If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Dr.Curtiss runs out of his medicine
Hi folx,
Here we go again... now it's ostensibly one of "us" selling his soul to the boulevard press devil for a few greenbacks... "How Hard Is It to Fly a 757 or 767?" http://airsafe.com/journal/v1num16.htm It's an exciting reading... the guy is in "unique position to answer that question", after 100hrs in C172 and 5-6 hrs in a 757 sim... 100-hr pilots, rejoice, flying big iron has never been easier... to quote: "In short, I believe that any person who has earned a private pilot's license and who has access to the same kind of ground school and simulator training that I received could fly a 757 or 767 well enough to hit a large building." Dr.Curtiss is surely doing fine... we'll keep you posted of his progress... And, the dramatic conclusion: "Given the wide availability of this kind of training, it would appear that the kind of terrorist actions that took place in New York and Washington could easily be repeated in the future." I guess as soon Dr.Curtiss picks up his 757 at Wal-Mart... I don't know whether to laugh or cry... -Toly. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Toly wrote:
Hi folx, Here we go again... now it's ostensibly one of "us" selling his soul to the boulevard press devil for a few greenbacks... "How Hard Is It to Fly a 757 or 767?" http://airsafe.com/journal/v1num16.htm It's an exciting reading... the guy is in "unique position to answer that question", after 100hrs in C172 and 5-6 hrs in a 757 sim... 100-hr pilots, rejoice, flying big iron has never been easier... to quote: "In short, I believe that any person who has earned a private pilot's license and who has access to the same kind of ground school and simulator training that I received could fly a 757 or 767 well enough to hit a large building." Dr.Curtiss is surely doing fine... we'll keep you posted of his progress... And, the dramatic conclusion: "Given the wide availability of this kind of training, it would appear that the kind of terrorist actions that took place in New York and Washington could easily be repeated in the future." I guess as soon Dr.Curtiss picks up his 757 at Wal-Mart... I don't know whether to laugh or cry... -Toly. What makes you think he's wrong? Just after 9/11 I asked a Navy fighter pilot friend who also flew for Continental if he thought I could have flown the planes into the building. He was well aware of my flying skills at that time as we had flown together prior to 9/11 (he's also a CFI). At that time I didn't even have a PPL. His reply was that I would have no trouble and in fact would have done a better job than the terrorists (because I wouldn't have boresighted the targets like the terrorists did, but would have accounted for the wind during the approach - which the terrorists did not). Gregg |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
I'd be inclined to agree with him...once the airplane is airborne and
cleaned up, the skills to steer it and adjust altitude are pretty much what you learn in a 152.....and you don't have to worry about the rudders. Bob Gardner "Toly" wrote in message m... Hi folx, Here we go again... now it's ostensibly one of "us" selling his soul to the boulevard press devil for a few greenbacks... "How Hard Is It to Fly a 757 or 767?" http://airsafe.com/journal/v1num16.htm It's an exciting reading... the guy is in "unique position to answer that question", after 100hrs in C172 and 5-6 hrs in a 757 sim... 100-hr pilots, rejoice, flying big iron has never been easier... to quote: "In short, I believe that any person who has earned a private pilot's license and who has access to the same kind of ground school and simulator training that I received could fly a 757 or 767 well enough to hit a large building." Dr.Curtiss is surely doing fine... we'll keep you posted of his progress... And, the dramatic conclusion: "Given the wide availability of this kind of training, it would appear that the kind of terrorist actions that took place in New York and Washington could easily be repeated in the future." I guess as soon Dr.Curtiss picks up his 757 at Wal-Mart... I don't know whether to laugh or cry... -Toly. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 16:10:03 -0700, "Bob Gardner"
wrote: I have to agree with Bob. (My apologies Bob) I'd be inclined to agree with him...once the airplane is airborne and cleaned up, the skills to steer it and adjust altitude are pretty much what you learn in a 152.....and you don't have to worry about the rudders. Nor are you worried about holding altitude or course. So what if you exceed some limitations. Are they going to use the airplane again? You aren't worried about the 100 MPH mind in a 500 MPH airplane either. There is a big difference between piloting an airplane and just hitting a target with it. The second one darn near missed. I could fly the Deb straight and level the first time I got in it, but it took me a few hours to learn the momentum difference and it took several hundred hours to really know the airplane. I find 8 to 10 year old kids who have been "flying" on sims can take over the controls on the Deb. With only a little coaching they can do straight and level as well as coordinated turns. That is a lot better than most Cessna 150 and 172 pilots, or Cherokee pilots do, particularly if they have a few hundred hours. The pilots typically have it in a 2G PIO in less than a minute. Of course covering the VSI helps :-)) The point is: If you are not afraid of stalling, not afraid of holding altitude, not afraid of breaking the airplane, or getting hurt, no intention of getting out alive, and your only goal is going from some point A to B and crashing into B after some one else had done the take off and climb, it's not that difficult a goal. Hopefully it's more difficult now days, but not because the plane is difficult to fly. Probably less difficult than learning to safely solo in a 172. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com Bob Gardner |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"gregg" wrote in message
news:lqtVc.197568$eM2.11576@attbi_s51... Toly wrote: Hi folx, Here we go again... now it's ostensibly one of "us" selling his soul to the boulevard press devil for a few greenbacks... "How Hard Is It to Fly a 757 or 767?" http://airsafe.com/journal/v1num16.htm It's an exciting reading... the guy is in "unique position to answer that question", after 100hrs in C172 and 5-6 hrs in a 757 sim... 100-hr pilots, rejoice, flying big iron has never been easier... to quote: "In short, I believe that any person who has earned a private pilot's license and who has access to the same kind of ground school and simulator training that I received could fly a 757 or 767 well enough to hit a large building." Dr.Curtiss is surely doing fine... we'll keep you posted of his progress... And, the dramatic conclusion: "Given the wide availability of this kind of training, it would appear that the kind of terrorist actions that took place in New York and Washington could easily be repeated in the future." I guess as soon Dr.Curtiss picks up his 757 at Wal-Mart... I don't know whether to laugh or cry... -Toly. What makes you think he's wrong? Just after 9/11 I asked a Navy fighter pilot friend who also flew for Continental if he thought I could have flown the planes into the building. He was well aware of my flying skills at that time as we had flown together prior to 9/11 (he's also a CFI). At that time I didn't even have a PPL. His reply was that I would have no trouble and in fact would have done a better job than the terrorists (because I wouldn't have boresighted the targets like the terrorists did, but would have accounted for the wind during the approach - which the terrorists did not). Two things I don't know how to do right now: to disengage the autopilot, or FMS, or whatever they have, and to use the intercom to talk to the pax. It's assumed they used some navigational assistance and not just pilotage (they knew the lat/long of the targets) so they probably learned how to program the avionics. And, apparently, the actual hijackers didn't know how to use the intercom either. -- David Brooks |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
David Brooks wrote:
gregg wrote: His reply was that I would have no trouble and in fact would have done a better job than the terrorists (because I wouldn't have boresighted the targets like the terrorists did, but would have accounted for the wind during the approach - which the terrorists did not). It's assumed they used some navigational assistance and not just pilotage (they knew the lat/long of the targets) so they probably learned how to program the avionics. They may have been able to *read* the avionics, but *programming* them seems a tad unnecessary when your target is one of the most distinctive buildings for hundreds of miles around. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Robert Briggs wrote: David Brooks wrote: gregg wrote: His reply was that I would have no trouble and in fact would have done a better job than the terrorists (because I wouldn't have boresighted the targets like the terrorists did, but would have accounted for the wind during the approach - which the terrorists did not). It's assumed they used some navigational assistance and not just pilotage (they knew the lat/long of the targets) so they probably learned how to program the avionics. They may have been able to *read* the avionics, but *programming* them seems a tad unnecessary when your target is one of the most distinctive buildings for hundreds of miles around. AND, the visibility was 100+ miles. Who the hell NEEDS avionics to navigate under those circumstances? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Orval Fairbairn" wrote in message
news In article , Robert Briggs wrote: David Brooks wrote: gregg wrote: His reply was that I would have no trouble and in fact would have done a better job than the terrorists (because I wouldn't have boresighted the targets like the terrorists did, but would have accounted for the wind during the approach - which the terrorists did not). It's assumed they used some navigational assistance and not just pilotage (they knew the lat/long of the targets) so they probably learned how to program the avionics. They may have been able to *read* the avionics, but *programming* them seems a tad unnecessary when your target is one of the most distinctive buildings for hundreds of miles around. AND, the visibility was 100+ miles. Who the hell NEEDS avionics to navigate under those circumstances? Well, in some of the text that was clipped, I said "Two things I don't know how to do right now: to disengage the autopilot, or FMS, or whatever they have...". At least I'd want to be sure I knew how to turn this stuff off before embarking on the mission - that was uppermost in my mind. The other part is speculation: we've read the press that they had apparently committed the heinous crime of purchasing GPS units. That sort-of says that they were intending to use lat/long data (can you define and then fly to a custom waypoint using airline avionics?). Remember, they didn't know what the weather was going to be when they bought the tickets. -- David Brooks |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Dr.Curtiss runs out of his medicine | Toly | Instrument Flight Rules | 6 | August 24th 04 09:41 PM |
Best dogfight gun? | Bjørnar Bolsøy | Military Aviation | 317 | January 24th 04 06:24 PM |
It runs! | RobertR237 | Home Built | 9 | September 13th 03 06:01 PM |
FORMATIONS, BOMB RUNS AND RADIUS OF ACTION | ArtKramr | Military Aviation | 0 | August 10th 03 02:22 AM |
Pilot runs out of fuel waiting for security clearance | Sydney Hoeltzli | Piloting | 68 | July 19th 03 06:04 PM |