Re: Analysis from a JHU CS Prof

[John Fraizer <nanog () Overkill EnterZone Net>]

I submit that yourself and your ATP should turn on the news.  They have
determined that the pilots were trained on these aircraft at at least two
schools in Florida.

---
John Fraizer
EnterZone, Inc



On Tue, 11 Sep 2001, Owen DeLong wrote:

> Apologies to the list, this is way off topic, and if you're looking for
> operational content, just hit delete now.  However, the number of people
> posting bad specualtion about aviation is bothering me and I feel
> compelled
> to reply.
>
> I hold a Private Pilot rating for Airplane Single Engine Land.  I also
> hold
> an Instrument Airplane rating.  I have about 800 hours of total flight
> time,
> including various single engine a small amount of multi-engine, some
> glider,
> some free balloon time. I have spent some time in the cockpit of an
> Airbus A-319 in flight, including an approach into San Jose
> International.
> I was in the jumpseat, but I received substantial education from the
> pilots
> while I was there.  If anyone feels that my answers are not adequate,
> please let me know off-list and I'll get you an answer from an ATP I
> know
> who is rated in the 757 and 767 types.
>
> John Fraizer wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Sep 2001, David Howe wrote:
> >
> > > > Also, it's worth remembering that airplanes aren't all that easy to
> > > > fly. This means that the perpetrators needed to find five adequate
> > > > pilots,
> > > Hmm. not actually sure about this - not having ever flown anything at
> > > all, but how much skill exactly does it take to keep something already
> > > pointed in more or less the right direction on target for two-three
> > > minutes until impact? ok, you couldn't expect a clean landing or even a
> >
> > It takes quite a bit more than you would expect.  Something that you
> > neglect to remember is that the plane that struck the Pentagon was
> > initially headed directly towards the Whitehouse, then executed a
> > high-speed, high-bank turn around DC, lined up on the Pentagon and managed
> > to nose into it at mid-level.
> >
> > It is VERY difficult to control an aircraft in a high-speed nose-down
> > attitude.  ESPECIALLY those that are less than "sporty" in flight
> > characteristics.
> It is not difficult to control these types of aircraft in a 200-300
> knott
> (knautical mile per hour, about 1.1 statute miles per hour) nose-down
> attitude.  It can be done on autopilot in most cases.  
>
> As I understand the reports, the plane that struck the Pentagon was on
> the
> standard noise-abatement approach path into National along the Potomac,
> and made a ~30 degree bank turn nose down into the side of the
> pentagon.  This may have required overriding the autopilot for the
> final portion of the descent, but otherwise, the entire process could
> have been conducted using a small subset of the autopilot capabilities
> that could easily be figured out by a student pilot.  If you're not
> worried about keeping your airspeed under control (not going too fast),
> it's relatively easy to point a plane at the ground and keep it going
> that way.
>
> > > halfway-smooth flight path from someone who has played a MS-Windows
> > > flight sim for a few months, but - if he was going from switching off
> > > autopilot to keeping the plane pointed at something the size of the
> > > WTC....... I would imagine it would all be on the yoke too, no throttles
> > > or concerns about airspeed given you are not really going to care that
> > > much what speed or acceleration you have on impact...
> >
> > Again.  Think about it.  The WTC is not actually that large of a
> > target.  Granted, it's was easy to pick out from the air but, lining up on
> > it and maintaining a flight attitude that will keep you in the air until
> > impact is a different story.  If you've seen footage of the second plane
> > impacting, look at the last second attitude correction.  Had the
> > individual who was flying the aircraft not made that correction, it would
> > not have struck the building. (At least THAT building.)  Also, airspeed is
> > very important if you want to keep an aircraft aloft.  ESPECIALLY when you
> > are pulling turns.  If you're just above stall and try to turn the
> > aircraft, you don't turn -- you fall.
> The WTC is a huge traget that is visible from a very long distance away
> under
> the weather conditions that existed.  The second plane made a very small
> correction a few seconds before impact.  Nothing I saw in the footage
> leads
> me to believe that the airplane was not operating on autopilot in
> altitude
> hold mode.  The correction could have been accomplished by a small twist
> of
> the heading select knob.  The world trade center impacts occured at a
> high
> enough altitude that it is not unlikely that the autopilot would not
> have
> overriden the altitude selection for terrain.
>
> > > ... or train for the two/three more common types, then pick a flight *on
> > > the day* that actually is flying that type of plane. book seats at the
> > > last minute (not a problem for domestic flights) or pre-book three or
> > > four different seats per attacker, and each picks a flight with the
> > > right sort of plane from the "pool" of available flights.
> >
> > There are mechanisms in place that would detect this type of
> > behavior.  (Prebooking multiple flights for the same individual.)
> I agree that this would be more difficult.  All that was really
> required,
> though, was some time in one of the popular simulator programs and a
> little
> bit of knowledge about any flight management system and some
> understanding
> of Altitude, Heading, Waypoints, and general autopilot operations.  All
> of this could probably be obtained in a relatively small amount of
> training
> time with any flight instructor at your local FBO.  Most of it could
> probably
> be learned on a PC with readily available software.  The autopilot
> operation
> of the large jets in Fly!2 and Micro$oft FS2000 is realistic enough to
> probably provide adequate autopilot training.
>
> This having been said, I don't put it past the various organizations to
> have trained type rated pilots for this purpose.
>
>
> Owen
>
> > ---
> > John Fraizer
> > EnterZone, Inc
>
> -- 
> ***********************************************************************
> "Every time you turn on your new car, you're turning on 20
>  microprocessors.  Every time you use an ATM, you're using a computer.
>  Every time I use a settop box or game machine, I'm using a computer.
>  The only computer you don't know how to work is your Microsoft
>  computer, right?"
>         - Scott McNealy, CEO of Sun Microsystems, Inc.,
>           from an April 1997 interview in Upside Magazine
>
> ***********************************************************************
> Microsoft CEO Bill Gates is optimistic about Contraceptive99's
> potential.
> He recently said, "Our contraceptive products will help users do to
> each other what we've been doing to our customers for years."
>
> The mail above is sent from my personal account and represents my own
> views.  It may or may not reflect the opinions of Exodus Communications,
> Jin Ho, Mo Sabourian, Tony Massing, Morris Taradalsky, or any other
> employee, officer, subsidiary, acquisition, member, partner, aff