View Single Post
  #7  
Old February 22nd 06, 06:34 AM posted to rec.travel.air,alt.disasters.aviation,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.military
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Aeronautical Engineer says Official 9/11 Story Not Possible



TRUTH wrote:

Thank you for all the responses. It's nice to get other opinions. There's
a few things that weren't commented on though.

For instance.....

"In the case of a Boeing 757 or 767, the pilot would be faced with an
EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrumentation System) panel comprised of six
large multi-mode LCDs interspersed with clusters of assorted “hard”
instruments. These displays process the raw aircraft system and flight
data into an integrated picture of the aircraft situation, position and
progress, not only in horizontal and vertical dimensions, but also with
regard to time and speed as well. When flying “blind”, I.e., with no
ground reference cues, it takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret, and
then apply, this data intelligently.


They weren't *flying blind*.

Quite the reverse. it was a lovely day with great visibility.

If one cannot translate this
information quickly, precisely and accurately (and it takes an
instrument-rated pilot to do so), one would have ZERO SITUATIONAL
AWARENESS. I.e., the pilot wouldn’t have a clue where s/he was in
relation to the earth. Flight under such conditions is referred to as
“IFR”, or Instrument Flight Rules."


Hence not applicable. It was VFR weather.


"According to FAA radar controllers, “Flight 77” then suddenly pops up
over Washington DC and executes an incredibly precise diving turn at a
rate of 360 degrees/minute while descending at 3,500 ft/min, at the end
of which “Hanjour” allegedly levels out at ground level. Oh, I almost
forgot: He also had the presence of mind to turn off the transponder in
the middle of this incredibly difficult maneuver (one of his instructors
later commented the hapless fellow couldn’t have spelt the word if his
life depended on it)."


The " precise diving turn " is simply someone's imagination. Probably the
reporter's version of events. It makes for more 'compelling' copy.


"The maneuver was in fact so precisely executed that the air traffic
controllers at Dulles refused to believe the blip on their screen was a
commercial airliner. Danielle O’Brian, one of the air traffic controllers
at Dulles who reported seeing the aircraft at 9:25 said, “The speed, the
maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar
room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a
military plane.”"


That's because they don't normally see commerical planes flown like that ! It
doesn't mean it can't be done. Commercial flights have regard to passenger
sensitivities.


"And then, all of a sudden we have magic. Voila! Hanjour finds the
Pentagon sitting squarely in his sights right before him."


Typical journalist hype. The journalist wan't there on the flight deck was he
so how does he or anyone else know what Hanjour *saw* ?

Etc.

Yawn.

Graham