Merged Was Hani Hanjour really inexperienced?

[Pardalis]

This is going to be another marathon thread where he keeps to his original idea no matter what we say.

 

[radical_logic]

Stop repeating yourself.

Then stop ignoring my posts. You claimed: "Those links are almost seven years old, there has been a major investigation since then."

And this was after I quoted page 334 of the 9/11 Comission report (the major "investigation" you referred to), which said "the President was struck by the apparent sophistication of some of the piloting, especially Hanjour's high-speed dive into the Pentagon."

Therefore, although the links I cited are "almost seven years old," they are by no means out-dated.

 

[Pardalis]

OK, so he was "surprised". So what?

 

[radical_logic]

What part of "based on faulty information" are you failing to grasp? Even that quote is wrong. Hani did not make a high-speed dive into the Pentagon.

What part of "link me to some credible refutations" do you not understand?

 

[radical_logic]

OK, so he was "surprised". So what?

You're not reading. He implicitly acknowledged the fact that Hanjour's piloting skills were very good - a claim supported by many other sources.

 

[ktesibios]

Although he appears to be unwilling to notice it, reading this thread convinces me that R-L's claims have not merely been addressed, they've practically been put under an electron microscope, examined and found utterly wanting- in advance, no less, as the merger of threads makes clear.

 

[Pardalis]

You're not reading. He implicitly acknowledged the fact that Hanjour's piloting skills were very good.

Not necessarily.

 

[radical_logic]

I can say that a novice could adequately take control of an airborne aircraft and drive it into the broad side of a barn.

But not, according to experts, into the Pentagon the way Hanjour purportedly did.

"[J]ust as the plane seemed to be on a suicide mission into the White House, the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver. The plane circled 270 degrees to the right to approach the Pentagon from the west…Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm."http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A14365-2001Sep11

"Whoever flew at least three of the death planes seemed very skilled. Investigators are impressed that they were schooled enough to turn off flight transponders -- which provide tower control with flight ID, altitude and location. Investigators are particularly impressed with the pilot who slammed into the Pentagon and, just before impact, performed a tightly banked 270-degree turn at low altitude with almost military precision."

http://www.detnews.com/2001/nation/0109/13/a03-293072.htm


"The steep turn was so smooth, the sources say, it's clear there was no fight for control going on. And the complex maneuver suggests the hijackers had better flying skills than many investigators first believed."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/11/national/main310721.shtml

"The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane," says [Danielle] O'Brien."

http://911review.com/cache/errors/pentagon/abcnews102401b.html

"The maneuver at the Pentagon was just a tight spiral coming down out of 7,000 feet. And a commercial aircraft, while they can in fact structurally somewhat handle that maneuver, they are very, very, very difficult. And it would take considerable training… And while they are structurally capable of doing them, it takes some very, very talented pilots to do that."

http://patriotsquestion911.com/#Muga

 

[lapman]

What part of "link me to some credible refutations" do you not understand?

What part of already been done are you failing to understand?

 

[Calcas]

You're not reading. He implicitly acknowledged the fact that Hanjour's piloting skills were very good - a claim supported by many other sources.

Who cares?

Even IF we acknowledge that his piloting skills "were not very good" (which most of us do NOT acknowledge) then perhaps he just got lucky.

Regardless, Beachnut and other pilots have said how easy it is to take a Noob into a simulator and, once at altitude, teach someone to fly (and crash.)

Have you seen the Dutch video where complete novices went into a simulator and were able to hit the pentagon 3 out of 3 times?

Did you see the recent Mythbusters episode where both Jaime and Adam were able to LAND an airliner (simulator) simply by getting directions from someone on the ground even though neither of them have any experience?

Why would you think someone with 600 hours couldn't do it?

Seriously, this is old, and debunked ****. Can't you do any better?

 

[radical_logic]

What part of already been done are you failing to understand?

http://www.airspacemag.com/flight-today/landing_in_baghdad.html?c=y&page=1

Point to a single sentence (if you can) that negates the claims I cited.

http://www.911myths.com/Another_Expert.pdf

Same challenge. But, let's suppose you could with this one. What would that really tell us? You would only have one expert claiming - not arguing - that the sources I quoted are incorrect.

 

[radical_logic]

Who cares?

Even IF we acknowledge that his piloting skills "were not very good" (which most of us do NOT acknowledge) then perhaps he just got lucky.

Based on the quotes I provided, the claim that Hanjour "just got lucky" is highly implausible.

Regardless, Beachnut and other pilots have said how easy it is to take a Noob into a simulator and, once at altitude, teach someone to fly (and crash.)

Regardless, the numerous experts I cited and referenced said how difficult the Hanjour-dive is.

Have you seen the Dutch video where complete novices went into a simulator and were able to hit the pentagon 3 out of 3 times?

Did they make the same dive Hanjour purportedly did?

Did you see the recent Mythbusters episode where both Jaime and Adam were able to LAND an airliner (simulator) simply by getting directions from someone on the ground even though neither of them have any experience?

Why would you think someone with 600 hours couldn't do it?

Because of what the experts say. See post 42.

Seriously, this is old, and debunked ****. Can't you do any better?

It is old, but not yet debunked.

 

[Tbone]

"The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane," says [Danielle] O'Brien."

http://911review.com/cache/errors/pentagon/abcnews102401b.html

I was wondering where that quote was. You aren't worth the time.

 

[beachnut]

Please see post 42.

Sorry please spell out with bank angle, speed, and the maneuver done that is too hard for Hani to do.

You can't so stop posting hearsay garbage from 9/11 truth failed idea bag of woo.

Why are you so ignorant of flying?

You have debunked ideas! Sorry, you can't even support your own ideas.

Debunked

http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_school_dropouts.html

As a pilot your ideas are nonsensical.

 

[lapman]

But not, according to experts, into the Pentagon the way Hanjour purportedly did.

Wrong

"[J]ust as the plane seemed to be on a suicide mission into the White House, the unidentified pilot executed a pivot so tight that it reminded observers of a fighter jet maneuver. The plane circled 270 degrees to the right to approach the Pentagon from the west…Aviation sources said the plane was flown with extraordinary skill, making it highly likely that a trained pilot was at the helm."http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A14365-2001Sep11

270 degree turn? Faulty information. Not credible.

"Whoever flew at least three of the death planes seemed very skilled. Investigators are impressed that they were schooled enough to turn off flight transponders -- which provide tower control with flight ID, altitude and location. Investigators are particularly impressed with the pilot who slammed into the Pentagon and, just before impact, performed a tightly banked 270-degree turn at low altitude with almost military precision."

http://www.detnews.com/2001/nation/0109/13/a03-293072.htm

270 degree turn? Faulty information. Not credible.

"The steep turn was so smooth, the sources say, it's clear there was no fight for control going on. And the complex maneuver suggests the hijackers had better flying skills than many investigators first believed."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/11/national/main310721.shtml

Made 2 days after the crash. No information known. Not credible.

"The speed, the maneuverability, the way that he turned, we all thought in the radar room, all of us experienced air traffic controllers, that that was a military plane," says [Danielle] O'Brien."

http://911review.com/cache/errors/pentagon/abcnews102401b.html

Leaves out the important quote

"You don't fly a 757 in that manner. It's unsafe."

So the ATCs were basing their opinion on how the plane was flown and not the piloting skills.

"The maneuver at the Pentagon was just a tight spiral coming down out of 7,000 feet. And a commercial aircraft, while they can in fact structurally somewhat handle that maneuver, they are very, very, very difficult. And it would take considerable training… And while they are structurally capable of doing them, it takes some very, very talented pilots to do that."

http://patriotsquestion911.com/#Muga

The Baghdad article shows how wrong this is. So far, you're batting zero.

 

[The Big Dog]

No, R-L, you are correct.

Lets call it a day.

Hani Hanjour was very inexperienced, of this there can be no doubt any longer.

I am certain that with him at the controls, the plane must surely crash.

Well done RL!! Huzzah!

 

[A W Smith]

Nothing but idiot trolls left in the "movement' citing bush of all people

yeah your right RadicallyIllogical.. Hanjour flew in an unsafe manner and meant to take out that construction generator trailer and not only missed but failed to pull up over the pentagon for the cit flyover and a second go round.

 

[Pardalis]

Strange that he uses Bush as one of his "experts".

The highjackers focused on only three things: steering, navigation and speed. If you ignore everything else: takeoff, landing, altitude, passenger safety and comfort of course you'll fail the class.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

So how does this prove Hani didn't fly the plane again?

 

[beachnut]

This is the first in a series of posts where I detail the many contradictions in the official story. Do not bother posting in this thread if you're going to attack me personally,

Who needs to attack you; your ideas are pure junk!

http://911debunker.livejournal.com/2647.html

"People need to realize that crashing a plane into a building as massive as the Pentagon is remarkably easy and takes no skill at all. Landing one on a runway safely even under the best conditions? Now that's the hard part!"
Source: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0274.shtml

You should not make up lies to a pilot who flies big jets. 7 years and you bring up stuff debunked in the same source if you read them. lol