The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?

Author Topic: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?  (Read 96551 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #40 on: February 21, 2011, 08:22:51 PM »
How could you tell it was a 757 and not a 737?

BTW I was trained in aircraft recognition.

I guess, thugh, since you say you do not know the lae you saw that day was Flight 77, this is all irrelevant.

Suddenly, I  am much less interested.

It is not very hard to tell a 737 from a 757.

Like I said it was a AA 757 but there is no way I can be 100% sure it was Flight 77.

 

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #41 on: February 21, 2011, 08:35:17 PM »
It is not very hard to tell a 737 from a 757.

Like I said it was a AA 757 but there is no way I can be 100% sure it was Flight 77.

 
From a distance it is quite difficult to distinguish them.  How far was it?  How high?  How do you know?

How did you identify that plane (whatever flight it was)?

I'm not even sure why you brought this up if you don;t know it was 77#.

Come to think of it, why did you?

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #42 on: February 21, 2011, 08:54:37 PM »
From a distance it is quite difficult to distinguish them.  How far was it?  How high?  How do you know?

How did you identify that plane (whatever flight it was)?

I'm not even sure why you brought this up if you don;t know it was 77#.

Come to think of it, why did you?

No it is not that hard even a few miles away (I was with in a mile go to google maps and look). The engine pods, tail and and the winglets would be a give away.

Because people say it wasn't a 757 or painted like an AA plane.

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #43 on: February 21, 2011, 08:55:46 PM »
Really? It's a 27% smaller plane but you put a little more white paint (over the green) near the composite plastic wing faring and at any airborne distance (no frame of reference) you could never tell the difference unless it went by a few hundred feet away at eye level where you could count the windows. Witnesses who saw it that way mostly all claimed it seemed/appeared to be, a smaller plane.

It's actually hard to tell the difference. (and would be harder still with some minor cosmetic paint-camouflaging) The Pentagon guardhouse camera shows us a much shorter plane in relation to the tail size (which includes the angular width loss). Every study I have seen of the plane hiding behind the ticket dispenser concludes that a full half or more of nose should be well visible if it were 757-length and showing that much tail-width.

Offline citizenx

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,086
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #44 on: February 21, 2011, 08:58:39 PM »
Really? It's a 27% smaller plane but you put a little more white paint (over the green) near the composite plastic wing faring and at any airborne distance (no frame of reference) you could never tell the difference unless it went by a few hundred feet away at eye level where you could count the windows. Witnesses who saw it that way mostly all claimed it seemed/appeared to be, a smaller plane.

It's actually hard to tell the difference. (and would be harder still with some minor cosmetic paint-camouflaging) The Pentagon guardhouse camera shows us a much shorter plane in relation to the tail size (which includes the angular width loss)

Exactly.

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #45 on: February 21, 2011, 09:22:52 PM »
Really? It's a 27% smaller plane but you put a little more white paint (over the green) near the composite plastic wing faring and at any airborne distance (no frame of reference) you could never tell the difference unless it went by a few hundred feet away at eye level where you could count the windows. Witnesses who saw it that way mostly all claimed it seemed/appeared to be, a smaller plane.

It's actually hard to tell the difference. (and would be harder still with some minor cosmetic paint-camouflaging) The Pentagon guardhouse camera shows us a much shorter plane in relation to the tail size (which includes the angular width loss). Every study I have seen of the plane hiding behind the ticket dispenser concludes that a full half or more of nose should be well visible if it were 757-length and showing that much tail-width.

I am sorry you find it hard to tell the difference, I don't, and my guess is most of the hard core guys over on A.net wouldn't have a hard either. Like I said they don't look alike. Even if you made a 737 look just like a 757 (tail cone, winglets, tail, pods) you can't make a 737 sound like a 757.

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #46 on: February 23, 2011, 02:17:31 AM »
Before I start let me again say I don't believe the 9/11 official story.
With out going into a lot of details I know for a fact that a AA 757 hit the pentagon.


Hani Hanjour was a commercial rated pilot not some hack.
Also I have no idea what ELAL 1862 has to do with AA 77.
A 747-200 has a MTOW of 833,000 ILBS and was close to that.
A 757-200 has a MTOW of 255,000 ILBS and was not close to that.

Hanni Hanjour couldn't lift-off a Cessna. Instructors stated unequivocally that "he could not fly" and they wouldn't even allow him to taxi out to try.

Those are maximum load weights

The El Al 1862 cargo jet was light and only had some chemical weapons containers loaded, nothing else, and was at 190,000 kg (after fuel dump) according to NTSB. There is a whole extra court case about them and that small illicit hazardous chemical weapons cargo they "failed" to tell authorities about.

AA 77 with only 20% passengers (50) would (with all the extra seats and cabin weight)  have been around 165,000 kg (not incl fuel) as well and have packed a 2.5 times harder impact at 500 vs 200 mph

Offline 9/11-insider trading

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #47 on: February 23, 2011, 02:23:47 AM »
vicsims. Any real "passengers" used the attack for new identities. Only scenario that makes sense to me about the planes.....

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #48 on: February 23, 2011, 02:55:49 AM »
vicsims. Any real "passengers" used the attack for new identities. Only scenario that makes sense to me about the planes.....
Well on 77 they claim to have DNA accounted for all the victims and even show where each body or "remnant" was (supposedly but seemingly impossibly) later "located".  It makes no sense at all how any passenger remains whatsoever could ever be anywhere near the punch out hole when no 10,000 gallons of jet fuel so obviously never was. Human remains of any sort are 70-80% liquid

The only thing that makes sense is that they intercepted Burlingame's jet and forced it down in radio jammed silence. Or they had a double agent air marshall or member of/in the crew, who directed him to do it. Otherwise the transponder loss and radio silence is hard to account for, they did have 2 fighters up supposedly on "routine training" nearby. AA77 was "lost to FAA" (ATC) for half an hour (as well as the E4B NAOC Kneecap command post lording-over DC all that morning) before the green plane reappeared and was simply presumed to be it.

worcesteradam

  • Guest
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #49 on: February 23, 2011, 03:15:15 AM »

To me, it looks like all flights after approximately 9 am on Sept. 11, 2001, for these two lists: AA 77 (Pentagon) & AA 11 (N. WTC), do not have a tail numbers (UNKNOW) or departure times (0:00).

One could explain this as flights were canceled or grounded. Of course flights were grounded after the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001 for awhile.

The RITA records for UA 93 (Shanksville, PA) and UA 175 (S. WTC) however, have their tail numbers or departure times listed, but also have all flights after approximately 9 am on Sept. 11, 2001 listed as UNKNOW (tail number) and 0:00 for departure times.

So it does seem suspicious that Flights: AA 77 (Pentagon) & AA 11 (N. WTC) were listed as UNKNOW (tail number) and 0:00 for departure times if they actually did depart from their airports as scheduled, since the attacks happened after they took off, not before.

I feel that this is suspicious and worth noting as another important inconsistency in the 911 official story.


They are both the American Airlines

and

we know Marvin Bush ran security for United Airlines

makes sense they used UA planes.
maybe AA never existed.

Marvin P. Bush, the president’s younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom that provided security for the World Trade Center, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. The company, Burns noted, was backed by KuwAm, a Kuwaiti-American investment firm on whose board Marvin Burns also served. [Utne]
According to its present CEO, Barry McDaniel, the company had an ongoing contract to handle security at the World Trade Center "up to the day the buildings fell down."

The company, then known as Stratesec, was delisted from the American Stock Exchange in July 2002 due to inability to make financing payments to ES Bankest, its primary shareholder, and other financial problems.[8]
[edit]See also

Kroll Inc. - Securacom sold security-related equipment to the New York Port Authority for the security of the World Trade Center. Securacom's contract for the sale of equipment was terminated in 1998.

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #50 on: February 23, 2011, 10:40:56 AM »
Hanni Hanjour couldn't lift-off a Cessna. Instructors stated unequivocally that "he could not fly" and they wouldn't even allow him to taxi out to try.

When did a CFI make that quote? Because by 4/1999 he was a commercial rated pilot.

 

The El Al 1862 cargo jet was light and only had some chemical weapons containers loaded, nothing else, and was at 190,000 kg (after fuel dump) according to NTSB. There is a whole extra court case about them and that small illicit hazardous chemical weapons cargo they "failed" to tell authorities about.

AA 77 with only 20% passengers (50) would (with all the extra seats and cabin weight)  have been around 165,000 kg (not incl fuel) as well and have packed a 2.5 times harder impact at 500 vs 200 mph

Can you post a link to the NTSB report?
Here is a link to the Nederlands Aviation Safety Board : http://english.verkeerenwaterstaat.nl/kennisplein/page_kennisplein.aspx?id=39448&DossierURI=tcm:195-17547-4

Per the report there was 114.7 metric tons(114,700.75kg) of cargo and 74 metric tons(74,000.50kg) of fuel giving the plane a take off weight of 338.3 metric tons (338,302.22kg). Even if all fuel had been dumped the weight of the plane would still be about 264,302kg

A 757-200 (AA flight 77 was a 757-200) only has a MTOW of 115,668kg.

Also where are you getting ELAL 1862 was only going 200mph?

I guess facts are not your friend.

Offline Kilika

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,762
  • Thank you Jesus!
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #51 on: February 23, 2011, 01:35:49 PM »
Hey mattj, welcome to the forum.

Apparently you have new information that can refute what agent has already posted? Good luck with that.

By the way, I've seen the interview video of one of the instructers at the airport that Hanjour was trying to fly at. He said without question the guy was not qualified to fly even a Cessna. A single engine prop plane, and you claim he was a certified muli-engine commercial airline pilot? Really? Your gonna have to show proof of that.
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #52 on: February 23, 2011, 03:40:18 PM »
Hey mattj, welcome to the forum.

Apparently you have new information that can refute what agent has already posted? Good luck with that.

By the way, I've seen the interview video of one of the instructers at the airport that Hanjour was trying to fly at. He said without question the guy was not qualified to fly even a Cessna. A single engine prop plane, and you claim he was a certified muli-engine commercial airline pilot? Really? Your gonna have to show proof of that.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10711FC3C5B0C7A8DDDAF0894DA404482&pagewanted=1

Quote
Mr. Hanjour returned to Arizona that October. Mr. Hanjour spent substantial periods of time in the state for the next five years, attending at least four flight schools and logging hundreds of hours in the air before earning his license. He was a poor student who often disappeared for weeks or months before resuming his training.
''He wasn't very committed,'' said a former flight instructor who worked with him. ''It took him almost a good three or four years to finish whatever he was doing.''
Inside the cockpit, the former instructor said, Mr. Hanjour was unsure of himself, even frightened, particularly during mandatory stalling exercises, in which an engine is turned off so that a pilot can practice righting the plane and restoring power. The instructor said he had reassured Mr. Hanjour that ''we're not going to fall out of the sky as long as we have wings.''
But ''he was very scared,'' the instructor added. ''He felt very hesitant. He was not one I would send my wife and my kids with.''
Yet, through accumulation of flying hours, Mr. Hanjour apparently built his competency. By the spring of 1999, seeking a commercial license, he was training on simulators at another school and ''doing pretty well,'' the former instructor said. On April 15, 1999, he earned a ''satisfactory'' rating by an examiner from the Federal Aviation Administration and was awarded a commercial license with a multiengine rating.

Offline Kilika

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,762
  • Thank you Jesus!
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #53 on: February 23, 2011, 04:06:26 PM »
Quote
On April 15, 1999, he earned a ''satisfactory'' rating by an examiner from the Federal Aviation Administration and was awarded a commercial license with a multiengine rating.

Thanks for the source. One little problem though that you may be overlooking. That license doesn't say he was certified in jet engine aircraft, such as commercial airliners like a Boeing 757. All it alludes to is certification in 2 or more engine prop planes. Big difference between piston driven engines and jet engines, as far as certification goes. I knew a guy who was training to be a corporate jet pilot and he said the multi-engine part was tough.

So technically, you have shown what appears to be proof, but it was my fault for not specifying the "jet engine" part. You haven't proven he was licensed in mutli-jet commercial airliners.
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #54 on: February 23, 2011, 05:08:11 PM »
Thanks for the source. One little problem though that you may be overlooking. That license doesn't say he was certified in jet engine aircraft, such as commercial airliners like a Boeing 757. All it alludes to is certification in 2 or more engine prop planes. Big difference between piston driven engines and jet engines, as far as certification goes. I knew a guy who was training to be a corporate jet pilot and he said the multi-engine part was tough.

So technically, you have shown what appears to be proof, but it was my fault for not specifying the "jet engine" part. You haven't proven he was licensed in mutli-jet commercial airliners.

There is no mutli-jet license. The only other rating he could have gotten would have been his ATP and that is good for props and jets just like a mutli engine rating.

Offline Kilika

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,762
  • Thank you Jesus!
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #55 on: February 23, 2011, 05:27:21 PM »
I stand corrected! I was under the understadning that there is a seperate jet license or certification. I do know that pilots have to be checked out or get certified in a given plane though. So with his license, he could act as a co-pilot in a commercial airliner apparently...

Quote
Pilot Licenses and Ratings-Tutorial  

This is a clear description of Airplane Pilot Licenses - what they are and how to get them. Actually they're called Pilot Certificates. A license grants a permission, whereas a certificate shows that one has fulfilled certain requirements.

Use the interactive rating computer below to see what your FAA pilot certificate would look like if you had different ratings. You can also proceed directly to [ Training | Tools ]

Pilot Certificates issued by the FAA have the following characteristics:

•Grade - determines the kinds of flying a pilot can do
 
■Student Pilot - local solo training flights without passengers
■Recreational Pilot - local uncontrolled day flights 1 passenger
■Private Pilot - flights worldwide with passengers, non-profit
■Commercial Pilot - paid flying allowed, can be airline copilot
■Airline Transport Pilot - paid flights, can be airline captain

•Ratings - what aircraft a pilot can fly and how - VFR or IFR
 
■Category - Airplane, Glider, Rotorcraft, Lighter Than Air...
■Class - eg Airplane Single or Multi Engine Land/Sea
■Type - needed for each turbojet or heavier than 12,500 lbs
■Instrument - separate for each Class and Type Rating
•Limitations - what operations are prohibited

 Grade Airplane Category Ratings
 
ATP
Commercial Pilot
Private Pilot
Recreational Pilot  Single-Engine

Land
Sea
Instrument  Multiengine
Land
Sea
Instrument  

XII. RATINGS AND LIMITATIONS STUDENT PILOT
PASSENGER CARRYING IS PROHIBITED
Flying Hours: x-country: instrument: night:  
  
The Certificate Grade is the hardest one to change. In order to get a new Grade Certificate you need to meet all the training and experience requirements for that certificate. The process is called upgrading and requires you to have to have the certificate with a lower grade. Student Pilots and Recreational Pilots can upgrade to Private Pilot. Only Private Pilots can upgrade to Commercial Pilot. Finally only Commercial Pilots can upgrade to Airline Transport Pilot. You are always required to take a knowledge test and a practical test in order to upgrade.

Adding Ratings within the same aircraft category is significantly easier. Except for the initial instrument rating, there are no knowledge tests or extra aeronautical experience requirements. An instructor endorsement and a practical test is all it takes, and yes - there is some textbook study for the practical test.
 

http://www.pilotratings.com/index.html
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)

Offline phasma

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,197
  • Have a H.A.A.R.P.Y DAY !
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #56 on: February 23, 2011, 05:45:18 PM »
This thread got derailed slightly - the OP was re the passengers.

Certainly I would not put it past THEM to fly a plane full of ppl into a building . . . the first two maybe three, the people on board would not have known about the other crashes and so probably could have been made compliant withPA system a threat or strongly worded sit tight tech problems announcement over the PA system . . .

not so easy the last plane . . .

But who knows? No bodies in the pentagon, no bodies in the field either . . . plenty of bodies in the towers of course, maybe thats why they were hit (to disguise the lack of bodies) and for their sheer size and the relative ease of approach . .
Things are not what they appear to be: nor are they otherwise - Surangama Sutra

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #57 on: February 23, 2011, 05:46:16 PM »
When did a CFI make that quote? Because by 4/1999 he was a commercial rated pilot.

Can you post a link to the NTSB report?
Here is a link to the Nederlands Aviation Safety Board : http://english.verkeerenwaterstaat.nl/kennisplein/page_kennisplein.aspx?id=39448&DossierURI=tcm:195-17547-4

Per the report there was 114.7 metric tons(114,700.75kg) of cargo and 74 metric tons(74,000.50kg) of fuel giving the plane a take off weight of 338.3 metric tons (338,302.22kg). Even if all fuel had been dumped the weight of the plane would still be about 264,302kg

A 757-200 (AA flight 77 was a 757-200) only has a MTOW of 115,668kg.

Also where are you getting ELAL 1862 was only going 200mph?

I guess facts are not your friend.

No you are ignoring the fact that your hopelessly incompetent student pilot boarded no green airplane to expertly handle like a top Gun Aviator nor crash into the Pentagon with! Should he have been able to overcome it's Naval Officer pilot, would have been flying a unpainted polished aluminum aircraft of the unusual non-green sort that belongs to American Airlines...

The El AL jet was stalled and fell at around exactly 200mph minus a very heavy engine and all its fuel

Flight 77 should have had 10,000 gallons of fuel still on board to make it across the continent so 200,000kg easy and 2.5 times more inertial mass.

seconds from disaster amsterdam air crash
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dNhbeLPbras
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=344YjqowH3w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QW1NImJ_2O8

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #58 on: February 23, 2011, 06:09:01 PM »
It was missing two engines and the whole leading edge of the wing.  He needed 280 mph and full controls to keep airborne with 2 other engines, when he slowed for landing the minute he hit sunk below 260 he lost it stalled and rolled due to no lift on the right side. Having no flap hydraulics in the right wing either he lost further speed due to using everything else to slow and to level the plane.

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #59 on: February 24, 2011, 03:19:29 AM »
No you are ignoring the fact that your hopelessly incompetent student pilot boarded no green airplane to expertly handle like a top Gun Aviator nor crash into the Pentagon with! Should he have been able to overcome it's Naval Officer pilot, would have been flying a unpainted polished aluminum aircraft of the unusual non-green sort that belongs to American Airlines...

Like I posted already he was a commercial rated pilot. Also none of the flying on 9/11 was all that hard. Also keep in mind pre 9/11 pilot where told not to fight hijackers.

The El AL jet was stalled and fell at around exactly 200mph minus a very heavy engine and all its fuel

Flight 77 should have had 10,000 gallons of fuel still on board to make it across the continent so 200,000kg easy and 2.5 times more inertial mass.


It was missing two engines and the whole leading edge of the wing.  He needed 280 mph and full controls to keep airborne with 2 other engines, when he slowed for landing the minute he hit sunk below 260 he lost it stalled and rolled due to no lift on the right side. Having no flap hydraulics in the right wing either he lost further speed due to using everything else to slow and to level the plane.

Your lack of basic physics and aviation knowledge is getting funny.

Flight 77 was a 757-200 it has a MTOW (Maximum Take-off Weight) of 115,680kg (That is the heaviest it can ever be)
Max fuel is 11,489 gallons with a max range of about 7,600 km or 4,100 NM.
IAD-LAX is about 3,800 km or  2,100 NM.

Now on to ELAL 1862

When the plane made impact it was 70 degrees nose down and had a roll of 90 degrees. My guess using very basic physics would put the impact closer to 400-450 mph.   

worcesteradam

  • Guest
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #60 on: February 24, 2011, 03:58:05 AM »
Also none of the flying on 9/11 was all that hard.

what?
apart from the navigation
77 was over several hundred mph at almost ground level. Never mind the bizarre flight path to get there.

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #61 on: February 24, 2011, 04:28:26 AM »
what?
apart from the navigation
77 was over several hundred mph at almost ground level. Never mind the bizarre flight path to get there.

The navigation was easy he just set the autopilot to track the DCA VOR.

When the 757 I believe to be AA 77 passed by my view it was about 2,000 within 4 miles(about 30-45 sec from impact). Not what I would call "almost ground level"

Offline Kilika

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,762
  • Thank you Jesus!
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #62 on: February 24, 2011, 04:56:22 AM »
The navigation was easy he just set the autopilot to track the DCA VOR.

When the 757 I believe to be AA 77 passed by my view it was about 2,000 within 4 miles(about 30-45 sec from impact). Not what I would call "almost ground level"

Now your talking shaky stuff. Don't know if you've read it here previously, but I use to work on fighter jet simulators for the US Navy, and was offered a job with Flight Safety International in Savanah. I've had flight theory classes. I worked on the F-14 air combat simulator that the two US Navy pilots that shot down the Lybians in the 80's trained on. A 757 cannot operate in the manner they claim, or at least I should said it is so extremely hard to manuever a plane that big in that manner that no human could pull it off without touching the ground BEFORE impact with the building.

The one 5 frame video released shows a whitish object moving horizontally, right to left. Even at the speed you claim, if you know anything at all about high speeds, it's that it takes a span of time and distance to "level out" an aircraft at that high a speed. And that isn't even accounting for ground effects on the aircraft just a few feet off the ground at high speeds.

And nobody yet has given a reasonable explanation for the light poles.

From the altitude you say, "2,000", and 70 degrees negative attitude at 450-500mph, how about telling me the aircraft's airspeed at the point of leveling out from that dive? And if your good with math, then what will be the distance traveled from the point at 2,000 feet when the pilot goes nose down to the point the pilots pulls back to level out?

The alledged plane didn't hit the building at 70 degrees attitude. It came in level, at high speed. So that means one must reverse-track it's path from the building outwards. It's at that point the claims start getting real shaky physics for the official story to hold water.
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #63 on: February 24, 2011, 10:21:15 AM »
Your mixing ELAL info with AA77 info

From the altitude you say, "2,000"AA, and 70 degrees negative attitude at 450-500mphELAL, how about telling me the aircraft's airspeed at the point of leveling out from that dive? And if your good with math, then what will be the distance traveled from the point at 2,000 feet when the pilot goes nose down to the point the pilots pulls back to level out?

The alledged plane didn't hit the building at 70 degrees attitude. It came in level, at high speed. So that means one must reverse-track it's path from the building outwards. It's at that point the claims start getting real shaky physics for the official story to hold water.

The plane I saw was on a 3-6 degree down glide path.  

Where did you work on the simulators? Check airman or tech?

Offline Kilika

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,762
  • Thank you Jesus!
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #64 on: February 24, 2011, 01:35:36 PM »
ELAL? Who's talking about an Isareli airline? Your the one that threw that into the mix. ELAL has nothing to do with this at all.

So 3-6 degrees? Really? That still doesn't answer my questions, and your redirecting to avoid asnwering.

Where did I work on simulators? NAS Oceana Naval Master Jet Base in Virginia Beach VA. To be exact, the McDonald Douglas built 2E6 Air Combat Simulator for the F-14 and F-4 fighter jets.

The Navy doesn't have "check airmen", whatever that is. I was a maintenance and operations technition, a TD rating. Not only did I do work on them, but worked with the squadrons that trained there during their training sessions. Not just maintenance, but I also did pre and post training flight checks, etc, so not only did I have to know how to fly, but also operate the basic systems of both aircraft, including their weapons systems.

I can personally say that most of the movie "Top Gun" was bunk. They had the process of weapons lock all wrong. The trainer was nothing more than a really advanced video game, and eventually I got real good at flying it. Me and a friend use to fly against each other after hours. Better than a few officer pilots which I proved in front of their squadron officers more than once when the pilot would complain the trainer wasn't working when they couldn't do something. It was usually the pilot had failed, not the equipment.

Been there, done that, and I may or may not have the photos to prove it, seeing both aircraft are now in full retirement. Only Iran even bothers to fly the F-14, but no parts has basically grounded their planes.

So, flat out I challenge the claim a human could have made the alledged flight path. THere is no way that plane could have pulled off that approach to the building in the manner they claim without there being damage that wasn't there. No way it could come in at 400+mph at basically level ball, low enough to clip light poles and not hit the ground before the building.

I'm taking the Missouri position. Show me a pilot that has actually tried to fly that flight path in a real simulator.

"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #65 on: February 24, 2011, 01:56:52 PM »
ELAL? Who's talking about an Isareli airline? Your the one that threw that into the mix. ELAL has nothing to do with this at all.

Agent is, he/she is trying to say AA 77 should have had more energy then ELAL 1862 

So 3-6 degrees? Really? That still doesn't answer my questions, and your redirecting to avoid asnwering.

So, flat out I challenge the claim a human could have made the alledged flight path. THere is no way that plane could have pulled off that approach to the building in the manner they claim without there being damage that wasn't there. No way it could come in at 400+mph at basically level ball, low enough to clip light poles and not hit the ground before the building.

I am not avoiding anything.
I don't think the plane hit the light poles(The plane knocked them down but I don't think it hit them).
There was nothing super human about the flight path.

How much real flight time do you have?

Offline Kilika

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,762
  • Thank you Jesus!
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #66 on: February 24, 2011, 02:19:20 PM »
Agent is, he/she is trying to say AA 77 should have had more energy then ELAL 1862 

I am not avoiding anything.
I don't think the plane hit the light poles(The plane knocked them down but I don't think it hit them).
There was nothing super human about the flight path.

How much real flight time do you have?


Not any hours the US Navy will confirm to you. What I did back then was under a "Secret" classification. If you didn't have at least a secret clearence, you didn't get in usually. We escorted all visitors everywhere. So you just just have to take my word that I put in at least 30 minutes to over an hour most days of the work week, not counting off hours I spent messing around on my own time late at night. So I can say it was in the hundreds of hours.

Your point?

Let me know when you find where a pilot has tried the flight path the FAA claims in a real simulator of a 757. Remember, Hanjour would have had one shot at it, no reset the training session. I'd bet the house every time that the pilot will put into the ground before the building, IF they are able to maintain that severe turn rate at those speeds and still remained lined up with the approach.

Do you have any idea how much distance a plane covers when doing a high speed banked turn, and how long it takes to get turned? And they claim he did what, a 270 degree turn at speed, dropped it to the deck and slammed the building just a few feet off the ground? Prove it.

Quote
(The plane knocked them down but I don't think it hit them)

That's an all-time classic!  :D
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #67 on: February 24, 2011, 02:37:38 PM »
Not any hours the US Navy will confirm to you. What I did back then was under a "Secret" classification. If you didn't have at least a secret clearence, you didn't get in usually. We escorted all visitors everywhere. So you just just have to take my word that I put in at least 30 minutes to over an hour most days of the work week, not counting off hours I spent messing around on my own time late at night. So I can say it was in the hundreds of hours.

Your point?

That you have a lot of time playing a video game (Your words) but zero flight time in real planes. I might only be a Private Pilot but I have over 2,500 hours.


Let me know when you find where a pilot has tried the flight path the FAA claims in a real simulator of a 757. Remember, Hanjour would have had one shot at it, no reset the training session. I'd bet the house every time that the pilot will put into the ground before the building, IF they are able to maintain that severe turn rate at those speeds and still remained lined up with the approach.

Do you have any idea how much distance a plane covers when doing a high speed banked turn, and how long it takes to get turned? And they claim he did what, a 270 degree turn at speed, dropped it to the deck and slammed the building just a few feet off the ground? Prove it.

The 270 degree turn was nothing more then a standard rate turn (That is private pilot 101). I have seen greater bank angles out of planes doing the ILS to RWY 1 circle RWY 33, or the LGA expressway visual approach to RWY 31. 

That's an all-time classic!  :D

Why you talked about ground effect and there is a lot of wake with a plane moving that fast that low.

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #68 on: February 24, 2011, 02:42:12 PM »
Like I posted already he was a commercial rated pilot. Also none of the flying on 9/11 was all that hard. Also keep in mind pre 9/11 pilot where told not to fight hijackers.

Your lack of basic physics and aviation knowledge is getting funny.

Flight 77 was a 757-200 it has a MTOW (Maximum Take-off Weight) of 115,680kg (That is the heaviest it can ever be)
Max fuel is 11,489 gallons with a max range of about 7,600 km or 4,100 NM.
IAD-LAX is about 3,800 km or  2,100 NM.

Now on to ELAL 1862

When the plane made impact it was 70 degrees nose down and had a roll of 90 degrees. My guess using very basic physics would put the impact closer to 400-450 mph.  

Nah it's MUCH MORE THAN directly comparable impact if you know anything at all about physics.

First, you are right about a 757 being a lighter plane but with the estimated 10,000 gals of remaining fuel it would be around 92,000kg going 550+ according to the FDR

The ELAL jet was descending, gear half out and full flaps to under 260 when it's roll began at around 1500 ft.  It was missing two engines 2 casings and 2 pylons and much of the wing which reduces it to 150,00 kg or less + 114,000 kg cargo to total: 264,000.

The FDR showed them decaying due to flap drag and throttle-back down to 240 mph into the roll. To gain speed it would have spun worse, so doubtless they froze and/or throttled back further to try to slow down, level off and come in easier realizing the other flaps were not working. But they left the flaps out. The estimate is 225 mph and the spin-drag uses energy too. They were committed to landing.

So let's just use these numbers and determine the number of kilotons of force:

274,000 kg at 240 mph = 3.78 kilotons
93,000 kg at 525 mph = 6.05 kilotons

It's called multiplication, even if the 747 was spinning like a top at 300 (well past 280 where it could fly again)  it's the same force.

Now if it was a silvery painted green 737 with little fuel carrying 6-7 bodies with a TERCOM pilot, then we got a little 2-3 kiloton hole

Offline Kilika

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8,762
  • Thank you Jesus!
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #69 on: February 24, 2011, 02:57:37 PM »
Quote
That you have a lot of time playing a video game (Your words) but zero flight time in real planes. I might only be a Private Pilot but I have over 2,500 hours.

Dude, a trained monkey can fly small prop jobs! Top speed of what MAYBE 200-250? And here you go trying to belittle my background as nothing but a video game? Tell that to the real Top Gun School test pilots that regularly came to the trainer to certify it. Tell it to the pilots that were required to have several hours of seat time in our trainer before they got in the real thing. It was real enough for US Navy fighter pilots, but not for you?

The reality is that you haven't got a single clue what training I had in order to work on those simulators. What you don't know is that I had as much or more ground flight training than you did for your certification for silly private planes. I'm talking old school aviation navigation right up to modern at the time instrument navigation and radar systems. While the acronyms may differ between civilian and military, it's all the same theory.

Let me guess, you never served in the military did you? You got the civilian aviation lingo down form what I know of the termanology, but you show no understanding of the military. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Your showing you true intentions. I don't care if you got 5,000 hours in a Piper Cub, I'm done with you. ::)
"For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows."
1 Timothy 6:10 (KJB)

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #70 on: February 24, 2011, 02:59:33 PM »
Quote
Now if it was a silvery painted green 737 with little fuel carrying 6-7 bodies with a TERCOM pilot, then we got a little 2-3 kiloton hole

- to put our missile to the DIA/NOC IP through   ;D

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #71 on: February 24, 2011, 05:09:14 PM »
In fact any much more maneuverable TERCOM-guided "classic" silvery-coated green painted Boeing 737 300/-400/-500, dressed up with AA decals with some victims bodies and an hour of fuel would weigh-out at around 35000 kg, and at 525 mph would be able to miss spools, fit in one floor and make a perfect, nice, modest 2.3 kiloton hole exactly like the one seen at the Pentagon for the missile to be guided through 9 seconds afterward. It would perfectly "hide behind" the ticket dispenser, and only the tiniest variance in approach angle would  cut all the same light poles down too, and make the oddly-narrower hole.

5 or 6 kilotons would have taken out at least 2 whole rings and made it impossible to get in to plant DNA evidence/bodies

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #72 on: February 24, 2011, 05:31:03 PM »
Dude, a trained monkey can fly small prop jobs! Top speed of what MAYBE 200-250?
Here is few planes in my log book.
T-6 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-6_Texan
MX2 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MX_Aircraft_MX2
EA300 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extra_EA-300


And here you go trying to belittle my background as nothing but a video game? Tell that to the real Top Gun School test pilots that regularly came to the trainer to certify it. Tell it to the pilots that were required to have several hours of seat time in our trainer before they got in the real thing. It was real enough for US Navy fighter pilots, but not for you?

I never belittled your background. Your the one that called it a video game.

The trainer was nothing more than a really advanced video game, and eventually I got real good at flying it.

I have a few hours in a G-V, Airbus 320 and a 777 sim and I can say to me they felt real.

Offline mattj

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 246
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #73 on: February 24, 2011, 06:09:05 PM »
Nah it's MUCH MORE THAN directly comparable impact if you know anything at all about physics.

First, you are right about a 757 being a lighter plane but with the estimated 10,000 gals of remaining fuel it would be around 92,000kg going 550+ according to the FDR
Why do you think a plane on a flight that is only 53% of its range would be loaded with 97% fuel load? I don't see any way it had more then 7,000 gallons or about 21,700 kg.

Fuel (21,700kg) + BOW (57,800kg) + people (5,000 kg)  + cargo (8,000 kg) =  92,500 kg
So yes it only took you 4-5 post to start dealing with real numbers but thank you and welcome to really.

The ELAL jet was descending, gear half out and full flaps to under 260 when it's roll began at around 1500 ft.  It was missing two engines 2 casings and 2 pylons and much of the wing which reduces it to 150,00 kg or less + 114,000 kg cargo to total: 264,000.

The FDR showed them decaying due to flap drag and throttle-back down to 240 mph into the roll. To gain speed it would have spun worse, so doubtless they froze and/or throttled back further to try to slow down, level off and come in easier realizing the other flaps were not working. But they left the flaps out. The estimate is 225 mph and the spin-drag uses energy too. They were committed to landing.

The 240 mph is at zero bank and and zero pitch. It would take me 3-4 pages to teach you about lift vectors and how to read a vg-diagram. Do a lot of reading and you will see how there was no way the impact was at 240 mph. I also think you are 20,000-30,000 kg low on the weight of the 747

So let's just use these numbers and determine the number of kilotons of force:

274,000 kg at 240 mph = 3.78 kilotons
93,000 kg at 525 mph = 6.05 kilotons

What Formula did you use?

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
Re: The 4 Flights of 9/11 - What about the Passengers? What happened to them?
« Reply #74 on: February 24, 2011, 10:58:51 PM »
I used the figure given to the Arlington firefighters by AA/FAA officials, which in "officialist" records was universally stated/determined and much-lamented over to be 10,000 gals of fuel remaining at time of impact, This is less than that guessed at for the WTC stories (15,000). 757's with RR engines are apparently very thirsty, I know not the fuel load because there was (conveniently) no NTSB crash investigation ever done of that nor any 9/11 aircraft's loss.

None of the 9/11 aircraft wreckage recovered anywhere was ever identified to belong to any of the registered airframes even, the only time in modern air safety history that (haphazardly discarded) wreckage has not been bothered to have been attributed to any particular airframe by any investigation.



The ELAL dumped (left/center) fuel in the lake for emergency landing on the second orbit. It probably lost the right wing fuel with the engines they couldn't determine if the pumps were working or not though witnesses saw a flame-out and vapor trail as the engines first dropped.

Even in 2000 ft 33fps added acceleration is only 15-20 more mph - the second (falling) curve vector is  fairly insignificant, therefore line integral calculation is unnecessary

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_work

They had full flaps so any further forward acceleration (airspeed) would have only turned into added rotational torque (spin) which is not suggested by witnesses who saw it gliding down frozen like a shark-fin therefore the additional wing and gear drag was a decelerating factor only

F=ma is the simplest standard normal single-vector calculation for force used in all engineering.

Here's a multiple unit conversion/calculator:  
http://www.1728.com/energy.htm

have fun, but there's really not much argument here - it's around 5.5 - 6 kilotons for the official "Single Pentagon Attack" Flight 77 Theory

The queer ultra-high temperature instant-incendiary blast-warped steel beams inside the building tell us a much, much different story of a second massive incendiary explosive airburst detonation much after the crash itself - ask any blacksmith



No airplane with some fuel that burned after impact did that to this steel !! Nor did any weight do it.

An airplane would have simply broken them off cold or cut them (as one is at it's base) this curvy-beam phenomenon is instantaneous 3000 degree blast wavefront DU penetrator (forward shaped charge) hardback MWS munitions damage

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
The actual figure according to the impossible flight plan proposed by the official story was to have been 8600 gallons a negligible difference from 10,000 but since it wasn't the same plane

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164982.msg1208846#msg1208846
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164982.msg1208824#msg1208824
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164982.msg1208388#msg1208388

we are only discussing why they couldn't allow the AA 757 to risk doing the job for them.

Online egypt

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4,785
  • Love: A Wish to bestow the fullness of Joyous Life
Hate to rain on your parade but you are drawing a long bow here. There has been plenty of evidence of people seeing an airliner that day. Plus wheelrims, engine rotor, landing gear, seats and bits of fuselage have been shown to be found from what I understand.

Read the entire article.  If the planes are military drones as photographic and video evidence seem to show.. and.. considering the extent of this criminal operation, it would be nothing to have "evidence" to be found later, after crashes, inside those aircraft.

Carrington -- thank you for posting this!  Yes.  What did happen to the passengers?  Were there any remains, at all?  If indeed the passengers were shifted around on planes and wound up at Cleveland Airport -- I cannot imagine that luggage would not have been messed up & "left" somewhere.

Questions:  1.  Did any of the families receive any luggage that did not accompany a passenger?  2.  Has anyone done any background digging on who these families really are {no offense meant to the horror experienced by anyone due to 9/11} ?

Love, e

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435
It is not very hard to tell a 737 from a 757.

Like I said it was a AA 757 but there is no way I can be 100% sure it was Flight 77.


Just to clean up this issue:



I'll make it easy for you. Note the American Airlines 737 non-paint scheme and decals on this ship (ABOVE). Make a special notice of the size and clear polished aluminum distance of the smallish letter "C" from the top of the blue colored window line. This is a fatter-stubbier looking airplane but surely very difficult to discern from 757 from the ground or any distance to every novice



This is a twin sister plane of AA 77, a Boeing 757-223 which sports the genuine uniquely AA waxed/polished bare aluminum non-paint job. Note the oversize letters "e" and "c"

http://www.planespotters.net/Aviation_Photos/photo.show?id=048266 { Examine this large picture!)

(smaller view comparable one was posted HERE earlier)


Compare it to this strange silvery painted fake part of the green airplane retrieved from the lawn and left on the Pentagon Heliport wall on 911. Note the wide silvery painted area under the small "C" here - there is no blue window at it's base.



which variety of a faked AA-decals "paint" job did the airplane have?

Offline agentbluescreen

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7,435

Questions:  1.  Did any of the families receive any luggage that did not accompany a passenger?  2.  Has anyone done any background digging on who these families really are {no offense meant to the horror experienced by anyone due to 9/11} ?

Love, e

I don't think it would be very tasteful to be bothering them with such questioning. Apparently they were all required to provide DNA Samples to enable forensics to identify the various remains from the plane and buildings. One thing is for sure perhaps someone with a Geiger counter could surely do some unsolicited grave or mausoleum visiting, though.

When this criminal case is opened they will likely have to be exhumed, though I don't see it coming out of any civil case, unless reasonable cause can be established in Disclosure.

Offline GH0STMASTER

  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 306
    • Get Your Geek On!
Does it bother anyone about the lack of passengers to bury?  And the pentagon plane that was a very hard maneuver done seconds before the plane crashed, and the other thing is what was those guys carrying with a tarp covering it?  Plus some of the parts were to small on the ground, and to top that off there was no damage done to the lawn.  The wing span was much larger than the hole at the pentagon too. Wow there are so many things wrong.  I would like to know also what all of the passengers families were told about their loved ones that day.  Plus how many did have something to bury.  I also would like to know what other planes were in the same areas of ALL the planes, and where did they go? I want to know because in order to kill the ones in the planes they had to go somewhere.  Out to sea maybe?  As hard as it is for some to comprehend  if the passengers were not on the so called planes, then find out what happened to them.   That is four flights of passengers, they did not just disappear into the abyss unless someone helped them get there.   
Get Your Geek On! http://getyourgeekon.info