… One of the most interesting quotes comes from Afework Hagos who commented on the plane see-sawing back and forth, suggesting that the pilot was struggling to keep the plane level in either pitch or roll or perhaps both. Hagos was stuck in traffic near the Pentagon when the 757 passed overhead. He reported, “There was a huge screaming noise and I got out of the car as the plane came over. It was tilting its wings up and down like it was trying to balance.”
Another eyewitness named Penny Elgas also referred to the plane rocking back and forth while Albert Hemphill commented that, “He was slightly left wing down as he appeared in my line of sight, as if he’d just ‘jinked’ to avoid something.” These observations were further confirmed by Mary Ann Owens, James Ryan, and David Marra who described the plane’s wings as “wobbly” when it “rolled left and then rolled right” and the pilot “tilted his wings, this way and in this way.”
This question of whether an amateur could have flown Flight 77 into the Pentagon was also posed to a colleague who previously worked on flight control software for Boeing airliners. Brian (he asked that his last name be withheld) agreed with the above statements about the fly-by-wire control systems used aboard airliners. He went on to say, “The control systems used on a 757 can certainly overcome any ground effect. That piece of software is intended to be used during low speed landings. A high-speed dash at low altitude like [Flight 77] made at the Pentagon is definitely not recommended procedure…and I don’t think it’s something anyone specifically designs into flight software for any commercial aircraft I can think of. But the flight code is designed to be robust and keep the plane as safe as possible even in unexpected conditions like that. I’m sure the software could handle that kind of flight pattern so long as the pilot had at least basic flight training skills and didn’t overcompensate too much.”
Brian also consulted with a pair of commercial airliner pilots who decided to try out this kind of approach in a flight training simulator. Although the pilots were not sure the simulator models such scenarios with complete accuracy, they reported no significant difficulties in flying a 757 within an altitude of tens of feet at speeds between 350 and 550 mph (565 to 885 km/h) across smooth terrain. The only issue they encountered was constant warnings from the simulator about flying too fast and too low. These warnings were expected since the manufacturer does not recommend and FAA regulations prohibit flying a commercial aircraft the way Flight 77 was flown, but the aircraft is built to high enough safety margins to survive these extremes nonetheless.
Perhaps the most insightful quote from one of the pilots was, “This whole ground effect argument is ridiculous. People need to realize that crashing a plane into a building as massive as the Pentagon is remarkably easy and takes no skill at all. Landing one on a runway safely even under the best conditions? Now that’s the hard part!”
Parte tratta dal sito http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/aerodynamics/q0130.shtml
Aggiornamento, queste sono riprese satellitari del luogo dell’attentato.
Pentagono visto dall’alto. La macchia scura è l’eliporto : il punto dell’impatto. Notate l’aeroporto che si trova immediatamente sopra la rosa dei venti.
Punto di vista del pilota. L’altezza è riportata direttamente nell’elevazione. Avete tutte le coordinate. Considerate che il Pentagono è più basso dell’autostrada e quindi il volo è necessariamente leggermente inclinato verso il basso e non orizzontale come qualcuno vuole far credere.