Low passing commercial craft footages for studying

As many of you know, the U.S. Government is like to put fear into the heart of the people. The best example is 9/11 of course. Or the last attempt when they foiled a "terrorist" attack on an American aircraft last week. In many times when you see a low flying aircraft, you already think for the worst (i.e. when the Air Force One is circled above N.Y.).

The primary reason that I've made this thread about these fantastic videos, you may check the maneuverability and speed of these aircrafts on low height. The crafts are similar to the crafts of 9/11. They're good for study as there are very few footages are existing about commercial crafts that are flying this low. Maybe they can help you to reveal the truth about 9/11.

Here are some phenomenal footage to watch and to see, not every low flying aircraft is dangerous. The brave Hungarians inbuilt low passing commercial aircraft into the airshow in the last years. These guys rule the sky. The videos are containing 767 low pass flying, but there are other with 737s what you may find at youtube.

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

The essence is, these pilots are exteremely skilled, one of the bests on the planet. And for them it's a real challenge to fly this low with a craft this big. Now imagine terrorists with less flying hours. For those ones whose are believing 9/11 was made my terrorists. Do you believe they can do this maneuver with few flying hours and hit a building? Think again. On the first video you can see, even these guys can't maintain the very same altitude over two different the low pass.

Also as you can see, not every country can be fooled with this sort of "low flying aircrafts" are always dangerous and every aircraft is part of a potential terrorist attack. What is creating fear in one side of the ocean, it's part of an airshow at the other side. If someone has a phobia, visit the Hungarian airshow in every 20 August. I saw this every year and it's fantastic.

Have a nice studying.

[edit on 1-1-2010 by Sharrow]

Whats that in the second video at 16sec???

right middle of screen

reply to post by sunspot0
Another aircraft on holding pattern. These 767s are not the only ones that are flying on this low in that airshow. Many small aircrafts are flying under the bridge (Red Bull Air Race). Here is a footage about it.

www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

We used to have B25s, DeHavilland and other crafts too. But the essence is, only the bests of the world can do these sort of maneuvers. Now compare these low passings with 9/11's precise maneuver to hit the WTC. It's impossible for an unskilled pilot.

Here are additional footages of low passing.
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

[edit on 1-1-2010 by Sharrow]

Hi Sharrow,
Just wondering are you referring more to the Pentagon attack rather than the twin towers?

[edit on 1-1-2010 by smurfy]

reply to post by smurfy
Same scenario. So yes, I can refer to that too. That was the absolute low pass over. But both scenario can be referred as low pass over as they were below 500 meters.

[edit on 1-1-2010 by Sharrow]

Originally posted by Sharrow
reply to post by sunspot0
Now compare these low passings with 9/11's precise maneuver to hit the WTC. It's impossible for an unskilled pilot."

[edit on 1-1-2010 by Sharrow]

Umm...let me "deny some ignorance", and forgive me if someone has said this already....
Commerical airliners(737,707,A320s,etc.) regularly fly close to the ground as a standard procedure. Flying the traffic pattern or holding pattern, etc. Often it can be as low as 1200-1500 feet AGL. It isn't as difficult as you are pointing it out to be, pilots are trained and do it on a regualr basis, every day in fact.

BTW, I have flown commerical simulators of the Boeing 737NG-800, I'm only a private pilot though, and I can do it just fine. You point the aircraft
in the right direction and it goes there(within reasonable limits of course).

The manuvers required really don't have to be that precise, to aim the aircraft at a large building-and the trade centers would have been pretty easy targets to make out of all the other buildings around it.

[edit on 1-1-2010 by JJRichey]

reply to post by JJRichey
I'm a trained pilot too. But you can't do that maneuver manually with a 767 what you saw at WTC on that speed. One degree change and you already miss the target. But they rolled to their target, instead of fly directly at them. Each of the crafts are approached from a rolling, turning vector.

What you saw on these videos is a hard maneuver, because it's between houses, above a river, close to mountains, which is already changing the characteristics of the air. Commercial jets are hard to handle here (Great possibility of a wind sheer).

[edit on 1-1-2010 by Sharrow]

The best footage what I searched. Similar flight, but from 6 angle, including cockpit (This one is a 737, not a 767 which is double in size.). It's excellent to analyze a similar flight which is happened at WTC or even the Pentagon.

www.youtube.com...

Here you can see how an aircraft is shaking when it's flying on this altitude. That's the reason why it's so hard to handle, especially when banking. This craft is handled by an expert commercial pilot who flew hundreds, even thousands of hours with this craft.

Now at WTC the crafts went twice fast as this one. Do you really believe that someone who was trained on a single engined small craft capable to make this maneuver with a 767? Think again.

[edit on 1-1-2010 by Sharrow]

reply to post by Sharrow



What do you fly?

In the following video, an amateur hits the Pentagon 3 out of 3 times in a full motion airliner simulator.

Amateur hits Pentagon 3 times in a row
(starts at the 4:40 mark)


Videos of two 757's, an A310, and a KC-135 doing high speed, low passes.










[edit on 3-1-2010 by 767doctor]

reply to post by 767doctor


Hey Doc, on the "757 going vertical" video, how many mph's do you think the aircraft is going? At least 500? Or less?

GREAT vids for sure...thanks OP!!!

Now, considering that the Pilots knew they were going to fly that low for show purposes, thats one thing as they had time to prep and train. But a terrorist doing it, thats another situation in and of itself. Especially since they were only minimally trained at best.

It gives us a clear indication that flying that low is possible and controllable but remember, these were flown by trained Pilots.

The amateur video is really good. However, for demonstration puposes in a simulator is an entire different environment than in the cockpit of a real world aircraft. I'm not discounting it at all, just pointing out a very real aspect that has the potential to play into the success of it.

Originally posted by 767doctor
In the following video, an amateur hits the Pentagon 3 out of 3 times in a full motion airliner simulator

But they do not go by the exact flight path of AA77 do they? Specially the final turn that it makes.

reply to post by REMISNE


Is there something remarkable about that final turn?

It was performed at an average 284 KIAS, average bank 26 degrees, average circle diameter over 5 miles and took about 3 minutes to complete. The only thing noteworthy about it is the sloppiness.

(No) Video Killed the Pentagon Star

Yeah, these hijackers were able to commandeer, navigate toward, dive and execute a bullseye strike into a low building, which just happens to be the most protected building in the world.

Arab aviators are notoriously submarginal in skill, which does not help to support the gimpy OS thesis. There is a very good reason why pilots need a decent amount of hours prior to being licensed for such aircraft: these modern computerized aircraft are not easy to accomplish Red Baron heroics with.

Regardless, this does not change the observation there does not exist ample material evidence to conclude a commercial airliner impacted with the Pentagon.

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

Arab aviators are notoriously submarginal in skill, which does not help to support the gimpy OS thesis.

Could you get more prejudice into a sentence?

And it's not even true. From where does this notoriety stem? Your fevered racist imagination?

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal
(No) Video Killed the Pentagon Star

Yeah, these hijackers were able to commandeer, navigate toward, dive and execute a bullseye strike into a low building, which just happens to be the most protected building in the world.

Arab aviators are notoriously submarginal in skill, which does not help to support the gimpy OS thesis. There is a very good reason why pilots need a decent amount of hours prior to being licensed for such aircraft: these modern computerized aircraft are not easy to accomplish Red Baron heroics with.

Did you not see the video I posted where an amateur hits the Pentagon 3 out of 3 tries in a full-motion airliner training simulator? You see, you and many others have stated it's impossible or at least highly unlikely that an amateur can do this. Thats based only on what others before you have said, coupled with your own personal incredulity. Flying a plane must be...like...hard, man! And are you not aware that Hani Hanjour had 600 total hours, a commercial ticket, and hours and hours of simulator training?

So, I've just shown your opinions to be without merit. The only comment so far in response to this video was something like "yeah but did he perform the final maneuver exactly like AA77?"...and to that I say, "so?". And if you re-watch the video, the amateur did do a final turn as you can hear the simulator aural warning crying out "BANK ANGLE, BANK ANGLE".

You guys would have a lot more credibility if you would just say "you know what, thats an interesting video which shows we are potentially wrong to think its impossible for an amateur to do this". Is your belief system so delicate that it can't take a little bruise once in a while?

Amateur hits Pentagon 3 times in a row
(starts at the 4:40 mark)


[edit on 10-1-2010 by 767doctor]