9/11 WTC Photos by private pilot published

[BigAl]

I have no particular purpose in posting these pictures but they do show even an Arab Mr. Maggo as pilot could locate the towers with no added high-tech nav gear.

I don't know how the reporter mistook 9/11 for "9th September". The loons will be able to spin this errata into their conspiracy right there with the BBC news reader forecasting WTC7 , Norman Mineta's statements and the Payne Stewart intercept timing.



Russian Pilot Making Photos 9/11 Flying Above NYC

Here is a shocking story of Russian pilot, now living in the USA who was on the air 9th September 2001 and have made photos right from the air when planes crashed the WTC.

He worked at that time as a programmer in one of the dot coms and had some free time which usualy he spent flying Cessna 172SP plane around NYC.

We have this photos today.

Just when he took off he spotted a smoke coming from WTC towers. He was very surprised and headed in that direction:

http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2006/12/04/russian-pilot-making-photos-911-flying-above-nyc/

[jiggeryqua]

I have no particular purpose in posting these pictures but they do show even an Arab Mr. Maggo as pilot could locate the towers with no added high-tech nav gear.


And I have no particular purpose in replying, except to quote from that article:

"The author of the photos says he doesn’t believe at all that this maneur (sic) could be done by some rookie who just graduated from “Florida Flight School”. According to his opinion it was some very experienced millitary pilot making his last kamikaze mission."

Oh, and a supplementary purpose to ask what relevance someone's ethinic origin would have to their ability to pilot a plane?

[T.A.M.]

yes, it was the evil NWO pilot extrodinaire. Dontcha know?

Jesus, we always get a return of the truthers this time of year, and every time they bring up the same old tired ****.

Look he called it a 737, so was (A) a crack pilot, who could tell only a professional could do it, or (B) a lame pilot who couldn't correctly id the aircraft.

Oh, and don't forget they said 9th of september, because he miss read the NWO script.

Get lost.

TAM:)

[Captain_Swoop]

Didn't you know, 'very experienced military pilot' types aren't allowed to retire. They are like Mega City Judges. They have to take a 'Long Walk'. Sometimes it includes a 'last kamikaze mission'

[I Ratant]

The other stuff on that site shows an airplane nut.
He has stature.
Mistaking a version of a twin engine Boeing for another version of a twin Boeing isn't that odd.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

The other stuff on that site shows an airplane nut.
He has stature.


Bill Sweetman and Martin Caidin have stature.

This is some anonymous froot loop posting on the internet claiming that only highly trained military pilots can hit something the same size and shape as a runway.

[I Ratant]

The guy's an airplane nut.
Who flies.
I know airplane nuts, I shave one every day.
And he has photos unique to his vantage point.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

He just doesn't know how to hit a runway.

[ozeco41]

...I don't know how the reporter mistook 9/11 for "9th September".
One possibly innocent reason is that many of us (British born Aussie in my case) sometimes forget to translate the US "9/11" into "11/9" otherwise we have the events happening on 9th November instead of 11th September. :D

[TjW]

The guy's an airplane nut.
Who flies.
I know airplane nuts, I shave one every day.
And he has photos unique to his vantage point.

Well, me too. But the idea that the equivalent of a pass down a really wide runway is harder to do than an actual landing strikes me as a bit bizarre.

Some people have an idea that the physical skills required to fly an airplane are terribly demanding. They aren't.

[fess]

These pictures have been around for a number of years, but I don’t remember this comment;
“According to his opinion it was some very experienced millitary pilot making his last kamikaze mission.” being part of the original post.

[Sabretooth]

"...pilot making his last kamikaze mission.”

As opposed to his first? :confused:

[jaydeehess]

I don't know how the reporter mistook 9/11 for "9th September". The loons will be able to spin this errata into their conspiracy right there with the BBC news reader forecasting WTC7 , Norman Mineta's statements and the Payne Stewart intercept timing.

,, not to mention the fact that he was flying over the "Gudson".
He also "shot it at the moment it hit the building".

OMG! He Shot it down!! He said he shot it down!!

[jaydeehess]

Some people have an idea that the physical skills required to fly an airplane are terribly demanding. They aren't.

Well maybe these ones do http://www.redbullairrace.com/cs/Satellite/en_air/Official-Red-Bull-Air-Race-Homepage/001238611393596

[Bell]

Did you notice what looks like United 175 in the fourth photo? (Little dark spot in the upper right corner)

Or, as Jerry Leaphart, I mean jammonius, would call it, a blob.

[I Ratant]

As opposed to his first? :confused:
.
It's like "You don't need a parachute to skydive. You need a parachute to skydive, twice."

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Well, me too. But the idea that the equivalent of a pass down a really wide runway is harder to do than an actual landing strikes me as a bit bizarre.

Some people have an idea that the physical skills required to fly an airplane are terribly demanding. They aren't.

Let's put this another, simpler way.

You've all seen big city freeways with pairs of lampposts lining either side, right? Well imagine that runways are set up with lampposts just like major freeways.

In order to safely land an airplane, you basically have to guide your craft between dozens upon dozens of pairs of lampposts consecutively until your plane comes to a halt.

In order to crash into the world trade center, you only need to pass between a single pair of lampposts 1300 feet tall.

[TjW]

Well maybe these ones do http://www.redbullairrace.com/cs/Satellite/en_air/Official-Red-Bull-Air-Race-Homepage/001238611393596

It certainly takes skill to do what they do. I haven't flown one of them, but I suspect that all of them have very light, very well balanced control forces, because it would be even more difficult to do demanding maneuvers if the airplane is difficult to fly. I expect they're very near neutral stick-free stability, with a fairly sharp, repeatable stall to make snap maneuvers easier. I'd guess when not having to horse them around at 7-10 g to win contests, they're probably very pleasant to fly.

[TjW]

Let's put this another, simpler way.

You've all seen big city freeways with pairs of lampposts lining either side, right? Well imagine that runways are set up with lampposts just like major freeways.

In order to safely land an airplane, you basically have to guide your craft between dozens upon dozens of pairs of lampposts consecutively until your plane comes to a halt.

In order to crash into the world trade center, you only need to pass between a single pair of lampposts 1300 feet tall.

No, a landing is even more difficult.
A low pass, or hitting the WTC, is a fairly simple 2 dimensional problem -- you want two of your coordinates, X and Y, to match the coordinates of your target. Within broad limits, your altitude and your airspeed when the other two match aren't critical.
Landing, OTOH, is a four dimensional problem. To land, you have to set everything up so that you not only miss all the lampposts, but at your landing spot you're at zero altitude (3 dimensions) and just about out of energy, the fourth dimension you have to manage. You need to be just above stall speed, where the airplane stops flying. Just to liven things up a little, slow speed is where the airplane responds the slowest to the controls.

Anyone who's solved the landing problem a few times shouldn't have any trouble crashing at speed into a target four times the width of a runway.

[Rolfe]

I don't know how the reporter mistook 9/11 for "9th September".


That's easy. I do it all the time. I would write that date as 11-9-01. Constantly seeing it written with a 9 at the beginning grinds you into thinking it happened on the 9th of the month.

Rolfe.

ETA: What ozeco said!

[beachnut]

Did you notice what looks like United 175 in the fourth photo? (Little dark spot in the upper right corner)

Or, as Jerry Leaphart, I mean jammonius, would call it, a blob.

Don't tell Jerry, this pilot saw the aircraft. Another eye witness jammonius has to ignore.

[tsig]

As opposed to his first? :confused:

He couldn't hit the building on his first ten attempts.

[alexi_drago]

According to his opinion it was some very experienced millitary pilot making his last kamikaze mission.

He was expeienced in kamikaze missions having done many before. He couldn't have been particularly good.

[Edx]

See no planers would say this guy is a double liar. ;D

[MaGZ]

In the fifth photo taken by the Russian you see one of the Otis fighters above WTC 1. Remember this was one of the fighters that fired a missile at the second plane missing it and hitting WTC 7.

[Sabretooth]

In the fifth photo taken by the Russian you see one of the Otis fighters above WTC 1. Remember this was one of the fighters that fired a missile at the second plane missing it and hitting WTC 7.

I see that! This pic must have been taken right after he straffed that bus load of kids heading to the Statue of Liberty!

[jaydeehess]

In the fifth photo taken by the Russian you see one of the Otis fighters above WTC 1. Remember this was one of the fighters that fired a missile at the second plane missing it and hitting WTC 7.

You mean that tiny horizontal bit in the picture?

Pray tell, how do you manage to see that it is a fighter and not some other aircraft?

[beachnut]

In the fifth photo taken by the Russian you see one of the Otis fighters above WTC 1. Remember this was one of the fighters that fired a missile at the second plane missing it and hitting WTC 7.
RADAR has no fighter there. You should use real evidence instead of delusions when you make statements.

[MRC_Hans]

In the fifth photo taken by the Russian you see one of the Otis fighters above WTC 1.

No, I don't see it. There is a small fleck, but it could be anything, including a bird.

Remember this was one of the fighters that fired a missile at the second plane missing it and hitting WTC 7.

No, I don't remember that.

Please provide all of the following:

- Any evidence of a fast-moving, noisy fighter in full view of thousands of onlookers and dozens of cameras.

- Any evidence of the very conspicuous smoke trail of a missile, in full view of thousands of onlookers and dozens of cameras.

- Any evidence of the rather huge explosion of a missile warhead, in full view of thousands of onlookers and dozens of cameras.

Hans

[jaydeehess]

- Any evidence of a fast-moving, noisy fighter in full view of thousands of onlookers and dozens of cameras.



pah! Wonder Woman was at the controls and her plane is invisible!

- Any evidence of the rather huge explosion of a missile warhead, in full view of thousands of onlookers and dozens of cameras.

Hans

Once again you are in error. An air-to-air missile needs not produce a large explosion since it does not take too much to rip holes in another fighter. On the other hand these same missiles, when they hit large buildings cause all manner of damage, they compromise the strutural integrity of the building and cause dozens of vehicles at street level to spontaneously ignite.

:D

[Bell]

In the fifth photo taken by the Russian you see one of the Otis fighters above WTC 1. Remember this was one of the fighters that fired a missile at the second plane missing it and hitting WTC 7.

:dl:

[Captain_Swoop]

Hey, you saw Running Man right? they can do anything with video editing.

[George152]

Well, me too. But the idea that the equivalent of a pass down a really wide runway is harder to do than an actual landing strikes me as a bit bizarre.

Some people have an idea that the physical skills required to fly an airplane are terribly demanding. They aren't.

For truthers anything physical and requiring co-ordination is somewhere between difficult and impossible.
driving a car on a narrow road and landing an aircraft on a runway are not disimular.

[George152]

In the fifth photo taken by the Russian you see one of the Otis fighters above WTC 1. Remember this was one of the fighters that fired a missile at the second plane missing it and hitting WTC 7.

Where did all these fighters come from (How long would it take to fly from Otis to NY)and how were they fully armed ?

How is it that every-one watching the WTC saw the B767s strike the towers but no-one saw (or heard or videod) jet fighters..

And why have none of the ground or flight crews come forward to say that they launched fighters or flew the fighters ?

[MRC_Hans]

And how is it that the ATC does not have any registration of fighters in their busy airspace?

Even a MAGZ should be able to figure out the reason fighters don't just fly into one of the world's most busy airspaces without strict coordination whith ATC.

Hans

[Oystein]

In the fifth photo taken by the Russian you see one of the Otis fighters above WTC 1. Remember this was one of the fighters that fired a missile at the second plane missing it and hitting WTC 7.

And off to ignore you go, Troll.