Originally Posted by SUPERMNNN
So far no one has proved to me that the two transponder signals were not the pilot action. If it was not the pilot action, what's the possible "accident" which could turned the transponder back on.
However what I have found are:
1. There is a airport 6 miles away, in airport controled airspace, it is illegal to turn off transponder.
2. Flight 93's flight path (before crashing) was in the direction to land on the runway of this airport.
Only our pilot would want to give out the plane's identification in a hijacked situation.
I can't take someting like "who knows, accident can happen", that's exactly the reason for wild offwall speculations.
A simple question should be, yes or no, if the transponder was switched on by the pilot, if not, why? (Forflight 93 sent out two signals before crashing, 6400 ft and 4800 ft)
While flying with transponder left turned off is illegal, it is probably not that big deal, compared to the safety of airframe in respect to things like overspeeding, upsets and structural integrity of the plane. "Aviate, navigate, communicate"... one guesses that a pilot regaining control of cockpit would not think of switching on the transponder until after dealing with a lot of other urgent business!