Cyprus-Forum.com

[Daniella]

Paphitis, assuming that the real target of the Beoing 757, was the Pentagon; would it be feasible for a crew to pilot the 757 with a 'missile-like' accuracy straight into the Pentagon building? Would it not require a few dummy runs or in their absence would a 'homing-beacon' placed in the Pentagon be of any help to the 'conspiracy theorists'?

I voted 'OXI' btw.

What do you mean about feasible?

I think maneuvering an aircraft to hit a building is an impossible feat to all pilot crews. I am certainly incapable of such a thing, but terrorists wouldn't have a problem if that is what they want to do.

Flying and maneuvering an aircraft is not a difficult thing to do. You can do it with limited training.

did you try ?
I have a licence to pilot aircraft as Cessna or similar (my father was an istructor) and i ever though that fly with an Airbus 757 was little complicated.
me, an idiot !

[LAps]

“The greater the lie, the greater the chance that it will be believed"

[Cap]

The theorists are leading by quite a margin.
The rest are in Sh**sville Arizona, population 15

[Robin Hood]

Paphitis,

Thank you for at least taking the time to formulate a reply rather than just a one line insult. Let’s just ignore the ‘plonkers’ comments, such opinion is irrelevant.

I believe you have substantial flying experience as a commercial pilot? I have some although only a mere ppl with IMC and night ratings, so I bow to your vastly superior commercial experience. What I have said is that the story from the investigating commission is not backed by the real evidence supplied by the data recorder and other significant factual evidence.

However, what you have said virtually backs what I have said in relation to the incident at the Petagon on 9-11. For instance:

According to the information taken of the data flight recorder, the aircraft WAS flying at 110Knts over Vne, DID turn through 270 Deg. It also DID go down to within 3m of grnd.lvel, and did have to climb over obstructions. As you say, these are impossibilities in a commercial airliner even in the hands of an expert. But this is what we are expected to believe happened.

Another point I didn’t mention was, that when the data recorded was checked against the American Airlines analysis software, the two were incompatible. In other words, the software in the recorder of an AA Boeing 757/767(?) could not be read by the AA software that was designed to do just that. I find this strange, don’t you?

I really wish I had your faith in thinking that the US administration would not take innocent US lives and that the even the CIA would not be capable of that. History says otherwise.

So, let me take some of your points:

• Bullshit

No ppl I have ever met in my limited experience could ....... in a airliner at 600Knts! I can remember my first feeble attempts at putting a C152 down neatly on a commercial sized runway (BA-Hawarden) at 45-50knts .... not something I would claim to be proud of?

• Upon impact ... momentum and kinetic energy – and the undamaged windows.

Even had the tail section broken off at the instant of impact, momentum and kinetic energy would have kept it travelling in a more or less straight line. The only thing that would change that would be Newtons law. i.e. when the assembly struck the building and yet it dissipated all this energy without any sign of damage above the impact point.

I would apply the same logic to the engines? Although the mass of the engine is only a meter or so in diameter, (the rest being the by-pass fan and the casing?) the same energy would have propelled it straight through the front wall and as these are the two single most solid pieces of machinery, they either vapourised upon impact (highly improbable)or mysteriously disappeared. The remains of the engines were never displayed ...... why?

• Mate, the aircraft would have been pulverised

You are absolutely correct ... to a point? The engines would have been virtually unrecognisable as engines but their sheer mass would have kept then in one very distorted and misshapen mass. The same logic I would apply to the main landing gear. But In spite of this pulverisation there are published pictures of a flimsy piece of fuselage outer skin with AA logo in part visible, several tens of meters away from the building, presumably blown there at the time of impact, intact and even the paint was undamaged. Again, strange taking your observations into account?

• Stranger things have happened.

True, I suppose you could say finding Mohammed Atta’s passport laying completely undamaged on top of the smouldering remains of the twin towers, which had been totally destroyed by a massive impact, fire and a collapse that pulverised thousands of tonnes of reinforced concrete, could be classified as one of those stranger things that ‘happen’?

• Only in your wildest fantasy.

Again true, it would be unbelievable but surely you would agree that a crash site is kept as far intact as recue operations allow (although not relevant in this case) so that the FAA could use this to find out the cause(s) of any incident. This did not happen in this case. Within hours the debris was being hauled away in trucks as it was on the Twin Towers crash site. Who was doing the clearing I cannot definitely say it was security but, one thing is certain ........ it was not Steptoe and Son!

• The aircraft can turn 270 deg.....

It would be a disaster of design failure if it couldn’t but, not on the flight parameters given. Vne +110Knts, a tight 'Top Gun' 270 deg turn, pulling goodness knows how many +G’s, descending to almost ground level and in the hands of an inexperienced PPL with zero time on type? Now that really takes some believing!

• Who told you the aircraft was only 3m above the ground.........

How else would it have been possible for the aircraft to impact the building at ground floor level? It may have been higher, further away from the point of impact but it was still bloody close to the ground.

• The facts refute all the conspiracy theories.......

You have proved exactly the opposite, the facts available do not support the Pentagon incident as explained by the Administration and their very limited investigation. ( I read that it cost $30m to investigate the Monica Lewinski/Bill Clinton affair but, only $3m was allocated to investigate 9-11! Simply heresay, as I cannot remember where I read it.) Why were the dozens of confiscated videos never released by the CIA and the five frames they did release showed nothing? All those that pointed at the impact site have been impounded in ‘...the interests of National Security’

I am no idiot and neither are you. If you had referred to my mental state after sinking a six pack, I would have whole heartedly agreed with your comment but, I drink very little and even feel the effects of one large KEO!

[Paphitis]

Paphitis, assuming that the real target of the Beoing 757, was the Pentagon; would it be feasible for a crew to pilot the 757 with a 'missile-like' accuracy straight into the Pentagon building? Would it not require a few dummy runs or in their absence would a 'homing-beacon' placed in the Pentagon be of any help to the 'conspiracy theorists'?

I voted 'OXI' btw.

What do you mean about feasible?

I think maneuvering an aircraft to hit a building is an impossible feat to all pilot crews. I am certainly incapable of such a thing, but terrorists wouldn't have a problem if that is what they want to do.

Flying and maneuvering an aircraft is not a difficult thing to do. You can do it with limited training.

did you try ?
I have a licence to pilot aircraft as Cessna or similar (my father was an istructor) and i ever though that fly with an Airbus 757 was little complicated.
me, an idiot !

Do you fly Daniella?

How many hours do you have and what types have you flown?

[Paphitis]

Paphitis,

Thank you for at least taking the time to formulate a reply rather than just a one line insult. Let’s just ignore the ‘plonkers’ comments, such opinion is irrelevant.

I believe you have substantial flying experience as a commercial pilot? I have some although only a mere ppl with IMC and night ratings, so I bow to your vastly superior commercial experience. What I have said is that the story from the investigating commission is not backed by the real evidence supplied by the data recorder and other significant factual evidence.

However, what you have said virtually backs what I have said in relation to the incident at the Petagon on 9-11. For instance:

According to the information taken of the data flight recorder, the aircraft WAS flying at 110Knts over Vne, DID turn through 270 Deg. It also DID go down to within 3m of grnd.lvel, and did have to climb over obstructions. As you say, these are impossibilities in a commercial airliner even in the hands of an expert. But this is what we are expected to believe happened.

Another point I didn’t mention was, that when the data recorded was checked against the American Airlines analysis software, the two were incompatible. In other words, the software in the recorder of an AA Boeing 757/767(?) could not be read by the AA software that was designed to do just that. I find this strange, don’t you?

I really wish I had your faith in thinking that the US administration would not take innocent US lives and that the even the CIA would not be capable of that. History says otherwise.

So, let me take some of your points:

• Bullshit

No ppl I have ever met in my limited experience could ....... in a airliner at 600Knts! I can remember my first feeble attempts at putting a C152 down neatly on a commercial sized runway (BA-Hawarden) at 45-50knts .... not something I would claim to be proud of?

• Upon impact ... momentum and kinetic energy – and the undamaged windows.

Even had the tail section broken off at the instant of impact, momentum and kinetic energy would have kept it travelling in a more or less straight line. The only thing that would change that would be Newtons law. i.e. when the assembly struck the building and yet it dissipated all this energy without any sign of damage above the impact point.

I would apply the same logic to the engines? Although the mass of the engine is only a meter or so in diameter, (the rest being the by-pass fan and the casing?) the same energy would have propelled it straight through the front wall and as these are the two single most solid pieces of machinery, they either vapourised upon impact (highly improbable)or mysteriously disappeared. The remains of the engines were never displayed ...... why?

• Mate, the aircraft would have been pulverised

You are absolutely correct ... to a point? The engines would have been virtually unrecognisable as engines but their sheer mass would have kept then in one very distorted and misshapen mass. The same logic I would apply to the main landing gear. But In spite of this pulverisation there are published pictures of a flimsy piece of fuselage outer skin with AA logo in part visible, several tens of meters away from the building, presumably blown there at the time of impact, intact and even the paint was undamaged. Again, strange taking your observations into account?

• Stranger things have happened.

True, I suppose you could say finding Mohammed Atta’s passport laying completely undamaged on top of the smouldering remains of the twin towers, which had been totally destroyed by a massive impact, fire and a collapse that pulverised thousands of tonnes of reinforced concrete, could be classified as one of those stranger things that ‘happen’?

• Only in your wildest fantasy.

Again true, it would be unbelievable but surely you would agree that a crash site is kept as far intact as recue operations allow (although not relevant in this case) so that the FAA could use this to find out the cause(s) of any incident. This did not happen in this case. Within hours the debris was being hauled away in trucks as it was on the Twin Towers crash site. Who was doing the clearing I cannot definitely say it was security but, one thing is certain ........ it was not Steptoe and Son!

• The aircraft can turn 270 deg.....

It would be a disaster of design failure if it couldn’t but, not on the flight parameters given. Vne +110Knts, a tight 'Top Gun' 270 deg turn, pulling goodness knows how many +G’s, descending to almost ground level and in the hands of an inexperienced PPL with zero time on type? Now that really takes some believing!

• Who told you the aircraft was only 3m above the ground.........

How else would it have been possible for the aircraft to impact the building at ground floor level? It may have been higher, further away from the point of impact but it was still bloody close to the ground.

• The facts refute all the conspiracy theories.......

You have proved exactly the opposite, the facts available do not support the Pentagon incident as explained by the Administration and their very limited investigation. ( I read that it cost $30m to investigate the Monica Lewinski/Bill Clinton affair but, only $3m was allocated to investigate 9-11! Simply heresay, as I cannot remember where I read it.) Why were the dozens of confiscated videos never released by the CIA and the five frames they did release showed nothing? All those that pointed at the impact site have been impounded in ‘...the interests of National Security’

I am no idiot and neither are you. If you had referred to my mental state after sinking a six pack, I would have whole heartedly agreed with your comment but, I drink very little and even feel the effects of one large KEO!

Nice post Robin Hood!

Please accept my apology if I went a little overboard with my earlier reply to you. All part of this forums theatrics I suppose.

It was obvious to me that you have an aviation grounding, and your analysis above and in your earlier post appear sound and dilligent.

But please allow me to respond on all of the above later, because it is a bit late at the moment.

However, I will still maintain my stance in that I don't believe in the Conspiracy Theories.

FDR data will be most useful as well. Do you have any reliable sources?

[cyprusgrump]

You can pick to pieces the details of the Pentagon crash and argue about it until the end of time… yes, we can argue about VNE, QNF, QNH and the FDR data (I also have a PPL)…

Personally, I believe that somebody that spent a significant amount of time on a fight simulator could fly an (already flying) plane into a building (you’re going to die; it doesn’t matter if you exceed VNE or coordinate rudder and ailerons).

However, that is somewhat irrelevant. If you believe that the Pentagon crash was part of a plot you also have to accept the Twin Towers crashes were part of the same plot.

And the chances of such a plot to fly aircraft into multiple buildings, and coordinate them with a controlled demolition without anybody involved in the plot breaking secrecy or anything going wrong are infinitesimally small…

[yialousa1971]

You can pick to pieces the details of the Pentagon crash and argue about it until the end of time… yes, we can argue about VNE, QNF, QNH and the FDR data (I also have a PPL)…

Personally, I believe that somebody that spent a significant amount of time on a fight simulator could fly an (already flying) plane into a building (you’re going to die; it doesn’t matter if you exceed VNE or coordinate rudder and ailerons).

However, that is somewhat irrelevant. If you believe that the Pentagon crash was part of a plot you also have to accept the Twin Towers crashes were part of the same plot.

And the chances of such a plot to fly aircraft into multiple buildings, and coordinate them with a controlled demolition without anybody involved in the plot breaking secrecy or anything going wrong are infinitesimally small…

[yialousa1971]

Daniella & Yialousa, how many times did you vote?

I didn't vote as there was no option for Israel.

[Filitsa]

Kiks, I don't agree with you, sorry. The whole thing went too easy for a random hi-jack and crashing.

What I find most strange is how the building conveniently fell straight down not causing it to tilt and destroy neighbouring buildings. The whole thing went like clockwork for an attack of this magnitude.

With all the homeland seourity the US has, they have a department made up of every combination of the english alphabet, and still these nobodys manged to do it??

Come on, just who do they think they are fooling??? Birkturk maybe, not me or the millions of others who understand just how dirty the CIA play.

They would kill their own to have a reason to do what they want.

Definately an inside job.

B25, the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox church was a neighboring building that was destroyed in the attack.

The Department of Homeland Security did not exist at the time of the attacks. Rather, it came as a consequence of them with the Homeland Security Act of 2002.