View Single Post
  #3  
Old February 22nd 06, 12:40 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.homebuilt,rec.aviation.student,alt.politics
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training

Complete an utter BS.



"Immanuel Goldstein" wrote in
message ...
| The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without
Training
|
| Nila Sagadevan | February 21 2006
|
| Nila Sagadevan is an aeronautical engineer and a qualified
pilot of heavy aircraft.
|
| [...]
|
| What follows is an attempt to bury this myth once and for
all, because I've
| heard this ludicrous explanation bandied about, ad
nauseum, on the Internet and
| the TV networks-invariably by people who know nothing
substantive about flight
| simulators, flying, or even airplanes.
|
| A common misconception non-pilots have about simulators is
how "easy" it is to
| operate them. They are indeed relatively easy to operate
if the objective is to
| make a few lazy turns and frolic about in the "open sky".
But if the intent is
| to execute any kind of a maneuver with even the least bit
of precision, the task
| immediately becomes quite daunting. And if the aim is to
navigate to a specific
| geographic location hundreds of miles away while flying at
over 500 MPH, 30,000
| feet above the ground the challenges become virtually
impossible for an
| untrained pilot.
|
| And this, precisely, is what the four hijacker pilots who
could not fly a Cessna
| around an airport are alleged to have accomplished in
multi-ton, high-speed
| commercial jets on 9/11.
|
| For a person not conversant with the practical
complexities of pilotage, a
| modern flight simulator could present a terribly confusing
and disorienting
| experience. These complex training devices are not even
remotely similar to the
| video games one sees in amusement arcades, or even the
software versions
| available for home computers.
|
| In order to operate a modern flight simulator with any
level of skill, one has
| to not only be a decent pilot to begin with, but also a
skilled instrument-rated
| one to boot - and be thoroughly familiar with the actual
aircraft type the
| simulator represents, since the cockpit layouts vary
between aircraft.
|
| The only flight domains where an arcade/PC-type game would
even begin to
| approach the degree of visual realism of a modern
professional flight simulator
| would be during the take-off and landing phases. During
these phases, of course,
| one clearly sees the bright runway lights stretched out
ahead, and even
| peripherally sees images of buildings, etc. moving past.
Take-offs-even
| landings, to a certain degree-are relatively "easy",
because the pilot has
| visual reference cues that exist "outside" the cockpit.
|
| But once you've rotated, climbed out, and reached cruising
altitude in a
| simulator (or real airplane), and find yourself en route
to some distant
| destination (using sophisticated electronic navigation
techniques), the
| situation changes drastically: the pilot loses virtually
all external visual
| reference cues. S/he is left entirely at the mercy of an
array of complex flight
| and navigation instruments to provide situational cues
(altitude, heading,
| speed, attitude, etc.)
|
| 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. 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.
|
| And IFR Rule #1: Never take your eyes off your
instruments, because that's all
| you have!
|
| The corollary to Rule #1: If you can't read the
instruments in a quick, smooth,
| disciplined, scan, you're as good as dead. Accident
records from around the
| world are replete with reports of any number of good
pilots - I.e., professional
| instrument-rated pilots - who 'bought the farm' because
they screwed up while
| flying in IFR conditions.
|
| Let me place this in the context of the 9/11
hijacker-pilots. These men were
| repeatedly deemed incompetent to solo a simple
Cessna-172 - an elementary
| exercise that involves flying this little trainer once
around the patch on a
| sunny day. A student's first solo flight involves a simple
circuit: take-off,
| followed by four gentle left turns ending with a landing
back on the runway.
| This is as basic as flying can possibly get.
|
| Not one of the hijackers was deemed fit to perform this
most elementary exercise
| by himself.
|
| In fact, here's what their flight instructors had to say
about the aptitude of
| these budding aviators:
|
| Mohammed Atta: "His attention span was zero."
|
| Khalid Al-Mihdhar: "We didn't kick him out, but he didn't
live up to our standards."
|
| Marwan Al-Shehhi: "He was dropped because of his limited
English and
| incompetence at the controls."
|
| Salem Al-Hazmi: "We advised him to quit after two
lessons."
|
| Hani Hanjour: "His English was horrible, and his
mechanical skills were even
| worse. It was like he had hardly even ever driven a car. I'm
still to this day
| amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon. He
could not fly at all."
|
| Now let's take a look at American Airlines Flight 77.
Passenger/hijacker Hani
| Hanjour rises from his seat midway through the flight,
viciously fights his way
| into the cockpit with his cohorts, overpowers Captain
Charles F. Burlingame and
| First Officer David Charlebois, and somehow manages to
toss them out of the
| cockpit (for starters, very difficult to achieve in a
cramped environment
| without inadvertently impacting the yoke and thereby
disengaging the autopilot).
| One would correctly presume that this would present
considerable difficulties to
| a little guy with a box cutter-Burlingame was a tough,
burly, ex-Vietnam F4
| fighter jock who had flown over 100 combat missions. Every
pilot who knows him
| says that rather than politely hand over the controls,
Burlingame would have
| instantly rolled the plane on its back so that Hanjour
would have broken his
| neck when he hit the floor. But let's ignore this almost
natural reaction
| expected of a fighter pilot and proceed with this charade.
|
| Nonetheless, imagine that Hanjour overpowers the flight
deck crew, removes them
| from the cockpit and takes his position in the captain's
seat. Although weather
| reports state this was not the case, let's say Hanjour was
lucky enough to
| experience a perfect CAVU day (Ceiling And Visibility
Unlimited). If Hanjour
| looked straight ahead through the windshield, or off to
his left at the ground,
| at best he would see, 35,000 feet -- 7 miles -- below him,
a murky
| brownish-grey-green landscape, virtually devoid of surface
detail, while the
| aircraft he was now piloting was moving along, almost
imperceptibly and in eerie
| silence, at around 500 MPH (about 750 feet every second).
|
| In a real-world scenario (and given the reported weather
conditions that day),
| he would likely have seen clouds below him completely
obscuring the ground he
| was traversing. With this kind of "situational
non-awareness", Hanjour might as
| well have been flying over Argentina, Russia, or Japan-he
wouldn't have had a
| clue as to where, precisely, he was.
|
| After a few seconds (at 750 ft/sec), Hanjour would figure
out there's little
| point in looking outside-there's nothing there to give him
any real visual cues.
| For a man who had previously wrestled with little Cessnas,
following freeways
| and railroad tracks (and always in the comforting presence
of an instructor),
| this would have been a strange, eerily unsettling
environment indeed.
|
| Seeing nothing outside, Mr. Hanjour would be forced to
divert his attention to
| his instrument panel, where he'd be faced with a
bewildering array of
| instruments. He would then have to very quickly interpret
his heading, ground
| track, altitude, and airspeed information on the displays
before he could even
| figure out where in the world he was, much less where the
Pentagon was located
| in relation to his position!
|
| After all, before he can crash into a target, he has to
first find the target.
|
| It is very difficult to explain this scenario, of an utter
lack of ground
| reference, to non-pilots; but let it suffice to say that
for these incompetent
| hijacker non-pilots to even consider grappling with such a
daunting task would
| have been utterly overwhelming. They wouldn't have known
where to begin.
|
| But, for the sake of discussion let's stretch things
beyond all plausibility and
| say that Hanjour-whose flight instructor claimed "couldn't
fly at all"-somehow
| managed to figure out their exact position on the American
landscape in relation
| to their intended target as they traversed the earth at a
speed five times
| faster than they had ever flown by themselves before.
|
| Once he had determined exactly where he was, he would need
to figure out where
| the Pentagon was located in relation to his
rapidly-changing position. He would
| then need to plot a course to his target (one he cannot
see with his
| eyes-remember, our ace is flying solely on instruments).
|
| In order to perform this bit of electronic navigation, he
would have to be very
| familiar with IFR procedures. None of these chaps even
knew what a navigational
| chart looked like, much less how to how to plug
information into flight
| management computers (FMC) and engage LNAV (lateral
navigation automated mode).
| If one is to believe the official story, all of this was
supposedly accomplished
| by raw student pilots while flying blind at 500 MPH over
unfamiliar (and
| practically invisible) terrain, using complex
methodologies and employing
| sophisticated instruments.
|
| To get around this little problem, the official storyline
suggests these men
| manually flew their aircraft to their respective targets
(NB: This still
| wouldn't relieve them of the burden of navigation). But
let's assume Hanjour
| disengaged the autopilot and auto-throttle and hand-flew
the aircraft to its
| intended-and invisible-target on instruments alone until
such time as he could
| get a visual fix. This would have necessitated him to fly
back across West
| Virginia and Virginia to Washington DC. (This portion of
Flight 77's flight path
| cannot be corroborated by any radar evidence that exists,
because the aircraft
| is said to have suddenly disappeared from radar screens
over Ohio, but let's not
| mull over that little point.)
|
| 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 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."
|
| And then, all of a sudden we have magic. Voila! Hanjour
finds the Pentagon
| sitting squarely in his sights right before him.
|
| But even that wasn't good enough for this fanatic Muslim
kamikaze pilot. You
| see, he found that his "missile" was heading towards one
of the most densely
| populated wings of the Pentagon-and one occupied by top
military brass,
| including the Secretary of Defense, Rumsfeld. Presumably
in order to save these
| men's lives, he then executes a sweeping 270-degree turn
and approaches the
| building from the opposite direction and aligns himself
with the only wing of
| the Pentagon that was virtually uninhabited due to
extensive renovations that
| were underway (there were some 120 civilians construction
workers in that wing
| who were killed; their work included blast-proofing the
outside wall of that wing).
|
| I shan't get into the aerodynamic impossibility of flying
a large commercial
| jetliner 20 feet above the ground at over 400 MPH. A
discussion on ground effect
| energy, tip vortex compression, downwash sheet reaction,
wake turbulence, and
| jetblast effects are beyond the scope of this article (the
100,000-lb jetblast
| alone would have blown whole semi-trucks off the roads.)
|
| Let it suffice to say that it is physically impossible to
fly a 200,000-lb
| airliner 20 feet above the ground at 400 MPH.
|
| The author, a pilot and aeronautical engineer, challenges
any pilot in the world
| to do so in any large high-speed aircraft that has a
relatively low wing-loading
| (such as a commercial jet). I.e., to fly the craft at 400
MPH, 20 feet above
| ground in a flat trajectory over a distance of one mile.
|
| Why the stipulation of 20 feet and a mile? There were
several street light poles
| located up to a mile away from the Pentagon that were
snapped-off by the
| incoming aircraft; this suggests a low, flat trajectory
during the final
| pre-impact approach phase. Further, it is known that the
craft impacted the
| Pentagon's ground floor. For purposes of reference: If a
757 were placed on the
| ground on its engine nacelles (I.e., gear retracted as in
flight profile), its
| nose would be almost 20 above the ground! Ergo, for the
aircraft to impact the
| ground floor of the Pentagon, Hanjour would have needed to
have flown in with
| the engines buried 10-feet deep in the Pentagon lawn. Some
pilot.
|
| At any rate, why is such ultra-low-level flight
aerodynamically impossible?
| Because the reactive force of the hugely powerful downwash
sheet, coupled with
| the compressibility effects of the tip vortices, simply
will not allow the
| aircraft to get any lower to the ground than approximately
one half the distance
| of its wingspan-until speed is drastically reduced, which,
of course, is what
| happens during normal landings.
|
| In other words, if this were a Boeing 757 as reported, the
plane could not have
| been flown below about 60 feet above ground at 400 MPH.
(Such a maneuver is
| entirely within the performance envelope of aircraft with
high wing-loadings,
| such as ground-attack fighters, the B1-B bomber, and
Cruise missiles-and the
| Global Hawk.)
|
| The very same navigational challenges mentioned above
would have faced the
| pilots who flew the two 767s into the Twin Towers, in that
they, too, would have
| had to have first found their targets. Again, these chaps,
too, miraculously
| found themselves spot on course. And again, their "final
approach" maneuvers at
| over 500 MPH are simply far too incredible to have been
executed by pilots who
| could not solo basic training aircraft.
|
| Conclusion
| The writers of the official storyline expect us to
believe, that once the flight
| deck crews had been overpowered, and the hijackers "took
control" of the various
| aircraft, their intended targets suddenly popped up in
their windshields as they
| would have in some arcade game, and all that these fellows
would have had to do
| was simply aim their airplanes at the buildings and fly
into them. Most people
| who have been exposed only to the official storyline have
never been on the
| flight deck of an airliner at altitude and looked at the
outside world; if they
| had, they'd realize the absurdity of this kind of
reasoning.
|
| In reality, a clueless non-pilot would encounter almost
insurmountable
| difficulties in attempting to navigate and fly a
200,000-lb airliner into a
| building located on the ground, 7 miles below and hundreds
of miles away and out
| of sight, and in an unknown direction, while flying at
over 500 MPH - and all
| this under extremely stressful circumstances.
|
| Complete text:
| http://physics911.net/sagadevan.htm
|
|
| --
| Closely Monitored,
|
| Immanuel Goldstein
|
| "The history of the present [US Government] is a history
of repeated injuries
| and usurpations, all having in direct object the
establishment of an absolute
| Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let facts be
submitted to a candid world."
| - Declaration of Independence
|
| The Pentagon Strike
| http://www.pentagonstrike.co.uk/flash.htm
|
| The Demolition of WTC Building 7
|
http://911research.com/wtc/evidence/videos/index.html#building7
|
| "It's just a god-damned piece of paper!"
| - Bush on the U.S. Constitution,
http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp12142005.html
|
| "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a
revolutionary act."
| - Orwell
|
| "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing
invariably the same
| Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute
Despotism, it is their
| right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and
to provide new Guards
| for their future security."
| - Declaration of Independence