IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Inexperienced Pilot Recreating 9/11 Flight 77's Descending Turn Into The Pentagon, Please don't blame me. I'm just the messenger ...

Graeme
post Sep 22 2018, 06:50 PM
Post #1





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 66
Joined: 18-February 09
From: UK
Member No.: 4,130



It's been years. I'm sorry, I'm 3000Mls distant and very busy.
Please be courteous in your reply, as I'm not after any Flac.
I just wonder what people think about this video.

I ran into this. After all the controversy about 'no plane' hit the pentagon ... (was it a missile?), I find this encouraging.

This guy says, his experience in a flight sim, suggests a 757 on a standard shallow descent approach would fit the profile
~(and from the official southern approach path).

My personal belief holds that for all planes involved in 9/11; they were remote controlled.
The alleged pilots were incable of the manoeuvres.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaOLpeTC7hY
Published on Jan 16, 2018

However read the comments about engine burn out/disintegration of airframe at velocity ... arguments as used by Pilots for Truth, per flight175 too. The guy takes a real hammering from stateside commentators.

And I've seen the reports of the witnesses who say they saw a civilian airliner pass over their location including the Navy Annex.

Again, don't blame me. I'm just posting this. I'm only the messenger.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Sep 22 2018, 07:13 PM
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,745
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Mick West?

Click here...
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=22665

(Moved to debate section)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Graeme
post Sep 22 2018, 07:17 PM
Post #3





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 66
Joined: 18-February 09
From: UK
Member No.: 4,130



As an afterthought. I'm wondering, if there could ever have been a little professional airline pilot pride at stake here.
Specifically, by example: the case of that Alaskan 'ground employee' who had never flown more than a Flight sim software who hijacked a BOMBARDIER Q400 from an Alaskan Airport.

A 29-year old Richard Russell, a horizon airlines Baggage Handler ....
He'd never flown but managed to pull off several (I heard) loop-the-loops (over water) before crashing.

I mean, is it possible that an entirely inexperienced non-pilot can still fly a larger civilian aircraft, and manoeuvre?

Well, evidently it is ... as it happened less than six weeks ago.

Extended audio: Horizon employee talks with air traffic control in cockpit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCzfsYg7OcY

This post has been edited by Graeme: Sep 22 2018, 07:23 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
excontroller
post Sep 23 2018, 08:56 AM
Post #4





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 103
Joined: 28-December 09
From: Ypsilanti, MI
Member No.: 4,819



QUOTE (Graeme @ Sep 22 2018, 05:50 PM) *
It's been years. I'm sorry, I'm 3000Mls distant and very busy.
Please be courteous in your reply, as I'm not after any Flac.
I just wonder what people think about this video.

I ran into this. After all the controversy about 'no plane' hit the pentagon ... (was it a missile?), I find this encouraging.

This guy says, his experience in a flight sim, suggests a 757 on a standard shallow descent approach would fit the profile
~(and from the official southern approach path).

My personal belief holds that for all planes involved in 9/11; they were remote controlled.
The alleged pilots were incable of the manoeuvres.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaOLpeTC7hY
Published on Jan 16, 2018

However read the comments about engine burn out/disintegration of airframe at velocity ... arguments as used by Pilots for Truth, per flight175 too. The guy takes a real hammering from stateside commentators.

And I've seen the reports of the witnesses who say they saw a civilian airliner pass over their location including the Navy Annex.

Again, don't blame me. I'm just posting this. I'm only the messenger.


I am a negligent member here, I seldom visit because of the frustration of knowing we will surely never make anyone understand. But, from my perspective, I agree with you, Graeme. FIRST and perhaps foremost, is the FACT that people who are NOT of reasonable experience in an airplane of ANY sort, couldn't find their ass with both hands, when it comes to identifying ANYTHING on the ground from an altitude of even 5000 feet, let alone the cruising altitudes we're expected to believe they started from. I, like you, feel sure these were remotely piloted vehicles, gigantic drones, if you will, which would implicate a surprising number of employees of NSA (most likely). The argument people always hang their hat on is " THAT MANY people couldn't keep their mouth shut ". But IF people were told it was an exercise, and everything SEEMED on the up and up, they could easily be used till they figured out what was really happening. By then, it's too late to say you were conned. I always felt that's what happened to Lee Harvey Oswald.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
excontroller
post Sep 23 2018, 08:59 AM
Post #5





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 103
Joined: 28-December 09
From: Ypsilanti, MI
Member No.: 4,819



QUOTE (Graeme @ Sep 22 2018, 05:50 PM) *
It's been years. I'm sorry, I'm 3000Mls distant and very busy.
Please be courteous in your reply, as I'm not after any Flac.
I just wonder what people think about this video.

I ran into this. After all the controversy about 'no plane' hit the pentagon ... (was it a missile?), I find this encouraging.

This guy says, his experience in a flight sim, suggests a 757 on a standard shallow descent approach would fit the profile
~(and from the official southern approach path).

My personal belief holds that for all planes involved in 9/11; they were remote controlled.
The alleged pilots were incable of the manoeuvres.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UaOLpeTC7hY
Published on Jan 16, 2018

However read the comments about engine burn out/disintegration of airframe at velocity ... arguments as used by Pilots for Truth, per flight175 too. The guy takes a real hammering from stateside commentators.

And I've seen the reports of the witnesses who say they saw a civilian airliner pass over their location including the Navy Annex.

Again, don't blame me. I'm just posting this. I'm only the messenger.

The bottom line, all this "rocket science" is not necessary. You need to look at all the real evidence and ask yourself, does ANY of the government's story SEEM reasonable? I think that's what has happened. We all get involved in the nitty gritty, but what occurred just defies ANY LOGIC.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
bobcat46
post Nov 12 2018, 04:54 PM
Post #6





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 120
Joined: 27-December 06
From: Hobe Sound, FL
Member No.: 382



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Sep 20 2018, 09:13 PM) *
Mick West?

Click here...
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=22665

(Moved to debate section)

When my son was 12, I took him up in a Cessna 150. He had been flying on Microsoft Simulator at home and wanted to try the real thing. So after getting up to about 3,000 feet and heading 000, I told him to take the controls and fly straight and level. He did that well, then I told him to do a 360 @45 degree bank and hold altitude. His head went down to the instruments and never looked out the windows, but did a perfect 360, lost no altitude and rolled right out on 000. So, a person can go from simulator to real aircraft and fly fairly well.

However, for a student pilot to go into a heavy commercial aircraft and do a precise maneuver at red line speed, there is no way. In my mid-twenties I was at the best of my flying skills as I had completed an aerobatic course and was doing search and rescue missions with the CAP over the mountains and into canyons in CA. I had a opportunity to fly a 727 simulator. Even though I was very proficient in a single engine sport plane, when flying the 727, I was sloppy and inaccurate. The day after 9/11 when they said student pilots were flying those planes, I immediately questioned that story and have ever since.

We are all able to drive a car well, even quite well at speeds of 100 mph. If I put you in a semi truck, sent you down the road at 100 mph and then had you go through an S curve, then a garage door, I don't think any of us would be able to do that. Well, that is what those planes supposedly did that day. They had to have been flown by autopilots with GPS tracking and targeting.

As far as what hit the Pentagon, it certainly wasn't a 757 and as far as what made that hole in the field at Shanksville, it wasn't a 757. I hope that before I go to my grave, the truth is told and believed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th November 2018 - 09:27 AM