Dr.Curtiss runs out of his medicine

David Brooks wrote:
Orval Fairbairn wrote:
Robert Briggs wrote:

They may have been able to *read* the avionics, but *programming*
them seems a tad unnecessary when your target is one of the most
distinctive buildings for hundreds of miles around.

AND, the visibility was 100+ miles. Who the hell NEEDS avionics to
navigate under those circumstances?

Well, in some of the text that was clipped, I said "Two things I don't know
how to do right now: to disengage the autopilot, or FMS, or whatever they
have...". At least I'd want to be sure I knew how to turn this stuff off
before embarking on the mission - that was uppermost in my mind.

Gaining manual control of the aeroplane is clearly relevant, but it
is rather a simple procedure.

The other part is speculation: we've read the press that they had apparently
committed the heinous crime of purchasing GPS units. That sort-of says that
they were intending to use lat/long data (can you define and then fly to a
custom waypoint using airline avionics?). Remember, they didn't know what
the weather was going to be when they bought the tickets.

Why purchase GPS units if you intend to use the FMS? Who wants to
prat around getting an unfamiliar FMS into the appropriate mode and
then programming it when his own GPS unit will do the job?

Robert M. Gary wrote:

Remember too that the 9/11 pilots did a crappy job. They overspeed the
planes on several occasions (according to tracking data). The hardest
part is energey management, they didn't have that down. The point is
that if all you want to do is fly into a building, you don't have to
be very good.

A very crappy job. Both were boresighting the towers; not accounting for
the wind effects. An especially bad job by the second terrorist who had the
smoke from the first hit to guide him. Both his at a substantial bank angle


IIRC one of them had to try twice.

Gregg