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.

 

Expert Top Gun/Airline Pilots say Flight 77's maneuvers are impossible

page: 12
19
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 20 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


Oh....I get it!!

There are still people who, despite ALL the evidence to contrary, think that ALL of September, 11 2001 was somehow "staged"??

Oh my....that is BEYOND deluded!!!

It is borderline insane....there!! I said it!!!

"Insane".....now, it is out there and open for discussion.....




posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird

It is borderline insane....there!! I said it!!!


Borderline? Everyone knows what the definition of insanity is, and we see the absolute same thing over and over and over again from Cap't Bob and his merry band of extrodinary lunatics and they keep thinking they'll get different results. Socks from Balsamo whining like a pussy about ATS being a Pentagon Blogger haven and , others using their *own* posts as PROOF and EVIDENCE of government malfesance!! "Our numbers are growing !!!!1112@!" "ACARS is TEH PROOF!!!! Wait....it isn't...let me move all those posts..."

These "Top Gun" experts and airline pilots who have hitched their intellectual wagon to Balsamo and this hilarious PfT are nothing more than the aeronautical lunatic fringe, the exceptions rather than the rule to clear, cogent and critrical thinking on these issues. "When an aircraft hits its "design limits", it breaks. Period" remains the single dumbest thing I have ever seen anywhere. Anyone who believes an aircraft design engineer establishes the "design limit" as the breaking/failure point of a specific piece or part is really, really stupid. Something breaks at its failure point, not an some pre-established "design limit"

As has been pointed out as only one of many examples, the 2 of the Brit/French Concordes used as the high-speed test aircraft exceeded their MMO by a significant margin, going beyond (mach 2.23) what the aircraft designers established as their "design limit", or the maximum operating cruise speed (mach 2.04) An aircraft or a piece or a part will fail ("break") when it hits its structural limit, not its "design limit", and anyone who subscribes to the latter, to be blunt, is an idiot. According to Balsamo, both those aircraft should have broken apart into a bajillion pieces as soon as the "design limit" was exceeded. Period.

An aircraft carrier arresting gear cross deck pendant (CDP) is "designed" to take 125 arrested landings.at which point it is replaced. I'll bet Balsamo his PayPal "Chip In" total (a whopping $160 at the moment from 5 gullible morons) that a 126th hit on one of those CDPs, exceeding their "design limit", would *not* result in its breaking and separating.

An aircraft is "designed:" to fly up to a certain speed. This is not a semantical argument or discussion...words mean things and that established "designed" speed limit would be the "design limit", since beyond that speed means nothing can be guaranteed. Computer data, simulation data, model data, structural loads, aerodynamic forces, life-cycle considerations, non-destructive testing of equipment data, all these and more data give aircraft designers a warm and fuzzy about how long a specific piece/part should last and where the safety limits are. There are rasons why there are "preventative maintenance" programs where piece/parts are replaced even before their life-cycle limits are reached. Safety is paramount, and when you are operating an airborne bus full of people and if designers established "design limits" that are 1 knot away from failure or as Balsamo charaacterizes it, "breaking", the airline industry would have died long ago.

Balsamo would have you believe, as many of his "experts" do, that one knot beyond that design speed ("when an aircraft reaches its "design limit:", it breaks") means the aircraft will break. "Period".

Experts? yeahsureright.
edit on 21-2-2012 by trebor451 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThePostExaminer
For the benefit of Mr Reheat.





pilotsfor911truth.org...



NICE! Robert balsamo confirmed !
ok lets see proudbird proof his claim of being 'a pilot' himself next. If he does not then that is all it will ever be.
Proudbird already claimed that balsamo was not a real pilot and that he never flown anything other then a cessna and look how that claim of his turned out.

It is not looking good for you PB !
The burden of proof is on you ,bird.

If you cannot proof your claim then do not bother mentioning it ever again.



edit on 21-2-2012 by Rafe_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rafe_
NICE! Robert balsamo confirmed !


Is that supposed to mean something special?



NICE! Hani Hanjour confirmed! An "additional aircraft rating", even! On a B-737 type aircraft!

Looks like ol' Cap't Bob is in good company.

I won't state the obvious, that a certificate or some sort of paperwork doesn't necessarily mean diddly-squat. I have no doubt Cap't Bob was indeed at some point in his life - perhaps even now! - some sort of certified "pilot", but his demonstrated immaturity and ignorance on many...no, most issues related to the events of 9/11 proves the classic adage that people can indeed rise up in a spefic profession in spite of their incompetence.



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Rafe_
 


Sorry, but I never made this claim:


Proudbird already claimed that balsamo was not a real pilot and that he never flown anything other then a cessna and look how that claim of his turned out.


Show a quote, the page and location where I wrote that.

Or else, what you claim about me is a lie.



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Rafe_
 


That airline went out of business in 2002. All Reheat said was that Robby had flown "mostly Cessna's" and that he appeared not to have rating now. The latter appears to be true, the former an exaggeration. But not by much - I doubt Balsamo has ever flown a large passenger jet of the kind used on 9/11.

Anyway, what does it matter. If you believe an "expert" who tells you the stuff Balsamo does uncritically then you're a fool.

By that logic you think you're not at liberty, for example, to criticise Michael Jackson's doctor for pumping him full of drugs until he died. Hey - he's an expert.



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by ThePostExaminer
 


Well, I already knew that Balsamo worked for ACA (Atlantic Coast Airlines) because he and I once discussed it. Back in the day, when I would finish a trip that got in too late for me to commute home on my own airline (from Newark, in those years) there was the Atlantic Coast Jetstream (a smallish turbo prop) that operated out of Newark to Dulles at about 2330 every night. I lived closer to National, but from Dulles I could grab a taxi home..well, to National where I parked my car, then home.

So, a copy of one dispatch release that lists him as a crew member? Big whoop......if you notice, his name location (bracketed between to blacked-out names above and below) indicate that he was a First Officer, at the time. Captain's name on top, F/O in the middle, and the one lone Flight Attendant on the bottom. That is standard crew listing order, most companies. Each company's Dispatch Release is differently formatted, though.

And on the Release you see the type of airplane (highlighted by Balsamo, presumably)."J328/G"

The "/G" is indicating the type of transponder and other equipment the airplane had.

The "J328" is probably the 'short hand' code for the Dornier 328. Although, I have other references showing the proper coding for that airplane type is "D328"....but, I don't know much about those smaller turbo props....never bothered to learn them.

If I am reading the "Tail Number" correctly, this is a link to that N-Number:

N428FJ

Looks like the airplane with that N-Number was sold to an operator in Denmark. So, it would now have a Danish registration number.



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by Rafe_
 


That airline went out of business in 2002.


Then why does the dispatch release say 2004?


All Reheat said was that Robby had flown "mostly Cessna's" and that he appeared not to have rating now.


Proudbird, do Pilot Certificates expire?


I doubt Balsamo has ever flown a large passenger jet of the kind used on 9/11.


Perhaps not. But did Ralph Kolstad? The person this thread is about? Hmmm.. let's see.

Captain Russ Wittenberg (ret)
30,000+ Total Flight Time
707, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, DC-8, L-1049, Learjet 24/25, L-188
Ground Instructor, Advanced Ground Instructor, Instrument Instructor, Flight Engineer Turbojet
Aircraft Dispatcher
Pan Am, United
United States Air Force (ret)
Over 100 Combat Missions Flown
Command time in:
- N591UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 93)
- N612UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 175)

Captain Ross Aimer
United Airlines, Retired
B-777/767/757/747/737/727/720/707, DC-10/-9/-8 Type ratings
Command time in:
- N591UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 93)
- N612UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 175)

Commander Ralph “Rotten” Kolstad
23,000 hours
27 years in the airlines
B757/767 for 13 years mostly international Captain with American Airlines.
20 years US Navy flying fighters off aircraft carriers, TopGun twice
civilian pilot flying gliders, light airplanes and warbirds
Command time in:
- N644AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 77)
- N334AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 11)

What type of aircraft have you flown Trickotheshade?


Anyway, what does it matter. If you believe an "expert" who tells you the stuff Balsamo does uncritically then you're a fool.


Disinfo Tactic 18


By that logic you think you're not at liberty, for example, to criticise Michael Jackson's doctor for pumping him full of drugs until he died. Hey - he's an expert.


Bigfoot Fallacy.

You guys really need to get some new blood. lol

This post saved.

Thanks for all the fish...


Have a good day!



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 11:44 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 11:50 AM
link   
reply to post by VinnieGoombatz
 





I don't know much about those smaller turbo props....never bothered to learn them.



Props?


No, the codes for all those various airplanes.....the ATC flight plan codes. Thought that was rather clear, in the context of the narrative.....Robert.

Oh, and you found a photo of the Dornier 328, N428FJ, in the "Delta Connection" paint scheme....congratulations, you verified my post above.




Now go look up Honeywell Primus 2000.


Why? Big deal.....avionics. Is this supposed to be "impressive" in some way?
edit on Tue 21 February 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by VinnieGoombatz

Perhaps not. But did Ralph Kolstad? The person this thread is about? Hmmm.. let's see.

Commander Ralph “Rotten” Kolstad
23,000 hours
27 years in the airlines
B757/767 for 13 years mostly international Captain with American Airlines.
20 years US Navy flying fighters off aircraft carriers, TopGun twice
civilian pilot flying gliders, light airplanes and warbirds
Command time in:
- N644AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 77)
- N334AA (Aircraft dispatched as American 11)


You are right, this thread is indeed about Kolstad rather than Balsamo. Therefore, allow me to ask, how does Kolstad explain why all the eyewitnesses around the Pentagon are specifically saying that what he's claiming is rubbish? Most of the truthers need to rely on the "armies of sinister secret agents" excuse while Balsamo knows he's serving us a baloney sandwich on bull [censored] bread so he avoids addressing eyewitness accounts entirely. What does Kolstad say?



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 11:57 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by VinnieGoombatz
 


Bull-oney:


Just like you don't know the difference between Vne and Vmo.


Rob, your tactics only work when you hold all of the cards.

Oh, and BTW.....I asked specifically last time that you not be re-banned....it's too much fun having you here, where you have to obey the rules.....but, it isn't my place to tell the ATS Staff what to do. Obviously....

Oh, and as for Ralph Kolstad's qualifications? Yes, indeed, no doubt. I too have about 20,000 hours total.....he was in Top Gun, well Bully for him!! I wasn't in the Navy.

Ya know though....Kolstad's claims from WAY back show either he was poorly briefed on the specifics of American 77's actual flight, or is willing to make a fool of himself, in public, for reasons only he knows.


Kolstad was quoted as having said THIS (from the OP of this thread, the bolded part):


Commander Kolstad is especially critical of the account of American Airlines Flight 77 that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon. He says, 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 757s and 767s and I could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.


I find that an astonishing thing to say.....after seeing the FDR info from the NTSB video. It was a simple, approximately 30° bank right-hand descending turn. Kolstad's claims that "....(he) could not have flown it ....." are absurd....and embarrassing (for him).

I notice that HE, himself, hasn't deigned to appear......why is that, I am forced to wonder.....
edit on Tue 21 February 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 12:07 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by VinnieGoombatz


*yawn* He's back.


Perhaps not. But did Ralph Kolstad? The person this thread is about? Hmmm.. let's see.

Captain Russ Wittenberg (ret)...


Wittenberg said "There was no wreckage from a 757 at the Pentagon. …",


Captain Ross Aimer United Airlines, Retired...


Aimer says AA77 "vaporized". Brilliant. Great bunch you got there, Bob.


Commander Ralph “Rotten” Kolstad...


Kolstad asks "Where is the tail section that would have broken into large pieces?"

Millions of hours of flight time in hundreds of aircraft-types and these pilots still say the dumnbest things. I didn't know Wittenberg was at the Pentagon and participated in the clean up and did not see any 757 parts - why else would he say such a thing? Aimer said, in that hilarious interview with Ranke, that he considers himself a "technician", yet he morphs into an expert of high-speed airliner crashes into a building like the Pentagon and, without ever being there to view the damage/wreckage, catagorically states the aircraft "vaporized". Kolstad, like an idiot, does the same thing and asks where the tail section is.

Why don't you go pull a few more of these bios off your page and post them? We can always use more...moon base and alien claims...cruise missiles...explosives...fly overs...what's next? An aircraft will "break" when it reaches its "design limits! Period! lmao



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 12:40 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by VinnieGoombatz
reply to post by trebor451
 


trebor, why does your screename spell Robert backwards?

Perhaps this is why....


Don't want to talk about your "experts"? Your moon base and alien claims?...cruise missiles?...explosives?...fly overs?...How an aircraft will "break" when it reaches its "design limits? Period!

I wouldn't either, to be honest. Trying to defend the idiotoic can get tiring sometimes, even when you believe those idiotic claims.

Tell us again about how AA77 should have cartwheeled into the Pentagon because that is what your RC aircraft does when its wing hits an obstacle, could you?



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 01:07 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by VinnieGoombatz
reply to post by trebor451
 


And yet all those people who you attack have gained achievements you can only dream to have...


What...Kolstad? The fact that he is the laughing stock of the *entire* Navy F-14/fighter community? Yeah...I dream of being someone who is looked at by my professional peers as an idiot. Some kind of "expert" you put forth there, Cap't Bob. Who's next? John Lear? Can you make sure he talks about those meetings with aliens over on the dark side of the moon on the base we have there? Looking forward to that one!



posted on Feb, 21 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451
What...Kolstad? The fact that he is the laughing stock of the *entire* Navy F-14/fighter community?


If Kolstad is the "laughing stock of the entire Navy F-14 Fighter Community", what does that make you considering you couldn't make it to the front seat, nor Top Gun, nor fly 23 years as an International Captain for American Airlines...? (not to mention the fact you don't even have the credentials to fly a Cessna 172..... solo.)

Again "trebor", why should the readers here listen to anything you have to say?



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join