Flight 175 plane speed challenged

[DGM]

"In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. - Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Licensed commercial pilot. Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career. Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic.

“Flight 175 is the aircraft that's alleged to have hit the South Tower. I don't believe it's possible for, like I said, for a terrorist, a so-called terrorist to train on a [Cessna] 172, then jump in a cockpit of a 757-767 class cockpit, and vertical navigate the aircraft, lateral navigate the aircraft, and fly the airplane at speeds exceeding it's design limit speed by well over 100 knots, make high-speed high-banked turns, exceeding -- pulling probably 5, 6, 7 G's. And the aircraft would literally fall out of the sky. I couldn't do it and I'm absolutely positive they couldn't do it." - Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force – Retired commercial pilot. Flew for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years. Aircraft flown: Boeing 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777. 30,000+ total hours flown. Had previously flown the actual two United Airlines aircraft that were hijacked on 9/11 (Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and Flight 175, the second plane to hit the WTC). Former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions.

“And also in all four planes, if you remember, none of the planes ever switched on their transponder to the hijack code. There's a very, very simple code that you put in if you suspect that your plane is being hijacked. It takes literally just a split-second for you to put your hand down on the center console and flip it over. And not one of the four planes ever transponded a hijack code, which is most, most unusual. ... Commercial airplanes are very, very complex pieces of machines. And they're designed for two pilots up there, not just two amateur pilots, but two qualified commercial pilots up there. And to think that you're going to get an amateur up into the cockpit and fly, much less navigate, it to a designated target, the probability is so low, that it's bordering on impossible." - Commander Ted Muga, BS CE, U.S. Navy (ret) – Retired Pan-Am commercial airline pilot. Aircraft flown: Boeing 707 and 727. Retired Civil Engineer. Retired Naval aviator. Aircraft flown: Grumman E-1 Tracer and E-2 Hawkeye.

It is important for people to understand that scrambling jet fighters to intercept aircraft showing the signs of experiencing "IN-FLIGHT EMERGENCIES" such as going off course without authorization, losing a transponder signal and/or losing radio contact is a common and routine task executed jointly between the FAA and NORAD controllers. The entire "national defense-first responder" intercept system has many highly-trained civilian and military personnel who are committed and well-trained to this task. FAA and NORAD continuously monitor our skies and fighter planes and pilots are on the ready 24/7 to handle these situations. Jet fighters typically intercept any suspect plane over the United States within 10 - 15 minutes of notification of a problem. This type of "immediate, high speed, high priority and emergency" scramble had been happening regularly approximately 75 - 150 times per year for ten years. ...- Robin Hordon – Former Certified Commercial Pilot. Former Certified Flight Instructor and Certified Ground Instructor. Former FAA Air Traffic Controller at the Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center, located in Nashua, NH, 1970 - 1981.

So what? These are not reliable sources. Only United Airlines will be accepted. No more lies from you.

 

[A W Smith]

.{snip irrelelevance}- Robin Hordon – Former Certified Commercial Pilot. Former Certified Flight Instructor and Certified Ground Instructor. Former FAA Air Traffic Controller at the Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center, located in Nashua, NH, 1970 - 1981.

who was fired as an ATC back during the Reagan presidency and who's only current qualifications are as a failed comedy club manager.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

who was fired as an ATC back during the Reagan presidency and who's only current qualifications are as a failed comedy club manager.

Really? You mean he was replaced by a scab along with 11,350 other ATC's?

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Not evidence of what hit the tower.

Radar Tracking Recording of object said to be 175 but with a different transponder code then 175.
ATC Testimony on what they assumed was 175
Plane Parts located at GZ but no serial number identification offered up.
Photos of a Plane hitting tower
Film of a Plane hitting tower
Phone calls assumed to have come from the object that hit the tower.
Personal Effects of Passengers said to be found at GZ placed in a hanger at an airport.
Body Parts and DNA of 12 people aboard flight 175 said to have been found at GZ.

i think i deserve the million

Evidence that Zen has given against Flight 175 hitting WTC 2:

I think it could have been faked, therefore is was in fact faked

 

[pomeroo]

Really? You mean he was replaced by a scab?

Wrong as usual. The air traffic controllers' strike was illegal. When you sign a contract agreeing not to go on strike and then break it, you are striking at the heart of the collective bargaining system. Reflexively pro-union Democrats in Congress could not figure out how to justify the behavior of the controllers' union.

 

[PhantomWolf]

Really? You mean he was replaced by a scab along with 11,350 other ATC's?

It doesn't matter who replaced him, he hasn't been involved in the industry for 20 years. Would you let a computer tech who hasn't seen the inside of a computer for 20 years try and fix your computer?

Besides, that is getting away from the point.

What hard evidence do you have that Flight 175 did not hit WTC 2?

Not what do you think happen, or what might have happened, or what you don't like about what is claimed to have happened. What hard evidence do you have that flight 175 did not hit WTC 2?

If you cannot or will not answer this when we can conclude you have nothing, and end this thread there.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

It doesn't matter who replaced him, he hasn't been involved in the industry for 20 years. Would you let a computer tech who hasn't seen the inside of a computer for 20 years try and fix your computer?

Besides, that is getting away from the point.

What hard evidence do you have that Flight 175 did not hit WTC 2?

Not what do you think happen, or what might have happened, or what you don't like about what is claimed to have happened. What hard evidence do you have that flight 175 did not hit WTC 2?

If you cannot or will not answer this when we can conclude you have nothing, and end this thread there.

I don't need an alternative to dispute the version you hold as fact. If you say it's fact then show the fact.

 

[Mercutio]

I don't need an alternative to dispute the version you hold as fact.

Absolutely true. All you need is something--anything--that is incompatible with the version that rational people hold as fact. So far, you have nothing. Even if we grant you every single dispute, you have done nothing to disprove the version that rational people hold as fact.

If you say it's fact then show the fact.

We both know that you have been shown plenty of evidence. Not proof, no, that is for math and logic; evidence. All of it--every bit--compatible with the version that rational people hold as fact. You have not shown one bit that contradicts it. You thought you had, with your OP, but that has been soundly refuted. Not only does it not reach the levels of skepticism that you have demanded of others, but it does not even reach the levels of skepticism that rational people demand. Your OP is a no-go.

So, what do you have? Anything incompatible with the version that rational people hold as fact?

No?

Next...

 

[gumboot]

"In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft.

Only two wide bodied jets crashed on 9/11. There were also two narrow-body jets. Unlike an aircraft accident, the 9/11 attacks were a criminal investigation. The FBI do not, as a rule, publicly release all information gathered in a criminal investigation. The NTSB, although they release a public report into any aircraft accident, also do not publicly provide the evidence that confirms the identity of the aircraft wreckage.

I challenge you to find a single NTSB report with provides "hard" evidence that the wreckage recovered is from the flight identified in the report.

On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. [/I]- Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Licensed commercial pilot. Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career. Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic.

Evidence of a criminal act is generally kept deliberately hidden from public view. For example there's a high profile murder case under way here in New Zealand, and the primary suspect is currently featured on the US Most Wanted website because he is in the USA. Police are keeping quiet details of the victim's cause of death, for obvious reasons.

This is all standard. Authorities do not publicly release evidence from a crime.

“Flight 175 is the aircraft that's alleged to have hit the South Tower. I don't believe it's possible for, like I said, for a terrorist, a so-called terrorist to train on a [Cessna] 172, then jump in a cockpit of a 757-767 class cockpit, and vertical navigate the aircraft, lateral navigate the aircraft, and fly the airplane at speeds exceeding it's design limit speed by well over 100 knots, make high-speed high-banked turns, exceeding -- pulling probably 5, 6, 7 G's. And the aircraft would literally fall out of the sky. I couldn't do it and I'm absolutely positive they couldn't do it." - Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force – Retired commercial pilot. Flew for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years. Aircraft flown: Boeing 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777. 30,000+ total hours flown. Had previously flown the actual two United Airlines aircraft that were hijacked on 9/11 (Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and Flight 175, the second plane to hit the WTC). Former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions.

It's really sad when veterans make such blatantly stupid comments. UA175 never got anywhere near 5g's, let alone 7. Flying a modern civilian airliner is exceedingly easy. The only hard part is landing.

“And also in all four planes, if you remember, none of the planes ever switched on their transponder to the hijack code. There's a very, very simple code that you put in if you suspect that your plane is being hijacked. It takes literally just a split-second for you to put your hand down on the center console and flip it over. And not one of the four planes ever transponded a hijack code, which is most, most unusual. ... Commercial airplanes are very, very complex pieces of machines. And they're designed for two pilots up there, not just two amateur pilots, but two qualified commercial pilots up there.

All of the 9/11 Hijackers were qualified commercial pilots, certified by the FAA. And as a matter of fact 767s and 757s can be and are flown by one person. One of the reason for having two pilots is so they can take turns on a long-haul flight (and for critical moments such as take off and landing). While in cruise at altitude, a pilot does little more than keep an eye on gauges and talk to ARTCC.

As for squawking 7500, the first sign of hijacking, as far as the pilots were aware, was a knife being rammed into their throats. Al Qaeda specifically trained the hijackers to focus on seizing the cockpit and subduing the pilots as soon as possible - securing the rest of the aircraft could come later. It was vital to their plan to kill the pilots rapidly and without warning. They practised for months.

And to think that you're going to get an amateur up into the cockpit and fly, much less navigate, it to a designated target, the probability is so low, that it's bordering on impossible."[/I] - Commander Ted Muga, BS CE, U.S. Navy (ret) – Retired Pan-Am commercial airline pilot. Aircraft flown: Boeing 707 and 727. Retired Civil Engineer. Retired Naval aviator. Aircraft flown: Grumman E-1 Tracer and E-2 Hawkeye.

The flights carried out on 9/11 have repeatedly been duplicated with ease in flight simulators by people with far less experience than the hijackers. Navigating was as simple as punching in the code for the appropriate VOR beacon, and then simply making sure the heading was directed towards that beacon point.

It is important for people to understand that scrambling jet fighters to intercept aircraft showing the signs of experiencing "IN-FLIGHT EMERGENCIES" such as going off course without authorization, losing a transponder signal and/or losing radio contact is a common and routine task executed jointly between the FAA and NORAD controllers.

Totally false. In the ten years prior to 9/11 NORAD undertook only one intercept of a civilian aircraft over CONR airspace. The NORAD aircraft arrived several hours after communication was lost, to relieve a lone fighter from Eglin AFB which had taken 81 minutes to perform the initial intercept.

The entire "national defense-first responder" intercept system has many highly-trained civilian and military personnel who are committed and well-trained to this task. FAA and NORAD continuously monitor our skies and fighter planes and pilots are on the ready 24/7 to handle these situations. Jet fighters typically intercept any suspect plane over the United States within 10 - 15 minutes of notification of a problem.

False. NORAD fighters were required to be airbourne within 15 minutes of the scramble being issued.

This type of "immediate, high speed, high priority and emergency" scramble had been happening regularly approximately 75 - 150 times per year for ten years. ...[/I]- Robin Hordon – Former Certified Commercial Pilot. Former Certified Flight Instructor and Certified Ground Instructor. Former FAA Air Traffic Controller at the Boston Air Route Traffic Control Center, located in Nashua, NH, 1970 - 1981.

NORAD's tasked area of responsibility is the Air Defense Identification Zone - a broad belt of airspace off the coast of the USA through which all international arrivals and departures must pass. Failure to file a correct flight plan and maintain radio and transponder communication within the ADIZ results in a NORAD intercept. These ADIZ intercepts are routine - with 67 in the months prior to 9/11. However none of the flights hijacked on 9/11 entered the ADIZ.

-Gumboot

 

[pomeroo]

I don't need an alternative to dispute the version you hold as fact. If you say it's fact then show the fact.

You have been shown the facts--repeatedly.

You are willing to make a complete fool of yourself by pretending those facts don't count.

The facts still stand. You are what you are.

Enough.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

Only two wide bodied jets crashed on 9/11. There were also two narrow-body jets. Unlike an aircraft accident, the 9/11 attacks were a criminal investigation. The FBI do not, as a rule, publicly release all information gathered in a criminal investigation. The NTSB, although they release a public report into any aircraft accident, also do not publicly provide the evidence that confirms the identity of the aircraft wreckage.

I challenge you to find a single NTSB report with provides "hard" evidence that the wreckage recovered is from the flight identified in the report.


Evidence of a criminal act is generally kept deliberately hidden from public view. For example there's a high profile murder case under way here in New Zealand, and the primary suspect is currently featured on the US Most Wanted website because he is in the USA. Police are keeping quiet details of the victim's cause of death, for obvious reasons.

This is all standard. Authorities do not publicly release evidence from a crime.

It's really sad when veterans make such blatantly stupid comments. UA175 never got anywhere near 5g's, let alone 7. Flying a modern civilian airliner is exceedingly easy. The only hard part is landing.

All of the 9/11 Hijackers were qualified commercial pilots, certified by the FAA. And as a matter of fact 767s and 757s can be and are flown by one person. One of the reason for having two pilots is so they can take turns on a long-haul flight (and for critical moments such as take off and landing). While in cruise at altitude, a pilot does little more than keep an eye on gauges and talk to ARTCC.

As for squawking 7500, the first sign of hijacking, as far as the pilots were aware, was a knife being rammed into their throats. Al Qaeda specifically trained the hijackers to focus on seizing the cockpit and subduing the pilots as soon as possible - securing the rest of the aircraft could come later. It was vital to their plan to kill the pilots rapidly and without warning. They practised for months.


The flights carried out on 9/11 have repeatedly been duplicated with ease in flight simulators by people with far less experience than the hijackers. Navigating was as simple as punching in the code for the appropriate VOR beacon, and then simply making sure the heading was directed towards that beacon point.

Totally false. In the ten years prior to 9/11 NORAD undertook only one intercept of a civilian aircraft over CONR airspace. The NORAD aircraft arrived several hours after communication was lost, to relieve a lone fighter from Eglin AFB which had taken 81 minutes to perform the initial intercept.

False. NORAD fighters were required to be airbourne within 15 minutes of the scramble being issued.

NORAD's tasked area of responsibility is the Air Defense Identification Zone - a broad belt of airspace off the coast of the USA through which all international arrivals and departures must pass. Failure to file a correct flight plan and maintain radio and transponder communication within the ADIZ results in a NORAD intercept. These ADIZ intercepts are routine - with 67 in the months prior to 9/11. However none of the flights hijacked on 9/11 entered the ADIZ.

-Gumboot

Gumboot touching one by one on all these expert comments with all of their years of experience and knowledge with your blanket bare assertions that they don't know what they are talking about is proof of nothing.

You’re not preaching to the Choir here Gumboot. It’s not going to work.

 

[A W Smith]

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc03.pdf

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Still waiting for Zen to prove Flight 800 was reconstructed.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I don't need an alternative to dispute the version you hold as fact. If you say it's fact then show the fact.

Welcome to the world of the delusional. You have no alternative, you have not evidence, all you have is the breeze of your waving hands as you alude to this big cover-up by the tens of thousands of people involved in the recover and investigations, none of which you have anything other then your delusions and the idea that it "could" be been faked. This is not reality, this is delusion. In such a delusion you also have no evidence that the WTC itself existed, or even New York, in fact since I have never been there, I can said in my delusion NY is a hoax perpetuated by Mark Roberts who is really a secrect agent for the Boston Tourist Board. People that think they are going to NY really end up in a massive set of sound stages in Boston with the parts of New Yorkers all played by actors. PROVE ME WRONG!

The evidence says that Flight 175 hit WTC2. The evidence says that the FBI and others treated the scene as they would any other crime scene of similar magnitude and difficulty. The evidence says that after the first few days the removal and processing of the towers was done with care and teams of people tried their best to locate and identify remains, personal items and over evidence for the wreackage.

You have ZERO evidence that none of this is true, thus if you persist, you are delusional. You have no consistant fact based alternative, and so if you persist you are delusional. Your claims boil down to deney absolutely anything and everything that is considered as evidence in a court of law on a daily basis, if not as evidence of anything on a daily basis, and if you persist in this, then you are beyond delusional.

Since I have a policy of not prolonging people's delusions, I guess there is no longer anything to say other than, go and get proffesional help.

 

[gumboot]

Gumboot touching one by one on all these expert comments with all of their years of experience and knowledge with your blanket bare assertions that they don't know what they are talking about is proof of nothing.

You’re not preaching to the Choir here Gumboot. It’s not going to work.

It's not my fault they're stupid. Unlike them I've actually made an effort to understand what I'm talking about. Everything I have said is factually and demonstratively true.

If anything I said above is false, it will be a simple matter to prove me wrong. I have a fairly hefty research document at my finger tips which recounts, in detail, NORAD's tasks and what they relate to. I can cite military orders, FAA regulations, NTSB reports, and countless documents which all support my claims.

You can offer nothing but the unsupported and blatantly incorrect claims of less than half a dozen pilots, none of whom has any area of expertise in the particular areas concerned.

Bring it on.

-Gumboot

 

[ZENSMACK89]

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc03.pdf

8:42:12 UAL-175 did you copy that? [ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]

(Nine minutes later)


8:51:42 R42 United one seventy five recycle your transponder and squawk code of one four seven zero. [ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]
8:52:09 R42 United one seventy five NewYork[ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]
8:52:20 R42 United,United one seventy five NewYork do you read New York?[ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]
8:53:52 R42 United one seventy five NewYork.[ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]
8:54:33 R42 United one seventy five NewYork do you read New York?[ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]

End

 

[pomeroo]

8:42:12 UAL-175 did you copy that? [ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]

(Nine minutes later)


8:51:42 R42 United one seventy five recycle your transponder and squawk code of one four seven zero. [ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]
8:52:09 R42 United one seventy five NewYork[ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]
8:52:20 R42 United,United one seventy five NewYork do you read New York?[ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]
8:53:52 R42 United one seventy five NewYork.[ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]
8:54:33 R42 United one seventy five NewYork do you read New York?[ZNY 1237-1307 Sector 42R]

End

Excellent. You've shown that Flight 175 was hijacked.

After it was hijacked, it was flown into the South Tower.

Enough.

 

[ZENSMACK89]

It's not my fault they're stupid. Unlike them I've actually made an effort to understand what I'm talking about. Everything I have said is factually and demonstratively true.

If anything I said above is false, it will be a simple matter to prove me wrong. I have a fairly hefty research document at my finger tips which recounts, in detail, NORAD's tasks and what they relate to. I can cite military orders, FAA regulations, NTSB reports, and countless documents which all support my claims.

You can offer nothing but the unsupported and blatantly incorrect claims of less than half a dozen pilots, none of whom has any area of expertise in the particular areas concerned.

Bring it on.

-Gumboot

Why don't you do your own proving? No expertise huh? How do you know better?

 

[gumboot]

Why don't you do your own proving? No expertise huh? How do you know better?

The NORAD Response to 9/11
Introduction
NORAD's Mission And Intercept Procedures
The Wargames
Resources

Enjoy.

-Gumboot

 

[ZENSMACK89]

Still waiting for Zen to prove Flight 800 was reconstructed.

This thread isn't about 800 it's about 175. Where's your evidence?