What Level Of Skill Was Required To Fly A Plane Into The Pentagon ?

a reply to: Salander

Your false authority is outed by your inability to craft any kind of intelligent or rational rebuttal. Persons have posted the flight path in map form and by English description.

A link to the English description.....

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please state what is false and what is impossible from the referenced material and the quoted material.

If you only can rant and beat your own chest, just go away with the inability to form a intelligent rebuttal.

If you cannot acknowledge your views are not proven, rely on false data, and not even close to a consensus with pilots and aerospace engineers, it just makes you look irrational and desperate.

a reply to: Salander

Please describe in your own wording what the maneuvers were for flight 77.

Something like a 300 degrees turn with a five mile radius with variations in speed between 200 to 300 knots?

a reply to: neutronflux

Please state what is false and what is impossible from the referenced material and the quoted material.

I think the answer will be something like . . .
"Because I said so"
or
"Because some website said so"

This conspiracy has never had a unified all encompassing theory.
Just fragmented ideas on how parts could have been done.

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
Naw, no metallic bits at all, it was plain in the live video......

Went out live first.......in front of God and everybody....I was watching......the next segment was expert bystanders witnesses on the event for explanation seeming official.......remember those guys, guys? Hours later, they had his passport.......SLAMM..case closed in one day on live tv verdict.....had his friggin passport.....found it on the, get this, the fariggin stareetttttt!

The passport is easy to explain. I'll explain it to you using small words and big pictures.

The passport was carried through the building and out the other side by the air inside the aircrafts cabin. The fuselage of a 767 contains 19500 cu/ft of air.

19500 cu/ft of air at sea level would have a mass weight of just under 1500 pounds and for AA11 it would be traveling at 600 fps.

1500 pounds travelling at 600 fps is a lot of inertia. It is not going to just stop when the plane hits the building. It's going to keep going and it will go through or around any thing that is in its way.

It will also CARRY items with it such as life vest, seat cushions, papers, and even passports.

Please note that the air and the passport were both traveling 600 fps at time of impact and both decelerated together once outside the building.

That is how the passport made it through the building undamaged.




Is there any evidence to back this up... Yes. When UA 175 went through the south tower the air from the fuselage was the first thing out the other side of the building, It left a visible telltale condensation trail (a drop in pressure causing moisture to briefly condensate ) in its wake. This trail can be seen in many of the photos and videos taken that day.

Notice it's well ahead of the fireball, This is why the passport is unburnt.





The first photo is a composite showing the alignment of the fuselage with the contrail before and after impact, the rest point out the contrail.

After exiting the building the passport drifted with the wind as it fell landing on Albany street behind the Bankers Trust Building.




Where it was found by this man Richard Wozniak.



Richard turned the passport over to Detective Yuk Chin and Truthers have been flipping out about it ever since.

a reply to: waypastvne

And they also found numerous IDs in the WTC ruble when looking for evidence, remains, and personal effects. This is just to put the passport in the context of not just being the one ID miraculously found at the WTC.

And I thought numerous other documents survived the WTC?

a reply to: neutronflux

And I thought numerous other documents survived the WTC?

Included were the Acme Co. plans for CDing the building.
Wile 'E was not found in the rubble as he had regenerated.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Please describe in your own wording what the maneuvers were for flight 77.

Something like a 300 degrees turn with a five mile radius with variations in speed between 200 to 300 knots?

Hanjour the Magnificent, first time in a 757 after having just slit the throats of 2 US former military pilots, calmly takes control of the aircraft, we assume in the left seat, commences a descending right turn leaving his target a mile and a half below him completely out of sight. At some point he goes to full throttle, skillfully rolling out on a perfect heading to his target unseen for most of the maneuver, strokes it across the front lawn pulling awesome G in the process, G that the airplane could not sustain, settles into ground effect at Vmo +90, and threads the needle, with impeccable pitch control in ground effect at Vmo +90.

Sorry dude, I've got to stop typing, I'm laughing to hard.....your hero image of Hani The Magnificent is too much....

originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: neutronflux

And I thought numerous other documents survived the WTC?

Included were the Acme Co. plans for CDing the building.
Wile 'E was not found in the rubble as he had regenerated.

That's funny

a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Thank you, it is so refreshing to read a serious and thoughtful post on this subject.

Yes, Hani the Magnificent has won the hearts and minds of many americans who know little to nothing about flying.

I wonder if you have read or listened to the analysis of one Dennis Cimino, an experienced pilot, former US Navy and expert in flight data recorders and other electronic systems?

His style is brusque, and his knowledge is impressive. Long story short, the FDR material provided him by the NTSB 5 years after it was requested shows that the FDR was not even assigned to an airframe. That alone shows a hoax. Besides that, other details show more silliness and absurdity.

Thank you

originally posted by: Salander

pulling awesome G

How many G's is "awesome G"

Give us a number.

a reply to: Salander

Ok, so you created a false scenario? This is what actually happened. I like how this has been posted, ignored by you, not used by you for any point of argument, and you try to rewrite the events.

therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz...

The "Maneuver" - AAL77's Final Turn and Dive:

Section Summary: It is a very common misconception that AAL77 performed some professional rated aerobatic stunt moments before impact. They claim AAL77's hijacker pilot performed a 360 degree spiral "cork-screw" turn at over 500 mph, leveling out to the ground just in time to hit the Pentagon. This is far from the truth. In reality the turn itself was closer to 300 degrees over about a 5 mile radius, with the speed fluctuating between 260 and 300 knots and the throttles at near idle. The total time of the turn took over 3 minutes, making it even less than the very gentle "rate-1-turn" (360 degrees in 2 minutes). The turn was very sloppy with the angle of bank fluctuating between 15 and 42 degrees. The pitch angle was even worse, with some parts of his "dive" gaining altitude. AAL77 finished its descending turn 6 miles from the Pentagon, at an altitude of 2,500ft. It is in this 6 mile leg that the pilot advanced the throttles to full, accelerating and diving the aircraft to over 500mph and aiming it as his 900ft wide target; the Pentagon wall.

The final part of this section has a Dutch conspiracy show which takes a novice pilot, with similar experience to the pilot hijacker, and shows him using a full motion flight simulator to impact the Pentagon wall, 3 out of 3 times.

Prove the jet fuselage was not going into early stages of fatigue and failure when it hit the pentagon. There is no proof the jet was under enough strain to cause it to instantly and catastrophic fail in a mode that would prevent it from crashing into the pentagon. I quoted a source that explained this, care to reference the source and create a rebuttal?

How long had the terrorists dedicated their lives and trained for hitting the pentagon.

Please disprove prove the jet was not going into early stages of fuselage failure when it hit the pentagon.

Please state which maneuvers were impossible again? The narrative were you falsely claim when full throttle was applied? The misrepresentation of the dive you think should have caused instant failure and caused the jet to drop straight to the ground? Instantly changing the jet's trajectory into the pentagon? The slow turns that took minutes to finish?

a reply to: waypastvne

Considering that we are talking about a hypothetical, a myth, why does it matter?

Depending upon exactly which path the mythical flight took, which exact obstacles the mythical flight had to clear to end up where it did, numbers way too high for a 757.

If you're sincerely curious about that, spend some time over at www.pilotsfor911truth.org...

a reply to: Salander

More items that have been debunked and explained over and over again to you. Please state the arguments, the facts, and evidence provided to you, and your rational and factual rebuttals to those arguments.

a reply to: neutronflux

Why don't you prove that it WAS going into the early stages of fatigue and failure, since it is YOU who are suggesting it was?

The entire official story has been debunked so many times, by so many people, in so many ways, that I've lost track.

I have no particular theory about exactly what happened or what hit the pentagon, but the known facts are that AA77 did NOT hit the pentagon.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

Why don't you prove that it WAS going into the early stages of fatigue and failure, since it is YOU who are suggesting it was?

Start by referring to the source cited by me on why flight 77 didn't undergo catastrophic failure. A failure you think would break flight 77's trajectory to make it fall straight to the ground?

All the items people have answered for you? All the items cited, evidence provided, all the eyewitness accounts provided to debunk what you post. But you post as if it has never been refuted, and you never providing a rebuttal.

And you cannot even take the time to explain how the crew and passengers of flight 77 ended up dead at the pentagon.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux

Why don't you prove that it WAS going into the early stages of fatigue and failure, since it is YOU who are suggesting it was?

What has been debunked? Asked over and over again how there was no interior of the pentagon on the front lawn. In the context of a missile or bomb?

You provide no answers to questions asked of you.

You provide no rebuttals to items cited.

You have not discredited the 100 plus eyewitnesses that give an account of a commercial jet hitting the pentagon.

And the only way you can debate is to use falsehoods concerning flight 77's flight path?

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: waypastvne

Considering that we are talking about a hypothetical, a myth, why does it matter?

Depending upon exactly which path the mythical flight took, which exact obstacles the mythical flight had to clear to end up where it did, numbers way too high for a 757.

If you're sincerely curious about that, spend some time over at www.pilotsfor911truth.org...

11.2 G's ?


Is that your Answer ?

Stay tuned for Salanders 7am before school posts and 3:30 pm after school posts.

Taking odds on......
Using a false narrative debunked: 6 to 1
Will give opinion without citing evidence, witnesses, sources, nor data: 5 to 1
Use part of a quote out of context: 4 to 1
Will ignore questions directed to the individual: 3:1
Use word Impossible: 1 to 1
State some limit with the letter V in the name / title: 1 to 1
Invoking false authority based on piloting skills: 2 to 1
FRD and bogus in the same sentence: 3 to 1
Use the words air frame / fuselage: 4 to 1.

Actually creating a rebuttal to arguments backed by evidence, facts, data, science, witnesses: 2000 to 1.

Giving an answer how the crew and passengers of flight 77 ended up dead at the pentagon, and what remains were released for burial: 20,000 to 1.

a reply to: neutronflux

Longtime lurker. First time poster. Interesting that this topic has taken the path that it has, and even more so that I just had a conversation with my buddy about this exact topic, and it fits your odds at 2:1.

Background of my buddy, he is 35 years my senior. For the past 2 years we have had lunch together every Saturday shooting the breeze, talking about old stories and talking about real life. He was a commercial pilot for Northwest Airlines for 30 years. He is no conspiracy theorist.

I asked him if he could have hit the side of the the pentagon at the speeds and trajectory mentioned in the reports. We didn't even get into the contents of the pentagon not being on the lawn, the funerals etc etc etc....Simply did he have the skill to do it on his best day.

His answer was a reluctant "maybe" slightly leaning towards yes...but still a lot would have to go perfect.

His answer to could someone without his experience do it? "Absolutely not."

Our conversation didn't have to go any further on any speculation...but if that guy says it, with his actual experience, something is fishy with the official story.

a reply to: neutronflux

What an array of consecutive canned reply barrage

Tinny sounding actually to my ears when we hear Prove to me.........this or that every hour