.
Advertisement

NILA SAGADEVAN: 9/11-The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training


The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training
by Nila Sagadevan

Nila Sagadevan is an aeronautical engineer and a pilot.

There are some who maintain that the mythical 9/11 hijackers, although proven to be too incompetent to fly a little Cessna 172, had acquired the impressive skills that enabled them to fly airliners by training in flight simulators.

 What follows is an attempt to bury this myth once and for all, because I’ve heard this ludicrous explanation bandied about, ad nauseam, 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 by themselves 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, and 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 ‘lost it’ 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.” 
http://www.willthomas.net/911/911_Commission_Hearing.htm

Khalid Al-Mihdhar: “We didn’t kick him out, but he didn’t live up to our standards.” 
http://100777.com/node/237

Marwan Al-Shehhi: “He was dropped because of his limited English and incompetence at the controls.” 
http://www.the7thfire.com/Politics%20and%20History/9-11/9-11_hijackers_still_alive.htm

Salem Al-Hazmi: “We advised him to quit after two lessons.”
http://www.willthomas.net/Books_Videos/911_Investigations_Stand_Down.htm

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.”
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/hanjour.html
 

Now let’s take a look at American Airlines Flight 77. Passenger/hijacker Hani Hanjour presumably 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 chap 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.

Imagine that Hanjour overpowers the flight deck crew, removes them from the cockpit and takes his position in the captain’s seat. The weather reports say it was fairly clear, so let’s say Hanjour experienced 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 any significant 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, 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—nothing like he had seen in a Cessna 172. 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 fellows 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.)

 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.” (http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=4084)

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, vortex compression, downwash reaction, wake turbulence, and jetblast effects are beyond the scope of this article. Indeed, the 100,000-lb jetblast alone would have blown entire semi-trucks off the roads this massive aircraft is alleged to have flown over at extremely low altitude. The DVD, “Loose Change – 1st Edition” (http://www.loosechange911.com) contains an excellent clip of trucks being swept off the end of a runway when a jetliner powers up for take-off.

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 about fifteen feet 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 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 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. 

The author recently received a letter from a senior 757 captain currently flying with one of the airlines involved in 9/11. It contains the following statement: 

“Regarding your comments on flight simulators, several of my colleagues and I have tried to simulate the ‘hijacker’s’ final approach maneuvers into the towers on our company 767 simulator. We tried repeated tight, steeply banked 180 turns at 500 mph followed by a fast rollout and lineup with a tall building. More than two-thirds of those who attempted the maneuver failed to make a ‘hit’. How these rookies who couldn’t fly a trainer pulled this off is beyond comprehension.”
 

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.

Gordon Duff

Gordon Duff is a Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War.He is a disabled veteran and has worked on veterans and POW issues for decades.

Gordon Duff is an accredited diplomat and is generally accepted as one of the top global intelligence specialists.He manages the world's largest private intelligence organization and regularly consults with governments challenged by security issues.

Gordon Duff has traveled extensively, is published around the world and is a regular guest on TV and radio in more than "several" countries.

Gordon Duff is a trained chef, wine enthusiast, avid motorcyclist and gunsmith specializing in historical weapons and restoration.

Business experience and interests are in energy and defense technology.

Visit Gordon Duff's YouTube Channel

Latest posts by Gordon Duff (see all)

Related Posts:

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VT or any other VT authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors or partners and technicians. Notices

Posted by on 4:04 pm, With 0 Reads, Filed under 9/11, WarZone. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Comments Closed

22 Responses to "NILA SAGADEVAN: 9/11-The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training"

  1. Attorney Alleen Weingart  October 9, 2010 at 1:02 pm

    Good point! I completely agree. Well stated.

  2. Alan Posthwaite  August 19, 2010 at 5:45 pm

    Take off and landing are hard. A PC simulator is fine for learning how to navigate to a point with an FMS. The automation is perfectly capable of keeping you at a safe speed and reasonable attitude in basic autopilot modes regardless of your proficiency hand flying an aircraft. On a calm VMC day the only issue is descending and pointing your aircraft at the target. This is relatively simple task if the target is large. There is no question that people with primitive aviation backgrounds are capable of such things: 4 of them did it on 9/11/01.

    BTW the 757/767 is one of the EASIEST planes to master with a VERY simple autopilot interface; it is FAR less complex than say an MD-80, and less capable than say an A-320. Push the heading select button and dial in the heading you want to fly (or LNAV and go direct if you have programmed the FMS correctly), dial the altitude you want and push FLCH and the airplane descends at its present speed to that altitude and levels off. I have no clue what modes these guys used, but basic modes of the autopilot take 15 minutes to grasp. An MD-80 would present MANY more challenges, and a DC-9 would probably be an insurmountable task due to all the manual inputs required.

    • Canine  September 13, 2010 at 6:08 pm

      @ Alan. Finally, a voice of reason. I spent 26 years flying tactical jets in the Marines Corps, and I can assure you that flying and navigating a 757/767 in VMC weather to hit the Pentagon and WTC’s with a modicum of training is clearly plausible. Likewise, the “targets” in question are geographically and visually significant, easily seen from miles away.

  3. Psi Op  August 18, 2010 at 6:11 am

    Isn’t it amazing that the passports of the pilots were recovered at both the WTC and the Pentagon? We are told to believe that the planes disintegrated and created infernos capable of bringing down the WTC in 8 seconds. Yet somehow the passports of the pilots were retrieved. This is a fairytale. We know who is responsible. PNAC, who should change their name to “Project for a New Chinese Century”. Anyone who believes the official fairytale does not have the ability to think. Kissinger has referred to US military as ignorant grunts. (Google it) This is what they think. Why do Kissinger and Zibrinski have so much influence in the US? They are not Americans. Are Americans really idiots to let this happen? How did they know the passports were from the alleged pilots? 7 of the accused are alive. Cell phones didn’t work from planes in 2001. According to FBI, Barbra Olson never placed her call. Traces of nano-thermite have been found in the dust from the WTC. Building 7 came down at freefall speed and wasn’t hit by a plane. The BBC announced the collapse of building 7 before it happened. (Google it). Wake up from your mesmerized slumber. In GOD we trust, their god represents Guns Oil and Drugs.

  4. K. Rechtstein  August 16, 2010 at 1:20 pm

    One very important aspect, we did’nt mention is that these “Arab Terrorists” must have been SUPERMEN, not only to fly like Top-Guns-Fighter Jets-Pilots, but to CONSERVE their FLEGMATIC COOL ‘n CONCENTRATE on the Op at hand under EXTREMELY STRESSING cicumstances… 9/11 was-is a criminal false flag-deliberate-premeditated murderous operation, and the perpetrators ‘n their accomplices within PENTAGON-GOV.-CONGRESS-SENATE-JUSTICE DEPT-CIA-FBI are free ‘n preparing a war of destruction against Iran.

  5. fixthefuture911  August 15, 2010 at 12:08 pm

    http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/pentagon.htm

    excellent ,

    PILOTSFOR911TRUTH

    80 MINUTE VIDEO ,PROFESSIONAL,INTELLIGENT,QUALIFIED

    JUST SEE THIS ONE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    NO 757AA AT PENTAGON,

    NOT IMPLYING NO PLANES INVOLVED IN TWIN TOWERS ATTACKS !!!!
    ABSOLUTELY NOT SAYING NO PLANES INVOLVED IN TWIN TOWERS ATTACKS !!!!
    NOT SUGGESTING NO PLANES INVOLVED IN TWIN TOWERS ATTACKS !!!!

    NO 757AA AT PENTAGON,

    NOT IMPLYING NO PLANES INVOLVED IN TWIN TOWERS ATTACKS !!!!
    ABSOLUTELY NOT SAYING NO PLANES INVOLVED IN TWIN TOWERS ATTACKS !!!!
    NOT SUGGESTING NO PLANES INVOLVED IN TWIN TOWERS ATTACKS !!!!

    http://www.freedomfiles.org/war/pentagon.htm

  6. Otto Lund  August 15, 2010 at 8:56 am

    Captain Sherlock solves 9/11 http://navigate3d.no/mbbs22/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=1596&start=1#M5257

    Regards,
    Otto

  7. Guenter  August 14, 2010 at 10:17 pm

    As an ex-commercial corporate pilot and flight instructor, IFR & multi-engines, but not jets, I wholeheartedly agree with this article. You have to be “superman” to do a trick like that. Especially the hardest to explain to “non-aviation-people” is the “ground-effect” phenomena, not even to mention the navigational skills. With a “Navajo” I might have been able to hit the WTC, but not even with as simple as a twin-engine Navajo could I have done the Pentagon trick as a “novice pilot” who could allegedly not even handle the “VW of the air”, the Ce-172. I personally “hate” the Ce-150 & 172 for initial training of students, since they are such forgiving planes, that virtually even the biggest idiots can manage to fly them. SO if these alleged hijackers were renown by their instructors to not even manage to handle a Ce-172, then it is obvious that “they” were NOT behind the controls of such planes that hit the said targets.
    However just for once to play devils advocate, the “only way” they could have pulled it off would be that they had been “real” commercial or ex-air force pilots and just had “played dumb” to their respective flight instructors by pretending they are novices.

  8. K. Rechtstein  August 14, 2010 at 6:08 pm

    Google: “Israel Did 9/11, All The Proof In The World” from http://www.theinfounderground.com and “Stranger Than Fiction”, An independant investigation of 9/11 and the war on terrorism, from http://www.apfn.org . There you have all the background and evidence you need, leading all the way to the Zion Talmudic Mafia holed in the USA and its handlers in the Rogue State of Israel, all presented in a structured- documented-straight forward way that clarify every aspect of the Zionist plot.

  9. Brian  August 14, 2010 at 2:41 pm

    Here is more evidence that flight 77 hit the Pentagon. From an article: The recovery of both black boxes belonging to the Boeing 757 from the Pentagon wreckage
    The recovery and identification of the remains of all but one of the people known to be aboard Flight 77

    Eschewing plain facts and common sense, the conspiracy theorists ask us to focus instead on misleadingly posed condundrums such as the following:
    • Question: “Can you explain how a Boeing 757-200, weighing nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles an hour only damaged the outside of the Pentagon?”

    Answer: It didn’t only damage the outside. According to the Washington Post, structural damage extended at least 150 feet inside, well into the third (“C”) ring of the building.

    • Question: “Can you explain how a Boeing 14.9 yards high, 51.7 yards long, with a wingspan of 41.6 yards and a cockpit 3.8 yards high, could crash into just the ground floor of this building?”

    Answer: It didn’t just crash into the ground floor. According to official statements and news reports, it took out both the first and second floors on impact.

    • Question: “Can you find debris of a Boeing 757-200 in this photograph?”

    Answer: No, but we can in this one credited to a U.S. Navy photographer [enlarged version]. Bear in mind, eyewitnesses say the Boeing 757 virtually disintegrated when it struck the reinforced wall of the building. Given that, and the tremendous forward momentum of the aircraft on impact, the assumption that a significant amount of debris ought to be visible in front of the Pentagon wouldn’t seem justified.

    According to a CNN article published the day after the attack, Michael Tamillow, a battalion chief of the Fairfax County, Virginia Fire Department, reported that parts of the Boeing 757 fuselage had indeed been recovered from the wreckage by FBI investigators (the same team that later found the black boxes). “No large pieces apparently survived,” the article said.

    http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77.htm

  10. Brian  August 14, 2010 at 2:34 pm

    I have read this before and it’s a really good article. However the author seems to be suggesting that the large plane could not have flown into the Pentagon at such a low altitude because the plane would have dug into the ground. I am not a pilot but if you read the analysis in this article and look at the pictures, yes a large plane hit the Pentagon: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/ppfinal.html?q=ppfinal.html

    There were plenty of eyewitnesses at the scene. An eyewitness: “Then I picked [the plane] up as it struck very low into the Pentagon. The wings folded back and it was like watching someone slam an empty aluminum can into a wall. The jet folded up like an accordion.” [Mike Walter – eyewitness]

    Also from the article:

    The amount of eye witnesses who specifically said they saw an American Airlines jet. In all cases there’s no indication the witnesses were talking about a small jet. At least 25

    In response to the question of “where is the wreckage of the plane”, the answer is that much of the wreckage slid into the ground floor of the Pentagon. It slid INTO the building, into the first floor space, starting a fire in the first floor, whereupon the upper floors later collapsed down onto the remains of the aircraft. Most of the aircraft wreckage is therefore under the collapsed roof section in the photo.

    Here is a great article that has numerous eyewitness accounts of the event:

    http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html?q=911_pentagon_eyewitnesses.html

    Here is one of the eyewitnesses: Mark Bright, actually saw the plane hit the building. He had been manning the guard booth at the Mall Entrance to the building.

    “I saw the plane at the Navy Annex area,” he said. “I knew it was going to strike the building because it was very, very low — at the height of the street lights. It knocked a couple down.” The plane would have been seconds from impact — the annex is only a few hundred yards from the Pentagon.

    He said he heard the plane “power-up” just before it struck the Pentagon. “As soon as it struck the building I just called in an attack, because I knew it couldn’t be accidental,” Bright said. He jumped into his police cruiser and headed to the area.

    Another eyewitness: A pilot who saw the impact, Tim Timmerman, said it had been an American Airways 757. “It added power on its way in,” he said. “The nose hit, and the wings came forward and it went up in a fireball.”

    I believe The plane was flown by remote control by the Mossad.

  11. AJHenry  August 14, 2010 at 2:11 pm

    Which brings us to the remote controlled expertise of Dov Zakheim, CEO of System Planning Corp from 1987-2001. Oddly, he and Rumsfeld announced the loss of $2.6 TRILLION on 10 Sept 2001. Here is some from All the Proof in the World:

    “ov Zakheim’s System Planning Corporation – remote airplane control technology

    Many have insisted that the planes which struck the twin towers were precision guided by remote control. Although sounding like science fiction when first hearing it, remote control technology of airplanes has been around for decades. SPC Corporation provided the flight termination system and command transmitter system, the technology that allows planes to be remote controlled should the pilots be incapacitated or the plane hijacked.

    Rabbi Dov Zakheim was the appointed Undersecretary of Defense and Comptroller from 2001 to 2004 under the George W. Bush administration. Zakheim is the man responsible for the disappearance of $2.6 TRILLION that went missing from the Pentagon books which was announced by Donald Rumsfeld on 10th September, 2001. The story was buried under 9/11’s rubble.

    Coincidentally, the specific section of the Pentagon that was “hit” or “blown up” contained the years budgetary information, as well as accountants, bookkeepers and budget analysts; many of whom died on 9/11. What a coincidence.

    In May 2001, when Dov served at the Pentagon, it was an SPS (his firm’s) subsidiary, Tridata Corporation, that oversaw the investigation of the first “terrorist” attack on the World Trade Center in 1993. This would have given them intimate knowledge of the security systems and structural blueprints of the World Trade Center.” (http://theinfounderground.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5367)

    Skipping Lucky Larry Silverstein’s prescience in purchasing the asbestos laden, out dated towers and then LOADING up on insurance weeks in advance of the attack, we can jump to the Israeli spies seen filming and celebrating the attacks. Were they cheering for the flames? The workers falling to their deaths? The messages to return to desks because all was ok? The collapse and poisoning of thousands?

    We can thank the New York Times for providing these details a mere 70 days after the fact. Buried under amid pablum such as “It doesn’t make sense that they held any of these kids as long as they did, and we don’t know of any reason why they’re still holding two” the Times manages to reveal that these criminals even posed for photos holding cigarette lighters in front of their grinning faces while the towers burned. (http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/21/us/nation-challenged-detainees-dozens-israeli-jews-are-being-kept-federal-detention.html)

    They did the USS Liberty and we couldn’t lay a glove on them. They are the only crowd that could have murdered JFK and passed off the pathetic lie of Lee Harvey Oswald. They’re the only ones who’s paw prints are all over 9/11.

    Remind me again why they jail scholars for questioning “the Holocaust”?

    Former Zionist insider Benjamin Freedman nutshelled it in 1961: “the Zionists and their co-religionists RULE these United States as though they were the ABSOLUTE MONARCHS.” (http://iamthewitness.com/archive.php?dir=audio/Benjamin.H.Freedman/). iamthewitness.com has an excellent collection of valuable historical texts which folks should downloaded and share. Don’t miss Douglass Reed’s The Controversy of Zion for more details on “kitchen cabinets” and such.

  12. Lese Majeste  August 14, 2010 at 10:33 am

    Thanks! This article inspired me to go ahead and sign up for that online medical degree, with my specialty being brain surgery!!!

    If Hani, who couldn’t even fly a simple, single-engine Cessna, but was able to fly one of the world’s largest and most complicated jets, the Boeing 757 after only running thru a couple of times on the Microsoft Flight Simulator, then I can become a M.D. online!!!

  13. K. Rechtstein  August 14, 2010 at 9:46 am

    =>Besides, 47 story high Salomon Bros. building #7, also belonging to insider Larry Silverstein, came down, in a controlled demolition way, without being hit by any plane or flying object of any kind. Event, the mainstream media tried hard to ignore. So did FEMA, NIST reports-inquiry; http://world911truth.org/building-7-mainstream-media-implodes-on-911/ . It’s high time to call for an INTERNATIONAL-INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION by experts-academics with no ties to Gov. or Agencies to investigate 9/11 crimes.

  14. K. Rechtstein  August 14, 2010 at 9:11 am

    Pulling trough an Op like 9/11, involves exact planning-huge logistic-secrecy-attn to-coordination-timing-syncronization of 1000 details, undetected, which is BEYOND the scope-capacity of any western or eastern “terrorist” organization except STATE SPONSORED TERRORISM with the collaboration of INSIDERS. Again, who benefits from the slaughter of innocents-crime of 9/11 (?) is the key question. The answer is to be found in the staged events prior ‘n posterior to the unaccounted for tragedy: ISRAEL

  15. Texas Vet  August 14, 2010 at 1:36 am

    Good post. I’ve thought about this a lot. Unless there was another alternative option(well-trained pilots) then each flight could be set with programmed on the fly (sort of like wifi for those unfamiliar) setpoints; or programmed before takeoff setpoints could also work. Once the regular pilots were disabled, the terrorist pilot would only have to sit in the seat and make sure the turning and altitude points were on track.

    If the plane went off track or had another problem (Penn flight) then kick it out of autopilot and crash it straight down by operation design.

    Today, with presumed fixes, a 911 operation would be almost impossible to pull off.
    Other Ops are still in play.

    T.V. former Boeing Avionics Computer Engineer.

  16. Ross  August 14, 2010 at 12:54 am

    This just puts another nail in the coffin of the official conspiracy theory.

    This is worthwhile watching.”Lucky Larry Silverstein Exposed” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84doiQHJ5rQ&feature=related
    Here we see no ambiguity of what Larry meant when he said “Pull it”
    Larry Silverstein,”…you know we had such terrible loss of life,maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it,arrrh,and they made that decision to pull,and watched the building,from here we watched the building come down.”

    There was no confusing what Silverstein meant because on this video clip we see both of hands mimic the collapse of the building on his last few words.Larry was later to say he meant to pull the firemen out but they were out hours before.

    Larry was checking with his insurance company on that day to see if they’d still pay out on controlled demolition rather than a terrorist attack.Larry thought it was feasible to wire the building in a few hours and thus still get his money and keep his credibility.”from here we watched the building come down.” Why was Larry waiting and watching if this was an accidential event ie the structure had been compromised.Did he have extra sensory perception or pre-knowledge?

    This is why he was so open and got caught out.It takes weeks to prepare a building for a controlled demo.

    WTC 7 needs to be used to greatest effect since it totally destroys the official conspiracy theory. http://www.ae911truth.org/

  17. K. Rechtstein  August 13, 2010 at 7:56 pm

    Thanks Gordon for bringing in this testimony from a pilot ‘n aeronautical engineer.Shortky after 9/11, debating the issue in a Latinamerican forum, I wrote:”If those supposed Arab Terrorists really were able to fly commercial jets like fighter jets, then we ought to start recruiting future pilots among Bedouins in the Arabien desert. Nobody can beat their skills after only few hours in a flight similator”.I by then knew that fire alone, even combined with a Boeing impact can’t act like controlled demolition

You must be logged in to post a comment Login


TOP 50 READ ARTICLES THIS WEEK