nanog mailing list archives
RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof
From: "Youse, Chuck" <Chuck.Youse () ebone com>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2001 12:22:35 +0200
Not to mention, forgetting the precision (I second the idea that it takes greater skill than people think to crash a plane), simply navigating these puppies over great distances and finding the targets would require a good amount of training. Yes, yes, GPS and other relatively new navigational goodies make this a lot easier than it would have been, say 20 years ago, but trust me, it's not point-and-click. It may be just coincidental that they utilized Boeing aircraft for this, as Airbus planes have trickier autopilot and collision-avoidance systems that would make intentionally flying into a building in an otherwise healthy airplane rather difficult. Chuck Youse -----Original Message----- From: Dave Stewart [mailto:dbs () ntrnet net] Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 6:09 AM To: nanog () merit edu Subject: Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof At 10:26 PM 9/11/2001, Petr Swedock wrote:
The planes were hijacked with knives and re-routed over large distances: which leads me to believe the original pilots were long dead. The two towers were struck with great precision: it's not as easy as it sounds. The pentagon was *landed* on... in a most precise manner: It takes a hell of a flyer to put a plane down like that. There were no fly-bys and/or go-rounds. There were no near misses. There is no doubt in my mind that those in control of the planes were skilled pilots.
Keep in mind as well that airspeed would be critical for maximum effect. Moving too fast, the plane flies right through the building, certainly causing massive damage and almost certainly starting a fire. However, that's not optimal. Fly too slowly, and you're on the edge of a stall - no laughing matter in any aircraft, but especially critical in these cases, due to the maneuvers every aircraft performed. Also, fly too slowly, you might not completely penetrate the building. From the beginning, there's been no doubt that the pilots were type-rated on the Boeing 757/767, nor has there ever been any doubt, at least in my mind, that these were not American or United pilots... with the possible exception of the United flight that crashed in PA.
Current thread:
- Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof, (continued)
- Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof measl (Sep 11)
- Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Owen DeLong (Sep 11)
- Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Petr Swedock (Sep 12)
- Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Matthew S. Hallacy (Sep 11)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Roeland Meyer (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Roeland Meyer (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Jim Dixon (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Roeland Meyer (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Dan Hollis (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Roeland Meyer (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Youse, Chuck (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Youse, Chuck (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Youse, Chuck (Sep 12)
- Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Peter Galbavy (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Roeland Meyer (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Daryl J. Wolff (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Matt Levine (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Daryl J. Wolff (Sep 12)
- RE: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Roeland Meyer (Sep 12)
- Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof alex (Sep 12)
- Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Mally Mclane (Sep 12)
- Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Nipper, Arnold (Sep 12)
- Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof Mally Mclane (Sep 12)
(Thread continues...)