutes before the official impact of AA11 in the North Tower.
- At 08:58: another ELT signal, this time five minutes before the official impact of UA175 in the South Tower.
In both cases, the signals came too early to have originated from the involved aircraft. Moreover, the crews could not have activated these devices manually in the Boeing 767s used. The signals remain a mystery, one that makes the silence at the actual crashes even stranger.
Four times silence
Because when the planes allegedly did crash according to the official account, something nearly impossible happened:
- At the North Tower impact (AA11): no ELT.
- At the South Tower impact (UA175): no ELT.
- At the Pentagon (AA77): no ELT.
- At Shanksville (UA93): no ELT.
Four impacts, each thousands of times stronger than what is needed to trigger an ELT. Four times, a device designed to activate automatically in emergencies stayed silent.
Statistically almost impossible
To put it in numbers: if we assume a 90% chance that an ELT works in a crash of a large commercial aircraft on land, then the chance that four planes in a row fail is:
0.1 × 0.1 × 0.1 × 0.1 = 0.0001 → in other words, 0.01% chance.
That is 1 in 10,000. Nearly impossible.
And this does not even take into account that these four aircraft were modern Boeings, well maintained, from leading American airlines. If there was ever a situation where ELTs should not fail, it was here.
Why this matters so much
Because an ELT is an objective measure. It is not about vague witness testimonies, not about footage that can be interpreted differently. It is about hard technology.
- If there was a crash, there should have been a signal.
- No signal means: no crash.
And that is precisely what makes the rare silence of 9/11 so explosive.
Analysis by Mark Conlon
The absence of ELT signals has not gone unnoticed. Researcher Mark Conlon has spent years combing through countless official documents, including FOIA-released radar logs, ACARS messages, and the timelines of the FAA and NTSB. His conclusion is nothing short of explosive:
The core of Conlon’s findings
According to Conlon, the lack of ELT signals indicates that none of the four planes crashed at the times and locations claimed by the official story.
- AA11 (North Tower): no ELT at the impact, but indications the plane was still airborne after 09:00.
- UA175 (South Tower): no ELT at the impact, but ACARS messages and even an MSNBC radar image showed the plane still active after 09:03.
- AA77 (Pentagon): no ELT at the impact, while radar logs showed the aircraft heading toward Missouri, where it disappeared.
- UA93 (Shanksville): no ELT at the crash, while ACARS messages placed it over Illinois, hundreds of miles away.
Conlon’s conclusion
Conlon brings these puzzle pieces together:
- No ELT signals at four separate crashes.
- Aircraft still active through official communication systems after their alleged crashes.
- Radar and coordinate data contradicting the official crash sites.
His final conclusion is sharp and unavoidable: None of the four planes actually crashed at the times and locations claimed by the official story.
Conclusion
We began this story with a small, seemingly insignificant device: the ELT, Emergency Locator Transmitter. A beacon designed to activate precisely in the most dramatic situations.
On September 11, 2001, according to the official story, four modern passenger planes crashed on land. Four moments when the ELTs should have automatically triggered. Four times when rescue services, air traffic control, and satellites should have picked up a signal.
But there was silence.
Strikingly, there were two ELT reports before the impacts on the Twin Towers, both picked up by the same pilot, but they came too early and could not possibly have come from the planes involved. When it really mattered, the ELTs stayed silent.
Statistically, that is virtually impossible. And Mark Conlon’s analysis makes clear what this silence means: the official crash locations and times of the four planes on 9/11 do not add up.
This “sELTomly heard silence” is more than a technical peculiarity. It is hard evidence that the reality of 911 looks different from the story we have been told for over twenty years.
The silence itself speaks volumes.
Outlook / Reflection
The absence of ELT signals is just one puzzle piece within a much larger picture. It is technical, objective, and shocking enough on its own. But 911 is not defined by a single anomaly: it is a complex web of events, accounts, and contradictions.
The “sELTomly heard silence” shows how a single detail can flip an entire story. It forces us to examine the very foundations of what we have been told. If a standard safety device that almost never fails somehow didn’t work four times in a row, all on the same day, what does that say about the rest of the official narrative?
For me, this is reason to refocus on the Pentagon. There, new questions pile up: the five light poles that the official story claims were struck, even though that is physically impossible. The fraudulent and unbelievable account of taxi driver Lloyde England. The remarkable role of USA Today employees who presented themselves as eyewitnesses. And the “North of Citgo” flight path, confirmed by more than a dozen witnesses, that contradicts the official path.
These are elements that, like the ELTs, do not fit into the imposed picture. The more of these puzzle pieces land on the table, the clearer it becomes that the image we were shown never truly added up.
