The Washington Post published graphics, sourced to Boeing that indicate the 767's were the extended range versions of the 200 class, which are the smallest of the three sizes.
Only one passenger seating chart was ever made public, for American Flight 11 out of Boston. It was obtained by the Boston Globe, who provided a copy to its sister-paper-in-profit, the New York Times, who published it after first dicking with it. It depicts the plane configured with first, business, and economy classes and seating 181, although if you study the chart closely you only come up with 159 as illustrated.
So not only were the smallest aircraft in the fleet utilized on September 11th, they also had the most leg room---11 fewer seat rows than in a charter-service cabin. Flight 11 was the first and the fullest of the four aircraft hijacked that day, but it was still only operating at 40 percent of capacity. However, in a note to Chapter 1, the Commission says Flight 11 was "at or slightly above the average number of passengers for the respective flights that summer."Note 21
That's bullshit cover of course. Page 21 of the Commission report gives us a tidbit of small print information, saying Flight 93 "had no business class section," from which we can infer it outfitted in two-classes, as 224 seats. CNN said Flight 93 crashed with 45 aboard--seven in crew, four unnamed hijackers, going on to name 26 passengers, which only adds up to 37. At the one-year mark, the Boston Globe published a list with 33 passenger names, which is still short.
But then the Report contradicts itself, saying in note 72 of Chapter 1 the capacity was 182, not 224: "The 37 passengers represented a load factor of 20.33 percent of the plane’s seating capacity of 182, considerably below the 52.09 percent for Flight 93 on Tuesdays in the three-month period prior to September 11 (June 11–September 4, 2001.)"
To gage the legitimate passenger occupancy rates on the four flights we should rightly exclude the hijackers as non-organic. Even the disseminators of the flight manifests didn't included their names, they only wanted their numbers. In reality, Flight 93 pulled away from the gate with only 33 passengers, four hijackers, and seven in crew, in a cabin fitted for 224, which is a 15 percent occupancy rate, and an indictment.
Note 21, which I briefly quoted before, reads in full:
"While Flights 11 and 77 were at or slightly above the average number of passengers for the respective flights that summer, Flights 175 and 93 were well below their averages. We found no evidence to indicate that the hijackers manipulated the passenger loads on the aircraft they hijacked. Financial records did not reveal the purchase of any tickets beyond those the hijackers used for themselves. See FBI response to Commission briefing request no. 6, undated (topic 8); AAL report, “Average Load Factor by Day-of-Week,” undated (for Flights 11 and 77 from June 11, 2001, to Sept. 9, 2001); AAL response to the Commission’s supplemental document requests, Jan. 20, 2004; UAL report, Flight 175 BOS-LAX Load Factors, undated (from June 1, 2001, to Sept. 11, 2001); UAL report, “Explanation of Load Factors,” undated.
Now they don't call me a paranoid conspiracy theorist for nothing, so I want you to read between the lines of the previous bibliographic references. The Commission had to make a supplemental document request of American Airlines in order to establish just the bare facts under discussion? Does this represent cooperation to you? Flight 77 carried 50 very special passengers, for an occupancy rate of under 25 percent. The 40 percent occupancy on board Flight 11 may have been typical in the summer months, but it has never been my experience to get on empty flights like that.
I've saved the best for last. Chapter 1, Note 40:
The 56 passengers represented a load factor of 33.33 percent of the airplane’s seating capacity of 168, below the 49.22 percent for Flight 175 on Tuesdays in the three-month period prior to September 11, 2001. See UAL report, Flight 175 BOS-LAX Load Factors, undated (from June 1, 2001, to Sept. 11, 2001). Nine passengers holding reservations for Flight 175 did not show for the flight. They were interviewed and cleared by the FBI. FAA report, “Executive Summary,” Sept. 12, 2001; FAA report, “Executive Summary, Chronology of a Multiple Hijacking Crisis, September 11, 2001,” Sept. 17, 2001; UAL record, Flight 175 ACARS report, Sept. 11, 2001; UAL record, Flight 175 Flight Data Recap, Sept. 11, 2001.Where in the industry did they get a capacity of 168? In the absence of clear evidence, I'm willing to go as low as 181, even though 200 is a more likely threshold of profitability. There were nine crew members!!! Subtract out the five Arabs if you want, for 51 divided by 181 equals 29 percent, which is in busted! Bush territory!
I want to say a word of thanks and praise here for Killtown's excellent work. No one else has so beautifully organized such a vast amount of material as he has, and his pages just continue to gain clarity and value as resources over time. Sometimes I think of him as more of an agency. Bits and pieces I thought forever lost were often found in safe keeping there. If I could sup at only one place, it would be at Killtown's feet, where I'd feel fat.
That said, Killtown absolutely mucked up his section posting on the Passenger Loads. He includes the crew numbers with the passenger numbers even, so it's not a philosophical difference over leaving in or taking out the skew of hijackers. But weirdly, I guess everything gets balanced out, since he also relies on inflated seating capacity numbers like 255 and 239, when we have clear evidence that is wrong in at least two cases--Flights 11 and 93, where it's 181, and 224 respectively.
Oh well, I did my numbers and the aggregate for the four planes hijacked on September 11th came in at 26 percent occupancy, instead of Killtown's 27%, so I guess he's smarter than he looks. I'm thinking about getting him a used 767 for Christmas. My way of expressing the potential in the New World Order.