Merged Was Hani Hanjour really inexperienced?

[Boone 870]

It's been reported that Hani had approximately 600 hours of flight time when he crashed Flight 77 into the Pentagon. To me, that doesn't really sound very inexperienced. Can anyone here give me a rough estimate of how many hours an Air Force pilot would have to acquire before he/she was allowed to take control of a similarly sized transport? Or a commercial airline pilot for that matter?

I realize that the training would probably be more intense, but anything for comparison would be helpful. Any links or resources would be appreciated. Thanks in advance!

 

[Unfit4Command]

It requires 250 hours to obtain a commercial pilot license I believe and Hanjour had both a private and commercial piloting license and was the most experienced out of all of the 9/11 hijackers.

From Debunking 9/11 Myths:
"Hani Hanjour: The most experienced pilot of the four and the only Saudi, Hanjour, 29, obtained his private Pilot's license and commercial pilot's license in Arizona in 1999 before returning to the Middle East. He was recruited for the plot when Al Qaeda leaders learned he was a pilot. When Hanjour returned to Arizona in late 2000, he entered refresher training and Boeing 737 simulator training."

"Truthers" often misrepresent how experienced the 9/11 hijacker pilots really were and try to push them off as awful pilots who couldn't fly at all.

 

[Boone 870]

I have a few more questions that I should have put in the opening post. How did the 9/11 commission come up with that number? Was his logbook recovered or did they contact known flight instructors and aircraft renters? Also, what type of aircraft had he flown? Once again, any help would be appreciated.

 

[nicepants]

I have a few more questions that I should have put in the opening post. How did the 9/11 commission come up with that number? Was his logbook recovered or did they contact known flight instructors and aircraft renters? Also, what type of aircraft had he flown? Once again, any help would be appreciated.

All pilots keep a log book. Certain hour minimums are required for various certifications (such as Commercial). That's where the log book comes into play. Your total hours are also reported when you get a medical certificate. 2nd class medical is required for commercial pilots, and is good for 1 year.

 

[Reheat]

It's been reported that Hani had approximately 600 hours of flight time when he crashed Flight 77 into the Pentagon. To me, that doesn't really sound very inexperienced. Can anyone here give me a rough estimate of how many hours an Air Force pilot would have to acquire before he/she was allowed to take control of a similarly sized transport? Or a commercial airline pilot for that matter?

I realize that the training would probably be more intense, but anything for comparison would be helpful. Any links or resources would be appreciated. Thanks in advance!

I think beachnut and I are the only two AF Pilots here and we're old guys - retired. An AF Pilot gets in the vicinity of about 200 hours of flying time prior to receiving AF Wings (graduation). That time has varied over the years, so that's an approximate number. It's now split into two different tracks - fighter/bombers versus heavy tanker/transport. After graduation the fighter/bombers group go for specialized training in their individually assigned aircraft. For the single seat type fighters the Pilot will achieve Aircraft Commander status much faster than the others. They get something in the neighborhood of 100 hours or so prior to being "turned loose" with their own aircraft. Although they fly and "command" their own aircraft, they are wingmen and are still fairly closely supervised for a period of time. That period of time of close supervision would entirely depend upon the individual level of pilot proficiency and judgment.

The heavy guys would receive about the same amount of specialized training in their individual aircraft and then fly as a co-pilot until such time as their proficiency level and judgment justify an upgrade to Aircraft Commander. Many would do that with less than 600 hours, but it's best to allow beachnut to elaborate on that as I never flew heavies in the AF.

If Hanjour actually had 600 hrs of flying time in anything he would have been very easily capable of doing what he did. He would have been very capable even with less hours as the others were. What he did was crash an aircraft into a building, not fly it safely within FAA standards!

Don't attempt to equate what the instructors said about his ability to fly a small aircraft which he likely intended to rent as that did not directly correlation to what he actually did on 911. The instructors were determining if he was safe and could fly to acceptable FAA type standards. You must remember that he was not required to meet FAA standards on 911 - he crashed. Fortunately, that's not an FAA standard.

If I'm not mistaken he only made two turns and they were not level turns. He had studied the cockpit layout of a 757 and was motivated enough not to be intimidated by the numerous instruments, tits, and knobs.

I've given you what you asked for, but don't try to correlate an AF Pilot's flying time or ability to what any of the hijackers did on 911. There is very little (if any) correlation as the AF does frown on Pilots who crash their aircraft into buildings.

ADD: He would have been required to show his logbook prior to flying with any one of the instructors where he attempted to rent an aircraft.

 

[Reality Believer]

I am not a pilot, but I had the opportunity to spend an hour in an FAA qualified, full motion MD-11 simulator. I can say that a novice could adequately take control of an airborne aircraft and drive it into the broad side of a barn. Hell I almost landed a few times successfully. The simulators are one awesome ride.

 

[beachnut]

flying is too easy

It's been reported that Hani had approximately 600 hours of flight time when he crashed Flight 77 into the Pentagon. To me, that doesn't really sound very inexperienced. Can anyone here give me a rough estimate of how many hours an Air Force pilot would have to acquire before he/she was allowed to take control of a similarly sized transport? Or a commercial airline pilot for that matter?

I realize that the training would probably be more intense, but anything for comparison would be helpful. Any links or resources would be appreciated. Thanks in advance!

Anyone in the world could fly a 757/767 into a building. I took kids who never flew, into a simulator after 9/11, they flew into buildings, first time. No misses. A guy published a video showing a low time small plane pilot in a 757 or 767 simulator and he hit the Pentagon first time, and every time he tried.

At pilot training in the USAF in 1974 we would get 200 hours of flight time and come out fully trained. It took 5 or 10 flights in a big jet and you could land and fly under the Captains supervision. By 600 to 1000 hours you would be ready to fly in all weather and be real safe as the Captain. The guy in the left seat.

But you could get in a 757/767 and take the plane in flight and hit a building as big as the WTC, and the Pentagon is way too big to miss.

600 hours is over kill to do 9/11. The terrorist were over trained. But then if you were going to fly a jet like that, what would you do. Hani not being able to land a C-172 was not a big deal, he was only interested in getting to the runway, not landing. His goal was not to learn to land but kill people by crashing into something. Getting a C-172 to the runway is good enough to learn the pointing aspect of flying. What does not move in the windscreen is where you hit. I bet they were taught that, every pilot is taught a version of what does not move is where you hit. Does that make sense?

Flying is easy, takeoffs and landings and running the systems can be hard. Go to the airport and take an intro flight. See how easy it is! I wish everyone would. In the 70s a lot more people went flying and tried to learn, Go see for yourself. If you try, just ignore the instruments, look outside and fly the plane. Learning all the instruments is hard, but you do not really need them. (sort of)

Reheat - did a good job and beat me to some of this. I have talked to some 757/767 Captains who are also in the AF Reserves, who worked with me while I was on active duty, and after 9/11 they agreed it would be an easy task to do the flying seen on 9/11. If you hear the truth movement lies, you must remember there are thousands if not millions of pilots who do not agree with the handful of pilots in the truth movement.

 

[Boone 870]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I personally don't have any doubt that Hani did not have enough experience and ability to do what he done that day, but a lot of people like to say that he was an inexperienced pilot and could not have pulled off the maneuvers that he did. I will have to look around a bit more and see if I can figure out a reason why he had trouble landing the 172.

Maybe there was a difficult final approach to the runway or he had few hours in that aircraft type.

 

[Corsair 115]

I am not a pilot, but I had the opportunity to spend an hour in an FAA qualified, full motion MD-11 simulator. I can say that a novice could adequately take control of an airborne aircraft and drive it into the broad side of a barn. Hell I almost landed a few times successfully. The simulators are one awesome ride.

Indeed they are! Back when I was 16 many moon ago, my dad, who was a flight instructor at the time, got me some time in an honest-to-goodness 737 simulator for my birthday. He set it up with me on a landing approach and then I flew it from there and landed it. I eyeballed it in all the way in each time, and the printouts afterwards showed I did a fairly good job of flying the correct glide slope.

It requires 250 hours to obtain a commercial pilot license I believe and Hanjour had both a private and commercial piloting license and was the most experienced out of all of the 9/11 hijackers.

At the other end of the scale, it's possible to wind up with a lot of hours with a long career. My dad ended up with over 33,000 hours in his log book when he finally stopped flying.

 

[beachnut]

Thanks for the replies everyone. I personally don't have any doubt that Hani did not have enough experience and ability to do what he done that day, but a lot of people like to say that he was an inexperienced pilot and could not have pulled off the maneuvers that he did. I will have to look around a bit more and see if I can figure out a reason why he had trouble landing the 172.

Maybe there was a difficult final approach to the runway or he had few hours in that aircraft type.

No, go fly and see for yourself. Anyone can have a bad day and flunk. Go take a flight, and see the difference between landing and being able to crash into the runway. Hani had no real motive to be a good pilot, just a killer who can point a plane. If you have not flown for a while you may be rusty. Hani "flew" large aircraft simulators, and if he had flown the sim, he may of been leveling off at 20 or 30 feet to land, not a good idea in a small plane but in the big jet 20 or 30 feet is where you want your butt so the wheel are on the ground, not underground. One my first rookie flight in a big jet, the instructor told me to level off at 20 feet above the runway, then he said "pull it", the throttles, and we touched down with a wisper. My first landing in large jet was perfect. Beleive me, if I went in a small plane and forgot the "picture" and leveled off at 20 feet a time or two, no one will rent me a plane until I prove I can land. With training, in an hour I will have the picture and be renting the plane.

Go fly and see why there is a problem landing. An intro flight cost 100 buck or so in a 172. Go do a Hani test flight, see how you are better than 4 terrorist pilots and better than every single 9/11 truth pilot by default.

Get up, get money, go to airport, get an intro flight. Find a small airport away from the city. You can do it today, get out the phone book or look it up. go fly

 

[DGM]

No, go fly and see for yourself. Anyone can have a bad day and flunk. Go take a flight, and see the difference between landing and being able to crash into the runway. Hani had no real motive to be a good pilot, just a killer who can point a plane. If you have not flown for a while you may be rusty. Hani "flew" large aircraft simulators, and if he had flown the sim, he may of been leveling off at 20 or 30 feet to land, not a good idea in a small plane but in the big jet 20 or 30 feet is where you want your butt so the wheel are on the ground, not underground. One my first rookie flight in a big jet, the instructor told me to level off at 20 feet above the runway, then he said "pull it", the throttles, and we touched down with a wisper. My first landing in large jet was perfect. Beleive me, if I went in a small plane and forgot the "picture" and leveled off at 20 feet a time or two, no one will rent me a plane until I prove I can land. With training, in an hour I will have the picture and be renting the plane.

Your instructor wanted you to do a controlled demolition on the plane?

 

[beachnut]

Your instructor wanted you to do a controlled demolition on the plane?

He said pull the power. I pulled the throttles back, and we watched the plane land. I saved my CD landings for later surprises.

 

[Boone 870]

Thanks Beechnut. Just to give you a little background information about myself, I have roughly 30 hours of flight time. All of the instruction that I received happened when I was 16 years old. I do remember that on my first flight the instructor walked me through everything from pre-flight to engine shutdown without him having to touch anything, including the controls. That flight included three touch and goes and I went on to solo with less than seven hours total flight time.

Anyway, I totally agree with you that the actual flying part is easy and the difficult part is learning aeronautical rules. That is why I wanted someone in the know to give me an idea of how many hours an Air Force pilot would have to acquire before being turned loose with his own aircraft.

While I have your attention, I have heard a theory that claims flight 77 would have "balloned" over the Pentagon because of the aerodynamics of high-speed flight and close proximity to the ground. Any thoughts? I personally don't buy into that one because I've seen a video on liveleak of a French KC 135 buzzing troops while going very fast and extremely low.

 

[R.Mackey]

While I have your attention, I have heard a theory that claims flight 77 would have "balloned" over the Pentagon because of the aerodynamics of high-speed flight and close proximity to the ground. Any thoughts? I personally don't buy into that one because I've seen a video on liveleak of a French KC 135 buzzing troops while going very fast and extremely low.

It's total crap. The argument goes that the "ground effect" at low altitude would lead to an increase in lift, and for some reason this is supposed to mean the aircraft would always have a positive rate of climb at that altitude and the speeds reported.

Any plane can dive through the ground effect. Any plane can also reduce angle of attack, overcome ground effect with the elevator, use spoilers to reduce the lift, etc. Anyone who makes this argument has absolutely no idea what he is talking about.

 

[apathoid]

Thanks Beechnut. Just to give you a little background information about myself, I have roughly 30 hours of flight time. All of the instruction that I received happened when I was 16 years old. I do remember that on my first flight the instructor walked me through everything from pre-flight to engine shutdown without him having to touch anything, including the controls. That flight included three touch and goes and I went on to solo with less than seven hours total flight time.

Anyway, I totally agree with you that the actual flying part is easy and the difficult part is learning aeronautical rules. That is why I wanted someone in the know to give me an idea of how many hours an Air Force pilot would have to acquire before being turned loose with his own aircraft.

While I have your attention, I have heard a theory that claims flight 77 would have "balloned" over the Pentagon because of the aerodynamics of high-speed flight and close proximity to the ground. Any thoughts? I personally don't buy into that one because I've seen a video on liveleak of a French KC 135 buzzing troops while going very fast and extremely low.

While none of these are approaching 530 mph, it's safe to say that they aren't "ballooning", quite the opposite - they appear to be extremely stable at low altitude..

ETA: And here's one of beachnut.......

 

[Reheat]

It's total crap. The argument goes that the "ground effect" at low altitude would lead to an increase in lift, and for some reason this is supposed to mean the aircraft would always have a positive rate of climb at that altitude and the speeds reported.

Absolutely correct! It's funny how so many armchair experts can express an opinion about something they know nothing about and others believe it because it was said in a loud confident tone of voice.

Ground effect is most prominent at high angles of attack i.e. landing. It's takes all of 30 seconds to find that kind of information via Google, so ignorance is no excuse for the CT Internet junkies.

BTW, I have flown at SUPERSONIC speeds very close to mother earth both over land and over water with no ill effects other than a sore neck from trying to watch the scenery go by real fast. It does create a hellofa wake and rooster tail over water and dust devils over dry sand or loose soil, but is otherwise hardly noticeable.

 

[apathoid]

You know, it occured to me that I hadn't seen this "ground effect" argument from PFT, and so thought that I might be able to use them as a debunking source for this particular claim........so I did the requisite Googling and quickly I remembered why I have so much disdain for these morons.

......Once this maneuver was completed, without going into a graveyard spiral, he started to pull out of the descent at 2200 feet and accelerated only 30 knots more at full power to 460 knots in a descent from 2200 feet to the pentagon in about a minute (Whats Vmo at sea level for a 757? Flap speed? Since it looks like he may have found the flap handle only accelerating 60 knots from 7000 feet, the from 2200 feet at full power). AA77 crossed the highways, knocking down light poles, entered ground effect, didnt touch the lawn and got a 44 foot high target (Tail height of 757) into a 77 foot target completely, without overshooting or bouncing off the lawn, or spreading any wreckage at 460 knots. With a 33 foot margin for error. Wow, impressive. Takes a real steady hand to pull that off..........

Yeah, he planned it exactly like that and executed this planned maneuver flawlessly.

So, who pulled off this stunt?

Hani Hanjour. Reported to have 600TT and a Commercial Certificate (see quotes right margin). Hani tried to get checked out in a 172 a few weeks prior at Freeway Airport in MD. Two seperate CFI's took Hani up to check him out. Baxter and Conner found that Hani had trouble controlling and landing a 172 at 65 knots. Bernard, the Chief CFI, refused to rent him the 172. I have instructed many years. I have soloed students in 172's when i had 300 hours as a CFI. How anyone could not control a 172 at 600TT and a Commercial is beyond me. Flight Schools keep going till you "get it" if you are a bit rusty, and then rent you the plane. They are in business to make money after all. .right? The Chief CFI basically refused any further lessons and basically told him to get lost. All this can be confirmed through google searches.

Later, a week after Sept 11. Bernard, the Chief CFI, made a statement saying, "although Hani was rejected to rent a 172, i have no doubt he could have hit the pentagon."

So the guy they use as a source of Hani's ineptitude actually debunks them by saying that Hani would have no problem pulling off the maneuver. So, that's that right? Well, no - Robbie then attacks the credibilty of this instructor and calls him an "inexperienced pilot". Sheesh

Sure, my grandma could hit the pentagon. How about looking into the maneuver before making that statement? He made that statement while the pentagon was still smoking for petes sake. A bit of monday morning quarterbacking if you ask me. A common theme among inexperienced pilots. This also can be verified via google searches.

 

[beachnut]

Thanks Beechnut. Just to give you a little background information about myself, I have roughly 30 hours of flight time. All of the instruction that I received happened when I was 16 years old. I do remember that on my first flight the instructor walked me through everything from pre-flight to engine shutdown without him having to touch anything, including the controls. That flight included three touch and goes and I went on to solo with less than seven hours total flight time.

Anyway, I totally agree with you that the actual flying part is easy and the difficult part is learning aeronautical rules. That is why I wanted someone in the know to give me an idea of how many hours an Air Force pilot would have to acquire before being turned loose with his own aircraft.

While I have your attention, I have heard a theory that claims flight 77 would have "balloned" over the Pentagon because of the aerodynamics of high-speed flight and close proximity to the ground. Any thoughts? I personally don't buy into that one because I've seen a video on liveleak of a French KC 135 buzzing troops while going very fast and extremely low.

Yes, most 9/11 truth are blowing smoke... You flew, you could have taken you trainer, and crashed into most anything as accurate as you fly the first time. You flew the first time, the terrorist trained for a long time, you could have done it the first time and the p4t are unable to imagine it happening.

The KC-135 will hit the Pentagon with a problem, just point it. I would rather fly a 757/767, they would be easier to control than older models of airliners or the older 707 based KC-135. That tanker was only 20 or 30 feet above the ground as it buzzed the guys in the desert. They could have crashed by just letting the plane down like you would fly when you learned. As you suspected, the 9/11 truth movement is making up lies about the flying.

The opinions you are getting here are what greater than 99 percent of all pilots would tell you. And you are one of those. The pilots who make up lies are a pathetic minority.

 

[Spins]

ETA: And here's one of beachnut.......

OMG that's insane!

 

[MikeW]

Keep in mind this footnote to chapter #7 in the 9/11 Commission Report:

170. FBI report, "Summary of Penttbom Investigation," Feb. 29, 2004, pp. 52*57. Hanjour successfully conducted a challenging certification flight supervised by an instructor at Congressional Air Charters of Gaithersburg, Maryland, landing at a small airport with a difficult approach.The instructor thought Hanjour may have had training from a military pilot because he used a terrain recognition system for navigation. Eddie Shalev interview (Apr.9, 2004).

Hanjour rented planes a few times from these people at the end of August 2001.