# WTC: Why were there so few people on all four planes? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [September 12, 2001, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-why-were-there-so-few-people-on-all-four-planes/81157 "2001-09-12T21:08:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2001, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-why-were-there-so-few-people-on-all-four-planes/81157/21 "2001-09-14T13:18:57Z")
The lack of people on the flights surprised me too. I don’t fly much but when I do its out of Denver. These flights are FULL. Not 90% not 95% but not a seat left full. It’s been like this for the last 5 years or so. ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2001, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-why-were-there-so-few-people-on-all-four-planes/81157/22 "2001-09-14T13:23:46Z")
Thank you **Omniscient** , your answer has satisfied my wife’s rather intense suspicion and curiosity. ---
**Author:** ![Jois](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ea666f/32.png) [@Jois](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jois)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2001, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-why-were-there-so-few-people-on-all-four-planes/81157/23 "2001-09-14T16:02:28Z")
Regarding tickets - I’m sure I heard that the hijackers paid cash for one way tickets. CNN? I’ve been wondering why the attacks occurred so early? Another 15-20 minutes for the first plane at the WTC would have place many more people at their desks, wouldn’t it? It seems that this was a mis-step in the planning. Also, I don’t think enough has yet been said that they failed in 1 of the 4 attacks. That they just expected everyone on the planes to “behave” and that 4-5 hijeckers weren’t enough even when the planes were not fully occupied. That they didn’t count of the cell phones to allert people to what was happening, that they were suicide missions, not the old fashioned pain-in-the-neck trips to Cuba. That they missed the re-conditioning of the Pentagon and hit one of the least occupied areas. I know that the Pentagon may have been a secondary target but it does seem much more likely that planes 3 and 4 were to attack the Pentagon. Maybe the planning wasn’t so well done? Jois ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2001, 4:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-why-were-there-so-few-people-on-all-four-planes/81157/24 "2001-09-14T16:24:07Z")
**Jois–** I was wondering much the same thing, thinking that since whoever did this obviously didn’t kill as many people as they could have, they weren’t going for body count but instead just to make a statement. Then I considered the following: 1. They needed four cross-country flights leaving at about the same time on the _same type of plane_. 2. They needed low-passenger flights so they could better control the passengers, especially since, as this hasn’t been done before, they had no idea whether or not it would work. 3. Part of their plan was to buy tickets at the last minute, so they needed planes with low counts. 4. I think they may have specifically chosen United and American because of their names, which would have limited their choice of flights even more. 5. I considered for a while that they could have flown around for an hour or two and then rammed the WTC when it was full of people, but again, they didn’t know how well or how long they could control the planes. I think this attack was well-planned, except for taking out Air Force One hours after the initial strike on the WTC. I’m not sure how they were planning on even FINDING it at that time. ---
**Author:** ![Jois](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ea666f/32.png) [@Jois](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jois)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2001, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-why-were-there-so-few-people-on-all-four-planes/81157/25 "2001-09-14T21:13:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Ethilrist \* > \*\ ***Jois–** > > I was wondering much the same thing, thinking that since whoever did this obviously didn’t kill as many people as they could have, they weren’t going for body count but instead just to make a statement. Then I considered the following: > > 1. They needed four cross-country flights leaving at about the same time on the _same type of plane_. > > 2. They needed low-passenger flights so they could better control the passengers, especially since, as this hasn’t been done before, they had no idea whether or not it would work. > > 3. Part of their plan was to buy tickets at the last minute, so they needed planes with low counts. > > 4. I think they may have specifically chosen United and American because of their names, which would have limited their choice of flights even more. > > 5. I considered for a while that they could have flown around for an hour or two and then rammed the WTC when it was full of people, but again, they didn’t know how well or how long they could control the planes. > > I think this attack was well-planned, except for taking out Air Force One hours after the initial strike on the WTC. I’m not sure how they were planning on even FINDING it at that time. \*\* All good points. Someone did say that the flights may have been chosen for the amount of fuel they would carry and therefore the amount of dammage on impact. (2) And I agree that (5) they could not have flown around for a while because of the surprise factor and maybe expertise in flying the plain. Jois ---
**Author:** ![Mudshark](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f04885/32.png) [@Mudshark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mudshark)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2001, 4:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-why-were-there-so-few-people-on-all-four-planes/81157/26 "2001-09-15T04:05:08Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally Posted by Tenebras_ > It’s expensive. Really expensive. Even if you can get each seat for $100, which is basically magic on a cross country flight, it would cost +$15,000. Per plane. And apparently all you need are 3-5 seats (at least, the first time). $15,000 dollars is pocket change to people who have billions invested in oil. About the planes, As long as the flight breaks even in profits, the airline will not cancle the flight. If they do not break even, the flight is usually cancled, and the passengers are bumped. What gets me is that all four planes took off on time and were not delayed/cancled. ---
**Author:** ![Neurodoc](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/848f3c/32.png) [@Neurodoc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurodoc)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2001, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-why-were-there-so-few-people-on-all-four-planes/81157/27 "2001-09-15T06:22:36Z")
I don’t know why the flights were so underpopulated…but it is clear that this fact was advantageous to the hijackers. So one must assume it was planned for by them. They may have simply done some homework and found that Tuesday AM transcontinental flights are generally light on passengers. Is this true? It should be easy to confirm if so. They may have overbooked with fictitious passengers who never showed up at the gate. If so, that can be proved by examining the booking records. And if that last is true, this provides a red flag that the airline industry should use. They should always scrutinize flights for such discrepancies between booked passengers and checked-in passengers, and any amount that exceeds a threshold should prompt serious scrutiny. ---
**Author:** ![Yuck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/50afbb/32.png) [@Yuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Yuck)\ **Post date:** [September 15, 2001, 8:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-why-were-there-so-few-people-on-all-four-planes/81157/28 "2001-09-15T08:51:25Z")
Don’t forget cargo and mail. Often when passengers are bumped it’s because of cargo/weight. Also, I don’t think the perps expected the WTC building to absorb the fuel. I think they expected the palnes to break up outside the buildings, then spread jet fuel around downtown NY and burn everybody and everything that was outside. I think the perps were just as surprised by the Towers going down as the Port Authority was. Couldn’t have asked for a neater job of collapsing a building. The mast at the top (seen on video) just never even leaned over on the way down! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc-why-were-there-so-few-people-on-all-four-planes/81157.md?page=1)