It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

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

page: 9
39
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: WeRpeons



In addition, the Fire Department surely doesn't have the credentials or the amount of knowledge to understand structural engineering as compared to many architectural engineers


So if the FDNY doesn't understand if a building is to collapse then why did I attend a course whose instructors are
FDNY officers - many of them present on 9/11

We are taught to watch the building for signs of instability - things like smoke pushing out of various part of building,
windows popping out of frames. doors being jammed/or not close, etc




posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
But neutronflux, your posts are tinny......like meaning came from a can.

Automated computer posting on ats my friends.......we humans spot that stuff right away.

Logic flow is easy....we start with the least tampered evidence, like what most posters put forth. Helps to be a trained observer and a pilot.....but mainly just good common sense. Hey, in the old days common sense abounded, what does that say we dealing with these days.....decorum prevents me from listing the cuss words here.

Off world invasion like......or many post these days that tells of just got off the friggin banana boat.....see what I mean.....I could expound....


Rants and innuendo with no ability to address the real issues.

You are another example why most rational people have no time for conspiracists.

Please refer to the actual dimensions of the entrance hole made at the pentagon. Like to post or link to a picture of what you think is the entrance hole at the pentagon.

Can you discredit the 100 plus individuals that give an account of a large commercial jet hitting the pentagon.

Conspiracists ignore the fact one of the terrorists that took over flight 77 had a FAA commercial flight certificate. So, I guess the premise of the thread is already debunked by its title vs facts.

That the terrorists were dedicated and trained for their single purpose of crashing an in air jet into a target about the size of 26 football fields. The court yard at the pentagon is around the size of 4 football fields alone.

Can you cite a theory for what happen at the pentagon which resulted in virtually no interior of the pentagon ending up outside and on the pentagon's front lawn? A missile with no warhead, four foot in diameter, that some how made a hole in the shape of an upside down tee, about 90 feet wide, and two stories at the tallest point? A missile with a warhead? A pentagon bomb?

There is no consensus among pilots and aerospace engineers the maneuvers where Impossible.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: waypastvne

Do you understand the differences between a transport category aircraft such as the 757 and an Extra? Certification differences, handling differences?

Have you ever performed aerobatics in a 757? Have you ever flown one?

Have you ever studied the numbers flown by AA77 on its forged FDR data? Do you know that according to that the airplane was something like 90 knots over Vne in the final seconds?

Have you ever flown your aerobatic airplane 50 knots over redline?


edit on 24-6-2017 by Salander because: FDR data



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

It is amazing how so many of those who promote the official story on this point are willing to attribute super-human pilot skills to Hanjour. A handful of pilots who fly the 757 for a living, at the Pilots For 911 Truth forum are on record as saying they could not perform that maneuver. Nobody flies those machines over Vmo, but dozens of non-pilots who still support the official story think it's no big deal.

The other factor is that the official story as reflected in the bogus FDR data show the airplane to have been in ground effect, 90 knots over Vmo, and with the engine cowlings necessarily within about 2 feet of the ground. It's an absurd claim, showing how completely absurd the story is.

The forged/fraudulent FDR data is just icing on the cake.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 04:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Sad people speak with false authority, offer theories not a consensus among pilots and aerospace engineers, ignoring questions directed at them, and cited sources.



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
www.journalof911studies.com...




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.


edit on 24-6-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed wording



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Can you cite the evidence that the FDR record is bogus?
edit on 24-6-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed wording



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 04:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: waypastvne





originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: Salander


THIS....answers my OP question.




As one who has been instructing in airplanes for more than 30 years,...
The maneuver required to make the official story right is impossible...


But I have also been training people how to fly for over 30 years. The last thing I teach students is spin training how to put a plane into a spin and get it back out again without over speeding the airplane. I normally start teaching landings in the 3rd hour of training.

I'm also an aerobatic pilot and have flown in airshows around the world. There is nothing in the flight path of AA77 that impresses me at all. Maybe someone would like to point out the impossible part of the flight to me because I don't see it.




On the other hand what UA93 did was impressive.


Did not want the post get lost do to rants and off topic items used to ignore a direct question



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

What would happen? The jet would crash into a building larger that 25 football fields and 70 foot tall.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to: firerescue

Just because you see signs of instability, doesn't mean it's being caused by the fire. The fire could have easily been used to justify the collapse when other covert means were used to ensure the collapse of both buildings in addition to building 7. Remember both steel buildings collapsed in less than hour after being hit by these planes! Traces of thermite was found in the debris and there was extreme hot red glowing metal in the debris shown in thermal images as late as October 21st! That alone should have been red flags to any investigation.

There's a reason why government officials called for the quick removal of the debris. Any police officer or homicide detective knows when there's a crime committed, the crime scene is not to be disturbed until there's a thorough investigation of any evidence left at the scene.

This was the worst attack on American soil! Yet the crime scene was disturbed and any possible evidence related to the collapse was quickly removed. There was more money spent on Bill Clinton's sex scandal investigation than there was on 9/11! Again more red flags. Bush wanted a reason to go into Iraq, and what better reason than to tie Saddam Hussein to 9/11. Which was nothing but a huge lie! Yet our media stood by and never questioned the president nor did they do their own investigation to check if there was any truth to it. When a country is attacked, the public always rallies around their president. Even though he may be spewing bold face lies.

There was way too many questions surrounding 9/11. Our own president and VP had a closed door meeting surrounding the attack of 9/11 which should have been open to the public! This was an attack on innocent civilians not just our country. Letting Saudi nationals fly home when all flights were grounded and 15 of the 19 hijackers were citizens of Saudi Arabia is another red flag. Since when are possible ties to a crime scene let go to flee the country without being questioned?

You can believe the official story surrounding 9/11, but in my opinion, the American people deserve a thorough, open and independent investigation surrounding the inconsistencies and the statistically impossibilities that transpired on the morning of 9/11. The victims families need to know unequivocally their loved ones did not die because of a covert operation to get the public behind a policy for our military to occupy and control the flow of oil in the middle east.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Because some people might be trying to decide I will quote more pilots, it is up to you to decide the level of value you place on their commentary.


Rob Balsamo
Credentials:
Commercial airline pilot. 4,000+ total hours flown.
Comment-

"The information provided by the NTSB does not support the 9/11 Commission Report of American Airlines Flight 77 impact with the Pentagon."



Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy (ret)
Credentials:
Airline captain with 27 years experience. Aircraft flown: Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100. Retired fighter pilot. Former Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School (Topgun). 20-year Navy career. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, and Grumman F-14 Tomcat. 23,000+ total hours flown.
Comment-

At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757’s and 767’s and could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!



Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, U.S. Air Force (ret)
Credentials:
Former combat fighter pilot. Aerospace engineer. Currently Captain at a major airline. Combat experience includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle and General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark fighter/bomber. Former President, U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board. Also served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer and as a member of the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review. Awarded Distinguish Flying Cross for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals. 20-year Air Force career.
Comment-

It's obvious that there's discrepancies between the two stories; between the 9/11 Commission and the flight data recorder information...
The things that really got my attention were the amount of descent rate that you had to have at the end of the flight, of Flight 77...you know, I'd ride my bike to the Pentagon. So, you know I'm a little bit familiar with that area. But, you know, that kind of descent rate it would have been impossible essentially for the results that we see physically from what the flight data recorder was recording. Like I say, that's an area that I think deserves explanation. ...



Commander Ted Muga, BS CE, U.S. Navy (ret)
Credentials:
Retired Pan-Am commercial airline pilot. Commercial aircraft flown: Boeing 707 and 727. 7,500 total commercial hours flown. Retired Civil Engineer. Retired Naval aviator. Military aircraft flown: Grumman E-1 Tracer and E-2 Hawkeye. 3,800 total military hours flown.
Comment-


The maneuver at the Pentagon was just a tight spiral coming down out of 7,000 feet. And a commercial aircraft, while they can in fact structurally somewhat handle that maneuver, they are very, very, very difficult. And it would take considerable training. In other words, commercial aircraft are designed for a particular purpose and that is for comfort and for passengers and it's not for military maneuvers. And while they are structurally capable of doing them, it takes some very, very talented pilots to do that. ...
When a commercial airplane gets that high, it gets very, very close to getting into what you refer to as a speed high-speed stall. And a high-speed stall can be very, very violent on a commercial-type aircraft and you never want to get into that situation. I just can't imagine an amateur even being able to come close to performing a maneuver of that nature.



Capt. Fred Fox
Credentials:Retired commercial airline pilot, with 33 years experience flying for American Airlines. Commercial aircraft flown: Boeing 707, 727, 747, 767, McDonnell Douglas DC-10, MD-80, and MD-11, Douglas DC-6, and General Dynamics/Convair 990 Coronado. Former U.S. Navy pilot. Aircraft flown: Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, 8 years experience.
Comments:

"I know from my experience that it would have been highly improbable that even a seasoned American test pilot, a military test pilot, could have flown a T-category, aircraft like the 757, into the first floor of the Pentagon because of a thing called Ground Effect."



When researching this, one theory is they heavily modified something called a A-3 Skywarrior into an automated drone, painted like plane, and it would be capable of making the maneuver. Not saying that's what happened just another theory that is out there.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 09:01 PM
link   
a reply to: firerescue

Really, just because the commander at WTC that day states there wasn't any explosions doesn't mean he wasn't subject to interrogations or pressured by our government to toll the official story. Our government hasn't always been squeaky clean. In the past, they have subjected many innocent civilians to covert human testing, and nuclear testing radiation fall-out without any concern for their well-being. Questions still surround the assassination of John F. Kennedy. The Gulf of Tonkin incident that paved the way for the Vietnam War was confirmed to have been a black flag operation. The U.S. also supported many dictators and covertly influenced overseas governments for our own self-interests.

The government is extremely good at disinformation and threatening military personal and innocent civilians from speaking the truth about covert operations. For every article that questions 9/11 there are articles that will debunk it. Kind of like the Roswell Incident. How many stories has the government used to try to dissuade what credible eyewitnesses saw with their own eyes and handled with their own hands??

What does the government have to hide to launch an independent investigation to squelch the so-called 9/11 conspiracy theories? Money?? They waste enough of our tax dollars on pork barrel spending, foreign aid and military expenditures! Something as important as an attack on American soil and killing 3,000 innocent civilians, a war brought about from this attack causing the death of over 5,000 or our military personal and the lives of over 100 thousand innocent Iraqi civilians, should without question have an independent investigation making sure no stone is left unturned.

Our government has even engaged in prosecuting government whistle-blowers. These are the true patriots who risk their lives to expose government corruption and a covert attack on our constitutional rights. If we don't question our government and demand credibility, we're not truly free.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
But neutronflux, your posts are tinny......like meaning came from a can.

Automated computer posting on ats my friends.......we humans spot that stuff right away.

Logic flow is easy....we start with the least tampered evidence, like what most posters put forth. Helps to be a trained observer and a pilot.....but mainly just good common sense. Hey, in the old days common sense abounded, what does that say we dealing with these days.....decorum prevents me from listing the cuss words here.

Off world invasion like......or many post these days that tells of just got off the friggin banana boat.....see what I mean.....I could expound....


Rants and innuendo with no ability to address the real issues.

You are another example why most rational people have no time for conspiracists.

Please refer to the actual dimensions of the entrance hole made at the pentagon. Like to post or link to a picture of what you think is the entrance hole at the pentagon.

Can you discredit the 100 plus individuals that give an account of a large commercial jet hitting the pentagon.

Conspiracists ignore the fact one of the terrorists that took over flight 77 had a FAA commercial flight certificate. So, I guess the premise of the thread is already debunked by its title vs facts.

That the terrorists were dedicated and trained for their single purpose of crashing an in air jet into a target about the size of 26 football fields. The court yard at the pentagon is around the size of 4 football fields alone.

Can you cite a theory for what happen at the pentagon which resulted in virtually no interior of the pentagon ending up outside and on the pentagon's front lawn? A missile with no warhead, four foot in diameter, that some how made a hole in the shape of an upside down tee, about 90 feet wide, and two stories at the tallest point? A missile with a warhead? A pentagon bomb?

There is no consensus among pilots and aerospace engineers the maneuvers where Impossible.





You use the word "conspiracists" a lot and it destroys any argument you make. The use of that word was introduced as a propaganda tool by the CIA into society, media, etc, to scuttle too many questions being asked when government does bad things.

And by using that word yourself, you unmask your bias, and that makes anything you say come into serious question.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 09:51 PM
link   
Rob Balsamo
Credentials:
Commercial airline pilot. 4,000+ total hours flown.
Comment-

"The information provided by the NTSB does not support the 9/11 Commission Report of American Airlines Flight 77 impact with the Pentagon."


He doesn't Say what he disagrees with

Commander Ralph Kolstad, U.S. Navy (ret)

Comment-

At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757’s and 767’s and could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor, U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!


Doesn't say what it was they did that he couldn't.

Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, U.S. Air Force (ret)
Credentials:


It's obvious that there's discrepancies between the two stories; between the 9/11 Commission and the flight data recorder information...
The things that really got my attention were the amount of descent rate that you had to have at the end of the flight, of Flight 77...you know, I'd ride my bike to the Pentagon. So, you know I'm a little bit familiar with that area. But, you know, that kind of descent rate it would have been impossible essentially for the results that we see physically from what the flight data recorder was recording. Like I say, that's an area that I think deserves explanation. ...


They decoded the last 4 seconds of FDR so it's been explained.


Commander Ted Muga, BS CE, U.S. Navy (ret)
Credentials:



The maneuver at the Pentagon was just a tight spiral coming down out of 7,000 feet. And a commercial aircraft, while they can in fact structurally somewhat handle that maneuver, they are very, very, very difficult. And it would take considerable training. In other words, commercial aircraft are designed for a particular purpose and that is for comfort and for passengers and it's not for military maneuvers. And while they are structurally capable of doing them, it takes some very, very talented pilots to do that. ...
When a commercial airplane gets that high, it gets very, very close to getting into what you refer to as a speed high-speed stall. And a high-speed stall can be very, very violent on a commercial-type aircraft and you never want to get into that situation. I just can't imagine an amateur even being able to come close to performing a maneuver of that nature.


There was no tight spiral. the turn took 4 minuets to complete a standard turn would be completed in 2 Minuets. the turn was huge.

en.wikipedia.org...

And Good God he is talking about Coffins Corner.

en.wikipedia.org...(aerodynamics)

AA77 was never high enough to even begin to worry about it.

Capt. Fred Fox


"I know from my experience that it would have been highly improbable that even a seasoned American test pilot, a military test pilot, could have flown a T-category, aircraft like the 757, into the first floor of the Pentagon because of a thing called Ground Effect."


Ha Ha. Another "Cushion of Air" pilot. Ground effect is a reduction of induced drag due to disruption of wingtip vortices, and happens well behind the aircraft. Not underneath it.


An increase in high pressure under the wing doesn't happen until you are 1 cord span (that is one cord span not wing span)
above the ground and is not significant until you are 1/2 cord span above the ground. The plane spent 2 seconds in ground effect and maybe 1/4 of a second riding the cushion of air.
edit on 24-6-2017 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 09:57 PM
link   
a reply to: WeRpeons




What does the government have to hide to launch an independent investigation to squelch the so-called 9/11 conspiracy theories?

You are assuming the government is hiding major facts at multiple crime scenes.
You are assuming all those people crawling over the crime scenes are hiding the truth.

You believe that the government pulled off 911.
You believe that the government has hidden the facts for 16 years.
But somehow they would chose someone independent enough to bring out your truths?

Just who would you chose to head this second investigation?



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 10:09 PM
link   
a reply to: WeRpeons




There's a reason why government officials called for the quick removal of the debris.

You call 8.5 months quick?
Just how long should they have left everything in place?

This 911 conspiracy mantra is a broken record.

You would think that after 16 years someone would spill the beans to wikileaks.
But not one single revelation.
Not one deathbed confession.
Not one disgruntled widow.

The head of the CIA can't get a little nookie on the side in secret.
The president can't get a BJ in the oval office in secret.
These only involved 2 two persons each.
But hundreds to thousands can be silent for 16 years ?????



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 10:28 PM
link   
a reply to: WeRpeons

Wow your bordering on delusional. Sometimes a fish is a fish not everything is a conspiracy. And as far as they go 9/11 never made sense. Nothing was gained but the US economy took a trillion dollar hit. Even a government knows that's not good.

Looking on hind sight there was absolutely no advantage to faking this. All the outcomes involved hurt the US.



posted on Jun, 24 2017 @ 11:14 PM
link   
a reply to: WeRpeons

Right - A building on fire is showing signs of structural instability and its not caused by the fire ...??

Assistant FDNY Chief Joseph Call in lobby of WTC North Tower

9:30 AM



FDNY Assistant Chief Joseph Callan: "Approximately 40 minutes after I arrived in the lobby, I made a decision that the building was no longer safe. And that was based on the conditions in the lobby, large pieces of plaster falling, all the 20 foot high glass panels on the exterior of the lobby were breaking. There was obvious movement of the building, and that was the reason on the handy talky I gave the order for all Fire Department units to leave the north tower.

"For me to make the decision to take our firefighters out of the building with civilians still in it, that was very tough for me, but I did that because I did not think the building was safe any longer, and that was just prior to 9:30.


Fire chief notices building structure is becoming unstable and orders men out . Sadly because of communication issues
many did not hear him

That was hour before it collapsed

One thing both buildings did not collapse within an hour - South Tower fell 56 minutes after impact

North Tower fell 102 minutes (aka approx 1 3/4 hours)

As for red hot debris - fires in pile continued to burn until December . What is red flag ??? that 2 x 110 stories
of burning debris which fell into basement of towers would continue to burn for weeks

Ever tried to put out a deep seated fire ?? Not Easy, requires heavy equipment to turn pile to get at fire



posted on Jun, 25 2017 @ 05:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

I like how you use a few choice pilots seeking their five minutes of fame? Strange non of the Pilots actually quote design limits nor provide examples from the actual flight path. Actual radius of turns for example. They never state what exactly what was impossible and why.

Again, you ignore their views are far from being a consensus amount pilots and engineers.

Whole thread woth more specifics on how the pentagon maneuvers were possible for a pilot with FAA commercial certificate.

The General Difficulty of the 9/11 flights, page two
www.metabunk.org...
Author: TWconra
www.metabunk.org...




I would find it relatively easy... I can't speak for them apart to say one of them obviously achieved it.

Any other alternative is too far fetched.

It wasn't a spiral descent BTW. It was a descending turn achieved by avoiding hitting the ground as one descends and rolling out facing the Pentagon.

Those who say it was impossible for these guys generally have bias towards some kind of far fetched conspiracy, such as the few actual airline pilots on P4T.

They aren't mainstream opinions for pilots. Most of us accept it was done by pilots with enough training to do it and who weren't constrained by the normal things that occupy us during a flight such as safety considerations, passenger comfort, ATC procedures and correct operating procedures.

These were guys who simply knew enough to visually navigate and point an airliner at a large target.

The hijacker on AA77 screwed up his descent, probably by not seeing the Pentagon till too late. The hijackers on both AA11 and UA175 misjudged their final run in and were manoeuvring to try to correct their aim points when they hit.

The WTC hijackers didn't do it perfectly and if they missed the first time, the USAF was still so much into its Cold War intercept instincts that they would had plenty of time to swing around and try again like the AA77 hijacker. Probably severally attempts if needed.

The 767 is easy to fly at high speed/low level due to aerodynamic damping and the flight control system. It runs on rails. I have no reason to suspect the 757 is any different.

I have taken off from Sydney airport, opened the taps on a 767 Level D sim, skimmed down the beaches at 50 feet and flown at high speed under the center of the Sydney Harbour Bridge with 10 metres clearance from the water and the bridge, followed by a climbing aileron roll. I wasn't trained for that either but I did it with little trouble.



edit on 25-6-2017 by neutronflux because: Fixed wording



posted on Jun, 25 2017 @ 06:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Anyway, you are working backwards. Murder investigations start with the victims.

You need to state how the human remains from flight's passengers and crew ended up at the pentagon.

You also neede to explain what caused the damage that result in death at the pentagon.



posted on Jun, 25 2017 @ 06:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

Rob Balsamo, another person with flaws seeking 5 minutes of fame.....

scienceof911.com.au...


Response to Rob Balsamo
As the paper on the data file from the Flight Data Recorder by Warren Stutt and myself has been attacked we have prepared a rebuttal to the issues raised in these attacks.

Frank Legge and Warren Stutt

January 2011.





Complaints (in bold italics) and our responses

1. There is no proof the FDR file is genuine. This is an amusing claim as it is the very file which PFT said proved the official account false. If it is not genuine, how can it prove the official account false? In fact no proof has been found that the file is false.





7. The NTSB data in fact does not support an impact. There is no logic whatsoever in the claim the data does not support an impact. The pressure altimeter is proven untrustworthy in that particular aircraft and radio height leads inevitably to impact at the level observed, close to the ground. Note, we only say that a divergence is found between radio height and altimeter in the particular aircraft which produced the file. It is indisputable that there is a divergence and Pilots for 9/11 Truth agrees. Their problem is that they put more trust in the altimeter than the radio height system but this cannot be justified.

8. Exceeding the performance limitations and capabilities of a standard 757. This is the “shifting the goal posts” argument. Worried that people might be waking up to the fact that the PFT calculation of g-force is grossly wrong, they search for another means to discredit those who say the plane hit the Pentagon. That is a lot of people they set out to discredit. The first falsity in their argument is the assertion that there is no safety margin in the published maximum safe speed data. This is absurd. Can you imagine the scandal that would arise if a pilot inadvertently strayed one or two knots above the stipulated maximum speed and the plane was destroyed! The second falsity is the assumption that the destruction of the plane would be virtually instantaneous. Excessive speed will produce fluttering. Fluttering will cause excessive loads to be imposed in a pulsating manner. This will cause fatigue. Fatigue can cause failure, but it takes time. This is of course why this type of failure is called fatigue failure! Here is a quote indicating how the Vg diagram is to be interpreted: “Any maneuver, gust, or gust plus maneuver outside the structural envelope can cause structural damage and effectively shorten the service life of the airplane.” Clearly this statement implies that there is a safety margin. An article quoting Boeing states: “Exceeding Vmo/Mmo can pose a threat to design structural integrity and design stability & control criteria of the airplane.” This does not sound like instant disaster. From the time the plane reached its maximum operating speed until impact was 14 or 15 seconds. Is there any proof that the observed gradual increase in speed would shorten the remaining life of the plane below 15 seconds? The FDR file gives a hint that fluttering occurred but it did not commence until about 4 seconds from impact. Is there any proof that the plane could not withstand fluttering for 4 seconds? Clearly this is a claim without evidence to support it.







 
39
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join