What if the towers stood?

[Bell]

Well, regardless of what his experience, the deniers would still be up in arms.

"Are we supposed to believe that a group of passenger overpowered hijackers armed with box-cutters??? Have you seen those things? Those blades are long and really sharp."

This isn't a joke - I seriously believe this is what their response would have been.

"How convinient that an ex figterpilot was onboard."

Yes, it doesn't matter what happened or not happened, it alsways proves the conspiracy.

 

[uk_dave]

"How convinient that an ex figterpilot was onboard."

Yes, it doesn't matter what happened or not happened, it alsways proves the conspiracy.

It's like the Naudet documentary.

CT: "So these guys just happen to be making a documentary about a fire crew who just happen to be the first on the scene after the alleged plane hit the tower"

Or, if the Naudet's hadn't got the footage in those first minutes...

CT: "So these guys are supposed to be making a documentary about a fire crew and it just so happens that they didn't get footage of the first alleged plane. How very convenient"

Any event, phrase or action can be spun by the CT'ers into being suspicious

 

[gumboot]

I'm not so confident. I think that only works in the movies.

In the real world, I think the chances of a private pilot (at least that's what he was in the United 93 movie) successfully landing an airliner, even with "help from air traffic control" is slim.

Dunno about that... it may be one rare thing the movies get right. Certainly landing and take-off are the difficult parts of flying, but the easy bits are mind-numbingly easy.

If you know how to land, most of the conversion becomes a matter knowing what the particular aircraft's stall speed is, gear down speed, flap angle, and so forth.

It was a nice clear day with not much wind. Find a nice big long runway with no crosswind, and I think getting the aircraft on the ground in one piece is very do-able. It wouldn't be a pleasant landing (much of airliner flying precision comes down to passenger comfort) but I think they'd be okay.

The key thing is, if he's a pilot, he understand the concept of stall and flap and approach angle and all of that stuff, which means Approach can talk to him in technical terms, not layman's terms.

Bear in mind, before instrument landing systems were developed the ground-controlled approach or "talk-down" was standard practise in situations in which a visual approach was impossible.

And it really wouldn't surprise me if a similar scenario - an amateur or non-pilot landing an aircraft with the aid of ground controllers - has occured multiple times in the history of aviation.

-Gumboot

 

[Rob Lister]

I also suspect an ex-fighter jockey could have pulled it off easily with only a little help from the tower.

 

[AWPrime]

edit

 

[Panoply_Prefect]

Dunno about that... it may be one rare thing the movies get right. Certainly landing and take-off are the difficult parts of flying, but the easy bits are mind-numbingly easy.

If you know how to land, most of the conversion becomes a matter knowing what the particular aircraft's stall speed is, gear down speed, flap angle, and so forth.

It was a nice clear day with not much wind. Find a nice big long runway with no crosswind, and I think getting the aircraft on the ground in one piece is very do-able. It wouldn't be a pleasant landing (much of airliner flying precision comes down to passenger comfort) but I think they'd be okay.

The key thing is, if he's a pilot, he understand the concept of stall and flap and approach angle and all of that stuff, which means Approach can talk to him in technical terms, not layman's terms.

Bear in mind, before instrument landing systems were developed the ground-controlled approach or "talk-down" was standard practise in situations in which a visual approach was impossible.

And it really wouldn't surprise me if a similar scenario - an amateur or non-pilot landing an aircraft with the aid of ground controllers - has occured multiple times in the history of aviation.

-Gumboot

Im no pilot, but I've actually succefully, however bumpy ("manly" the pilot who guided me said), landed an Airbus professional simulator in the [SIZE=-1] SAS Flight Academy at Arlanda here in Stockholm. So as far as I understand it, it is doable ([/SIZE][SIZE=-1]Taking into account that doing it from the safety of a pilot seat in a however realistic simulator doesnt quite compare to being faced with a life-and-death situation).[/SIZE][SIZE=-1].

Cheers,
SLOB
[/SIZE]

 

[Mancman]

I've been wondering for a while what were to happen if the fires in the World Trade Center were able to be extinguished in time to prevent the collapse of both towers? Would it be possible for construction crews to repair the massive structural damage to the towers caused by the jets and fires, or would it require the entire top portion of the towers to be dismantled and reconstructed?

Just asking questions.

It does depend on how unsettled the lower section of the buildings were, but I think the towers would have had temporary support structures placed in the impact damage holes, and then been dismantled down to a couple of floors below where the fires raged (~90 for WTC1 and ~75 for WTC2), and rebuilt, probably with a few extra floors added for good measure.

Would have been an incredible challenge though. I imagine much of lower Manhattan would have to be closed whilst the work took place over several years.

 

[Larry Lovage]

I'd have had a go, and all I've run is Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Apparently ignorant towel-headed Muslim terrorists cannot do simple trigonometry, because it's completely impossible to fly an airplane straight into a building. This theory ignores the fact that there's loads of stuff on any airliner that is designed to allow you to do pretty much everything - including set a fixed descent rate, and you just twist a knob to get the plane pointing int he right direction.

I'm afraid I do disagree with the above poster who reckoned that that sort of thing only happened in the movies - it is not beyond the realms of possibility for even an amateur pilot to pull off a successful landing, to the extent at least that not everybody on the plane died. It's just a tragedy that they failed to regain control.

I think the tops of the towers would have to be dismantled,

Ironically, by "pulling".

 

[beachnut]

I'm not so confident. I think that only works in the movies.

In the real world, I think the chances of a private pilot (at least that's what he was in the United 93 movie) successfully landing an airliner, even with "help from air traffic control" is slim. Of course, a somewhat controlled crash landing would have been infinitely better than what happened on 9/11 and probably yielded survivors even if the plane was damaged beyond repair.

The horror in this kind of scenario is very real.

he would do it, a simple pilot who can really fly

they would talk him down to 20 feet

then they would say pull the throttles back evenly,

squeak, touch down, even the brakes are just like the little airplane, get those toes up there on the top of those rudder pedals and slow the plane down

Ask a pilot, a heavy pilot, oops you did

 

[boloboffin]

The passengers would never have assumed control of the plane.

They had to overcome the two guys outside. At that point, Jarrah began thrashing the plane around, bouncing the people around the cabin. Still, they began to attack the door. Jarrah is clearly heard assessing their approach, and finally put the plane into a dive so steep and disorienting that no one on earth could have gotten into the cockpit to stop him. From his recorded statements, it appears to have been a part of the contigency plans of the hijackers to do so.

 

[Alt+F4]

I had grown up outside of New York and was very familiar with the sight of the twin giants. So the thought that first one and then the other would crumble to the ground was staggering, especially given my initial assumptions about the death toll, which was certainly above 10,000.

If the attacks had happened an hour later there might have been 10,000 victims. I'm a NYCer and witnessed the second plane strike and the collapse of both towers with my OWN EYES (not on the idiot box) and I agree with you, my first thought was, "this just can't happen".

 

[Darth Rotor]

I also suspect an ex-fighter jockey could have pulled it off easily with only a little help from the tower.

Check.

I am guessing a rep (senior captain) from the airline company would have walked him through it, step by step, on a secondary freq, leaving tower freq open for other radio traffic. Might not have been pretty, and the landing might have been firm, and he might have run off the over run if he didn't time the thrust reversal and secondary flight controls perfectly, might even have braked so hard he had a wheel fire, but I am guessing the fighter pilot would get it down.

DR

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

"she's built like a steakhouse, but drives like a bistro!"

 

[roger]

I did it, in a full motion simulator of a helicopter where the guy showing it to me maliciously caused a simulated engine failure. He felt that I probably would have hurt the bird but we would have survived. Autorotations aren't exactly easy, but I did it, with no flight time beyond Microsoft Flight Simulator. ya, I know, it's a random anecdote.