Monday, November 13, 2006

Novice Pilot Hits Pentagon in Flight Simulator

This is apparently a Dutch film:



As you can see, he does not seem to have any particular difficulty in hitting the building.

26 Comments:

At 13 November, 2006 09:43, Blogger James B. said...

But he hit the Pentagon at a different point than AA77 did, that proves it was a cruise missile! /end CT

 
At 13 November, 2006 10:32, Blogger default.xbe said...

someone alert spooked911 so he can tell us how this "didnt fit the challenge exactly"



he didnt like me hitting the sears tower because guess thats alot easier than hitting the WTC

 
At 13 November, 2006 10:56, Blogger The Reverend Schmitt., FCD. said...

Watching a Dutch person using a flight simulator copy the plane crash into the Pentagon while listening to chipper Japanese pop music was the most surreal thing I've been a part of in some time.

Honestly, how rigorous does the testing need to be before the 9/11 conspiracy theorists just admit they basically hold their beliefs for literally no outside reason and go join Scientology or something

 
At 13 November, 2006 12:43, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here is a version that has english translations under it.

http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=
-129851858930592160&q=zembla#27m40s

 
At 13 November, 2006 14:28, Blogger CHF said...

The twoofers will no doubt counter that they couldn't hit the Pentagon using Microsoft Flight Simulator on their PCs so therefor it was impossible.

 
At 13 November, 2006 14:45, Blogger Curt Cameron said...

Jay, here's a clickable link to the video with translations. I changed it to the US Google Video site as well.

This video talks about the old CT idea that the G-forces would have ripped apart the plane, but honestly, I haven't seen them use that idea much ever since the flight analysis of 77 came out, which showed exactly the maneuver that Hanjour did. Before that, there were all kinds of crazy ideas. JohnDoeX at the LC forum drew his idea of the "official version" on a map, and it was that 77 made an almost full-circle turn at 500 mph, a turn with a ground-track diameter of only about 1/4 mile. I don't know where he pulled that idea out of, but I'm not surprised that he was not able to believe it really happened that way.

Anyway, since the official flight analysis has come out, there's been very little from the CT crowd about how Hanjour couldn't have been skilled enough to do that very sloppy maneuver.

 
At 13 November, 2006 15:59, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thx for that info curt :)

 
At 14 November, 2006 08:39, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

And this proves what? Oh nevermind, it proves nothing.

 
At 14 November, 2006 10:33, Blogger Alex said...

It proves yet another of your idiotic theories wrong. Does it prove that this is how it happened? No. But at least it'll shut you up next time you're tempted to try the "HE COULD NEVA HAV HIT IT!!!!" argument.

 
At 14 November, 2006 11:11, Blogger The Artistic Macrophage said...


And this proves what? Oh nevermind, it proves nothing.


right, just like 100% of the "truth" movements "research"...proves nothing.

TAM

 
At 14 November, 2006 12:02, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

It proves yet another of your idiotic theories wrong. Does it prove that this is how it happened? No.
Alex, your a barrel of contradictions!
So why the fuck are you typing anything? Now it has come down to video games prove a hijacker flew into the Pentagon? Wait nevermind you answered that question.
You guys have certainly gotten a bit desperate don't you think?

Mac,right Right. It proves nothing.

 
At 14 November, 2006 12:08, Blogger Alex said...

Have you had a frontal lobotomy recently? Because I swear you weren't THIS dumb before....

 
At 14 November, 2006 12:10, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

Anyway, since the official flight analysis has come out, there's been very little from the CT crowd about how Hanjour couldn't have been skilled enough to do that very sloppy maneuver.

The animation supplied by NTSB via a FOIA request, does not match the "official" flight path, according to Pilots for 9/11 Truth. According to this animation, apparently derived from Flight 77's FDR, Flight 77 did not hit the light poles. Why?

Again parts of the official conspiracy theory don't quite add up but supporters here want to continue to offer up this garbage as proof to the offical theory. Do you all choose to be blind to these facts or what?

 
At 14 November, 2006 12:11, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

Have you had a frontal lobotomy recently?
LOL! Now that is funny. Just a UFO visit that is all. Know what I mean? Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.

 
At 14 November, 2006 17:21, Blogger apathoid said...

So why the fuck are you typing anything? Now it has come down to video games prove a hijacker flew into the Pentagon? Wait nevermind you answered that question.


Its not a video game. Its a full motion training simulator that pilots use to earn new type ratings and stay current. I've actually "flown" one before, landing a 767 in a crosswind...I had about 25 minutes stick time in a Cessna before that. Bottom line, steering an airplane is not hard. Perhaps this is the reason you have exactly 1 airline pilot(of of tens of thousands) in the Denial movement.....

 
At 14 November, 2006 17:35, Blogger apathoid said...

The animation supplied by NTSB via a FOIA request, does not match the "official" flight path, according to Pilots for 9/11 Truth. According to this animation, apparently derived from Flight 77's FDR, Flight 77 did not hit the light poles. Why?

The animation was overlayed to Google Earth. GE's aerial imagery uses True North, AA77's DFDR data used Magnetic North. The difference is about 10 degrees at that lattitude/longitude. The difference between the animation and actual flight path...10 degrees.

Magnetic Variation

[Nick Burns, the Computer Guy]
By the way - you're welcome!!!
[/Nick Burns, the Computer Guy]

 
At 14 November, 2006 22:11, Blogger Alex said...

Heh, thanks for that apathoid, I would have never thought of it if you hadn't pointed it out.

How much would you like to bet that the deniers will claim the variation between true and magnetic north is a government conspiracy?

 
At 15 November, 2006 09:31, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

Perhaps this is the reason you have exactly 1 airline pilot(of tens of thousands) in the Denial movement..... I won't call you a moron, but before you make a moronic statement, you may want to do a little research before spouting off about things you are unaware of.

Steering an airplane isn't hard? Depends on how you steer it, where you steer it, how fast your going, the atitude/altitude of plane, crosswind, load, atmospheric conditions etc. etc. I do like the blanket statement though to support the OS that Hani 'flew it'.


For one, here is a list of core public members in pilotsfor9/11truth:
http://www.pilotsfor911truth.org/core.html


Apparently more qualified than you to issue statements about flying commercial airliners.

Well I won't go into evidence of you being a pilot and such but if you examined the website, the flight path, and the NIST release you would revamp your initial statement. And then you can explain why the flight path doesn't account for the downed light poles, the angle is wrong in relation to the trailer damage,and then you can answer the following from the website:

Questions for the US Govt (and OS pilots) regarding AA77 Flight Data Recorder.

1. The current FDR shows 480' MSL True Altitude, too high to hit the light poles. What are your findings of True Altitude at end of data recording 09:37:44. Why did you provide a Flight Data Recorder that shows the aircraft too high without a side letter of explanation? How did you come to your conclusion.

2. What is the vertical speed at end of data recording :44. How did you come to your conclusion.

3. What is the Absolute Altitude and end of data recording? How did you come to your conclusion.

4. Why does the csv file show the altimeter being set in the baro cor column on the descent through FL180, but the animation altimeter does not show it being set?(This is a blatant cover-up to confuse the average layman in hopes no one would adjust for local pressure to get True Altitude. Too bad for them we caught it).

5. Why do the current G Forces for the last minute of data correspond to the changes in vertical speed, yet at end of data :44-:45 it shows an increase in vertical speed never accounting for any type of level off to be level with the lawn as shown in the DoD video?

6. Do you have any video showing a clear impact and/or of the plane on its approach to impact?

7. Why does your animation show a flight path north of the reported flight path?

8. Why are there no system indication of any impact with any object up to and after :44?

9. Why does the csv file and animation show a right bank when the official report requires a left bank to be consistent with physical damage to the generator?

10. How did you come to the conclusion of 09:37:45 as the official impact time?

11. What is the exact chain of custody of the FDR? What date/time was it found? Where exactly was it found? Please provide documentation and names.

12. Why does the hijack timeline show a 3 min interval for hijacking to take place? Why was Capt. Burlingame reported to have not followed protocol for the Common Strategy prior to 9/11?

 
At 15 November, 2006 10:05, Blogger Alex said...

Heh, I love all these idiotic questions, when realistically, there's only a few relevant facts:

1) Multiple witnesses saw a commercial aircraft.

2) Parts from a 757 series aircraft were recovered at the scene.

3) Remains of passengers were recovered, and ID'd, at the scene.

That's it. Ask all the questions you want, I don't really care, but you're just obfuscating things. It's the equivalent of going to court to fight a ticket and saying:

Your Honour, I have a list of questions which must be answered before my guilt is established:

1) Why was the officer wearing pink socks?
2) At his angle to the license plate, it's quite possible that reflections from an X-ray laser would have blinded the officer, making it impossible for him to identify the vehicle properly.
3) Why did the officer not follow protocol in his angle of approach to the vehicle?


You'll get laughed out of court and told to pay the full goddamn fine. Either deal with the relevant facts of the case, or go home.

 
At 15 November, 2006 10:27, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I bet he didn't come up with those questions himself ;)

Must be some questioneer they have for every conspiracy nut to show to someone when they have nothing else left as evidence.

 
At 15 November, 2006 10:27, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Try and mess with your mind :)

 
At 15 November, 2006 10:29, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

Jay Your a genius big guy. I referenced those questions from the website in the post.

 
At 15 November, 2006 10:36, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeh like i said ;) Ok, i was wrong, i missed that little part in your post.

 
At 15 November, 2006 12:03, Blogger Swing Dangler said...

Alex Somehow I knew you would come up with someway to avoid the question/s. The fact is the NIST flight path doesn't match the story and those important facts such as damaged lightpoles and damaged trailers.

Head back to the mothership, big guy, no room for your elementary examples on this planet.

 
At 15 November, 2006 14:16, Blogger Alex said...

Swinger, why are you avoiding my questions? Answer me now! Why were you wearing pink socks on the day of the attacks?!? Fetzer tells me you didn't fly that day; how did you know the attacks would happen?!?! Your mother offered me sex in exchange for staying quiet about you; it's PROOF POSITIVE that you're a CIA agent!

 
At 15 November, 2006 21:04, Blogger apathoid said...

I won't call you a moron...

Go ahead - I've been called worse.

but before you make a moronic statement, you may want to do a little research before spouting off about things you are unaware of.

Okay, I've researched it a little more. PfT now has 2 airline pilots - I'm impressed.

Depends on how you steer it, where you steer it, how fast your going, the atitude/altitude of plane, crosswind, load, atmospheric conditions etc. etc. I do like the blanket statement though to support the OS that Hani 'flew it'.

It is beyond insane to think that a pilot, complete with a COMMERCIAL RATING, cant steer a friggin plane into a building. Hello??

To re-iterate - Hani Hanjour was a commercial pilot!!!

You just saw a novice do it in a Boeing simulator and I told you that with next to no experience - I was able to land a 767 in a 15 knot crosswind in such a simulator(it wasnt pretty, but..) It wasnt hard.

1-5

The entire notion of the plane not being high enough to hit the poles has a faulty premise. That being that the airplane impacted the Pentagon at exactly 0937:44.000, exactly the moment at which the last data was being recorded by the DFDR.

Thats not accurate. The fact that official impact time is given as 0937:45(est), and the fact that there were 2 empty data frames in the CSV for 0937:45 and 0937:46 would indicate that AA77 was at least 800ft(perhaps as high as 1,600 ft) from the Pentagon wall at 0937:44.000.

Here is an excellent read by JREFer Anti-Sophist on the operation of the FDR, the associated data aquisition unit, and the data that they record and eventually spit out.

6

A little bird tells me that the Doubletree security video shows a glimpse of AA77(I have my doubts)

7

Answered above.

8

??? Elaborate please.

9

See answer for 1-6

10

Radar data

11

"Somewhere in that massive pile of rubble lay two mangled metal containers that might reveal what happened aboard American Airlines Flight 77 in the minutes before terrorists crashed it into America's military headquarters. As a cockpit voice recorder analyst for the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), it was Cushman's job to help locate the airplane's black boxes, as the voice and data recorders that all airliners carry are known informally. It was the first crash site she'd visited.

"Over the next few days, working the 3 p.m. to morning shift, she and several other NTSB experts struggled to separate airplane parts from office parts. Early on the morning of Sept.14, while Cushman was at the site, the cockpit voice recorder, or CVR, was found. It was quickly transported across the Potomac to the NTSB lab in Washington, D.C., where Cushman works with three other analysts, and its data was downloaded.

"Ordinarily, that would have been just the start of Cushman's association with the device, but this time, it was the end. The events of Sept. 11 had already been classified as criminal acts, rather than accidents, so the FBI, which has its own forensic audio lab, took charge of the box and its data.

That's also why Cushman can't say much more about her role in that investigation, or about the work she did on the recorders recovered from Flight 93, which plowed into a field in Pennsylvania after passengers apparently thwarted another hijacking. Like the Pentagon CVR, the black box from that plane came to NTSB only for the extraction of its data before being turned over to the FBI". http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/hear.html

"FBI Director Robert Mueller said Friday that the agency has gotten information from the flight data recorder recovered in the crash of American Airlines Flight 77, which slammed into the Pentagon. He declined to say what information the FBI received from the recorder, which tracks an airplane's flight movements for the last 25 hours. He said the agency had not gotten any information from the voice data recorder from Flight 77". http://www.sptimes.com/News/091501/Worldandnation/FBI_analyzing_voice__.shtml

"Early Friday morning, shortly before 4 a.m., Burkhammer and another firefighter, Brian Moravitz were combing through debris near the impact site. Peering at the wreckage with their helmet lights, the two spotted an intact seat from the plane's cockpit with a chunk of the floor still attached. Then they saw two odd-shaped dark boxes, about 1.5 by 2 feet long. They'd been told the plane's "black boxes" would in fact be bright orange, but these were charred black. The boxes had handles on one end and one was torn open. They cordoned off the area and called for an FBI agent, who in turn called for someone from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) who confirmed the find: the black boxes from AA Flight 77." http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3069699/

12

??? Elaborate please.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home