Aeronautical Engineer says Official 9/11 Story Not Possible

Pooh Bear wrote in
:



TRUTH wrote:

"khobar" wrote in
news:apTKf.4201$Sp2.2506@fed1read02:

At no time were any of the aircraft flying blind, thus the
established facts as to what happened that day are completely
consistent with what the article claims. Oops.

Paul Nixon

On what basis do you say this? If a pilot cannot see the ground, and
cannot use instruments, how are they not flying blind?

The pilot clearly *could* see the ground ( it was a lovely clear day
).

There is no evidence AFAIK that the pilots couldn't use instruments
either.


Graham





The point is that the article's author says that pilots use their
instruments when flying at that high altitude. So if they're not
instrument trained, aren't they really "flying blind"? (I know I would
be)

The flight instructors said they couldn't fly. That's been reported all
over the news the past few years. And at least one of them couldn't even
spell. How on earth could they pilot 757/767s? How is it realistic to
think that they could?


btw, are any of the responders to my posts real pilots? If so, are any of
you guys 757/767 pilots (not just simulators)? Are there any Aeronautical
Engineers here who have the education and training to debunk the article
scientifically?

Thanks

TRUTH wrote:

The point is that the article's author says that pilots use their
instruments when flying at that high altitude. So if they're not
instrument trained, aren't they really "flying blind"? (I know I would
be)

The next time you fly, look out the window.
If it is a clear day, you can make out object, even at altitude.
I have no trouble recognizing Monterey and Santa Cruz, even when flying
to SJC at night.


The flight instructors said they couldn't fly.

So, if they couldn't fly, why did they hijack the plane and fly it?
Are you suggesting the planes weren't hijacked by the people that took
these classes?

That's been reported all
over the news the past few years. And at least one of them couldn't even
spell. How on earth could they pilot 757/767s? How is it realistic to
think that they could?

Do you think they would have picked someone illiterate to fly the planes?



btw, are any of the responders to my posts real pilots? If so, are any of
you guys 757/767 pilots (not just simulators)? Are there any Aeronautical
Engineers here who have the education and training to debunk the article
scientifically?

I don't need to debunk the article. There is ample evidence of what
happened, especially in the PA crash, unless you thought the PA incident
was unrelated.

Truth,

btw, are any of the responders to my posts real pilots? If so, are any of
you guys 757/767 pilots (not just simulators)? Are there any Aeronautical
Engineers here who have the education and training to debunk the article
scientifically?


Hey, WAKE UP! It's 2006. Do you really, honestly think no one has addressed
those "issues" since 9/11/2001? Everybody and his brother have - in the
first MINUTES after the incident. Search the internet, pull the TV "news"
tapes. You're way behind in your "fact finding"...

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Hey, let's talk about TWA 800 instead...

How could a 747 with most of its nose removed (and the accompanying rearward CG shift) maintain level flight and climb for 5000'? Where is the autopilot located in a 747?

Level flight and climb are mutually excluded. But wings
level and climb is very possible. The weight of the node
section being gone would cause the rapid climb and there was
no roll input since the wings were attached.

Could it have been shot down by a missile? Or attacked by a
UFO? Or maybe it was hijacked? Sure those are very slight
possibilities, but the FBI and FAA seem to have put a pretty
good case for the fuel tank explosion theory.



"Chris Wells"
wrote in message
...
|
| Hey, let's talk about TWA 800 instead...
|
| How could a 747 with most of its nose removed (and the
accompanying
| rearward CG shift) maintain level flight and climb for
5000'? Where is
| the autopilot located in a 747?
|
|
| --
| Chris Wells

Pilots fly IFR at high altitude, not because they can't see
and control the airplane, but because the FAA rules require
Instrument Flight Rules, not instrument flight.


"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
| Pooh Bear wrote
in
| :
|
|
|
| TRUTH wrote:
|
| "khobar" wrote in
| news:apTKf.4201$Sp2.2506@fed1read02:
|
| At no time were any of the aircraft flying blind,
thus the
| established facts as to what happened that day are
completely
| consistent with what the article claims. Oops.
|
| Paul Nixon
|
| On what basis do you say this? If a pilot cannot see
the ground, and
| cannot use instruments, how are they not flying blind?
|
| The pilot clearly *could* see the ground ( it was a
lovely clear day
| ).
|
| There is no evidence AFAIK that the pilots couldn't use
instruments
| either.
|
|
| Graham
|
|
|
|
|
| The point is that the article's author says that pilots
use their
| instruments when flying at that high altitude. So if
they're not
| instrument trained, aren't they really "flying blind"? (I
know I would
| be)
|
| The flight instructors said they couldn't fly. That's been
reported all
| over the news the past few years. And at least one of them
couldn't even
| spell. How on earth could they pilot 757/767s? How is it
realistic to
| think that they could?
|
|
| btw, are any of the responders to my posts real pilots? If
so, are any of
| you guys 757/767 pilots (not just simulators)? Are there
any Aeronautical
| Engineers here who have the education and training to
debunk the article
| scientifically?
|
| Thanks

TRUTH wrote:




The point is that the article's author says that pilots use their
instruments when flying at that high altitude.

He's blurring the lines. Above 18,000 feet pilots are required to be on
an instrument flight plan. That may or may not require them to use
their instruments for navigation.



So if they're not
instrument trained, aren't they really "flying blind"? (I know I would
be)

It is easy to teach a person to read a couple of instruments and get to
a certain place once you have already been placed in the air.



The flight instructors said they couldn't fly.

Anybody can fly a plane once it's already in the air with minimal
instruction. The skill comes in taking off and landing.


That's been reported all
over the news the past few years. And at least one of them couldn't even
spell.

How is that even relavant?


How on earth could they pilot 757/767s? How is it realistic to
think that they could?

You make it sound like brain surgery. Any dolt can fly a plane that's
already in the air.




btw, are any of the responders to my posts real pilots?

Yep.


Are there any Aeronautical
Engineers here who have the education and training to debunk the article
scientifically?

You don't need an engineer. Anybody in the aviation industry reads that
and laughs.

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote in
:



TRUTH wrote:

"khobar" wrote in
news:apTKf.4201$Sp2.2506@fed1read02:

At no time were any of the aircraft flying blind, thus the
established facts as to what happened that day are completely
consistent with what the article claims. Oops.

Paul Nixon

On what basis do you say this? If a pilot cannot see the ground, and
cannot use instruments, how are they not flying blind?

The pilot clearly *could* see the ground ( it was a lovely clear day
).

There is no evidence AFAIK that the pilots couldn't use instruments
either.


Graham





The point is that the article's author says that pilots use their
instruments when flying at that high altitude. So if they're not
instrument trained, aren't they really "flying blind"? (I know I would
be)

The point is, dumbass, that the author doesn't know what in hell he is
writing about! End of story!



The flight instructors said they couldn't fly. That's been reported all
over the news the past few years. And at least one of them couldn't even
spell. How on earth could they pilot 757/767s? How is it realistic to
think that they could?


It doesn't take much talent to steer the plane, after all the hard work
of configuring the plane has been done. They didn't have to know ho to
operate the gear, flaps, etc. All they had to know was which direction
to fly and how to disconnect the autopilot.


btw, are any of the responders to my posts real pilots? If so, are any of
you guys 757/767 pilots (not just simulators)? Are there any Aeronautical
Engineers here who have the education and training to debunk the article
scientifically?

Yes -- a "real pilot" since 1959. I have about fifty close friends who
either fly or have flown for the airlines and they all would say that
you are full of ****.

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote in
:



TRUTH wrote:

"khobar" wrote in
news:apTKf.4201$Sp2.2506@fed1read02:

At no time were any of the aircraft flying blind, thus the
established facts as to what happened that day are completely
consistent with what the article claims. Oops.

Paul Nixon

On what basis do you say this? If a pilot cannot see the ground, and
cannot use instruments, how are they not flying blind?

The pilot clearly *could* see the ground ( it was a lovely clear day
).

There is no evidence AFAIK that the pilots couldn't use instruments
either.


Graham





The point is that the article's author says that pilots use their
instruments when flying at that high altitude.

This is because of FAA flight rules, not because of any problem with
seeing.

So if they're not instrument trained, aren't they really "flying blind"?
(I know I would be)

If the weather is clear (and it was) you don't *need* instruments to
navigate even at the aircraft's service ceiling.