9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

G W bush was behind this entire fake attack on the pentagon and he should be prosecuted for murder.

reply to post by CatHerder For a plane to have hit the Pentagon where the hole was, it would have had to have been sliding along the gound which would have left a trench. There was no trench. On the morning of 9-11-01 I was working at Fort Bragg, NC, and listening to the events as they were being broadcast over the local oldies (at that time) station: 95.5 FM. When the plane went down over Pennsylvania an official announcement was made that it was "...confirmed shot down by an American fighter jet." Later on, of course, the 'official' story was changed to say that the passengers had overcome the terrorists and forced the plane down themselves. I still think that one of the missiles intended for the plane missed and slammed into the Pentagon. I'm also sure that Pentagon employees were briefed to make sure they told the 'right' story. None of this really matters, though, since it is unlikely we will ever be told the whole truth about 911.

reply to post by Anonymous ATS Actually, no it wouldnt have had to leave a trench. If you look hard enough you will find the pictures that show where the engines hit things just before the plane impacted the building. As for the other issue, the numerous false stories that were aired as "confirmed" that day have been discussed on ATS for years. Car bomb at the State Dept, Flight 93 landing in Cleveland, oil refineries being shut down, Air Force One as a target etc.... The "confirmed" report of Flight 93 being shot down is another example of a false story aired by a media outlet in an attempt to scoop their competitors on that day.

reply to post by weedwhacker Re the lack of GPS enhancements in the AA77 DFDR (Loral/Fairchild F-2100): Was the compass heading determined from magnetic north or true (geographic) north? There's a difference between the two norths of approx 11 degrees on that part of the globe which seems to explain the differences in flight path IE plotting headings referenced to magnetic north on a map oriented to true north.

reply to post by Pilgrum Pilgrum, you are correct, the Variation here is about 10 or 11 degrees...but I believe the FDR records both Magnetic and True Headings. One of the selections on the EHSI is 'PLAN' mode, and it orients to True North on the display. Since waypoints are designated by their Lat/Long co-ordinates, the system has to know work in relation to True North, then it uses the variation to display a 'magnetic' heading.

reply to post by weedwhacker I just checked the FDR data and the final heading (magnetic) is 70 degrees. Correcting that for true north as used on maps gives a bearing of 59 degrees which appears to be closer to the 'official' flight path than the alternate suggestions. Note: I'm not taking sides here - just looking at the data as presented.

reply to post by Pilgrum Good find, good questions you raised. See, many people would not even think of it...especially when someone has a particular point to make, and wishes to ignore anything that might contradict that point. Not only in this discussion, but every where you look, the 'spin' is there! There also is the question of how fast the DFDR updated each bit of information. There, we get the altitude question raised. Granted, it seems odd to professional pilots that some Arab with a red bandanna on his head would know to re-set the altimeter...but, as I've mentioned, even a student pilot knows how to receive the correct altimeter setting, and is taught what to do.

Originally posted by weedwhacker Arab with a red bandanna on his head would know to re-set the altimeter...but, as I've mentioned, even a student pilot knows how to receive the correct altimeter setting, and is taught what to do.

But to make a 270% turn with no corrections and come out lined up with 1 side of the buidling is asking a lot from a pilot that barely has 100 hours of flight time.

Originally posted by weedwhackerPeople I've spoken to called the L-1011 a 'Cadillac' compared to the Douglas' DC-10 as a 'chrevolet'.

True, the L1011 is certainly a Caddilac. With the Direct Lift Control, full autoland, and CAT3 certification it was an aircraft well ahead of it's time. Flew it for 8 years before i had to move on to Mercedes Benz (B757/767/777)

Originally posted by ULTIMA1But to make a 270% turn with no corrections and come out lined up with 1 side of the buidling is asking a lot from a pilot that barely has 100 hours of flight time.

I dunno, but i tested that out with my grandson, (he's 6). A few turns on the heading knob on the MCP made the deal, a perfect 270 degree turn with the bank angle limiter set to 30 degrees. All done in the sim of course.

reply to post by SickSoul SickSoul!!! Your six-year-old son, turning the MCP heading knob! Priceless!!!! You set the Bank Angle Limit at 30 degrees? We usually kept it at 25 degrees. I'm talking about on the real airplane, of course. BUT, as you know, when in LNAV, it (the autopilot) will tend to ignore the Limit. So, the Bank Angle Limit only really works in HDG SEL. The Auto Pilot, in LNAV, could bank up to 35 degrees...very uncomfortable, as you know. Exceed 35 degrees, and you will get the 'bank angle, bank angle' verbal warning.

reply to post by ULTIMA1 No, ULTIMA.....no. A turn is a turn....doesn't matter how many hours you have....well, actually, if you had 10 hours, you could do it!! 100 hours, well....even better!!!!!

Originally posted by weedwhacker reply to post by SickSoul

 

SickSoul!!! Your six-year-old son, turning the MCP heading knob! Priceless!!!! You set the Bank Angle Limit at 30 degrees? We usually kept it at 25 degrees. I'm talking about on the real airplane, of course. BUT, as you know, when in LNAV, it (the autopilot) will tend to ignore the Limit. So, the Bank Angle Limit only really works in HDG SEL. The Auto Pilot, in LNAV, could bank up to 35 degrees...very uncomfortable, as you know. Exceed 35 degrees, and you will get the 'bank angle, bank angle' verbal warning.

Had some time after a sim session to play around with the sim, so i just put the bank angle selector at max and told him a number of degrees to turn the knob on. I didn't set up the FMC, so it was all done in Heading select on the MCP. (He's my grandson, i'm a old man)

reply to post by SickSoul SickSoul, I love it!!!! Should have filmed it!! There are quite a few vids on YouTube....of Simulators....some YT vids are junk, but some are quite good.

Originally posted by weedwhacker reply to post by SickSoul

 

SickSoul, I love it!!!! Should have filmed it!!

I might do that some time BTW the sim used was Continental B757/76 sim in Houston.

reply to post by SickSoul AND, again....when in HDG SEL, the Bank Angle Limit wil be respected....it has 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, or max....those are the settings, on the MCP. Some customers have 30 instead of Max...ours did. BUT, when in LNAV, the A/P will bank as needed, if the FMC tells it to, up to about 35 degrees. In fact, when pilot's fat fingers do some bad programming, in the FMC, we learn to either change the 'mode'....IE, from LNAV to HDG SEL, or just to disconnect the A/P, and fly by hand, until we reconnect. After establishing a new course, in the FMC.... See, you passengers think we are smooth...and we are, until we screw up!!! edit to add....OK, that's why we have Simulators. That's the place for all of the learning..... [edit on 6/10/0808 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by SickSoul Sicksoul....which Sim? I've flown all of them, in Houston. CO only has two, anyway. the B757/767.....and the 767/400 The old one, the B757, had a problem in the rudder pedals....I guess they fixed that, by now....

Originally posted by weedwhacker reply to post by SickSoul

 

Sicksoul....which Sim? I've flown all of them, in Houston. CO only has two, anyway. the B757/767.....and the 767/400 The old one, the B757, had a problem in the rudder pedals....I guess they fixed that, by now....

B757/76 sim, as we had to simulate the B757-200 with the rollers (RB211)

Ha! You professional pilots and your simulators. Just my little comment on the whole "they couldn't have pulled that off" bit. When I was an intern at Sikorsky, I was allowed into the flight simulator room where they loaded up a Black Hawk control scheme and a generic airport and city landscape. This was a complete replica of a Black Hawk cockpit and every dial, knob, switch, and screen worked like on the real thing. Our pilots would use this for training before doing the same thing in a new helicopter or for getting a rating certification for an existing helicopter. Now we all know how much harder it is to control a helicopter as opposed to a fixed-wing aircraft. All it took me was 30-45 minutes to figure out how to control a Black Hawk well enough to "slide" around the ATC tower (i.e. move in a circular path around it while keeping the nose pointed at it), take-off and land decently, fly around the buildings, and even follow a road at ground-level without crashing. Of course, I didn't do those things with the smoothness of a seasoned pilot, but you get my point. With all the technology that's in a modern aircraft, it's really not that hard for someone who's determined to control them to a sufficient level. If a 6 year old can pull it off, well...

reply to post by SickSoul Yeah....they use the Sim for the 757, with the RB211 engines....but then we got the 767s....all B767-400s, at Continental. GE engines. THEN....the B767-200s....GE engines....of course....I tend to forget, it's been a few years....What do they have now, there on JFK Boulevard, in Houston????