Aeronautical Engineer Claims Hijacker Piloting on 9/11 'Impossible'

The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training -

Nila Sagadevan is an aeronautical engineer and a qualified pilot of heavy aircraft.

There are some who maintain that the mythical 9/11 hijackers, although proven to be too incompetent to fly a little Cessna 172, had acquired the impressive skills that enabled them to fly airliners by training in flight simulators.

What follows is an attempt to bury this myth once and for all, because I've heard this ludicrous explanation bandied about, ad nauseam, on the Internet and the TV networks - invariably by people who know nothing substantive about flight simulators, flying, or even airplanes.

A common misconception non-pilots have about simulators is how "easy" it is to operate them. They are indeed relatively easy to operate if the objective is to make a few lazy turns and frolic about in the "open sky". But if the intent is to execute any kind of a maneuver with even the least bit of precision, the task immediately becomes quite daunting. And if the aim is to navigate to a specific geographic location hundreds of miles away while flying at over 500 MPH, 30,000 feet above the ground the challenges become virtually impossible for an untrained pilot.
In the case of a Boeing 757 or 767, the pilot would be faced with an EFIS (Electronic Flight Instrumentation System) panel comprised of six large multi-mode LCDs interspersed with clusters of assorted "hard" instruments. These displays process the raw aircraft system and flight data into an integrated picture of the aircraft situation, position and progress, not only in horizontal and vertical dimensions, but also with regard to time and speed as well. When flying "blind", I.e., with no ground reference cues, it takes a highly skilled pilot to interpret, and then apply, this data intelligently. If one cannot translate this information quickly, precisely and accurately (and it takes an instrument-rated pilot to do so), one would have ZERO SITUATIONAL AWARENESS. I.e., the pilot wouldn't have a clue where s/he was in relation to the earth. Flight under such conditions is referred to as "IFR", or Instrument Flight Rules.
Let me place this in the context of the 9/11 hijacker-pilots. These men were repeatedly deemed incompetent to solo a simple Cessna-172 - an elementary exercise that involves flying this little trainer once around the patch on a sunny day. A student's first solo flight involves a simple circuit: take-off, followed by four gentle left turns ending with a landing back on the runway. This is as basic as flying can possibly get.

Not one of the hijackers was deemed fit to perform this most elementary exercise by himself.

Mohammed Atta: "His attention span was zero."

Khalid Al-Mihdhar: "We didn't kick him out, but he didn't live up to our standards."

Marwan Al-Shehhi: "He was dropped because of his limited English and incompetence at the controls."

Salem Al-Hazmi: "We advised him to quit after two lessons."

Hani Hanjour: "His English was horrible, and his mechanical skills were even worse. It was like he had hardly even ever driven a car. I'm still to this day amazed that he could have flown into the Pentagon. He could not fly at all."
The writers of the official storyline expect us to believe, that once the flight deck crews had been overpowered, and the hijackers "took control" of the various aircraft, their intended targets suddenly popped up in their windshields as they would have in some arcade game, and all that these fellows would have had to do was simply aim their airplanes at the buildings and fly into them. Most people who have been exposed only to the official storyline have never been on the flight deck of an airliner at altitude and looked at the outside world; if they had, they'd realize the absurdity of this kind of reasoning.

In reality, a clueless non-pilot would encounter almost insurmountable difficulties in attempting to navigate and fly a 200,000-lb airliner into a building located on the ground, 7 miles below and hundreds of miles away and out of sight, and in an unknown direction, while flying at over 500 MPH - and all this under extremely stressful circumstances.

This is quite a smashing write up by Nila Sagadevan, be sure to check out the whole article. I did a brief search for Nila and found a book he had written, and a little bit about him on amazon:

Nila Sagadevan was born in Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) and educated in Britain. Born in a predominantly Buddhist country to liberal-minded Hindu parents who encouraged belief in a single Creator, he was sent at the age of 5 to Christian boarding schools where he read the Bible, attended Sunday school, and sang in the school choir.

An aeronautical engineer-turned-pilot, Sagadevan left Scotland for America in 1972. He lived in Alaska for 15 years when a profound, life-altering experience changed his concept of earthly religions forever, and caused him to deeply ponder the anthropocentric mindset that guides human life. His quest for knowledge and self-inquiry has led him on a journey through more than 40 countries and to many of the centers of the world's major religions.

Sagadevan, who was the featured guest in a television documentary on extraterrestrial phenomena, also hosted his own radio program, The Open Mind, in the 1980s. The program, which discussed declassified "Top Secret" government documents obtained through the Freedom Of Information Act, reached millions of listeners in the US and Europe. Sagadevan's writings-on world affairs, race relations, spirituality, and other subjects-have appeared in a variety of magazines and newspapers. He lives with his wife and teenage son in Southern California.

I also found where he has been in communication with Jim Fetzer of Scholars for 911 Truth, here is a quick snip from an email on the subject of cell phone calls on 9/11:

Fellow SPINE (Scientific Professionals Investigating Nine-Eleven) member, A.K. Dewdney, is professor of mathematics at the University of Waterloo, Ontario. Upon conducting a series of exhaustive tests using a variety of cell phones on several general aviation aircraft, he has written a paper on the subject entitled, 'Project Achilles' (

It must be clearly understood that Prof. Dewdney's tests were conducted in slow-moving (I attempted (discretely, of course) a total of 37 calls from varying altitudes/speeds. I flew aboard three types of aircraft: Boeing 757, 737, and Airbus 320. Our cruising altitudes ranged from 31-33,000ft, and our cruising speeds, from 509-521 MPH (verified post-flight by the captains). My tests began immediately following take-off. Since there was obviously no point in taking along the wrist altimeter I use for ultralight flying for reference in a pressurized cabin, I could only estimate (from experience) the various altitudes at which I made my attempts.

Of the 37 calls attempted, I managed to make only 4 connections, and every one of these was made on final approach, less than 2 minutes before flare, I.e., at less than 2,000ft AGL.

.. and in the same thread, a quote from George Nelson (Colonel, USAF ret.):

For what it's worth, I recently flew a Cherokee 140, VFR, from Point Royal, Virginia to Lawrenceburg, Tennessee at 4500 to 6500 feet. Using a 6340 Nokia, which has both the old and new transition technology. I was unable to make even one connection during the entire trip. The phone register markings showing reception and transmission quality never appeared over 2,000 feet, and much of the time I was flying over Interstate highways where most of the cell towers are located. I was surprised that Prof. Dewdney was able to get any connections at all on his flights.

Quite a lot to look over here.. If you happen to work with an amateur pilot (like I do) try asking them some theoretical questions and feel free to share in the comments section.

Thanks The Professional for the heads up!

Yeah, remote controlled

Yeah, remote controlled Muslim terrorists sure are great pilots, eh?? LOL

btw, Jones' paper is now up to version 4.8!!!!!!!!

More and more evidence coming in, and obviously more peer communications!

CB: Jones takes on Greening!

CB: Jones takes on Greening! (IE. the 9/11 Myths scientist)

Sorry, didn't mean to use

Sorry, didn't mean to use that "IE" above.

Anyway an excerpt:

Other explanations for the observations are sought, of course. For example, F. Greening has suggested that aluminum from the planes which struck the Towers could melt, and that this aluminum might fall on "rusted steel surfaces inducing violent thermite explosions." [Greening, 2006] So a few students and I did straightforward experiments by melting aluminum and dropping molten aluminum on pre-heated rusted steel surfaces. There were in fact NO "violent thermite" reactions seen. We observed that the temperature of the molten aluminum in contact with the rusty iron simply cooled at about 25 C per minute (using an infrared probe) until the aluminum solidified, so that any thermite reactions between the aluminum and iron oxide must have been minimal and did not compete with radiative and conductive cooling, thus NOT supporting predictions made by Greening. There was no observable damage or even warping of the steel. (See photograph below.) Nor were violent reactions observed when we dropped molten aluminum onto concrete. [Jones, 2006] These experiments lend no support whatever to the notion that molten aluminum in the WTC Towers could have destroyed the enormous steel columns in the cores of the buildings, even if those columns were rusty and somehow subjected to direct contact with molten aluminum. [See Greening, 2006] We also noted that while the steel pan holding the aluminum glowed red hot, the molten aluminum inside retained its silvery color, adding to the evidence that the molten metal dripping from the South Tower shortly before its collapse was NOT molten aluminum-- besides the fact that the salmon-yellow color of the molten metal (video clip above) implies a temperature too high for the dark-smoke hydrocarbon fires burning in the building.

Great stuff! looks like

Great stuff! looks like Jones finally provided the response to 911myths as requested.. good to see..

Seems like Greening is

Seems like Greening is actually helping, by coming up with different theories, all of which will be proven wrong! (I hope I'm not being overly optimistic.)

Hmm.. couldn't the white "blobs" Jones refers to as molten iron actually be the molten aluminum he discusses in the next section? The colors of the molten metals look similar in the two pictures he provides

Susan, I haven't gotten any


I haven't gotten any word on what happened at the march today, were you there?

p.s. i accidentally deleted your duplicate post out of the wrong thread, sorry about that.

NP, But its so frustrating

NP, But its so frustrating that nothing is said about this not even in the blogs. I cannot make it as I am 1000 miles away, but I want this criminal out of the whitehouse! No-one, no MSM or anyone has spoken a word about it. It wasnt marketed well enough I feel!!

OFF TOPIC, but then... it

OFF TOPIC, but then...

it may be the cause for the next 911.

William Clark, author of "Petrodollar Warfare", on increasing tension between Washington and Teheran.

real audio:

executive summary:

If you want to avoid a war .. now is the time to "broadcast" the two amazing facts:

- EURO kills USD, therefore US 'forced' to play dirty or face HAVING TO PAY UP.

- US treasury accounting going untrustworthy (USA determined to cheat even more)

also see my posts in Google:

Google Video's got LOOSE

Google Video's got LOOSE CHANGE as one of their 4 popular videos..

People should not be afraid

People should not be afraid of their governments.Governments should be afraid of their people.

i got all warm inside when i

i got all warm inside when i heard that on a commercial yesterday.

In case anyone missed it,

In case anyone missed it, that quote is from this commercial for this flick coming March 17. Must-see:

Notice the lead actor John Hurt was also in the movie 1984...............!

As for the piloting article, as a longtime flight-simmer from back in the days of Sublogic, I certainly "wondered" about the piloting. In the early days when graphics were poor, the simulated WTC towers were about the only flightsim scenery in New York, so we would fly all around and between the two towers... obviously crashing into them a good number of times. That was usually with a simulated Cessna. Otherwise it was a thrill to navigate to a destination by instrument, come down through the clouds and see that once-faraway runway lined up nicely for approach. Or not....

11:45 ET Loose Change Number

11:45 ET Loose Change Number One on Google

perhaps the article from

perhaps the article from Nila Sagadevan should be emailed to all flight schools, aircraft companies, etc ???

Good info. The fishy "facts"

Good info. The fishy "facts" that muslim hijackers who were inexperienced pilots were able to fly the plane off-course and magically found three of their intended targets convinced me the most to decide that 9/11 was an inside job.

FYI, you left off some info

FYI, you left off some info about Nila S -

The UFO expert aeronautical engineer . . .

"Sagadevan . . . was the featured guest in a television documentary on extraterrestrial phenomena."

@ CB: can you quote a source

@ CB: can you quote a source for LC2E beeing number one at google video? I've try to find this statistic but this is area is completely new to me...

The original source of the

The original source of the quote

"People should not be afraid of their governments.Governments should be afraid of their people."

is Ben Franklin, isn't it? Or at least it's a paraphrase.

"When the people fear their

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

Thomas Jefferson

"Every pilot who knows him

"Every pilot who knows him says that rather than politely hand over the controls, Burlingame would have instantly rolled the plane on its back so that Hanjour would have broken his neck when he hit the floor."

As would many of the passengers and crew members... My colleague almost dismissed the whole article because of this sentence.

So then, what did in fact

So then, what did in fact happen??????

There is no proof that any

There is no proof that any boxcutter-wielding hijackers, that can in any way be blamed for 9/11, ever actually existed. (would it therefore be too much to ask for the word "mythical" to precede every use of the word "hijackers"? it's not easy fighting The Big Lie...)

On 9/11, the TV networks went on and on -- in a "what else could it possibly have been?" way -- about how "the hijackers" were obviously willing to die for their beliefs, yet the networks kept from us all the knowledge that the planes in question can fly and navigate themselves without any humans at all required to be in the cockpit.

So I sure love it when articles of this nature do not help the networks keep such important knowledge of the planes in question from ever entering our minds...

Getting people to think about and visualize the mythical cockpit struggle between pilot and hijacker only serves to reinforce The Big Lie.

I'm not going to pretend to

I'm not going to pretend to be some cell phone system expert here, but as an electrical engineer I know a few general things. A cell, which is a geographic region that the providers divide up for a particular tower or antenna array, is usually highly directional and well contained. That is to say, for most of the popular implementations of cell tower antennas the gain above the horizon is low and for the vertical is zero. So in theory, if you had you cell phone 50ft directly above your cell tower it would not be able to talk directly to it. I don't recommend trying this, as you might get microwaved in the process of getting 50ft directly above it, as they tend to pump out some significant wattage of radiation. Though in reality, due to reflections you would get a weak signal from the tower below or even get direct signal from a neighboring cell tower on a different channel.

So what I'm saying is there is no signal reception above cell towers, and even if there is, it's weaker than the regular reception range of a cell. Cells tend to be tight in urban (~

Detail ATP License ratings

Detail ATP License ratings in DC-8, DC-9 (MD-80), FK-100, B-737 (200,300,400), A-320 (319,320,321), A-330 (200,300), B-747 (classic) & B-757, B-767.

Folks my 6 year old son can not drive a car but he can put the key in and turn it on. He knows how to use the turn signals and the wipers. Simply because he can not drive and would be considered a lousy driving student, does not mean he can not do basic functions.

The B-757 (step down) and B-767 (step up) airplanes (of which I have several thousand hours experience in airline service) is one of the first generation EFIS aircraft. It is not full EFIS but partial. However, it does have an FMC/FMGC system that is very good. It does have the capability to do all the necessary navigation so this task could have been accomplished with extremely minimal training.

You do not have to be a pilot to do what was necessary. Remember they were not "going around the pattern" in a solo event. That is, while basic, a complex maneauver.

All they needed to know was a few fundamental things. Where is the "Direct to" key. What are the coordinates of the WTC and how to create a way point.

Once they created a Point (the WTC) simply tell the FMC to go to it and the plane goes. ALl the necessary interferance from the back can be handled easily for you don't even need to watch anything else. I can show anyone on this board how to do it in less than 5 minutes. If you are really dumb I can write it down for you on a cocktail napkin and you can take it with you. To defrag your computer is far more difficult than doing that simple act.

Now once you get to the spot you simply take over and with a little knowledge of crab and crosswind flying you simply point and _____.

I flew the 10th of September and many of you may not remember that day. I did since I flew down the eastern seaboard past NYC less than 10 hours before the first strike with over 230 passengers.

There was a frontal system that was passing over NYC that was causing severe havoc. Thunder, lightening, windshear, and pouring rain. Just off the coast of Washingtton was Hurricane Erin with its bands of rain stretching off the coast of Long Island. this is the very gap I flew down that night.

the purpose of this information is critical. The hurrican was using a considerable amount of energy from the atmosphere; however, the strong cold front was pushing weather eastward. eventually the front pushed Erin well off shore and it became a non event. However, in this process it cleared all the moisture out of NYC. Hence the next day NYC was as clear as a bell. Perfect day from a weather point.

With this perfect weather (you know no smog or nasty haze) you can see for miles and my friends when this happens you CAN spot the towers from miles away. Once the hijackers got into visual range they simply needed to disconect the AP (once again I could tell you how to do it in ONE step) and point the yoke.

The speed of the first a/c was slower than the second; however, speeds as all talk about are crazy. You can not get 500 mph at 2-3000 ft unless you are flying an F-15 with burners. You might get 350-380 indicated if you redline which may give you 400 true at that altitude but not likely. A realistic max is around 330-340

Realisticly the first a/c impacted around 250 kts or less. The second aircraft was faster and you will notice massive amounts of changes (corrections to flight path) were executed the last few seconds. He nearly missed the building.

The 1st a/c hit straight on just as taught in flying straight and level. The second hit on an angle because of the need to correct the path because of his high speed.

So in conclusion folks this was not only possible but because of the way it was completed it was EXACTLY indicative of the level of flying they had. An experience pilot would have done it differently.

Anyone ever think about what would have happened if he MISSED the building. I mean aircraft #2?


On the telephone issue,

On the telephone issue, SATCOM has been around for years and is readily available on telephones on modern airliners. How do you think all these telephones work. You know the ones in every seat back in front of you on the plane.

GPS phones are also available. Don't look at what you have but what is available to the world.

Handheld GPS phones and portable satcom transceivers are all over the world and calls are routinely made from aircraft everyday. It is actually a big ticket revenue item.