QUOTE (seek_the_truth @ Dec 27 2006, 08:53 AM)
Controllers say the plane crossed the Pentagon at 7,000 feet and then made a sweeping circle to the right, during which time it dropped down to near surface level.
See, thats what gets me. People will say "they didnt need to know how to land the airplane, they just needed to know how to fly it. Um yeah, a person with a Comm license in a 757 for the first time, not aware of the systems (BIG difference from a Comm to a left in a 757)
and is going to fly a jet by dead reckongning at M.74 (at MOST), do a huge desending turn, in a PERFECT circle, they going M.74 with no flaps, fly the airplane direcily into the Pentagon. MMMM, throttle=altitude and with a jet, it works a bit different because of the huge engines (for a while
). Wow, I don't know everyhting about avaition at all, but I can tell you that is pretty much impossible.
With a decsent rate of 2800 FPM
and slaming into a building thats only what, 60ft high and going m.74
? NO, no one is going to stand there and tell me that. You would go way tooo fast in that decent rate and flight path and lose control of the airplane is a basic spin configuration
. Also, the 757 has autothrottles
, good luck managing autothrottles for the first time
. To descend at that rate, you would probably need about 60% on the throttles. While you can read all teh specs and limitations all you want, nothing is pilot training manuals tell you how to fly a plane or land it. FOr it to descend without gaining airspeed, it would need flaps.
I have never heard anything about flaps yet.
Im only a student pilot, but I can tell you with what little experience I have, something is not right with the official story.
Do we know anything about whether FLAPS were used
or whether INDEED the airspeed remained constant
Is the amateur/novice use of autothrottles a good point to raise also in annihilation of the anybody with a commercial license could do that?
Would this posting by truth seeker THEN CONSTITUTE a complete annihilation of the "anybody with a commercial license could have done the same thing" motif...
...there ARE TWO arguments that seemed to be presented by the government loyalists..
[COLOR=blue]1)Auto-Pilot was used by the hijackers[/COLOR]2)Anybody with a commercial license could do what they did---descent of 7000 feet in 150 seconds at 270 degree turn leveling off to strike Pentagon at 30 feet above ground level with no damge to lawn
1) If the Government Loyalists question BOTH the BaroAltitude and RadarAltitude figures... THEN HOW could they be certain AutoPilot could CORRECTLY POSITION plane 30 feet above lawn OR EVEN NOT fail to miss the Pentagon completely?
IS WHAT I JUST CITED a good answer to retort the autoPilot claim or could I say something better...
I am currently posting at truthabout911@yahoo!groups
and PhysOrg Physics Forum
2)Is there anything anyone would like to add to what Captain Wittenberg states below THAT WOULD FURTHER annihilate "anybody with a COMMERCIAL LICENSE could have done the same thing" motif
Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force – Former Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. Commercial pilot for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years, flying 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777 ’s. Had previously flown the actual two United Airlines airplanes that were hijacked on 9/11 (Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and Flight 175, the second plane to hit the WTC).
Article 7/17/05: "The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total B.S. plain and simple." … Wittenberg convincingly argued there was absolutely no possibility that Flight 77 could have "descended 7,000 feet in two minutes
, all the while performing a steep 270 degree banked turn before crashing into the Pentagon's first floor wall without touching the lawn
"For a guy to just jump into the cockpit and fly like an ace is impossible - there is not one chance in a thousand,
" said Wittenberg, recalling that when he made the jump from Boeing 727's to the highly sophisticated computerized characteristics of the 737's through 767's it took him considerable time to feel comfortable flying." http://www.arcticbeacon.com
Audio Interview 9/16/04: Regarding Flight 77, which allegedly hit the Pentagon. "The airplane could not have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into what they call a high speed stall
. The airplane won’t go that fast if you start pulling those high G maneuvers at those bank angles. … To expect this alleged airplane to run these maneuvers with a total amateur at the controls is simply ludicrous...
It’s roughly a 100 ton airplane. And an airplane that weighs 100 tons all assembled is still going to have 100 tons of disassembled trash and parts after it hits a building. There was no wreckage from a 757 at the Pentagon. … The vehicle that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77. We think, as you may have heard before, it was a cruise missile." http://911underground.com
Editor's note: For more information on the impact at the Pentagon, see General Stubblebine, Colonel Nelson, Commander Muga, Lt. Col. Kwiatkowski, Major Rokke, and Steve DeChiaro.
Member: Pilots for 9/11 Truth Association Statement: "Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe that have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day since the United States Government doesn't seem to be very forthcoming with answers."