My First Flying Lesson - 9/11 Opinions

Two weeks ago I was awarded a flying lesson for my birthday. The weapon of choice was a Cessna 150, single
prop. aircraft.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3c1cd16c0c51.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9d06b6e35409.jpg[/atsimg]

A video of my flight if you care to watch:
www.youtube.com...

This was my first time in such a tiny beast and it was impressive to say the least. Aside from computer sims.,
I have no previous training, or knowledge of flight except emailing my friend Dennis who discusses certain aspects
of flight and aircraft on a weekly basis.

You can bet I was testing some theories and asking questions of the instructor surrounding Sept. 11 without
being obvious.

The instructor was so impressed with my lingo, instrumentation knowledge and ability to control the plane
during taxi and flight, he let me take the yoke for the entire lesson. The only time he flew the aircraft was to
show me the g forces which could be produced, some high bank turns and lining up for landing.

I asked him what it would take to stall out the Cessna, he said "here let me show you". He dropped the throttle
to idle and the plane slowed to a standstill. We hung in mid-air for what seemed like a few seconds, and then
the nose tipped down a bit and the airplane fluttered down gracefully.

At this time I could feel my body lifting off the seat slightly. We talked about positive and negative forces. Once
he recovered from the stall, he asked me to extend my legs and arms as he pulled up quickly. Instantly, my
limbs felt like concrete blocks; I couldn't lift my legs from the floor. He then dipped down at a fast rate of speed.
My gut shot up into my mouth and my body literally peeled from the seat only to be held by the seat belt.

So what does this mean for the official story? At any time terrorist stormed through the cockpit door of a 7x7,
and tried to stab the pilots, either the captain, or co-pilot could have easily pulled up the yoke, or pushed down
on the yoke sending the evil men slamming around the cabin.

Either pilot could have banked quickly and thrown the terrorists into the wall! There is no logical explanation that
four aircraft with eight pilots failed to think of this simple defensive trick.

If you have never experienced such forces, it's tough to imagine how severe the diving and banking can act on your
body...yet these were just controlled examples during a lesson!

Think of standing on a bus while the driver slams on the brakes, or turns a tight corner...then multiply that feeling
by 100. There is no chance you will be able to standup while the aircraft falls from beneath your feet and you
are weightless.

There is no chance you will be able to move your arms freely as you were conducting an orchestra...it's analogous
to having a 50 pound weight suddenly strapped to your wrist and you're not sure which direction the force is
going to push/pull your arm or any objects you are holding.


After taking this lesson, my opinion of Hani and the official story stinks even more. If I was able to control a
Cessna 150 on a windy day and pretty much take off and fly the entire lesson (minus landing), then I wonder
how Hani could not get a rental for such a simple airplane, or fly a Boeing 757!

The official story is a scam. Any pilot worth their socks would have thought of this.

8/8 failed on 9.11.01

Yeah, right.

Check out the FedEx hi-jack and check out what these pilots did to save their lives:

www.youtube.com...

Next time ask your CFI to add full power and kick full left rudder as your stall breaks.

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Next time ask your CFI to add full power and kick full left rudder as your stall breaks.

edit on 20-10-2010 by TiffanyInLA because: (no reason given)

Knowing it is Off-Topic, But that is THEE most exhilirating experience you can possibly have in a popcorn-machine of doom like the '150...

Back to topic though, While i'm sure using such tactics (i.e. nosing the plane down) sounds good on paper, one has to take into account the sheer stesses involved in pulling such a trick off. Aircraft (even big, lumbering commercial ones) aren't built like the proverbial brick out-house...

My questioning is, would a 767 be able to handle these induced stresses? If is IS possible, surely the pilots would then have known the limitations and given it a crack.

It doesn't take much to set your passengers into a weightless environment; much less than some turbulence
would inflict on the airframe.

In the Cessna, a gentle nose down lifted me off the seat.

Have a look at the FedEx hijack video I linked; that will give you an idea of how much stress the aircraft can
endure while easily knocking the hijacker to the floor.

Originally posted by Havoc40k
Knowing it is Off-Topic, But that is THEE most exhilirating experience you can possibly have in a popcorn-machine of doom like the '150...

Nawwww... that's what we call simple - "unusual attitude recovery".



By the way Tino, if you had full fuel at take-off, you were over gross with that beast in the right seat.

"Weapon of choice" is an interesting phrase given the circumstances...

But you could fly a plane pretty easily with no lessons and some flight sim time? Surely that would imply it's pretty easy? Which would make it more, not less, likely that the 9/11 pilots were capable...

Then ask yourself why Hani was denied rental of a Cessna.

I would not equate the Cessna 150 to a Boeing 7x7 by any stretch if that is implied? Out of interest, a few of
my friends and myself will be booking sim time in a level D, 757 this Spring. Based on the computer sim.
differences, the expectation of a level D sim. will further highlight the gross differences in handling, complexity
in flight dynamics, and instrumentation/controls over the much smaller, lighter C. 150.

Also, consider my points about the eight pilots who could have simply jogged the yoke to toss the 'terrorists'
off balance. Please view the FedEx hijack video.

reply to post by turbofan


The hijackers measured 5'7 at the tallest. So these little guys with box cutter knives over-powered a bunch of people that could have collectively taken them out in a short amount of time.

The pilots could have thought up of more than a few ways of stopping the hijackers.

Use a thought experiment.

You are on the flight deck the day before 911 and the door is shut but not locked.
You hear a scuffle and yelling on the other side of the door.
At that point in time do you believe you are going to die in less than an hour?
Are you certain you are being hijacked and it’s not just a booze fight?
If you are certain it’s a hijacking are you certain they don’t have their hand on the trigger of a bomb?

Once you figure out it is a hijacking and no bomb is involved you likely know there are more than one hijackers. At that point in time one or more are in the cockpit. If you don’t see it directly you will have to assume that one or more of your flight attendants (your friends) lives are in danger. Meaning a butter knife to their throat.

If you did throw some G forces into the mix is there some one waiting to regain control of each of the hijackers? Even if there was some big bruiser looking to pounce on each, they too would be thrown about the cabin with the dive/climb.

At that point in history, when was the last killing of a passenger during a hijacking in America? It’s easy to be a Monday morning quarterback when you know what the outcome was. It’s easy to see the opportunities to save your life when you know how you will die.

At that point in time I don’t any of us would have done anything different than what the flight crew had done. Even when the Pennsylvania passengers had a reasonable clue as to their fate, their efforts came up short.

The next time you thwart the Quickmart robbery let us know.


And yes flying a plane once it’s in the air is an easy task. Just like driving on the freeway when there is no other cars around.

Welcome to the world of aviation, OP. However, there is a huge difference between the behavior of a 150 and heavy metal. Although I do not subscribe to the official story, I can accept the PREMISE that intruders could have entered the cockpit and offed the flight crew. They were in no way expecting it, were fully engaged in other activities and would not have been prepared to respond.

But given that, there are control limits placed on commercial airliners to prevent overstressing the airframe. You simply can't push it around like you can a 150. But I still think the OS is crap.

reply to post by samkent


Bank robberies and thrift store robberies are thwarted all the time. Sometimes by the customers even when involving firearms. I don't see why in this instance over 70 passengers (flight 11) and over 60 passengers (flight 175) were all paralyzed by fear of these little men with box cutters, and made no attempts to stop them at all, allowing them to complete a difficult maneuver into the twin towers.

And yet flight 93, with less than 32 passengers, not including the hijackers made an effort to stop them, although none survived.

Originally posted by laiguana
reply to post by samkent

 

Bank robberies and thrift store robberies are thwarted all the time. Sometimes by the customers even when involving firearms. I don't see why in this instance over 70 passengers (flight 11) and over 60 passengers (flight 175) were all paralyzed by fear of these little men with box cutters, and made no attempts to stop them at all, allowing them to complete a difficult maneuver into the twin towers.

And yet flight 93, with less than 32 passengers, not including the hijackers made an effort to stop them, although none survived.

Because the passengers on the former two planes believed they were going to be freed.

And the passengers on 93 knew for a fact they were not.

This is kind of obvious, really.

reply to post by turbofan


Sorry, it's just you said it wasn't that hard to fly (something I would definitely agree with given some of the people they give pilots licenses to). Which to me would be a compelling argument that the hijackers' actions were possible.

As to your point about the yoke, it's very easy to know what to do in hindsight. I imagine they were surprised, seated, frightened. I doubt they had time to react in a measured manner. And if you look at the FedEx situation the circumstances were rather different.

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Next time ask your CFI to add full power and kick full left rudder as your stall breaks.

edit on 20-10-2010 by TiffanyInLA because: (no reason given)

I agree!!

A full power stall is not nearly as "graceful" as a power off stall. AND a stall during a high bank turn is pretty dam scary, but you will probably have to take an aerobatics class to experience that one.

Congrats on your lesson, and your success!

Don't forget though that a Cessna performs and handles like driving a little jeep. Flying a commercial airliner is more like driving a giant tourbus/RV. You can't get the same instant g-forces, and it takes a lot more violent movements of the yoke and rudders to get a fraction of the response. I still think the pilots had options, but the comparison to a cessna is not fair.

Originally posted by turbofanThen ask yourself why Hani was denied rental of a Cessna.

Perhaps because of his woeful english skills? The fact that the FBO gave him 3 chances would suggest that maybe he wasn't all that terrible. And in any cases, what he appeared to have most trouble with (landing and taking off), was irrellevant on 9/11, as the pilots had already done the take off. All that was left for Hani Hanjour, was to enter DCA on the FMC's DCT page, let the autopilot fly him close enough, and once the Pentagon was in sight, point the plane at it.

ETA: And even the latter he failed at, to the point that he had to do a descending turn. And if you look at how that went, his pilot skills (and lack thereof) shows.

Originally posted by turbofan
So what does this mean for the official story? At any time terrorist stormed through the cockpit door of a 7x7,
and tried to stab the pilots, either the captain, or co-pilot could have easily pulled up the yoke, or pushed down
on the yoke sending the evil men slamming around the cabin.

Either pilot could have banked quickly and thrown the terrorists into the wall! There is no logical explanation that
four aircraft with eight pilots failed to think of this simple defensive trick.

Sure there is. Momentum.

You flew a tiny plane at very slow speeds, 757s have significantly more momentum, and as a result any bank or radial acceleration has to input enough energy to overcome this.

Of course, it is probably possible to be violent enough to catch hijackers off guard, but these people were armed, they outnumbered the cockpit crew, and there was no indication they were suicidal until after they had taken over.

It would be rather silly of them to risk their own lives and try and fight people armed with knifes and potentially a bomb when the normal procedure for hijacking would be that they would land somewhere and make their demands.

Good luck with your lessons, I eventually plan to do more helicopter flying stuff, as I simply love them.

I'm not disputing the fact that a B7x7 has more momentum, inertia, weight, etc.

I'm not equating the flight dynamics of a Cessna to a Commercial airliner.

What I'm stating is that it's possible for a larger jetliner to disable a threat by using aggressive yoke
movements. The proof is within the video I linked for the FedEx hijack.

Whether you believe there was time for the captain and co-pilot to react in four separate scenarios is YOUR
opinion. My opinion is that eight out of eight pilots failing to think of such a tactic in four event is complete
garbage.

Pilots:

1. Was manuvering the aircraft aggressively for defense part of the common strategy pre 9/11?

2. Was giving up the aircraft to a hijacker an option to comply with their requests?

My answers are 1 = Yes, 2 = No

Originally posted by turbofan1. Was manuvering the aircraft aggressively for defense part of the common strategy pre 9/11?

2. Was giving up the aircraft to a hijacker an option to comply with their requests?

My answers are 1 = Yes, 2 = No

However, out in the real world, the answers were:
1 = No.
2 = Yes.

The final layer, security on board commercial aircraft, was not designed to counter suicide hijackings. The FAA-approved "Common Strategy" had been elaborated over decades of experience with scores of hijackings, beginning in the 1960s. It taught flight crews that the best way to deal with hijackers was to accommodate their demands, get the plane to land safely, and then let law enforcement or the military handle the situation. According to the FAA, the record had shown that the longer a hijacking persisted, the more likely it was to end peacefully. The strategy operated on the fundamental assumption that hijackers issue negotiable demands (most often for asylum or the release of prisoners) and that, as one FAA official put it, "suicide wasn't in the game plan" of hijackers. FAA training material provided no guidance for flight crews should violence occur.60

Just like the pilots of FedEx 705, when their heads were bashed in, the pilots on 9/11 would only have known that it wasn't a standard hijacking situation, when their throats were slit.

reply to post by roboe


I thought the official story said the pilots were herded to the back of the plane?

reply to post by turbofan

Does it now? then I wonder what it was we heard on the mayday calls from UA93? And I wonder why passengers would be reporting that both pilots on UA175 had been killed?