Take the $10,000 challenge!, page 3

Sorry to be pedantic but I don't think so, he does say:

...and turn the plane around and head back towards the D.C. area and try to crash into the Pentagon any place you wish. You can hit it from the side, from the top, or where ever. It doesn’t matter where you hit it as long as some part of the plane touches the building, even if it’s just the tip of the wing.

Which kind of implies he doesn't think someone can navigate from that far away and then hit the building at all. He clearly has not said (or implied) that you need to replicate the maneuvers.
His challenge appears to be based more on navigation and general operation of the aircraft than anything, especially the psychological effect of presenting a novice with the 757 cockpit the way it is in the original post.
I would have found it daunting once too, but these days... Not really.. Not easy, don't get me wrong, without any specific training I'd crash and burn before I realised what was going on I imagine... Who knows without trying..
I'd love to try, but it costs hundreds into thousands just for 20 minutes - 1 hour. The missus and the bills would never agree! I'd rather spend the cash on a holiday or new TV to be honest.

On the point that the aircraft 'could not handle it', forgetting the other arguments I coincidently found this when looking for evidence to help one of my other discussions, it appears to be quite useful information to back up the 'shot down' theory of Flight 93 which I do quite believe (though it fully incorporates the official side of events as well) but also has other uses:

A 757 has a cruising speed of 550mph. It should have been able to go much faster than cruising speed before things started breaking off. These planes can dive, pull out and do a barrel roll without coming apart. One reply to this idea has been that the 550mph speed is only at "altitude". Flying that fast at low altitude would have doomed the structure of the aircraft.

In fact, all three other WTC jets were reported to have been flying around 500mph when they crashed. The Pentagon jet was 50 feet off the ground and clipping trees. They didn't fall apart.

It's difficult to imagine what could have been done from the cockpit to overstress a 757 at 500 mph. The consensus from the 757 pilots that have emailed is that it would be possible to overstress this aircraft, but they are really not sure what it would take to do that. It is not built into the simulators. One believed the debris may well look as it does in this case, but he always thought a shoot down debris field would look similar.

Jet engine mounts ARE designed to break away before the wing does. There are instances of engines falling off when struck by large blocks of ice formed by lavatory plumbing leaks. I have yet to read of a large passenger jet engine falling off due to overstress. Flight 427 spun in due to a stuck full rudder and didn't lose an engine. It's hard to imagine a more violent entry than that. Alaska Air 261 dove and rolled inverted, flew inverted for quite a ways as pilots tried to unstick a jammed down elevator. Engines stayed on just fine.

He recalled the case of a China Air 747 that tumbled out of control over the Pacific in 1985. The pilots were able to recover by subjecting the jumbo jet to upward of four times the force of gravity.
seattlep-i.nwsource.com...

Passenger jets, by definition, must be designed with a fairly high structural tolerance in comparison to other aircraft due to their precious cargo. We can anticipate they might fly through thunderstorms, lightning, high wind conditions, unexpectedly turbulent air with heavy loads. Flight 93 had 38 passengers. 1/4 full... so theoretically should have been able to handle more than a fully loaded aircraft.
www.flight93crash.com...

I know we've all seen the video of the old 707 doing a barrel roll, I found the statement that a 747 of all planes carried out a 4g manoever incredible, though I can quite believe it. It's amazing what these planes can actually put up with when somone dares to push them to their limits for whatever reason.

[edit on 13-4-2006 by AgentSmith]