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
Mike " Twcobra" Glynn Of Qantas Airways Feels That Vmo Is Just Another Number?

rob balsamo
post Aug 6 2014, 04:26 AM
Post #1



Group Icon

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



Qantas Airways is perhaps one of the best airlines on this planet.

But apparently one of their Captains feels that aircraft limitations can be exceeded by a wide margin because he spoke to some "test pilots".

Of course, Captain Mike Glynn will not divulge such names..... because I feel... as do many of our Core Members, that Captain Mike Glynn is full of shit.

Captain Mike Glynn has refused to debate me many times and ran from me at reddit.

We have several Pilots at Qantas who agree with our work, some named on our core member list... some not....

I look forward to the opportunity in which Captain Mike Glynn crawls out of his hole.... and comes to debate me/us.... with real names on the line.

In the meantime, anyone who is flying on Qantas, I highly recommend you ask for the name of the Captain. If that name is Mike Glynn, keep in mind that he feels aircraft limitations set by the manufacturer have no bearing on aerodynamics. And I highly recommend you leaving such an aircraft and re-scheduling your flight.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
MikeR
post Aug 6 2014, 05:25 AM
Post #2





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 162
Joined: 29-February 12
Member No.: 6,710



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Aug 6 2014, 08:26 PM) *
Qantas Airways is perhaps one of the best airlines on this planet.

But apparently one of their Captains feels that aircraft limitations can be exceeded by a wide margin because he spoke to some "test pilots".

Of course, Captain Mike Glynn will not divulge such names..... because I feel... as do many of our Core Members, that Captain Mike Glynn is full of shit.

Captain Mike Glynn has refused to debate me many times and ran from me at reddit.


Can anybody confirm the rumour that "Capt'n Mike Glynn"
is a M*ss*d pseudo of the Qantas Number Two (sic) janitor?

Otherwise, we'll dump BigQ into the no-fly bin ...
along with MA and ElAl
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 29 2014, 04:34 AM
Post #3



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (MikeR @ Aug 6 2014, 05:25 AM) *
Can anybody confirm the rumour that "Capt'n Mike Glynn"
is a M*ss*d pseudo of the Qantas Number Two (sic) janitor?


I hope he is only a janitor... because apparently he thinks one can fly an airplane at Vmo+150 knots.. or Vd+20%, and it will remain in control and stable.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Yost
post Oct 25 2014, 12:36 PM
Post #4





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 66
Joined: 5-February 14
Member No.: 7,699



Looks like TWCobra has taken a stab at "debunking" your 9/11 Simulations video.

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/pilots-for...-debunked.4809/

I don't really have time right now to address it, but at a glance it looks like the guy is just rehashing his same, tired arguments.

Anyway, just making you aware Rob, maybe take a look at it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Oct 25 2014, 07:25 PM
Post #5



Group Icon

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



QUOTE (Yost @ Oct 25 2014, 12:36 PM) *
I don't really have time right now to address it, but at a glance it looks like the guy is just rehashing his same, tired strawman arguments.


Fixed that for you... smile.gif

Mike "TWCobra" Glynn says our claim is:

The claim: That hobby level Flight Simulation software; Microsoft Flight Simulator X (10) can be used to scientifically discredit the NTSB reports on the speeds that were evidently achieved by AA Flight 11 and UA Flight 175 during the September 11 attacks.


....when our "claim" in reality, is a mere question:



In fact, Mike was the one who gave me the idea to produce "9/11: Simulations".

When I first encountered him at YT and reddit, and then sent him data via email - (he was actually trying to debate data when he didn't even have the data.. typical of duhbunkers rolleyes.gif ) - he said he was going to attempt to reproduce the flights in FSX, and get back to me. He then ran from me at reddit and asked me to join him on metabunk. Of course, he never did post his results from FSX (and now we can see why...), and everyone knows what happened when I tried to 'debate' him at MB.. my posts were deleted and I was banned


Mike says -

TAS (and G forces) is the major determinant of the radius of a turning circle at any given altitude so flying too fast would make the lining up of a target substantially more difficult.


I agree to a certain extent as other factors are involved when lining up with any ground target... such as wind.

Example -

(just a quick search I did)

Groundspeed determines radius when lining up with a target on the ground.

But I won't give Mike too much grief on this... for now.


Our presentation is not about control, rather primarily - "Can FSX duplicate the attacks using data from the Govt?", the answer being a resounding, "No!".

The attacks can only be duplicated in FSX when crash logic is disabled. Anyone who has viewed our film will understand our objective and conclusion. Mike needs to review the film again to understand what is being presented.

With that said, it appears Mike understands that operating at such excessive speeds does in fact make precise control "substantially more difficult", but for some reason attempts to make excuses. Meanwhile, many pilots raise a red flag (and the list is growing), when told a "Hijacker" with zero experience in type - had less experience than the "Hijacker" who couldn't control a 172 at 65 knots - was able to perform to near ATP standards at speeds exceeding Vmo by a wide margin.

Mike goes on to say -
Yet Balsamo accomplishes the feat with little difficulty.

Yes, it was easy for me, because I am an experienced pilot and Flight Instructor... and I understand aerodynamics as speed increases. I can also control a 172 at 65 knots, unlike Hani Hanjour.... thankyouverymuch....

I did have several inexperienced people try to fly the profiles as dictated by the data, they lined up nicely with Downtown NYC.. but as they got closer and the speed increased, they could not hit the target due to dutch roll. They constantly over-controlled the airplane, as one would expect from someone who is inexperienced. Things happen very fast at such excessive speeds. We cut this from the film due to the fact the film was not about control, and also due to the fact duhbunkers will no doubt complain the building was missed on purpose. Instead, we just left it up to the viewer to try it at home, along with the interview of FAA Check Airman Dan Govatos.

Mike says:
So what does that say about his use of FSX to make his supposed points?

I ask, what does this say about Mike when he was the one who proposed FSX in the first place? Yet never posted his results?

As usual, Mike "TWCobra" Glynn doesn't understand the argument... or... understands that he cannot win, and instead attempts a strawman due to an obvious hypocritical bias and bruised ego.

Seems duhbunkers have one thing in common, they all like a good spanking from time to time... laughing1.gif
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: 21st October 2019 - 08:56 AM