What Level Of Skill Was Required To Fly A Plane Into The Pentagon ?

a reply to: m1kelowry

Some people have pointed out that Hanjour had his commercial pilots license.
You don't get them out of a cracker jack box now do you?

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

What is more believable?

That Hanjour with 600 hours flight time, a private pilot's license, a FAA commercial certificate, simulator training, and a flight instructor claiming Hanjour had the skills to crash into the pentagon, crashed into the pentagon.

Vs.

Some how a group tapped into the flight control systems of a 757 listed here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Bypassing flight controls, autopilots, trim controls, safety dampeners. A system that would override control surfaces controlled by redundant hydraulic actuators. Probably with redundant control electronics. All with items they could smuggle onto flight 77? The hacking gear, control systems, tools, wiring, communications gear, I/O boards, flight telemetry gear, receiving and broadcast gear to handle multiple channels of telemetry. And the hijackers would have the time, mechanical skills, mechanical equipment, the electrical skills, and the engineering skills to do this after the hijacking and before the crash?

I think the chances that flight 77 was "hacked" in flight is about zero. So your installation of gear inflight to make flight 77 a "drone" is debunked.

a reply to: neutronflux

The way you describe it, on paper it seems like he could fly a plane. However, every instructor at the flight school he last knowingly attended was like...this guy can't fly at all. Yes, he also couldn't speak English, but he COULDN"T fly. They thought his certs were forgeries.

How we could slip through the system to actually be listed is beyond me and them.

As you know I like my analogies.

I present to you the certificate of a lifeguard. He also has medals from his school in the back stroke, front crawl, breast stroke, plus 2 school records. Holy moly you say. We need to get this cat a scholarship to my college STAT. Then you find out he is training for the Olympics, and believe it or not he has only been swimming for a year....but knows CPR.

So you say...this guy on paper passes all the tests, but before I sign him up as a lifeguard or give him a scholarship I better just call his last 3 coaches.

"THE GUY CAN'T SWIM AT ALL."

Well that end that doesn't it.

a reply to: m1kelowry

Do some research before you fly off the handle with your false claims Hanjour couldn't fly.

Geesh, like you get a commercial pilots license when you can't fly....

Quit looking at the conspiracy sites and do some real research.

originally posted by: m1kelowry
a reply to: neutronflux

How can anyone find anything from a source you would consider reputable if it is an actual conspiracy? Do you believe the gov't would admit or provide the evidence to destroy it's own plan?

That's why it simply goes back to the belief of a pilot without the skills to pull off the mission.

Some people have actually responded with how easy it is to fly a plane. I call complete B.S. Go speak with an actual pilot who flies a commercial jet and ask him how easy it is if all the training he had was on a Cessna or flight simulator.

That, or just keep on believing in the talents of that pilot.

And you still don't even have the credibility to describe what this impossible maneuver is.

And you have not offered any rebuttals to the works by Scientists for 9/11 Truth.

Items that you claimed that have been debunked:

Instructors claimed Hanjour didn't have the skills-debunked

That the pentagon had a missile system on 9/11-debunked

There is still flight 77 footage to release-debunked

That flight 77 conducted some impossible maneuver-debunked

Claims the flight recorder data was not legit - debunked

You didn't understand how close the pentagon is to a busy commercial airport.

Cannot discredit the scores of civilian accounts of a large jet hitting the pentagon, backed by radar data, flight controllers, confirmed by an in flight pilot, contact damage along the flight path, nor explained how the remains of flight 77's crew and passengers ended up at the pentagon.

The released pentagon security videos shows a large jet.

You do not have the credibility to offer up a theory that is more credible than a large jet impact.

And you cannot see how people that deny a large jet impact at the pentagon are killing the truth movement's credibility, and will always be a hindrance to the truth. Or understand how they enable conspiracists that exploit 9/11. Just sad

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

So you are down to:

A installation of a system that would take control of flight 77 pre 9/11. And explaining where the system was installed. How long it would take to install. Who installed it. How it was missed by pilots, crew, and maintenance on inspections and system tests. How the receiving and transmitting telemetry equipment was hidden. What was the range of the control system? Was the control signals handed off from ground station by ground station? Where were the transmission antennas?

The inflight swap. Requires actors, two jets, multiple facilities, both jets avoiding radar, and the harvesting and planting of human remains that would pass recover team scrutiny, forensic team scrutiny, coroner's scrutiny, DNA testing, and actors to play the families that took possession of the remains. Just for starts.....

Or..... it's a biggy

Hanjour with a private pilot's license, FAA commercial certificate, and commercial jet simulator training, and simulator rented time that may have included practice crashing into the pentagon may have actually crashed flight 77 into the pentagon.

And you still haven't debunked grey alien mercenaries using a control beam to make flight 77 crash into the pentagon?

a reply to: neutronflux

And you still haven't debunked grey alien mercenaries using a control beam to make flight 77 crash into the pentagon?

I'll take the Starship Enterprise with a tractor beam, Alex .......

Ugh this will never end..
9/11 is MESSED up.
Every single instance is full of large gaps
Even before the very first plane strikes
the controversy begins.
Custodian William Rodriquez
hears an explosion in the basement,
of a building he knows well.
Then another 110 stories above as the
plane struck.

Of course Hanjour could not have flown the
plane as described by the NTSB data points.
All while operating at speeds way over the aircraft
capabilities ? Wings folding vertical stabilizers shuddering
Clackers etc ? No way just Nope.
No these were fancy military-esque
Grey hi performance planes that look like 767-757's
and maybea cruise missile. Because there was no
actual plane found at the Pentagon.
Just convenient fun size pieces and
amounting to nothing.

a reply to: UnderKingsPeak

You are right....all those polished aluminum pieces with American Airlines markings magically appeared. Along with the remains and personal effects known to have been onboard the 757 known as American Airlines Flight 77. It was all MAGIC!!!


Psst...you also might want to find William Rodriguez's first interview on the actual day....where he describes noises that sound like someone was moving furniture. It is MUCH different than the tales he spins today about explosions shattering the ceiling/walls and knocking him across the room.........he will gladly take your $15 to tell you about it.

a reply to: UnderKingsPeak

Flight 77 conducted a five mile radius turn between 200 to 300 knots. The turn was 300 degrees, and took over two minutes. After the turn, Hanjour pointed the jet at the pentagon, started the descent. During the descent, working the throttles to wide open. The descent is backed by contact evidence on an antenna, trees, light poles, trailers, a concrete lip, radar data, and flight recorder data.

Please state when the jet reached speeds above its design limits, which are used to ensure a long service life in decades, before the crash?

a reply to: m1kelowry

Let's play this way. You list a single source that states the flight recorder data from flight 77 was bogus. A paper that cites sources. I am interested on how far back you will go? I will read it and cite items one at a time as I find items to debunk.

You can do the same in exchange with this source.
Title: Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon
Frank Legge, (B.Sc.(Hons.), Ph.D.) and Warren Stutt, ( B.Sc.(Hons.) Comp. Sci.) January 2011

Summary and Conclusion
In response to FOIA requests the NTSB provided a CSV file and a coded FDR file. All contradictions between the official account of the course of flight AA 77 and these files appear to be traceable to missing data. In the case of the CSV file the data stopped about four seconds short of the impact. In the case of the FDR file the final frame was not initially decoded. Some researchers recognized that data was missing, while others claimed that the files proved the official account was false, as it appeared the flight terminated at a point too high to have created the observed damage trail on the ground.
Previous analyses were further confounded by uncertainty of the position of the last data point; failure to consider possible calibration errors in the pressure altimeter data, caused by high speed and low altitude; and false information in the NTSB flight animation.
The recent complete decoding of the FDR file has enlarged and clarified the information available and has thereby enabled resolution of the contradictions. It is clear that this file supports the official account of the course of flight AA 77 and the consequent impact with the Pentagon. The file thus also supports the majority of eyewitness reports.

Only list one item at a time to simplify rebuttals...

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

And you and NF can incessantly repeat the government talking points, but it doesn't make those lies become truths. All it really does is reveal how desperate you are admiring the emperor's new clothes.

a reply to: Salander

Umm, live reports from CNN about stepping over AA marked parts isn't a government talking point. News video showing pieces of wreckage isn't a government talking point. An Arlington County firefighter relaying what he saw there that day is not a government talking point. Reagan Tower personnel commenting on what they witnessed is not a government talking point.....wait, I forgot...all of us were in on the plot...with the exception of you....

a reply to: cardinalfan0596

LOL, neither is Dennis Cimino's analysis a government talking point. Indeed, it is a fact most fatal to the official story you defend. Quickly, sweep it under the rug, bury it inside Iron Mountain. LOL

a reply to: Salander

What was that impossible maneuver again?

a reply to: Salander

That you rely on Mr. Cimino and his erroneous ideas about avionics is telling. Does he still spout his "they penetrated the airspace of Washington DC without the proper IFF Mode 4A" crap?

originally posted by: artblucat
a reply to: m1kelowry

Some people have pointed out that Hanjour had his commercial pilots license.
You don't get them out of a cracker jack box now do you?

Well it was said that Barack Obama had a license to practice law, and was actually a Constitutional Law Professor.

In real life, one could never believe that by the way he governed. Licenses mean precious little. Look at how many doctors who have licenses cannot practice medicine.

You offer a silly example for how Hanjour had to have flown, a myth if there ever was.

a reply to: Salander

Licenses mean precious little.

Your belief that one can get a commercial pilots license without being able to fly is ludicrous.
As far from reality as your 911 conspiracy beliefs.

Instructors claimed Hanjour didn't have the skills-debunked

a reply to: m1kelowry

Missiles at the Pentagon-Debunked.

There were no missiles at the Pentagon until several days after 9/11. They weren't hidden anywhere, there were no automatic systems, or anything else that has been claimed. There was no need for them, and they would present far more danger than utility.