On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 12:58:36 -0400, Quaalude wrote:

On Mon, 3 Oct 2011 12:47:05 -0400, Tom wrote:

On Mon, 03 Oct 2011 12:38:35 -0400, Orval Fairbairn wrote:

Hanjour

The instructors at the airfield in Maryland said, "It was like he had
hardly even ever driven a car. He could not fly at all."

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/05/04/us/a-trainee-noted-for-incompetence.html

And yet, Orval Fairbairn asks us to believe that Hanjour pulled off a
stunt that would press the limits of even the most experienced aviation
test pilot.

Perhaps you need to remove you head from Mary's drums, Orval, the
banging has advanced your senility.

Pilots for Truth:

"Our conclusion is, the maneuver looks possible, for guys like us. But
for Hani? Unlikely. He either got REALLY lucky, or someone/something
else was flying that plane. Sure wish we had clear video of a 757
hitting the pentagon to silence all these "Conspiracy theorists". They
want us to believe the pentagon is only covered by a parking gate
camera? C'mon..."

The reactive force of the hugely powerful downwash sheet, coupled with
the compressibility effects of the tip vortices, simply will not allow
the aircraft to get any lower to the ground than approximately one half
the distance of its wingspan ¡X until speed is drastically reduced,
which, of course, is what happens during normal landings.

Flight 77 "hit the Pentagon" at cruising speed.

So speaketh an aeronautical engineer.