Arabia's Flying Mujaheddin

Discussion in 'World Events' started by hypewaders, Nov 17, 2003.

  1. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    Baron Max: Sorry I missed this response from you- I didn't mean to ignore it. " I've talked to three airline pilots and one former US Navy combat pilot and they all agree that with only a little bit of training, the terrorists could have hit the buildings ....as they obviously did.

    I'd like to hear from the Navy combat pilot if you get a chance to speak with him/her again: How does he or she define "a little training"?

    "Just a little side note: One of the airline pilots said that the second plane to hit the towers seemed to be on instrument flight/auto pilot, and at the last minute saw that he was going to miss the tower, so he banked it viciously in order to hit it."

    That's completely impossible. The rates of turn of UAL93 far exceeded the capabilities of the autopilot. Autopilots must not (by certification and maintenance standards) be capable of maneuvering fast enough to surprise a crew that might mis-program it. At low speeds, they are limited to standard-rate (2 degrees/second). At maximum speed (and the S.Tower airplane was even faster on impact than the first) the limit is half Standard Rate. That's four minutes and more than 30 miles to turn a circle- very sedate. Riding in an airliner, you can feel when the autopilot/autothrottles are engaged if you pay close attention. There are only very fluid, slow changes of attitude and airspeed possible by design. They can be set up (by a pilot very familiar with the airplane) to fly a coupled instrument approach to an ILS (using ground-based guidance beams) with high accuracy. But not at over 500 knots: The Autopilot could never capture the (6-20 mile) final approach course and glideslope in time: The rates, damping, and anticipation aren't available with an autopilot. UAL93 was maneuvering HARD, and simply could not have been on autopilot.

    As to the bank angles on impact, this was consistent with both WTC attacks, and was more likely a deliberate technique to spread the fuel over more stories of the building- not a course correction. The fuel was the weapon, and they chose aircraft that were fueled for long flights. For a lower structure, the bank was deleted, and maximum kinetic impact was effected at ground level. To me the Pentagon attack was the most amazing one for the skill required. But all were astounding.

    When I transition pilots into faster airplanes, they are never... NEVER are able to land with accuracy. The 9-11 pilots were making the most extreme transition imagineable , if we are to believe that they graduated from light piston civilian trainers to heavy jets with such alacrity. According to the government story, this was the very first time these pilots had handled a jet aircraft. That's impossible. I challenge you to show this thread to your pilot friends, and let them respond directly, Baron.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Well, I didn't think that I'd have to explain that to an experienced pilot! When the plane is on auto-pilot, if the pilot grabs the controls and makes drastic corrections, the auto-pilot automatically disengages!

    The auto-pilot could easily have been programmed so that the plane flew toward those GPS coordinates ....if the guy missed the coordinates or they weren't quite right, then he had to bank sharply to make the correction. That's all ....and it's really quite simple.

    Perhaps. But I bet they could "aim it" and slam it into the ground pretty damned close to the end of the runway! Landing and slamming into the ground are two very, very different things ....or don't you agree?

    But it's neither here nor there, Hype. You have your opinions and, seemingly, millions of others have a different opinion to yours, including many airline pilots. Which one do you think I'll believe?

    Sorry, Hype, I'm just not into conspiracy theories ...except in novels sometimes. Are you an author, perchance?

    Baron Max
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    "When the plane is on auto-pilot, if the pilot grabs the controls and makes drastic corrections, the auto-pilot automatically disengages!"

    I wish I could take you up and let you disengage the autopilot this way, Baron. First, you have to fight the autopilot, which resists your input until a specified torque is exceeded- It's a pretty good amount of control pressure, about like the manual pressure necessary to pick up a large watermelon. Then suddenly, the autopilot, as if saying "all yours" completely lets go in an instant. Your nervous system and muscles don't react as quickly, so what results is a big "bobble" or oscillation in the flight path. I should tell you that you can also disengage the autopilot at the press of a handy button while exerting no pressure on the controls, and eliminate the bobble. But how these guys disengaged autopilots isn't the issue, because they were maneuvering far in excess of the autopilots' capabilities.

    These attacks runs were skillfully hand-flown to impact by highly-trained jet pilots. This is not a grand conspiracy theory, but an observation from experience. Why the US government would cover up the training records of the pilots involved with an implausible, shoddy cover story is an illegal conspiracy, but not so hard to figure out. The Bush Administration probably would not have your support, Baron, if they had not fed you childish versions of events like these, that can mesh with a simplified world view.

    In case you didn't notice, before 9-11 the USA had already commenced a rapid hands-off concerning the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Why? The regime was on the verge of being toppled by the likes of al-Qaeda. Our troops and equipment were pulled out, because they were contributing to the instability. When the 9-11 story lead straight back to Arabia, a big, unwieldy axe was used to chop off every story line in that direction.

    "Don't go there" was our government's response to anything involving the Arabian peninsula, even though it is seething with opposition to our favorite monarchs and mafias in the big inverted Sunni Triangle. But the truth is there. 9-11 had infinitely more connections with Saudi Arabia than with Iraq. 9-11 even had far more connections with Saudi Arabia than with Afghanistan: The fact that there were no Afghan and no Taliban pilots (all Sunni Arabians) should pique your intellect on that note.

    The truth is not a conspiracy theory. I am not so much interested in the web of lies that the Bush Administration has concocted in order to satisfy supporters like you, Baron Max. I am interested in the simple truth, and I strongly suspect that part of that truth is that those who attacked us were no amatuers, and they came from a country that does virtually all its air force procurement and training with the USA. The cover story is going to bust apart sooner or later, and only because there are Americans who value the truth over convenient lies. Right now, the government stories of who these pilots were is a shambles.
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2005
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    And how will you know the "simple truth" when you see it/read it/hear it?

    Oh, wait! First you say you want the "simple truth", but then you go on to promote YOUR idea/suggestion of what that MIGHT be??? Or perchance, are you saying/implying that ....IF AND ONLY IF... they finally agree with what you suggest/believe, then you'll believe it?

    I ask again .....how will you know "the simple truth" when you see it/read it/hear it?

    Baron Max
     
  8. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    "And how will you know the "simple truth" when you see it/read it/hear it?"

    It will make sense.

    "then you go on to promote YOUR idea/suggestion of what that MIGHT be???"

    Part of discovery is testing reasonable hypotheses. Formulating a reasonable hypothesis requires both curiosity and familiarity with the issues. In the press and public, these seem to be strangely lacking today. I think that we have been masterfully manipulated with 9-11: I don't mean by the event itself, but rather how our national response has been tailored. The simple answers we have been given raise still more questions, because they don't make sense.

    "are you saying/implying that ....IF AND ONLY IF... they finally agree with what you suggest/believe, then you'll believe it?"

    I would require clear evidence of how 3 low-time pilots having zero jet experience, and who had all displayed shoddy piloting skills in civilian flight schools were capable of consistently deadly low-level, high-speed, and high accuracy jet attack. I would as part of that evidence require their verifiable identities: Names, bios, training records etc.(these are all entirely lacking presently). If in fact true as you have expressed your belief and trust, the training methods for achieving such uncommon results would interest me greatly. Military training could be streamlined substantially. Therefore I would be very grateful for full disclosure of such evidence, that would include methods certain to revolutionize flight training.

    I would find a story plausible if it also provided clear evidence of how the pilots involved were exclusively supported through Afghan-Taliban financial channels, and that the money trail does not lead into Arabia. This demarcation line is where things get highly fuzzy and suspect. Actually that's generous: This demarcation line shows blatant obscuration of the facts. Our "friends" in the Sa'ud Dynasty are insistent that they have control of their revolutionary commoners, and that there is nothing we need to know about them. Our US government concurs. But I expect regardless that "the simple truth" will include organizations physically within and in opposition to the government of the Kindom of Saudi Arabia. The original Al-Qaeda was not an Afghan or Iraqi creation. It was a revolutionary Arabian one, and the trail must certainly lead there. But that trail did not suit the needs of the Bush cabinet: They do not wish to perturb Saudi Arabia in the least- Hands off.

    So it utterly fascinates me that 4 years after the crime, no perpetrators have yet to be identified, while most Americans remain indifferent and incurious. I suspect it is a product of a particular fear on both sides of government, that government is not as in control of events as we would like to believe. Government is afraid to touch the issues in Arabia, because an Iran-style revolution is pending, and because they have many back-channel connections with the rOIL Family to protect. The American population in general does not want an education in Mideast politics and economics, including American ineptitude in sorting it all out- We just want leadership to handle it for us with fatherly reassurance and decisiveness. Both the Bush Cabinet and the American public are likely to be sorely disappointed. Things are getting out of hand, and the deliberate obscuration of what is going (government) and head-in-the-sand mentality (public) are not helping matters.

    "I ask again .....how will you know "the simple truth" when you see it/read it/hear it?"

    I expect the truth will be embarrassing, even damning, to those presently in power, who are making the most obvious efforts to obscure the real story. I expect it is something like Clinton's lies (or any "white lie") in the sense that it is the coverup (and not the acts concealed) that rises to criminality. I have no reason to believe that the Bush Administration had any culpability in 9-11 the event. I have much reason to believe that they have and are impeding the public discovery of specifically who did it and specifically how. Eventually, possibly after a momentous course of events in Arabia, the story is going to be told. In the case of my hypothesis, once personnel feel safe in speaking, they will reveal the identities of fellow pilots who defected and murdered thousands in New York and Washingon. The most likely time for such revelation would be after the collapse of the Saud monarchy.

    I think that 9-11 was seen as a golden opportunity by the Bush cabinet, and that is was also seen on the inside as an issue much too complex for the American People to confront in an open, democratic, detailed, and protracted way. I think that they decided to shape public perceptions of what had occured in order to further their grandest objectives for the Mideast. So they held up Osama and Saddam to a confused and fearful public, and committed us to the very nation-building and federal spending that George W. Bush himself had categorically foresworn during his initial Presidential campaign.

    The Bush Cabinet decided to "go massive" as Rumsfeld declared, and pull out all the stops. But because they did not understand what they were doing, these campaigns have flopped. But that's another thread.

    This particular thread explores inconsistencies in the delivery of the prime motivator that got America up in arms (the 9-11 attack). I have put down why I think the story of these 9-11 pilots has been rather sloppily tampered with. I know enough about both aviation and the Mideast to recognize several glaring inconsistencies, which have bothered me since the verry first moment the US Government put them out.

    I fully expect much more of the truth to emerge about 9-11. You mentioned the JFK assassination, which has never been satisfactorily explained IMO, (and most Americans also agree). As shocking as 11-22-63 was to the nation, 9-11 has vastly greater domestic and international implications. There will be greater motivation to learn the truth, in all its verifiable detail.

    9-11 the event also likely involved more nations and individuals in the chain than did our other example of national mysteries. In the case of any Arabian connections, the regime now in power is not likely to endure much longer. An Arabian revolution will likely shake more public sources out of the tree, once that repressive regime is gone (even if replaced by another repressive regime). More will be also be learned in this case because 9-11 took place in a new era when information travels more freely, both within, without, and between secure and public, domestic and international channels. It's so much information that it's hard to digest, but digest it we will, and I am confident that we will eventually sort out an evidence-based understanding from the chaotic pile of mostly spin and misinformation that we have been given.
     
  9. Baron Max Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    23,053
    Okay, Hype, ...anyone who's willing to type that much onto an Internet forum post must have some horrendous inner need to be believed. So ......I give in to your onslaught of words.

    Baron Max
     
  10. Roman Banned Banned

    Messages:
    11,560
    Hahaha.

    I read them. They're pretty good words.
     
  11. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    Gratia, Roman. And thank you Baron, you have been a rare and vocal participant, and a worthy adversary in this lop-sided dogfight. So I must respectfully and gratefully accept your submission. Seriously, it's been fun.
     
  12. crazy151drinker Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,156
    Hype,

    There is a HUGE difference between flying an F-16 and a jumbo jet! What practicle exp could one get from flying a F-16? Take off and landing sure....the concept is the same. But the handing characteristics are totally different! If were saying that they had some practice 747 or something- fine, I could go that route. That would be interesting, but flying fighter planes is hardly realistic training for a 747.
     
  13. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    The Royal Saudi Airforce had BAC lightings, Hawker Hunters, F-5Bs and later F-15s when I was bumming around Dhahran Airbase. An American friend of mine was an instructor for the RSAF, on assignment for the US Air Force. We talked a lot, and there's not much more to know about him.

    I sold Z-242 military basic trainers to several air forces, and entertained many other military tire-kickers. In the course of demonstrating the airplanes, it was imp0ortant to fly the training profiles in the Zlin to see if they could simulate a larger aircraft. We found that with simple modifications, we could make a propeller-driven basic aerobatic trainer exhibit the flirtatiousn personality of a MiG-21 in terms of control response, roll rate, g-forces, etc.

    Anyway, every air force around the world periodically has to deal with a change of equipment. Therefore, front-line fighter and attack pilots are encouraged to take trainimg in as many disparate aircraft types are in Armed Forces inventory, or available through civilian contractors.

    Among the fundamentals of gravity-bomb delivery... Gravity-bomb: it has no guidance, and is lobbed like a football. In order to place the football on target, it is necessary to assume a stabilized ballistic flight path that intersects the target. When learning this fundamental, it is not very important what you are flying.

    Keep this in mind when I tell you that in the United States, military and general aviation (general aviation is all non-military and non-airline flying activity) are two very different worlds. You do nbot learn ballistic weapons delivery, or even the fundamentals thereof in a civilian flight training business targeting airline-bound trainees.

    They don't teach this stuff. Could they? Yes. But they don't. Air Forces do. Americans taught the Arabian 9-11 pilots how to fly attack. That is what makes the most sense, considering the Big Picture.
     
    Last edited: Dec 30, 2006
  14. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    As with the whitewashing of the national origins and identities of the 9-11 perpetrators, our multiplying radical enemies are scrupulously portrayed in White House and yellow-media accounts as anything but Saudi, and preferably Iranian and Syrian.

    Which, as some of us have understood for some time, is a pack of lies:


    We're being consistently distracted from highly-volatile undercurrents in Saudi Arabia, and distracted from deep backroom Washington ties to a corrupt mafia whose days are numbered. We're told by leaders who know better, that we are killing and dying in a focused and sincere "War on Terrorism / War on Islamic Extremism". How long before this absurd ruse is dispelled? Until this deception is recognized by most Americans, our "war effort" will continue to be like pissing into the wind.
     
  15. Neildo Gone Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,306
    Nothing is going to be done about Saudi Arabia as long as the Bush's still have power. We'll only attack Saudi Arabia once the House of Saud falls. They're no different than Iraq, a puppet government to make money and control their resources.

    Once we no longer have that control, we find a list of 1,000 reasons to invade, and viola! Things don't get any better than that. We control an enemy and have them been our so-called ally, then we get to denounce them as terrorists any time we choose for a military strike to regain that control over them.

    - N
     
  16. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    Yes, if the Sunni hotheads make a grab, the Shi'a majority will promptly kick their asses. That is, speaking of the Eastern Province.

    Also, firefights in Makka during haj are definitely not convenient, nor respectful. Firefights in Makka? FUCKING KILL THEM! Will be the ChainI nc chant. That won't be passive at all. It won't be very smart, either. So they'll step in it.

    If the Bumbleviks have managed to put such eventualities in motion, we Americans must be prepared to be vulnerably hated by millions of important people (if mostly important for numbering in the millions) for a very long time.

    Bro, can you spare 10 bucks?
     
  17. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,941
    So we trained our own enemies, what else is new? How else are you supposed to get new ones? If we invaded Saudi Arabia and destroyed their government, the radical fundamentalists would take over, just like Iraq.
     
  18. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    It will be worse when Saudi goes the way of the Shah's Iran, and before Mesopotamia-Pakistan-Aghanistan (one fundie riot from the Gulf to China- uninterrupted!) is a democratic (not Shi'a revolutionary) paradise.
     
  19. TW Scott Minister of Technology Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,149
    No one. Much like the Park Ranger who has been struck by lightning more than fifty times in his life, some things just survived unharmed for no apparant reason.

    The black boxes were found, at least one of them. The tapes not released out of respect for the deceased and their families.
     
  20. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    "The tapes not released out of respect for the deceased and their families."

    The families of the hijackers (whose identities have still not been publicly revealed) must be very grateful.
     
  21. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    I'm assuming that it's also understood that the privileged youth (i.e.: Royal Saudi Air Force Aviators) have limited degrees of separation from the Royal Family.
     
  22. hypewaders Save Changes Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,061
    I'm also assuming (like assuming anyone reads and thinks about this) that it's understood that the Saudi regime is resultantly unstable.

    Hello? Is this internut thing on?
     
  23. te jen Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    532
    Probably not, if the shit hits the fan and the White House declares martial law. They'll cut off public access to the internet (or at least to non-corporate entities like sciforums and any other venue that can be construed as threatening) and we'll be left blind and dumb. Remember, in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king.
     

Share This Page