Lloyd England exposed was involved in 9/11 false flag event

banie01 · 07-03-2019 09:28PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

. Are you really a pilot?

And I wasn't referring to myself when I mentioned the experienced professional pilot.
Another poster with many years experience joined the thread yesterday.

I fly recreationally though.

Cheerful Spring · 07-03-2019 09:37PM

banie01 wrote: »

There is copious evidence proving that the maneuver undertaken in particular the turn prior to the final run can be undertaken by inexperienced stick handlers.

There is also the fact that the target the stick man was aiming for would present as @1400ft wide on its widest point.
Making it easily visible, not that it would be hard to notice the building from the start of an 8000ft descent.

You persist with the belief that Hanour needed to be a skilled pilot.
He didn't, he needed a lack of fear and a modicum of luck.

757 uses a control wheel and a Yoke, not a stick.

Of course, it matters. Luck has nothing to do with it. You need to be an experienced pilot to control a plane on the ground. The ground effect needs to be managed and only capable pilots can handle it.

I agree to disagree on this.

banie01 · 07-03-2019 09:42PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

757 uses a control wheel and a Yoke, not a stick.

Of course, it matters. Luck has nothing to do with it. You need to be an experienced pilot to control a plane on the ground. The ground effect needs to be managed and only capable pilots can handle it.

I agree to disagree on this.

Stickman / Stick handler is a colloquialism for a pilot.
And you know nothing about ground effect other than the misinformation you have gotten hold of.

What do you think is the effect of ground effect at high speed?
Its also not as if there was a prolonged period of low level flight to contend with.

Dohnjoe · 07-03-2019 09:58PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Of course, it matters. Luck has nothing to do with it. You need to be an experienced pilot to control a plane on the ground. The ground effect needs to be managed and only capable pilots can handle it.

who was flying the plane that crashed into the Pentagon?

Was speed was it going?

Was it definitely flight 77?

Timberrrrrrrr · 07-03-2019 10:04PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Takes no skill whatsoever to fly a commercial airliner good one, we should all just jump in the seat and fly a plane.

To level a plane off at 2 to 3 feet of the ground requires a lot of skill. Are you really a pilot?

I could put you in an 18 wheeler articulated lorry tomorrow and you wouldn't be able to drive it.

I could have you as a passenger in the same lorry on an empty motorway, put it on cruise control and let you take over the wheel, you wouldnt be "driving" it you would just be steering it.

Do you see the difference?

banie01 · 07-03-2019 10:14PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I could put you in an 18 wheeler articulated lorry tomorrow and you wouldn't be able to drive it.

I could have you as a passenger in the same lorry on an empty motorway, put it on cruise control and let you take over the wheel, you wouldnt be "driving" it you would just be steering it.

Do you see the difference?

That is actually a fantastic analogy!

Cheerful Spring · 07-03-2019 11:17PM

Dohnjoe wrote: »

who was flying the plane that crashed into the Pentagon?

Was speed was it going?

Was it definitely flight 77?

I don't think anyone truly knows who flew the plane. The US government position still is Hani Hanjour was the pilot, I doubt it. How can they know this to be true? It not like they had video footage of him flying the plane? Maybe Flight 77 was taken over remotely it not like this technology did not exist in 2001. Operation Northwoods talked about taking over a plane and flying it remotely to the target.

I told you I don't know. There not a shred of evidence flight 77 was going 530mph when hit the Pentagon. The 9/11 commission can claim 530mph I don't buy this for a second.

Did Flight 77 exist at all? In my opinion, the plane seen north of the Cisco service station did crash at the Pentagon.

I don't support the US government position the plane hit the Pentagon coming in from the Southwest. T

the FDR data does not match up, the eyewitnesses dispute this approach, Loyld England said the light pole incident happened at the cemetery (northside) gopher6 the military pilot said the plane was coming in from the northeast and the Pentagon damage does not match a plane hitting the Pentagon at an angle (southwest). I don't know exactly what it all means but there a conspiracy there.,

The Nal · 07-03-2019 11:43PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I don't support the US government position the plane hit the Pentagon coming in from the Southwest. T
,

104 people saw it happen in broad daylight.

Cheerful Spring · 07-03-2019 11:48PM

The Nal wrote: »

104 people saw it happen in broad daylight.

Read what I said. A plane crashed at the Pentagon.

07-03-2019 11:52PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The Nal wrote: »

104 people saw it happen in broad daylight.

Read what I said. A plane crashed at the Pentagon.

So you are back to you previous silly position that it was an A-3.
You are pathetic.

Dohnjoe · 08-03-2019 01:20AM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I don't think anyone truly knows who flew the plane. The US government position still is Hani Hanjour was the pilot, I doubt it. How can they know this to be true? It not like they had video footage of him flying the plane? Maybe Flight 77 was taken over remotely it not like this technology did not exist in 2001. Operation Northwoods talked about taking over a plane and flying it remotely to the target.

I told you I don't know. There not a shred of evidence flight 77 was going 530mph when hit the Pentagon. The 9/11 commission can claim 530mph I don't buy this for a second.

Did Flight 77 exist at all? In my opinion, the plane seen north of the Cisco service station did crash at the Pentagon.

I don't support the US government position the plane hit the Pentagon coming in from the Southwest. T

the FDR data does not match up, the eyewitnesses dispute this approach, Loyld England said the light pole incident happened at the cemetery (northside) gopher6 the military pilot said the plane was coming in from the northeast and the Pentagon damage does not match a plane hitting the Pentagon at an angle (southwest). I don't know exactly what it all means but there a conspiracy there.,

So you don't know anything but you are completely sure of it

banie01 · 08-03-2019 10:15AM

So we are back to CS rabbiting on about his "theory"!
While ignoring evidence, specifications, official reports and scientific consensus.

Even when offered the opportunity to give his own suggested speeds and work out from that how many frames of 1FPS video the aircraft should appear in at his preferred speed he refused to do it.

Deflection, ignoring questions, ignoring actual evidence whilst presenting no alternative evidence that hasn't already been thoroughly debunked.

The only reason people are even bothering to reply to him anymore is to highlight the actual hypocrisy on display.
CS can dismiss reams of actual consensus, scientific and professional evidence out of hand...
And present nothing, absolutely nothing other than CT crank theory in rebuttal

The Nal · 08-03-2019 10:24AM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Read what I said. A plane crashed at the Pentagon.

104 people saw a plane hit the building.......from the southwest.

26 could even identify the branding on the plane ie American Airlines

39 others identified it as a large jet/commercial airliner.

We know for sure an American Airlines plane hit the Pentagon from the Southwest, Cheerful Spring of course ignores this.

smurfjed · 08-03-2019 01:13PM

Oh boy where do I start......

FDR data has the plane 180 feet in the air at the 9.47am moment of impact. At this altitude, the plane would have flown past the Pentagon.
(and again posted...)
FDR data had Flight 77 180 feet above the highway at 9.37am when supposedly crashed. How did the plane crash at this height? How did get down to 20 feet in less than a second?

Where does the FDR get its height information from and what relationship does this have with real height?

I not confused had a thread discussing true north and magnetic heading in Washington DC. There is a positive and negative value to be added depending on where your plane is.

I asked you about BEARING and HEADING, how did TRUE and MAGNETIC get involved? Do you know the magnetic variation for Washington?

This was tried in an actual simulator by a qualified pilot. The results are not surprising.

That video was so funny, apart from the fact that it was a cheap ass simulator, did you notice that it had FOUR throttles for FOUR engines? Plus there is a big mental difference between someone who wants to disprove something versus someone who has a single minded focus and hopes to get his 46 virgins.

Pilot decelerate when their landing and dropping to the ground. According to you, they speed up?

Generally planes slow down to LAND, in this case he really didn't give a ****.

It's common sense you slow down below ground to hit the Pentagon

Below GROUND? anyway see my answer above this one.

''I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon,'' the former employee said. ''He could not fly at all.''

The truck analogy given above is perfect.

Takes no skill whatsoever to fly a commercial airliner good one, we should all just jump in the seat and fly a plane.

Did you the reports of the guy who stole a propeller airliner in Washington state and did aerobatics before he crashed it? He wasn't a pilot.

He didn't, he needed a lack of fear and a modicum of luck.

So so true.

The 9/11 commission can claim 530mph I don't buy this for a second.

You know the length of the aircraft, they have video of the aircraft approaching the building, then its a case of mathematics to calculate the speed.

So many questions, so lets start with the first one, what is the difference between BEARING and HEADING?

Dohnjoe · 08-03-2019 01:22PM

Also the maneuver is quite doable and has been replicated. On a Dutch conspiracy show, a novice on a simulator managed to hit the Pentagon 3 out of 3 times (can post video later as I am in work)

Dohnjoe · 08-03-2019 01:26PM

From the recovered Flight Data Recorder of flight 77, the final moments, note the airspeed

smurfjed · 08-03-2019 01:26PM

We used to bring friends in to fly real simulators, you would be very surprised how someone like me with very little knowledge of how a 747 worked could teach people how to land it.

The next time I do "upset recovery" training, I should video it so that you can see how rapidly we can end up 100 kts faster than the max speed thanks to that wonderful thing called GRAVITY.

Dohnjoe · 08-03-2019 01:34PM

smurfjed wrote: »

We used to bring friends in to fly real simulators, you would be very surprised how someone like me with very little knowledge of how a 747 worked could teach people how to land it.

The next time I do "upset recovery" training, I should video it so that you can see how rapidly we can end up 100 kts faster than the max speed thanks to that wonderful thing called GRAVITY.

Yup, but the "conspiracy" answer to this is always incredulity that simulators can't perfectly replicate the exact real world effects of wind, pressure, the stresses on the aircraft, blah blah

and then of course quickly turn the debate around, demanding that you "prove" to them a simulator replicates the forces exactly (which of course is an impossibility)

watch this space..

Cheerful Spring · 08-03-2019 03:02PM

Dohnjoe wrote: »

So you don't know anything but you are completely sure of it

Did I say Flight 77 was not the plane that crashed at the Pentagon? You posting info from last year or maybe two years ago can't remember.

My argument is the plane was further to the north and came in more straight. Flew in at a slower speed and Hani was not the pilot.

Cheerful Spring · 08-03-2019 03:09PM

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Also the maneuver is quite doable and has been replicated. On a Dutch conspiracy show, a novice on a simulator managed to hit the Pentagon 3 out of 3 times (can post video later as I am in work)

Never said was not possible. Of course, you can hit the Pentagon. What speed what he going at please do let's see what speed he hit the Pentagon at.

Cheerful Spring · 08-03-2019 03:33PM

The Nal wrote: »

104 people saw a plane hit the building.......from the southwest.

26 could even identify the branding on the plane ie American Airlines

39 others identified it as a large jet/commercial airliner.

We know for sure an American Airlines plane hit the Pentagon from the Southwest, Cheerful Spring of course ignores this.

I revised my opinion, unlike you guys will never do. Dohnjoe is posting info from a year ago. I looked at the evidence again and did some measurements of my own. Most truthers the crazy ones deny a plane even hit the Pentagon. I believe now a commercial airliner hit the Pentagon.

The only difference between me and you is I believe the American Airlines plane was further to the north of the Annex building. And the plane hit the Pentagon slower than 530mph and Hani was not the pilot.

We don't know for sure the plane hit from the Southwest. There no video footage of the plane stop saying you know. My biggest problem with the Southwest theory is the plane looked like it hit the wall straight on. The southwest angle the plane is turned out sideways left wing out across the grass. When the right wing and right engine hit the wall the left wing is going to break off yet they found no piece of the left wing on the grass?

The Nal · 08-03-2019 04:01PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I revised my opinion, unlike you guys will never do. ing is going to break off yet they found no piece of the left wing on the grass?

Why would I revise the truth? It happened. Theres nothing to revise.

Overheal · 08-03-2019 04:15PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I believe the American Airlines plane was further to the north of the Annex building. And the plane hit the Pentagon slower than 530mph and Hani was not the pilot.

At what speed, then, and based on what evidence? More importantly: why would this be significant?

smurfjed · 08-03-2019 04:42PM

And the plane hit the Pentagon slower than 530mph

How did you come to your conclusion that the speed was slower? Please run us through the calculations. And as this is aviation, can we stick to NAUTICAL MILES please.

The Nal · 08-03-2019 04:42PM

Overheal wrote: »

At what speed, then, and based on what evidence? More importantly: why would this be significant?

Because it directly contradicts what 104 people saw and means its still a conspiracy if Al Qaeda weren't involved. They're "innocent" remember. They had nothing to do with 9/11.

Overheal · 08-03-2019 04:52PM

The Nal wrote: »

Because it directly contradicts what 104 people saw and means its still a conspiracy if Al Qaeda weren't involved. They're "innocent" remember. They had nothing to do with 9/11.

Which is a fallible leap in conclusions: it was raining lightly that day but the eyewitnesses reported no rain at the moment in question, therefore they're all liars and lizardmen. (even though rain comes and goes in bands...) So what if it was 530 or 520 or 540? If we agree that a plane crashed into the Pentagon, then a plane crashed into the Pentagon, regardless of what heading or how many barrel rolls it did or didn't take in transit.

Dohnjoe · 08-03-2019 04:55PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Never said was not possible. Of course, you can hit the Pentagon. What speed what he going at please do let's see what speed he hit the Pentagon at.

Who hit the Pentagon? and at what speed? with evidence

You're claiming it was someone else, who?

Dohnjoe · 08-03-2019 07:34PM

Short clip from the Dutch TV show (with subtitles), on a proper Boeing simulator, a novice hit the Pentagon 3 out of 3 times

Ipso · 08-03-2019 07:43PM

smurfjed wrote: »

We used to bring friends in to fly real simulators, you would be very surprised how someone like me with very little knowledge of how a 747 worked could teach people how to land it.

The next time I do "upset recovery" training, I should video it so that you can see how rapidly we can end up 100 kts faster than the max speed thanks to that wonderful thing called GRAVITY.

But . . . . what about freefall?

Cheerful Spring · 08-03-2019 08:00PM

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Short clip from the Dutch TV show (with subtitles), on a proper Boeing simulator, a novice hit the Pentagon 3 out of 3 times

They hit the Pentagon in the wrong spot that's the east wall to the north lol. They never showed what speed they were going at.

Lloyd England exposed was involved in 9/11 false flag event

Comments