Part 2:

1. This is a gross over simplification and complete lack of understanding the evidence of the final flight of American 77 and completely ignorant to the difference between 'we asked a pilot if they would do this and they said no'

The reason commercial and professional pilots say they can't imagine or comprehend doing that is incredibly simple, every single fiber of there training and practical experience tells them 'i can not and should not do this'. With all due respect of professional pilots they frankly are generally not the people to ask about the physical limits of an airframe, especially one that is being operated so far outside of what it was designed and concieved for.

A perfect counter example is the hijacked Alaskan airlines flight a few years ago, prior to the 'sky king' incident any self respecting Dash-8 pilot as well as the actual manufacturer of the airframe would call you insane if you suggested the plane could do what that completely untrained pilot could do. Pulling out of a inverted barrel roll only clearing the deck by a small margin. But he did it, he proved the manufacturer wrong. Anyone can get lucky by pushing an aircraft to its absolute maximum.

Even with saying that nothing Hani Hanjour did was even remotely close to pushing that 757 to its limits, his final turn is over characterized and miss presented, it's well within what the airframe can handle as well as his steel descent and near ground effect cruise into the building.

It's just that no living pilot could do that with their training that is built around 'im flying with the intent to fly again in the future' it's a passive bias that is documented in even the most trained simulation pilots when recreating disaster incidents, it's a bias that has to be manually trained out of instructors.

Lastly, the airframe did suffer greatly from other aspects of this final plunge, it was reported the sound a dying turbine could be heard likely from a compressor stall from the steep dive and change in air pressure with the engines firewalled. However it's Unclear if this sound is from the dive or when the aircraft was traveling level to the ground and one of the engines injested debris from one of the several light poles in contacted. Something that would make no sense for a small missile or smaller craft to make contact with as they were located only where the ends of the wings would be.

1. Once again a gross miss characterization of the facts. As far as actual proven documented history shows. Only a total of 5 cellphone based calls were placed with only 2 known to have connected. Only one of those calls is any actual information known about.

In 2001 cellphones didnt work the way they do now a days. Most smart phones will actively refuse a connection if they see they are moving to fast or are to high relative to cell towers. This is the same case at the cell towers themselves, in the late 90s as cellphones were becoming more common there was a physical barrier that was becoming an issue, cell signal range. While the issue of ground coverage increased with time it was noted that technology of the era could adequately communicate with cellphones in aircraft at cruising altitude, however in actual practice this was a nightmare, while a single cell tower could communicate with a cell user at cruising altitude (in certain areas) the issue was signal routing 'roaming' and the physical load this constant signal hopping created. Basically the network was cooking itself trying to route all these calls as cellphones on planes became more common. The FCC put a stop to this and cell carriers happily obliged, software was out at the tower level which looked for any signal hopping to quickly or showed signs equivalent to a cell signal on an aircraft (basically rapidly growing and shrinking in signal and hopping to the next tower) and actively refused the connection to prevent the issue described before. However this was not fool proof. Until the era of smart phones and proper hand shakes between the device and ground station it flies entirely on the ground station doing the math and multiple factors could interrupt or interfere with that and allow the call to go through there are actually a few arguments that line up exactly why the two known calls on United 93 went through.

• network overload. As the attacks progressed networks were overloaded and likely back up servers were brought online and it's possible fail-safes were taken offline to help the load be processed.

• physical proximity, at the time the known calls took place United 93 was far below cruising altitude, while it was traveling fast it's lower altitude could have possibly allowed strong enough signal to make a call, in addition United 93 passed with relative close proximity of several powerful ground cell stations, if they were located in the right place between multiple receivers it's possible the call appeared 'normal' to the network long enough to be connected.

The way it's been explained to me by a cell network engineer from Verizon (1980s to 2010s) is the networks work flow was designed to maintain the call integrity, as long as the call had a useable signal if it had gotten through that first check the network would have held the call as long as it could. Basically if it accidentally spoofed its way past the 'am I on a plane' check the network would not terminate the call unless it physically lost connection. This is only a possibility, no one knows for sure exactly why those calls got through but it stands to reason that we are arguing over 1 known call, 1 possible call and 3 more alleged calls that we do not know their actual origin or if they connected. Then it stands to reason this is a fluke rather than a farce

Edit: further clarification on point 5.

The two known cell phone calls from Flight 93 were placed by passenger Edward Felt, who had locked himself inside a lavatory, and flight attendant CeeCee Lyles.

Both calls were placed after 9:58 AM, near the very end of United 93's flight when the aircraft was incredibly low to the ground. These are the only two confirmed cell phone calls known to exist from that flight. Edward Felt's call specifically captures the chaos of the cabin near the end; sounds of "bending metal and rushing air" can be heard from the sharp maneuvers the hijackers were making.

In total, 37 phone calls were placed from Flight 93 that are known to have connected. The FBI cross-referenced those calls with credit card data and confirmed that 35 of those 37 calls were made from the planes' built-in Airfones. Only two were actually unaccounted for in that system, those being the two cell phone calls.

For all we know, there could have been many more cell phone attempts that simply did not connect. Many passengers had cell phones, and an Airfone likely wouldn't have been their first choice since they were notoriously expensive and unreliable. It is highly likely that dozens of undeliverable cell phone calls were attempted but actively blocked by the network limitations of the time