NASA Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The "Elephant In The Room"

After hearing so many pilots are so gullible as to believe some of the so called rhetoric used to support the truthers claims, I am scared to be flown by them. Logical thinking should be a requirement for pilots. I am not saying the OS is the truth but some things will remain unanswered and this elephant in the room is great to debate.

Originally posted by weedwhacker


It's amazing.... :shk: Rob, you just don't get it, and probably never will....but, resorting to the snide cimments, when trapped and unable to support a postion, is a well-recognized M.O.

weedwhacker, it appears you didn't see the mod warning in this thread.

Originally posted by seagull
This is going to be said once, and once only...

The topic of the thread is:

"NASA Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The "Elephant In The Room"

Yep. Just checked, it still is. It is not conjecturing upon who might be who, or calling each other whatever names you think you can get away with...

Discuss the topic at hand.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Back to topic.

weedwhacker, you claim to be type rated in the 757/767 and claim the speeds are plausible.

Are you willing to take your 767 (or any aircraft you claim to be typed in) 150 knots above Vmo at any altitude? It appears you will have some company as hooper, Tricky and Joey will probably sit first class.

Are you willing to put your name to your claims as does Deets?

You failed to answer these questions more than 5 times now. I'll keep repeating them till you do.

reply to post by TiffanyInLA


Hmmmm...in this response to pterdine you said you "happen to agree" with Mr. Deets?

Well, let's review, again, what he said:

"The possibilities as I see them are: .... or (4) the 767 flew well beyond its flight envelope, was controllable, and managed to hit a relatively small target."

Great!!! You agree with Mr. Deets!!

So, what's all the rest of the nonsense about, then?

(SEE? I can play that very same game YOU use, too...)

BUT, if you "happen to agree" with Deets, and a handful of others....yet, several HUNDREDS and THOUSANDS times that amount of other well-qualified, experienced aviation and aerospace professionals disagree with the stance of YOU, Deets, et al...hmmm...looks like that's a troubling problem for you all...





[edit on 15 July 2010 by weedwhacker]

Are you willing to take your 767 (or any aircraft you claim to be typed in) 150 knots above Vmo at any altitude? It appears you will have some company as hooper, Tricky and Joey will probably sit first class.

Are you willing to put your name to your claims as does Deets?

weedwhacker, do you feel a V-G diagram cannot be constructed if the V-speeds are known?

6th time asked.

Please stop evading.

reply to post by TiffanyInLA


You are not worth the time I take to type this.. You pick one line or paragraph and address it.. But you failed to address the other POINTS I brought up.. This site's moto is Deny Ignorance!! You are now officially Denied.... any more of my time...

I was very clear that I could care less about "the record".

Your gaggle of merry men and women..have stomping points that you feel hold water.. let me tell you, your story and theories have just as many holes as the official story..

Originally posted by Mobius1974
I was very clear that I could care less about "the record".

So, you don't care that the flight path you witnessed is fatal to what the govt is trying to sell to the public.

Got it. Thanks for your concerns (or lack thereof).

"You get the govt you deserve" has never rang more true.

reply to post by TiffanyInLA


Ok, one more second of my time!!!

Fatal to the official story!!!

How many people are on the record stating what I said? I have to assume as busy as 395 was that day.. there are allot.. Isn't a fatality a one time deal?
Wasn't the fatal blow dealt by others that have gone on the record?

Aren't we being a tad dramatic ?? Of course we are.. thruthers love drama.. Thats what keeps them going.

Which one part of this post will you choose to address... and which parts will you ignore completely.



Above is what the real thinkers in the world are doing at "Truthers"
What a name by the way..Truthers.. almost as bad as ...nvm there isn't anything as bad!

reply to post by TiffanyInLA


See you did it again... Go on the Truthers forum and ask them how you should respond to the other points and facts you are being confronted with.

The end!

[edit on 15-7-2010 by Mobius1974]

Ooops, in an attempt to impress the lady with my bravery I have once again made myself look insane. I'll fly the damm plane supersonic or 40% over KYAG. Come on, real men, I need a co-pilot. If any of the planes had gone Mach 1.5, then that would be my elephant in the room.

Originally posted by Mobius1974
How many people are on the record stating what I said?

Many. I asked you to go watch the interviews on location in Arlnigton, including 2 Pentagon Police Officers.

Many describe your path.

You refuse to watch it.

Here is the link again.

National Security Alert

Please Mobius, I'm trying to be as polite as possible to you. You should really watch the above video to understand the implications of what you and many others witnessed.

Originally posted by earthdude
Ooops, in an attempt to impress the lady with my bravery I have once again made myself look insane. I'll fly the damm plane supersonic or 40% over KYAG. Come on, real men, I need a co-pilot. If any of the planes had gone Mach 1.5, then that would be my elephant in the room.

You're funny earthdude, in a good way.

You'll need a type rating to what you want to do.

Those who CLAIM to have the type rating and also blindly support the govt story are silent about the proposal. We can safely say at this point in time that their silence is their refusal. They know the speeds reported by the govt are absurdly excessive outside the aircraft envelope, but they make excuses anyway, of course never putting their name to their claims as does Deets and many others.

I had to Ignore her.. You would be amazed at how short this thread got, minus her posts.

She refuses to answer ANY questions.. I have a valid point.

I dont care if what I saw contradicts the official story.. There was so much happening that day.. the differences in the flight path from what she posted.. doesn't look like a huge difference.

Originally posted by Mobius1974
I dont care if what I saw contradicts the official story.. There was so much happening that day.. the differences in the flight path from what she posted.. doesn't look like a huge difference.

Wasn't Mobuis just preaching about "Deny Ignorance"?

How ironic.

We argue details and loose sight of the main idea. I'm on the side that isn't sold on any of the stories.
Regarding the pilots for truth: You guys should know that a wind tunnel test of a 727 will prove nothing. The real world is different and there are far more variables to control. Just because you can fly don't make you smart.
1. The test plane could never be made to exactly represent the planes crashed.
2. The wind tunnel would need to be large enough for thousands of feet of pitch and yaw. (Stationary mounts with sensors and a little give won't cut it)
3. The air in a wind tunnel is not smooth enough.

I'm going to need an escape pod for the real test.

One more thought: the data I looked at for flight 93 shows incredible changes in altitude. Loss of control is my theory. The plane would begin to climb until the pilot reduced power in order to regain control. What did he care, he was pointed in the right direction, more or less. This supports the OS so pilots for truth should not use it. Somebody else check it out.

Originally posted by earthdude
Regarding the pilots for truth: You guys should know that a wind tunnel test of a 727 will prove nothing.

Where does Pilots For 9/11 Truth request a 727 test to be done?

I have never seen such a request.

The real world is different and there are far more variables to control. Just because you can fly don't make you smart.

(Restraining myself from making another weedwhacker joke here)

But yes, I agree.

1. The test plane could never be made to exactly represent the planes crashed.
2. The wind tunnel would need to be large enough for thousands of feet of pitch and yaw. (Stationary mounts with sensors and a little give won't cut it)
3. The air in a wind tunnel is not smooth enough.

How much experience do you have with wind tunnel testing? More than Deets?

Any awards from NASA? AIAA?

I'm going to need an escape pod for the real test.

One more thought: the data I looked at for flight 93 shows incredible changes in altitude. Loss of control is my theory. The plane would begin to climb until the pilot reduced power in order to regain control. What did he care, he was pointed in the right direction, more or less. This supports the OS so pilots for truth should not use it. Somebody else check it out.

You need to check the definition of Va (Maneuvering speed) and then watch the NTSB reconstruction animation of UA93 based on Black Box data. Full, repetitive, control yoke deflection is experienced on UA93 above Vmo. But it appears the airplane is still controllable and no parts fell off.

By definition and precedent (AA587), this is impossible to achieve.

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA

Originally posted by earthdude
Regarding the pilots for truth: You guys should know that a wind tunnel test of a 727 will prove nothing.

Where does Pilots For 9/11 Truth request a 727 test to be done?

I have never seen such a request.

[

I must have been on another truther site, somebody wanted a test from Boeing. If I got one number wrong, then it would be rude of you not to tell me. I do admire how most of the time we are all very mannerly here. I am a layman with a little knowledge, yes, a dangerous thing is that little knowledge. If you can't sell me on this elephant then you are going to have a hard time with the experts. I never had much admiration for the people at Boeing, but I still contend that they have some planes that will hold up way past the red line. Mr. NASA thinks different. NASA guys should think the way he thinks and not be the daredevil I am.
So, who has a plane for me to fly the wings off of? I might just bring it back down intact.

The speeds were impossible for a passenger airliner at sea altitude it's been proven many times already but people just like to ignore it. The maneuvers alone also suggest this was no inexperienced pilot, it's naive to think these terrorists could fly those planes into the buildings. One must conclude those so-called passenger airliners were at least automatically following a pre-planned flight path or computer guided like a smart bomb or missile.

It also appears to me the plane cut through the facade like a hot knife through butter, there was no give in the plane. It only exploded once inside, just like you would expect from the likes of a bunker buster. The military have spent ages perfecting this technique with specially designed missiles, yet on 9/11 we get that same effect they've been working on for ages out of a regular passenger plane.

It looked more like blow torches was used to cut a plane shaped hole in the tower, and totally not like a passenger plane flying into it!

[edit on 15-7-2010 by Insolubrious]

Originally posted by earthdude
If you can't sell me on this elephant then you are going to have a hard time with the experts.

Well, since I started this thread, there is only one person who CLAIMS to be an expert and disagrees with the OP. That person is weedwhacker. Yet he evades the proposal of taking his 767 or any aircraft 150 over Vmo. Of course, he never puts his name to his claims as does Deets, Capt Aimer, Capt Kolstad, Capt Latas, et al.

gopher doesn't really count as it's clear he doesn't have much experience past X plane on his PC. He doesn't even know that ATC will immediately become aware when an aircraft is off course... and ATC did, on 9/11.

All other experts in this thread (I think there are about 4 or 5 with real aviation experience who chimed in), none of which are members of P4T, all agree. The speeds are really an "Elephant In the Room" and need to be properly investigated.

Of course, the long list of experts at Pilots for 9/11 Truth also grows.

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Well, since I started this thread, there is only one person who CLAIMS to be an expert and disagrees with the OP. That person is weedwhacker. Yet he evades the proposal of taking his 767 or any aircraft 150 over Vmo. Of course, he never puts his name to his claims as does Deets, Capt Aimer, Capt Kolstad, Capt Latas, et al.

But what kind of silly suggestion is that? What airline would let a pilot over-speed their 767? He doesn't actually own the plane. Besides, I don't think anyone said it wasn't dangerous to fly a plane that fast. I think the claim was that plane managed to survive a short time at that speed without falling apart and failure was probably imminent.

reply to post by JetStream


Facts? You want facts on this site? Here's a fact, Jack. Dwain is guessing, pure and simple, and PFFt is hanging their entire theory on the discrepancy between his guess and a 2 for 2 on the WTC.
There doesn't seem to be any evidence for modified airframes. No super-pilot from PFFFT has come up with how the airframes would be modified, who would have done it, and how they managed to do it with no one noticing. Did they cleverly jack up tail numbers and sneak a ringer plane underneath? Were these aircraft out for 6 months of servicing and no one noticed? Did a cabal do the design and mods? Did no crewmember notice bigger engines or structural changes?
Note that one does not have to be a pilot to ask about how this was done or challenge Dwain's oracle numbers, although "Tiffany" would have you believe that if you weren't a pilot on these craft, you cannot make any good arguments.
How the aircraft reached the speeds noted is the "elephant" according to Deets. Given the lack of evidence for any modifications, the arguments have to be based on his other three possibilities.