Flight School Head Admits Neither He Nor 9/11 Hijackers Could Fly 9/11 Planes

Flight School Head Admits Neither He Nor 9/11 Hijackers Could Fly 9/11 Planes

www.prisonplanet.com

According to the owner of a flight school at which 2 of the 4 accused 9/11 hijack pilots trained on simple aircraft with questionable ... all » competence, neither he nor the 9/11 hijackers implicated in the attacks, could pilot the 757 and 767 aircraft that they are alleged to have flown into targets on September 11, 2001.

(visit the link for the full news article)

just as I watch loosechange (at last) I also come across this article.

I am probably besr described as sitting on the fence, but leaning more in the conspiracy direction - too many things don't add up, this is just one of them.

www.prisonplanet.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Amazing.

Yet, still there are many who believe jumping into a 767 and "flying" it is just like piloting a Cessna or such..

Now, assume they could fly it (which the guy who trained them says they couldn't!), could they put them into a tower, measuring 207 feet wide, and get the wings in so neatly that measure 156 feet?

That's 25.5 feet each side to play with. One of these planes got it almost bang on, the other did a pretty good job even considering the impressive diving maneouvre at the end..

Food for thought!

Does he mean that he did not teach those two how to specifically fly those type of aircraft or that they were somehow physically and or mentally incapable of performing such a feat in the most simplistic way? Regardless of how much those hijackers knew, as a collective group, when and where they learned it and or how much improvising they did. How can anyone make such a statement?

www.pentagonresearch.com...

However, when Baxter and fellow instructor Ben Conner took the slender, soft-spoken Hanjour on three test runs during the second week of August, they found he had trouble controlling and landing the single-engine Cessna 172. Even though Hanjour showed a federal pilot's license and a log book cataloging 600 hours of flying experience, chief flight instructor Marcel Bernard declined to rent him a plane without more lessons.

In the spring of 2000, Hanjour had asked to enroll in the CRM Airline Training Center in Scottsdale, Ariz., for advanced training, said the center's attorney, Gerald Chilton Jr. Hanjour had attended the school for three months in late 1996 and again in December 1997 but never finished coursework for a license to fly a single-engine aircraft, Chilton said.

When Hanjour reapplied to the center last year, "We declined to provide training to him because we didn't think he was a good enough student when he was there in 1996 and 1997," Chilton said.

Hanjour apparently went to the center after living in Hollywood, Fla., in early 1996 with a couple who knew his older brother. Susan Khalil said she recognized Hanjour in photos the FBI recently showed her and recalled him as "painfully shy" with "really poor hygiene" when he lived with her family for two months in 1996.

Despite Hanjour's poor reviews, he did have some ability as a pilot, said Bernard of Freeway Airport. "There's no doubt in my mind that once that [hijacked jet] got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it," he said.

Terrorists don't give up that easily.

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Does he mean that he did not teach those two how to specifically fly those type of aircraft or that they were somehow physically and or mentally incapable of performing such a feat in the most simplistic way? Regardless of how much those hijackers knew, as a collective group, when and where they learned it and or how much improvising they did. How can anyone make such a statement?

Hmm, did you respond without watching the OP video? After watching it, it's clear to see he meant that even with all his experience of flying, there is not really any concievable way he could have maneouvred the craft like they did, being totally different systems and engines.

Bearing in mind, this guy is an instructor with many years of experience and they were described as not even being able to manage a Cessna on landing. I'd say he knows a bit of which he speaks.

Originally posted by adjay

Hmm, did you respond without watching the OP video? After watching it, it's clear to see he meant that even with all his experience of flying, there is not really any concievable way he could have maneouvred the craft like they did, being totally different systems and engines.

Bearing in mind, this guy is an instructor with many years of experience and they were described as not even being able to manage a Cessna on landing. I'd say he knows a bit of which he speaks.

They are not able to land a Cessna because they aren't interested in it. Just enough to learn how to fly. Hence the hijacking in mid flight, not on takeoff. Jeez man, its not like the terrorists need to go that far to become competent pilots that knows how to take off, get to point A to B and land like professional pilots. Just know how to fly the dam things.

I think the best theory is that the planes were hijacked, probably by the people named as the hijackers, who were probably working for Abu Nidal, who has been fingered as a turncoat who would take Israeli jobs in the past. The hijackers were probably fooled into thinking they were dying for holy jihad, although I believe Israel and/or America ordered the whole op. Nevertheless, remote control of the airplanes probably happened. Remote control would be a good failsafe for the plotters if the hijackers could not or would not complete the job.

reply to post by adjay


You say that, but the official story is that they only hijacked the planes after they had taken off.

How difficult would it be to force the pilot to fly for a bit, then kill him and take over once you're sure you know how it works?

That said, i don't believe the conventional theories behind 9/11, i'm inclined to believe that the planes were remote-guided somehow from the ground.

edit: the various implications, including pilot lock-out and passenger control can contribute to this theory.

[edit on 26-11-2007 by Throbber]

Originally posted by deltaboy
They are not able to land a Cessna because they aren't interested in it. Just enough to learn how to fly. Hence the hijacking in mid flight, not on takeoff. Jeez man, its not like the terrorists need to go that far to become competent pilots that knows how to take off, get to point A to B and land like professional pilots. Just know how to fly the dam things.

Actually, it was pretty important to be able to land a Cessna. One of them was stopped from renting a plane due to not being able to handle it very well in the air - and restricted from practicing his flying.

And if you think piloting a 767 is easy, try learning to fly some time. There's a lot more to it than pulling a stick around like a pc flight sim. I concede fully they had no real "incentive" to learn take off and landing maneouvres... But to neglect them would be idiocy - if they wanted to pull this off, they wouldn't show a distinct "lack of interest" in them, for fear of being caught.

If you can't understand the dramatic difference between flying a Cessna propeller driven single engine light aircraft, and a hydraulicly controlled multi engine jet airliner, I'm not sure what else to say. But try and imagine how easy a minnow finds quick turns in the water, compared to a sperm whale.

Originally posted by adjay
And if you think piloting a 767 is easy, try learning to fly some time. There's a lot more to it than pulling a stick around like a pc flight sim. I concede fully they had no real "incentive" to learn take off and landing maneouvres... But to neglect them would be idiocy - if they wanted to pull this off, they wouldn't show a distinct "lack of interest" in them, for fear of being caught.

If you can't understand the dramatic difference between flying a Cessna propeller driven single engine light aircraft, and a hydraulicly controlled multi engine jet airliner, I'm not sure what else to say. But try and imagine how easy a minnow finds quick turns in the water, compared to a sperm whale.

Show lack of interest of being caught? Well gee based on the interviews of the instructors, they encourage the ARABS to quit. Not call the FBI about Arabs that don't take their studies seriously. And based on how these hijackers manage to get a few certifications is pretty much how far they learned. Even if they hate following what real pilots should do.

Originally posted by Jim_Kraken
The hijackers were probably fooled into thinking they were dying for holy jihad, although I believe Israel and/or America ordered the whole op. Nevertheless, remote control of the airplanes probably happened. Remote control would be a good failsafe for the plotters if the hijackers could not or would not complete the job.

This is exactly my opinion. I strongly believe this to be real - and hence the reason so much control over the media/documents/trial evidence and so on. The bad part is, with all the crazy conspiracy stuff thrown about (that I have no doubt is majorly influenced by the instigators), this little gem is easily missed by most. Anybody who has a major issue with this theory should openly and honestly question themselves why.

The remote control part I believe could be a factor too, down to the precision with which the planes were flown, not least of which would be the Pentagon "unnecessary" 360.

Originally posted by Throbber
How difficult would it be to force the pilot to fly for a bit, then kill him and take over once you're sure you know how it works?

I've had this discussion before on here, and personally came to the conclusion it would be pretty hard. Small cockpit space, lots of blood = hard to get another person in the pilots seat. Added to that the difficulty in the element of surprise - coupled with no keyed mic response (even after 1 plane got the cockpit breach warning).

The flying part is pretty much the same AFAIK - same controls, general placement, plus they apparantly had flight videos and manuals for Boeing jets.. The bit that is hard is the way the plane reacts to control surface movement, I've never flown one myself but from all I have seen and heard it takes some finesse to fly one of these things, and finesse is not a quality acquired in minutes.

Originally posted by deltaboyAnd based on how these hijackers manage to get a few certifications is pretty much how far they learned. Even if they hate following what real pilots should do.

Even when the guy who trained them (with years of experience teaching others to fly, certificating others) says that he himself couldn't have pulled off what they did? So they have crap flying skills, they can't polish up on them due to not being allowed to fly (when they have federal licences!), yet they then magically "jump" their skillset forward to do something their former instructor doubts seriously he could do? Ok then!

Originally posted by adjay

The flying part is pretty much the same AFAIK - same controls, general placement, plus they apparantly had flight videos and manuals for Boeing jets.. The bit that is hard is the way the plane reacts to control surface movement, I've never flown one myself but from all I have seen and heard it takes some finesse to fly one of these things, and finesse is not a quality acquired in minutes.

No, it is not acquired in minutes - however could it be acquired in say... half-an-hour if the hijackers had previous training, and were aware of how difficult it was to fly?

Btw, i doubt a terrorist would be squemish about blood.


Anywho - i'm going to go over why i think the planes were remote controlled as opposed to hijacked.

If one were technologically capable enough to take over a plane and lock out the pilot, the pilot would have no choice but not to alert the passengers - as alerting them could cause critical imbalance in the weight caused by panicking civilians, thereby causing the plane to crash.

Furthermore, evidence can be created.

Originally posted by adjay
Even when the guy who trained them (with years of experience teaching others to fly, certificating others) says that he himself couldn't have pulled off what they did? So they have crap flying skills, they can't polish up on them due to not being allowed to fly (when they have federal licences!), yet they then magically "jump" their skillset forward to do something their former instructor doubts seriously he could do? Ok then!

The instructor just ain't thinking far in his imagination to hijack planes and crash into buildings. Terrorists are not stupid, and they got brains.

www.faqs.org...

Hazmi and Hanjour left San Diego almost immediately and drove to Ari-
zona. Settling in Mesa, Hanjour began refresher training at his old school,Ari-
zona Aviation. He wanted to train on multi-engine planes, but had difficulties
because his English was not good enough.The instructor advised him to dis-
continue but Hanjour said he could not go home without completing the
training. In early 2001, he started training on a Boeing 737 simulator at Pan
Am International Flight Academy in Mesa.An instructor there found his work
well below standard and discouraged him from continuing.Again, Hanjour persevered; he completed the initial training by the end of March 2001. At that
point, Hanjour and Hazmi vacated their apartment and started driving east,
anticipating the arrival of the "muscle hijackers"--the operatives who would
storm the cockpits and control the passengers. By as early as April 4, Hanjour
and Hazmi had arrived in Falls Church,Virginia.

Based on my 19,000 hours of flying over 40 years in over a hundred different aircraft including 1, 2, 3 and 4 engine jet and most of it as a command pilot or instructing another pilot and having instructed both in Cessna 172s and other light airplanes and knowing what it takes to fly an airplane through the sky at 500 mph and hit a 208 foot target with an airplane with the wingspan of 156 feet I find many of the comments on this thread remarkably if not totally ignorant about flying a Boeing 757 sized aircraft with little or no experience in that type aircraft.

If there were hijackers on those airplanes that allegedly hit the WTC the hijackers themselves were not flying the airplane. There is no way, as some have said on this thread, that once in the air they could have hit the building. There is no way, none, zero that that could happen. Much less twice.

Its a fantasy. Its a hoax. Its a PsyOp. No arab hijackers could have possibly flown those airplanes into the World Trade Center towers, towers that are 208 feet wide at 500 mph.

But your posts are appreciated even if they irritate the aeronautically informed.

reply to post by johnlear


I do not disagree that ultimately it's impossible for a trainee to have the kind of flight experience required to perform those kinds of stunts, i was only saying how that - with training, observant caution and a light smattering of luck - what seems like an 'impossible' thing for a trainee to do, might infact just be a 'fluke'.

So, in essence i'm saying that if it turns out in the future that this whole debate can be proved 100% correct by using time-travel, i believe that the terrorists were extremily lucky little SOBs.

But then again, that's because i don't want to feel insignificant in what i could potentially do if i set my mind to it.

EDIT: Let me make this clear, i do not believe the official story - i have an entirely reasonable explanation for how this could have happened and no one but the pilots and those responsible would know about it.

And of course, the pilots may be aware of what's going on, but there's nothing they can do about it.

One thing, though -

John, you say you've got experience, so if you're not the guy to ask i don't know who is - in modern aircraft, is the piloting mostly done electronically?

[edit on 26-11-2007 by Throbber]

Originally posted by Throbber
No, it is not acquired in minutes - however could it be acquired in say... half-an-hour if the hijackers had previous training, and were aware of how difficult it was to fly?

Btw, i doubt a terrorist would be squemish about blood.

I don't think so. They could definitely get the jist of things, and no doubt they could fly.. But there's no way they could achieve the "military precision" the ATC noted, the Pentagon 360 turn was almost perfect, almost immediately after the terrorist supposedly took control.

I doubt they'd be squeamish either, but it would seriously hamper their efforts in getting the dead pilot out from his chair - quite likely strapped in, the seats "lock" into an already tight seating position.

Originally posted by Throbber
If one were technologically capable enough to take over a plane and lock out the pilot, the pilot would have no choice but not to alert the passengers - as alerting them could cause critical imbalance in the weight caused by panicking civilians, thereby causing the plane to crash.

Furthermore, evidence can be created.

Never thought of this one before, but it definitely works. Would this mean the flight recorders were heavily edited? Could there have been some "drill" involvement/cooperation? Could it be made to look like a malfunction to any pilots?

reply to post by johnlear


I could have said the same thing for inexperienced Kamikaze fighter pilots who were so good in steering and damaging American warships. But then they were also not interested in landing either.

www.highbeam.com...

A teenage pilot who crashed a small plane into the 28th floor of a bank building left a suicide note saying he acted alone and sympathized with Osama bin Laden, police said Sunday.

British citizen Charles Bishop, 15, an honors student described as a troubled loner with few friends, was not licensed to fly and made an unauthorized takeoff in a Cessna 172-R from the St. Petersburg-Clearwater Airport Saturday. The plane crashed into the 42-story Bank of America building shortly after 5 p.m. local time, killing the boy instantly.

Not licensed to fly, yet he manage to fly into the building. I guess inexperienced pilots only crash into baseball fields.