It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by shots
You answered your own question. It clearly states the complex maneuver suggested the pilots had better training then thought.
Who Was Hani Hanjour?
- "...after instructors at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Phoenix found Hanjour's piloting skills so shoddy and his grasp of English so inadequate they questioned whether his pilot's license was genuine."
- "...staff never suspected that Hanjour was a hijacker but feared that he posed safety hazard if he flew commercial airliner."
- "Staff members characterized Mr. Hanjour as polite, meek and very quiet. But most of all, the former employee said, they considered him a very bad pilot. "I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon," the former employee said. "HE COULD NOT FLY AT ALL."
Also you are under estimating what a commercial airliner can do. Ask any pilot, or watch History channel where it shows the kind of tests they put a commercial liner through, you would be surprised what they are capable of.
Originally posted by Souljah
So again - can you explain, so how did flight 77 arrive at the pentagon at an altitude of about 2 feet 500MPH?
Originally posted by shots
Do yourself a favor and Deny your own ignroance. Go out and buy a good flight simulator with realistic feed back controllers. Pick any aircraft from the list you want, then practice with it for a while.
Any good software will give you all the bells and whistles right down to an identical cockpit of the real thing with all the buttons throttles etc you would have to use, you will hear a stall speed indicator, stick shakers etc. just like the real thing.
That is how real pilots do it only with commercial models prior to an aircrafts first flight.
911Truth.org
How did AA77 hit a target known to be defended by anti-aircraft missile batteries? The flight executed a maneuver pilots have characterized as extremely difficult, descending from several thousand feet while making a 280∞ turn, banking at the last second and flying level with the ground to strike the first floor. The alleged hijacker flying the plane (Hani Hanjour) flunked out of flight school. The side of the Pentagon hit, opposite from the command center, had just been renovated to reinforce it against terrorist attack. The offices there were mostly empty; initial expectations of 850 dead were quickly revised to 130.
Rumsfeld's "Pentagon missile" hoax
Newsweek reported a few weeks after 9/11 that the "black boxes" from the plane were found, and that data would indicate how the plane was steered in its final moments in an incredible spiral dive into the nearly empty, recently reconstructed and strengthened sector of the Pentagon. The alleged hijacker, Mr. Hani Hanjour, flunked out of flight school and clearly did not have the skills to perform that maneuver. The fact that the plane flew around the Pentagon, past Donald Rumsfeld's office, past the National Military Command Center, and struck the least populated part suggests that whoever was at the controls wanted to ensure the minimal level of casualties. Would a "terrorist" have chosen to fly this way? Even an expert pilot would have had a hard time doing this. This is strong circumstantial evidence for remote control technology. Proving its use is probably impossible, but the technology is commercially available.This suggests that remote control technology of some sort was actually used to hijack the plane, and that the role of the "hijackers" may merely have been that of patsies. The black boxes would confirm or refute this theory, but most 9/11 "conspiracy" investigators have fixated on the fleeting hope that the surveillance videos would be released (which would merely prove the obvious) while ignoring the hidden data that could actually prove something.
Originally posted by Souljah
And you are trying to tell me, that mister Hanjour was such an Expert pilot, to have performed such a complex manouver, that even a VERY experienced pilot could have alot of problems to do? How come, if he was just a Pathetic pilot? You think he bought Flight Simulator 10 and practiced that forever?
Originally posted by Aris
...............
What makes me even more suspicious is the fact that 90% or so of the plane can't be identified but 98% of passengers' DNA can?? That doesn't square with me. I could understand finding maybe half or less of the plane only in itty bitty parts and several positive DNA identifications but no plane ID'd yet 66 of 68 passengers ID'd???
At any rate, it's like you said, we can't tell what occured and this specific point doesn't help.
Originally posted by Aris
Originally posted by Muaddib
You need to present proof, otherwise all you are doing is making more wild claims and trying to be a victim to get some sympathy.
Sorry for butting in. I'm not taking sides in your argument with another member but I couldn't help but find your above comment ironic.
Have you, or anyone else for that matter, Muaddib, presented any proof that Flight 77 hit the Pentagon?
And when I say proof, I mean proof, not wild speculation of your own.
Show me one shred of proof.
You can't, can you.
So for you to accuse someone of 'wild speculation" when in fact you are wildly speculating yourself, is most ironic.
Originally posted by Flyer
No it doesnt, the proof lies in the people who claim it was a plane and they are the only people with the evidence.
I could claim I had pixies visit me every night and then tell everyone I was right because noone could disprove my claim.
Its a lot easier to prove something is there than something isnt.
Originally posted by Muaddib
.....extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence... In this case the "extraordinary claim" is that it wasn't a plane....when eyewitnesses at the scene said "it was a passenger plane which hit the Pentagon"...and more so when evidence has been given time and again which does shows parts of a passenger plane...
Originally posted by Aris
Muaddib, I'd like you to read my replies found in the link I just provided in my previous post as well because you're repeating allegations that are wild speculation.
Originally posted by Flyer
BS, the only one is possession of all the evidence is the government, its their duty to release the evidence to convince everyone that their story is true, clearly they havent done that.
Originally posted by Souljah
........................
So again - can you explain, so how did flight 77 arrive at the pentagon at an altitude of about 2 feet 500MPH?
Originally posted by Souljah
.................
Third - do you see a car by the newly created Road on the last picture? Well it's pretty BIG if compared to the Boeing757 in the picture above?
I mean - Who Are They Kidding?!?
Originally posted by Souljah
Hey - What About That ROAD?!?!
Despite the appearances of exterior photographs, the Boeing 757-200 did not "only damage the outside of the Pentagon." It caused damage to all five rings (not just the outermost one) after penetrating a reinforced, 24-inch-thick outer wall. As 60 Minutes II reported in their "Miracle of the Pentagon" episode on 28 November 2001, the section of the Pentagon into which the hijacked airliner was flown had just been reinforced during a renovation project:
"We made several modifications to the building as part of that renovation that we think helped save people's lives," says Lee Evey, who runs a billion-dollar project to renovate the Pentagon. They’ve been working on it since 1993. The first section was five days from being finished when the terrorists hit it with the plane.
As eyewitnesses described and photographs demonstrate, the hijacked airliner dived so low as it approached the Pentagon that it actually hit the ground first, thereby dissipating much of the energy that might otherwise have caused more extensive damage to the building; nonetheless, as described by The New York Times, the plane still hit not "just the ground floor" but between the first and second floors:
The Boeing 757 crashed into the outer edge of the building between the first and second floors, "at full power," Mr. Rumsfeld said. It penetrated three of the five concentric rings of the building.
Another account of the crash described:
The plane banked sharply and came in so low that it clipped light poles. It slammed into the side of the Pentagon at an estimated 350 miles per hour after first hitting the helipad. The plane penetrated the outer three rings of the building. The jet fuel exploded, which sent a fireball outward from the impact point. About 30 minutes after the crash, a cross-section of the building collapsed, but only after enough time had elapsed for rescue workers to evacuate all injured employees.