Aeronautical Engineer says Official 9/11 Story Not Possible

On a clear day, you could see the Twin Towers for miles from the west or
New Jersey side.

"TRUTH" wrote in message

In article gPJKf.969$gh4.231@trnddc06, "sfb" wrote:

On a clear day, you could see the Twin Towers for miles from the west or
New Jersey side.

I saw them quite clearly as a passenger while landing at Newark airport.
That's nine or ten miles, on a not-particularly-clear day.

Chad Irby wrote:
In article gPJKf.969$gh4.231@trnddc06, "sfb" wrote:

On a clear day, you could see the Twin Towers for miles from the west or
New Jersey side.

I saw them quite clearly as a passenger while landing at Newark airport.
That's nine or ten miles, on a not-particularly-clear day.

It's good to see the pillock TRUTH finally posted (or got posted) into
an aviation group.
He's been displaying his total lack of knowledge in things flying in
the conspiracy groups for some time...

Thank you for all the responses. It's nice to get other opinions. There's
a few things that weren't commented on though.

For instance.....

"In the case of a Boeing 757 or 767, the pilot would be faced with an
EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrumentation System) panel comprised of six
large multi-mode LCDs interspersed with clusters of assorted “hard”
instruments. These displays process the raw aircraft system and flight
data into an integrated picture of the aircraft situation, position and
progress, not only in horizontal and vertical dimensions, but also with
regard to time and speed as well. When flying “blind”, I.e., with no
ground reference cues, it takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret, and
then apply, this data intelligently. If one cannot translate this
information quickly, precisely and accurately (and it takes an
instrument-rated pilot to do so), one would have ZERO SITUATIONAL
AWARENESS. I.e., the pilot wouldn’t have a clue where s/he was in
relation to the earth. Flight under such conditions is referred to as
“IFR”, or Instrument Flight Rules."


"According to FAA radar controllers, “Flight 77” then suddenly pops up
over Washington DC and executes an incredibly precise diving turn at a
rate of 360 degrees/minute while descending at 3,500 ft/min, at the end
of which “Hanjour” allegedly levels out at ground level. Oh, I almost
forgot: He also had the presence of mind to turn off the transponder in
the middle of this incredibly difficult maneuver (one of his instructors
later commented the hapless fellow couldn’t have spelt the word if his
life depended on it)."

"The maneuver was in fact so precisely executed that the air traffic
controllers at Dulles refused to believe the blip on their screen was a
commercial airliner. Danielle O’Brian, one of the air traffic controllers
at Dulles who reported seeing the aircraft at 9:25 said, “The speed, the
maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar
room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a
military plane.”"

"And then, all of a sudden we have magic. Voila! Hanjour finds the
Pentagon sitting squarely in his sights right before him."

"But even that wasn’t good enough for this fanatic Muslim kamikaze pilot.
You see, he found that his “missile” was heading towards one of the most
densely populated wings of the Pentagon—and one occupied by top military
brass, including the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld. Presumably in order
to save these men’s lives, he then executes a sweeping 270-degree turn
and approaches the building from the opposite direction and aligns
himself with the only wing of the Pentagon that was virtually uninhabited
due to extensive renovations that were underway (there were some 120
civilians construction workers in that wing who were killed; their work
included blast-proofing the outside wall of that wing)."

"I shan’t get into the aerodynamic impossibility of flying a large
commercial jetliner 20 feet above the ground at over 400 MPH. A
discussion on ground effect energy, tip vortex compression, downwash
sheet reaction, wake turbulence, and jetblast effects are beyond the
scope of this article (the 100,000-lb jetblast alone would have blown
whole semi-trucks off the roads.)

"Let it suffice to say that it is physically impossible to fly a 200,000-
lb airliner 20 feet above the ground at 400 MPH."




According to the article, the alledged hijackers would have had to be
trained instrument pilots, and thoroughly familiar with the 757/767 six
large screen LCD display in order to pilot the aircraft.

Also, how did the alledged highjacker fly into the Pentagon and make that
expert maneuver? Where's the 757 wreakage? How did such a large plane
make such a small hole? What about Sagadevan's comments about it not
being physically possible to fly a 757 twenty feet above the ground at
400MPH?



To answer some of your questions... The consensus of the 9/11 Truth
Movement is that the planes were flown remote control, and that the
passengers' voices were synthesized using a new technology. (One piece of
evidence for this is this cell phone call quote from a passenger: "Hello
mom, this is Mark Bingham." When was the last time your called your
mother and announced your last name?) Very weird...

"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
Thank you for all the responses. It's nice to get other opinions. There's
a few things that weren't commented on though.

For instance.....

"In the case of a Boeing 757 or 767, the pilot would be faced with an
EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrumentation System) panel comprised of six
large multi-mode LCDs interspersed with clusters of assorted "hard"
instruments. These displays process the raw aircraft system and flight
data into an integrated picture of the aircraft situation, position and
progress, not only in horizontal and vertical dimensions, but also with
regard to time and speed as well. When flying "blind", I.e., with no
ground reference cues, it takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret, and
then apply, this data intelligently. If one cannot translate this
information quickly, precisely and accurately (and it takes an
instrument-rated pilot to do so), one would have ZERO SITUATIONAL
AWARENESS. I.e., the pilot wouldn't have a clue where s/he was in
relation to the earth. Flight under such conditions is referred to as
"IFR", or Instrument Flight Rules."


"According to FAA radar controllers, "Flight 77" then suddenly pops up
over Washington DC and executes an incredibly precise diving turn at a
rate of 360 degrees/minute while descending at 3,500 ft/min, at the end
of which "Hanjour" allegedly levels out at ground level. Oh, I almost
forgot: He also had the presence of mind to turn off the transponder in
the middle of this incredibly difficult maneuver (one of his instructors
later commented the hapless fellow couldn't have spelt the word if his
life depended on it)."

"The maneuver was in fact so precisely executed that the air traffic
controllers at Dulles refused to believe the blip on their screen was a
commercial airliner. Danielle O'Brian, one of the air traffic controllers
at Dulles who reported seeing the aircraft at 9:25 said, "The speed, the
maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar
room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a
military plane.""

"And then, all of a sudden we have magic. Voila! Hanjour finds the
Pentagon sitting squarely in his sights right before him."

"But even that wasn't good enough for this fanatic Muslim kamikaze pilot.
You see, he found that his "missile" was heading towards one of the most
densely populated wings of the Pentagon-and one occupied by top military
brass, including the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld. Presumably in order
to save these men's lives, he then executes a sweeping 270-degree turn
and approaches the building from the opposite direction and aligns
himself with the only wing of the Pentagon that was virtually uninhabited
due to extensive renovations that were underway (there were some 120
civilians construction workers in that wing who were killed; their work
included blast-proofing the outside wall of that wing)."

"I shan't get into the aerodynamic impossibility of flying a large
commercial jetliner 20 feet above the ground at over 400 MPH. A
discussion on ground effect energy, tip vortex compression, downwash
sheet reaction, wake turbulence, and jetblast effects are beyond the
scope of this article (the 100,000-lb jetblast alone would have blown
whole semi-trucks off the roads.)

"Let it suffice to say that it is physically impossible to fly a 200,000-
lb airliner 20 feet above the ground at 400 MPH."




According to the article, the alledged hijackers would have had to be
trained instrument pilots, and thoroughly familiar with the 757/767 six
large screen LCD display in order to pilot the aircraft.

As the article states,

"When flying "blind", I.e., with no ground reference cues, it takes a
highly skilled pilot to interpret, and then apply, this data intelligently.
If one cannot translate this information quickly, precisely and accurately
(and it takes an instrument-rated pilot to do so), one would have ZERO
SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. I.e., the pilot wouldn't have a clue where s/he was
in relation to the earth. Flight under such conditions is referred to as
"IFR", or Instrument Flight Rules."

At no time were any of the aircraft flying blind, thus the established facts
as to what happened that day are completely consistent with what the article
claims. Oops.

Paul Nixon

"khobar" wrote in
news:apTKf.4201$Sp2.2506@fed1read02:


"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
Thank you for all the responses. It's nice to get other opinions.
There's a few things that weren't commented on though.

For instance.....

"In the case of a Boeing 757 or 767, the pilot would be faced with an
EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrumentation System) panel comprised of
six large multi-mode LCDs interspersed with clusters of assorted
"hard" instruments. These displays process the raw aircraft system
and flight data into an integrated picture of the aircraft situation,
position and progress, not only in horizontal and vertical
dimensions, but also with regard to time and speed as well. When
flying "blind", I.e., with no ground reference cues, it takes a
highly skilled pilot to interpret, and then apply, this data
intelligently. If one cannot translate this information quickly,
precisely and accurately (and it takes an instrument-rated pilot to
do so), one would have ZERO SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. I.e., the pilot
wouldn't have a clue where s/he was in relation to the earth. Flight
under such conditions is referred to as "IFR", or Instrument Flight
Rules."


"According to FAA radar controllers, "Flight 77" then suddenly pops
up over Washington DC and executes an incredibly precise diving turn
at a rate of 360 degrees/minute while descending at 3,500 ft/min, at
the end of which "Hanjour" allegedly levels out at ground level. Oh,
I almost forgot: He also had the presence of mind to turn off the
transponder in the middle of this incredibly difficult maneuver (one
of his instructors later commented the hapless fellow couldn't have
spelt the word if his life depended on it)."

"The maneuver was in fact so precisely executed that the air traffic
controllers at Dulles refused to believe the blip on their screen was
a commercial airliner. Danielle O'Brian, one of the air traffic
controllers at Dulles who reported seeing the aircraft at 9:25 said,
"The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all
thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic
controllers, that that was a military plane.""

"And then, all of a sudden we have magic. Voila! Hanjour finds the
Pentagon sitting squarely in his sights right before him."

"But even that wasn't good enough for this fanatic Muslim kamikaze
pilot. You see, he found that his "missile" was heading towards one
of the most densely populated wings of the Pentagon-and one occupied
by top military brass, including the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld.
Presumably in order to save these men's lives, he then executes a
sweeping 270-degree turn and approaches the building from the
opposite direction and aligns himself with the only wing of the
Pentagon that was virtually uninhabited due to extensive renovations
that were underway (there were some 120 civilians construction
workers in that wing who were killed; their work included
blast-proofing the outside wall of that wing)."

"I shan't get into the aerodynamic impossibility of flying a large
commercial jetliner 20 feet above the ground at over 400 MPH. A
discussion on ground effect energy, tip vortex compression, downwash
sheet reaction, wake turbulence, and jetblast effects are beyond the
scope of this article (the 100,000-lb jetblast alone would have blown
whole semi-trucks off the roads.)

"Let it suffice to say that it is physically impossible to fly a
200,000- lb airliner 20 feet above the ground at 400 MPH."




According to the article, the alledged hijackers would have had to be
trained instrument pilots, and thoroughly familiar with the 757/767
six large screen LCD display in order to pilot the aircraft.

As the article states,

"When flying "blind", I.e., with no ground reference cues, it takes a
highly skilled pilot to interpret, and then apply, this data
intelligently. If one cannot translate this information quickly,
precisely and accurately (and it takes an instrument-rated pilot to
do so), one would have ZERO SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. I.e., the pilot
wouldn't have a clue where s/he was in relation to the earth. Flight
under such conditions is referred to as "IFR", or Instrument Flight
Rules."

At no time were any of the aircraft flying blind, thus the established
facts as to what happened that day are completely consistent with what
the article claims. Oops.

Paul Nixon





On what basis do you say this? If a pilot cannot see the ground, and
cannot use instruments, how are they not flying blind?

TRUTH wrote:

Thank you for all the responses. It's nice to get other opinions. There's
a few things that weren't commented on though.

For instance.....

"In the case of a Boeing 757 or 767, the pilot would be faced with an
EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrumentation System) panel comprised of six
large multi-mode LCDs interspersed with clusters of assorted “hard”
instruments. These displays process the raw aircraft system and flight
data into an integrated picture of the aircraft situation, position and
progress, not only in horizontal and vertical dimensions, but also with
regard to time and speed as well. When flying “blind”, I.e., with no
ground reference cues, it takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret, and
then apply, this data intelligently.

They weren't *flying blind*.

Quite the reverse. it was a lovely day with great visibility.

If one cannot translate this
information quickly, precisely and accurately (and it takes an
instrument-rated pilot to do so), one would have ZERO SITUATIONAL
AWARENESS. I.e., the pilot wouldn’t have a clue where s/he was in
relation to the earth. Flight under such conditions is referred to as
“IFR”, or Instrument Flight Rules."

Hence not applicable. It was VFR weather.


"According to FAA radar controllers, “Flight 77” then suddenly pops up
over Washington DC and executes an incredibly precise diving turn at a
rate of 360 degrees/minute while descending at 3,500 ft/min, at the end
of which “Hanjour” allegedly levels out at ground level. Oh, I almost
forgot: He also had the presence of mind to turn off the transponder in
the middle of this incredibly difficult maneuver (one of his instructors
later commented the hapless fellow couldn’t have spelt the word if his
life depended on it)."

The " precise diving turn " is simply someone's imagination. Probably the
reporter's version of events. It makes for more 'compelling' copy.


"The maneuver was in fact so precisely executed that the air traffic
controllers at Dulles refused to believe the blip on their screen was a
commercial airliner. Danielle O’Brian, one of the air traffic controllers
at Dulles who reported seeing the aircraft at 9:25 said, “The speed, the
maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar
room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a
military plane.”"

That's because they don't normally see commerical planes flown like that ! It
doesn't mean it can't be done. Commercial flights have regard to passenger
sensitivities.


"And then, all of a sudden we have magic. Voila! Hanjour finds the
Pentagon sitting squarely in his sights right before him."

Typical journalist hype. The journalist wan't there on the flight deck was he
so how does he or anyone else know what Hanjour *saw* ?

Etc.

Yawn.

Graham

"khobar" wrote in
news:apTKf.4201$Sp2.2506@fed1read02:


"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
Thank you for all the responses. It's nice to get other opinions.
There's a few things that weren't commented on though.

For instance.....

"In the case of a Boeing 757 or 767, the pilot would be faced with an
EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrumentation System) panel comprised of
six large multi-mode LCDs interspersed with clusters of assorted
"hard" instruments. These displays process the raw aircraft system
and flight data into an integrated picture of the aircraft situation,
position and progress, not only in horizontal and vertical
dimensions, but also with regard to time and speed as well. When
flying "blind", I.e., with no ground reference cues, it takes a
highly skilled pilot to interpret, and then apply, this data
intelligently. If one cannot translate this information quickly,
precisely and accurately (and it takes an instrument-rated pilot to
do so), one would have ZERO SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. I.e., the pilot
wouldn't have a clue where s/he was in relation to the earth. Flight
under such conditions is referred to as "IFR", or Instrument Flight
Rules."


"According to FAA radar controllers, "Flight 77" then suddenly pops
up over Washington DC and executes an incredibly precise diving turn
at a rate of 360 degrees/minute while descending at 3,500 ft/min, at
the end of which "Hanjour" allegedly levels out at ground level. Oh,
I almost forgot: He also had the presence of mind to turn off the
transponder in the middle of this incredibly difficult maneuver (one
of his instructors later commented the hapless fellow couldn't have
spelt the word if his life depended on it)."

"The maneuver was in fact so precisely executed that the air traffic
controllers at Dulles refused to believe the blip on their screen was
a commercial airliner. Danielle O'Brian, one of the air traffic
controllers at Dulles who reported seeing the aircraft at 9:25 said,
"The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all
thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic
controllers, that that was a military plane.""

"And then, all of a sudden we have magic. Voila! Hanjour finds the
Pentagon sitting squarely in his sights right before him."

"But even that wasn't good enough for this fanatic Muslim kamikaze
pilot. You see, he found that his "missile" was heading towards one
of the most densely populated wings of the Pentagon-and one occupied
by top military brass, including the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld.
Presumably in order to save these men's lives, he then executes a
sweeping 270-degree turn and approaches the building from the
opposite direction and aligns himself with the only wing of the
Pentagon that was virtually uninhabited due to extensive renovations
that were underway (there were some 120 civilians construction
workers in that wing who were killed; their work included
blast-proofing the outside wall of that wing)."

"I shan't get into the aerodynamic impossibility of flying a large
commercial jetliner 20 feet above the ground at over 400 MPH. A
discussion on ground effect energy, tip vortex compression, downwash
sheet reaction, wake turbulence, and jetblast effects are beyond the
scope of this article (the 100,000-lb jetblast alone would have blown
whole semi-trucks off the roads.)

"Let it suffice to say that it is physically impossible to fly a
200,000- lb airliner 20 feet above the ground at 400 MPH."




According to the article, the alledged hijackers would have had to be
trained instrument pilots, and thoroughly familiar with the 757/767
six large screen LCD display in order to pilot the aircraft.

As the article states,

"When flying "blind", I.e., with no ground reference cues, it takes a
highly skilled pilot to interpret, and then apply, this data
intelligently. If one cannot translate this information quickly,
precisely and accurately (and it takes an instrument-rated pilot to
do so), one would have ZERO SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. I.e., the pilot
wouldn't have a clue where s/he was in relation to the earth. Flight
under such conditions is referred to as "IFR", or Instrument Flight
Rules."

At no time were any of the aircraft flying blind, thus the established
facts as to what happened that day are completely consistent with what
the article claims. Oops.

Paul Nixon



The government's version of 9/11 is not established fact... not to those
who can read between the lines

TRUTH wrote:

"khobar" wrote in
news:apTKf.4201$Sp2.2506@fed1read02:

At no time were any of the aircraft flying blind, thus the established
facts as to what happened that day are completely consistent with what
the article claims. Oops.

Paul Nixon

On what basis do you say this? If a pilot cannot see the ground, and
cannot use instruments, how are they not flying blind?

The pilot clearly *could* see the ground ( it was a lovely clear day ).

There is no evidence AFAIK that the pilots couldn't use instruments either.


Graham

TRUTH wrote

On what basis do you say this? If a pilot cannot see the ground, and
cannot use instruments, how are they not flying blind?

Why couldn't they see the ground?

OH yeah, I know... the tall buildings blocked their view.

What do YOU think really happened?
You know soooooooo much about what "didn't happen".