911myths.com : WHY FAKING >73° BANK-ANGLES for a NoC FLYING PLANE.?

originally posted by: stosh64
a reply to: LaBTop
That's a pretty long rebuttal to someone who has not been here since Dec. 28, 2012.

Just saying

Reheat

Probably took the OP that long to make the post!

Nice job, but it is TLDR. I tried, but idk what most of it means. A for effort though...

a reply to: PublicOpinion

I don't need your advice, mate. You need mine.

Well, not taking right advice is why the 9/11 Truth Movement is the laughingstock that it is today. I can't take your advice because you were not knowledgeable enough to understand that large aircraft can fly at high speed at low level, that is, until I made you aware of that fact.

a reply to: skyeagle409

I can't take your advice because you were not knowledgeable enough to understand that large aircraft can fly at high speed at low level, that is, until I made you aware of that fact.

SkyTV lied again. I'm Sure, Not. And this is Idiocracy.

That's the point I was thinking of as well, max-speed in groundeffect sounds like pure insanity. An impossible stunt for a 'starter' with regards to piloting-skills.

Free advice, twofold:
- mark my words and stop putting things in my mouth I never said
- work on your text comprehension skills

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: PublicOpinion

I guess I can sum it up by simply saying that you have been made aware that large aircraft can fly at high speed at very low altitudes with no problem.

IF I would've said that, yes. Read again!

Since it was impossible for American 77 to have conducted a NoC flight path and strike the Pentagon in a slight left bank, the flight path issue was a non-issue from the beginning.

These depictions should have been clues that a NoC flight path was a fabrication.

Depiction 1: SoC flight path Proof

Depiction 2: SoC Flight Path Proof

Depiction 3: SoC Flight Path Proof

Depiction 4: SoC Flgiht Path Proof

You've got a point here, no need to be disingenuous after all.
Let's keep it objective, will ya?

Highspeed in groundeffect without piloting skills or autopilot-functions, whilst hitting lightpoles as if it were nothing, is a problem. No need to talk away things, that start to make you go hmmm...

a reply to: PublicOpinion

whilst hitting lightpoles as if it were nothing, is a problem.

Cars take out light poles all the time without a problem.
Why do you feel a plane can't handle it in the last 2 seconds of flight?

a reply to: samkent

Bullocks. Drive into one and show me how you managed to hit a second.

Why do you feel a plane can't handle it in the last 2 seconds of flight?

Groundeffect, highspeed, no autopilot, no piloting-skills. There you go.
Also, why do you 'feel' there is absolutely no problem with this story?

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Groundeffect, highspeed,...

Which pilots of low wing aircraft use to cushion their landings or depend upon to get their aircraft off the ground before takeoff speed is reached during soft field takeoffs.

... no autopilot,

Why would he use autopilot when a pilot can handle an aircraft much faster than an autopilot?

... no piloting-skills.

Hani Hanjour obtained a commercial pilot license, which requires flying skills above that needed to obtain a private pilot license. Hani Hanjour also flew many hours under IFR, which requires flying skills even more precise, not to mention that he had logged well over 200 flying hours. Afterward, he applied for a B-737-Type rating, With that much flying experience, what makes 9/11 conspiracy theorist think that Hani Hanjour could not fly a Cessna?

Hani Hanjour's Commercial Pilot License

Hani Hanjour's Application

a reply to: skyeagle409

Hani Hanjour obtained a commercial pilot license, which requires flying skills above that needed to obtain a private pilot license. Hani Hanjour also flew many hours under IFR, which requires flying skills even more precise, not to mention that he had logged well over 200 flying hours. Afterward, he applied for a B-737-Type rating, With that much flying experience, what makes 9/11 conspiracy theorist think that Hani Hanjour could not fly a Cessna?

Hani Hanjour couldn't fly a kite much less a paper airplane.

You desperately want everyone to believe in the impossible, hows that working for you?

I am a better pilot then Hani hanjour, I have 12 years in flight simulators experience.

I know many real pilots online and they laugh at the idea that Hani Hanjour could pull off such a stunt.

That's why the OS of flight 77 is the laughing stock of the century. No professional pilot believes it.

You can continue re post:


Hani Hanjour's Commercial Pilot License

Hani Hanjour's Application

A thousand times, It's not convincing enough.

a reply to: Informer1958

Hani Hanjour couldn't fly a kite much less a paper airplane.

Perhaps he couldn't fly a kite, but he was good enough to pass his FAA written, oral, and flight demonstration test to obtain a private and commercial pilot licenses, and have hours of IFR flight time under his belt in addtion to applying for a B-737-Type rating, which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that your claim in baseless.

I am a better pilot then Hani hanjour, I have 12 years in flight simulators experience.

Then, why are you arguing with me?

a reply to: skyeagle409

Then, why are you arguing with me?

Because you and I know the CIA can cook up any kind of paper work for their villein.

a reply to: Informer1958

Because you and I know the CIA can cook up any kind of paper work for their villein.

If you were a real pilot, you would have known that I am correct on all counts.

in addtion to applying for a B-737-Type rating

Really, so who's 737 did he fly to get certafied ?

a reply to: wildb

Really, so who's 737 did he fly to get certafied ?

The flight simulator of Pan Am. Now, let's take a look at the flight record of Hani Hanjour.



* 250 Hours Total Flight Time

* 75 Hours Instrument Flight Time

* 29 Hours Multi Engine Flight Time

a reply to: skyeagle409

Pan Am went under in 1991..

a reply to: wildb

That was Pan Am International Flight Academy.

Isn't.

a reply to: skyeagle409

* 250 Hours Total Flight Time

* 75 Hours Instrument Flight Time

* 29 Hours Multi Engine Flight Time

CIA fake documents.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

That was Pan Am International Flight Academy.

Ok fine , now how do you know he trained there?

a reply to: Informer1958

* 250 Hours Total Flight Time

* 75 Hours Instrument Flight Time

* 29 Hours Multi Engine Flight Time

CIA fake documents.

Evidence please. No evidence, no case.

a reply to: wildb

You can begin here.

Hani Hanjour and the Pan Am International Flight Academy

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

You can begin here.

Hani Hanjour and the Pan Am International Flight Academy

Fix your link please..