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.
In 1996, Hanjour returned to the United States to pursue flight training,after being rejected by a Saudi flight school. He checked out flight schools in Florida, California, and Arizona; and he briefly started at a couple of them before returning to Saudi Arabia. In 1997, he returned to Florida and then, along with two friends, went back to Arizona and began his flight training there in earnest. After about three months, Hanjour was able to obtain his private pilot's license. Several more months of training yielded him a commercial pilot certificate, issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in April 1999.
Settling in Mesa, Hanjour began refresher training at his old school,Arizona Aviation. He wanted to train on multi-engine planes, but had difficulties because his English was not good enough.The instructor advised him to discontinue but Hanjour said he could not go home without completing the training. In early 2001, he started training on a Boeing 737 simulator at Pan Am International Flight Academy in Mesa.An instructor there found his work well below standard and discouraged him from continuing.Again, Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001
Shortly thereafter, Hanjour switched to Caldwell Flight Academy in Fairfield, New Jersey, where he rented small aircraft on several occasions during June and July. In one such instance on July 20, Hanjour--likely accompanied by Hazmi--rented a plane from Caldwell and took a practice flight from Fairfield to Gaithersburg, Maryland, a route that would have allowed them to fly near Washington, D.C. Other evidence suggests that Hanjour may even have returned to Arizona for flight simulator training earlier in June.
Oddly enough, a day before 9-11, donald rumsfeld gave a press briefing stating that 2.3 trillion dollars of the pentagon budget was totally unaccounted for. The following day, a "plane"(or missile as rumsfeld admitted) directly impacted the area where all these relevant documents were allegedly held. Coincidence?
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by drwizardphd
Well, I wish the self-proclaimed "truthers" would all get together, and stick to one story!!!
Most people, including myself, do not doubt that planes hit the towers on 9/11.
A simple perusal of many, many, many threads in the 9/11 forum right here on ATS will show that you characterization of "Most people" might be a slight exaggeration, in your above statement.
3: i work in aviation
...and even i know that the amount of push coming out of even smaller jet engines will cause damage to vehicles and blow objects of several hundred pounds around like ragdolls...
...the 330 degree turn and the descent are extraorinary because in order to do that you (like you said) have to have some sort of instrumental knowledge.
the view point (as you already know as you stated you are an aviator) from a large cockpit like that at an angle in a decline is not the same as driving your compact around the block or doing a three point turn (which alot of "normal" people cant seem to do with ease).
4 planes hit 3 buildings.
...you also stated that it is impossible for the planes to have been remotely controlled. (or improbable, or not likely...
We have had drones for years, and have had the proven capability to remotely fly large passenger planes since the late 60's when america was trying to start a war with cuba.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by wx4caster
4 planes hit 3 buildings.
Huh???? Living in an alternate Universe, maybe??
Can you please point me to one thread that demonstrates that most people do NOT believe planes were involved.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Lillydale
Can you please point me to one thread that demonstrates that most people do NOT believe planes were involved.
Serious? YOU ask this question????
Talk about deflection...
HEY!! How about just look at ANYTHING mr. CITRANKE writes, about how the pentagon explosion was an "INSIDE JOB" from bombs within....just look at ANYTHING spreston writes.....there are SO MANY examples right here on ATS....
Surely youaren;t playing a game here, are you Lilly????
Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Lillydale
Oh, give me a break!!!!!
You know EXACTLY the context of that post, both mine and yours....don't try to play any more mind games, it's sickening.....
Allow me to examine your post, which I thank you in advance for...
3: i work in aviation
OK...right there a lot of my 'friends' on ATS also "work in aviation". That is a VERY broad description. I will come right and say it, not only do I work in aviation
You must be thinking, here, of static thrust scenarios...also known as "jet blast"....
If any of this makes sense, then you're getting it. You are catching on to the mechanics of Newtonian Motion....
For an airplane that is already in flight...the propulsive force from the engines has already supplied a lot of the forward energy. Another source of momentum is gravity...ANY pilot who reads this will understand that concept.
SO...from a passing high-speed airlplane at low altitude??? Think of the wave of compression, of the air ahead of the object, and the resulting disturbance in the air as the object passes....IT IS THE BULK OF THE OBJECT that matters, NOT the exhaust flow from the engines, in this case....
NO!! You just look out the window. Alright, part of the turn, you lose sight of your original point, of course...BUT, any pilot knows, at a fairly constant speed, and fairly constant bank angle, your radius of turn will stay fairly constant....allowing for any drift due to wind, of course....but winds were light...and the turn shown was quite normal, in many regards....
(for those who are not familiar, a '3-point turn' is an automotive term...it is really a TWO-DIMENSIONAL maneuver, involving turning the car, stopping, reversing and turnig and reversing again...as necessary to get you car pointing in a direction 180 degres from the start....in airplanes, we don't STOP, REVERSE, and CONTINUE like that...)
4 planes hit 3 buildings.
Huh???? Living in an alternate Universe, maybe??
There would HAVE TO BE some sort of visual reference, for these "remote pilots"...NOT ONLY ALL of the various things to watch, on their instruments....but so, so many other things, to "PULL THIS OFF" perfectly.
BUT...the question that is never asked...WHY FOUR AIRPLANES???????
ONE is difficult enough...TWO would be phenomenal, and would have made enough if it were a "false flag" as suggested....BUT WHY FOUR?????!!!!
AND, WHY DID ONE "fail", if the intent was to have FOUR???? Don't you see yet?
Point is, the PLAN failed BECAUSE of United 93!!!! It had an excessive taxi delay prior to take off. This is not a mystery, it is FACT!!!!
Trying to imagfine FOUR airplanes, all commercial jets that were known to have departed on normally scheduled flights, from their respective airports, and NO BODY has yet come forward, not ONE employee who was responsible for those flights
....there are so many layers, and paperwork and documentation.....and PEOPLE who would, by NOW have said something!!! I mean, if there's money to be made...dontcha think SOMEONE would have come forward?????
Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
reply to post by wx4caster
A fueled airliner at high speed makes for quite the bomb. You statement really does not make any sense of any kind.
Originally posted by wx4caster
3: i work in aviation, and even i know that the amount of push coming out of even smaller jet engines will cause damage to vehicles and blow objects of several hundred pounds around like ragdolls.
that is my point, if the a person has trouble with a 3-point turn, a 2-dimensional maneuver in a vehicle with nearly 360º vantage, how could the average person pull off a 3D complicated harmony of hydrolics with such precision? but again, that is oppinionated.
...how could the average person pull off a 3D complicated harmony of hydrolics with such precision?
preadator pilots pull off complicated maneuvers and strikes via UAVs remotely controlled by operators hundreds and sometimes thousands of miles away from thier unit from computer screens and joysticks inside connex boxes, and they do it every day. this is not a stretch of the imagination.
Performance
Maximum speed: 135 mph (117 knots, 217 km/h)
Cruise speed: 81–103 mph (70–90 knots, 130–165 km/h)
more eerily is the transcripts of the cell phone calls. you as a pilot know that cell signal is unavailable at altitude.