9/11 Pentagon Video To be Released

[SeanD]

People I know on a personal level were there, one who fueled that exact same aircraft many times at IAD when he worked for Ogden. This person was sitting in traffic waiting to go to work at the Pentagon and saw the entire thing go down right in front of him, he even felt the heat blast from the engines as it passed. It was with out a doubt a 757. He had observed it about a mile out before impact and wondered why it was so low and banking from left to right rapidly then watched it come in to the Pentagon. Yes it looks small in the footage. The Pentagon is not a small building.

 

[mrnolmts]

...This person was sitting in traffic waiting to go to work at the Pentagon and saw the entire thing go down right in front of him, he even felt the heat blast from the engines as it passed. It was with out a doubt a 757...

Well, assuming your friend is reliable (sounds like he is, since he's a fueler), it seems that settles that. A 757 hit the Pentagon. Do you know whether or not he was 100% sure before they announced it was AA 77, or did the news "confirm" his suspicions? It is a well known fact that humans are pretty poor witnesses.

 

[Bjammin]

here we go again with the insults. the ends need to justify the means. when put in a corner with little facts to back up your side, you go ahead and insult and attack somebody who claims not to have all the information and who doesnt believe the official story.

let me guess, I bet you fell for the Gulf of Tonkin and if alive you probably would have believed the USS Maine as well, right?

Where do I not have the facts? You're the one who has no facts. I'll be happy to answer any questions you have, very much unlike you.

I was flying that day, was directly involved in much of the aftermath and have friends on the front line right now including a brother in-law.

I was not involved or have seen anything other then what everyone sees in the other 2 things mentioned and until I did some research I would care not to comment on them.

Many covert operations happen every year you would never be aware of. I see these operations keep things happy-go-lucky for Joe american civilian on a regular basis. Very offen the public is not given all the facts as to not compromise intelligence gathering methods or people in the field. Many civilians go off squacking without any idea about anything.

Have you been to Iraq? Have you any type of clearance to see intelligence?

You insist on being an expert, but can't confirm anything.

You poo poo experts, eyewitness accounts, pictures, and facts and just cling to you one blurry picture and some misguided emotions.

Sure, ASK QUESTIONS, but listlen to the answers you get back instead of looking blindly for something that doesn't exist.

Ends justifing the means? I'm just looking at what fits in the big picture.

Official story? I saw the events unfold for myself. I've made up my own story based on facts that I've read and seen. It just happens to agree with what 99.9% of everybody else believes.

 

[SeanD]

Well, assuming your friend is reliable (sounds like he is, since he's a fueler), it seems that settles that. A 757 hit the Pentagon. Do you know whether or not he was 100% sure before they announced it was AA 77, or did the news "confirm" his suspicions? It is a well known fact that humans are pretty poor witnesses.

110% sure it was an AA 757. He didnt know it was the same flight he fueled until he heard on the news but what he saw was indeed an AA 757. He knows his aircraft very well and even called 911 to report that he witnessed an AA 757 hit the Pentagon before the media reported it. Later he came to find out according to that tail number he had fueled that same aircraft numerous times.

 

[mrnolmts]

...He knows his aircraft very well and even called 911 to report that he witnessed an AA 757 hit the Pentagon before the media reported it...

Good enough for me. Still find it strange that the other cameras that may have caught something, were confiscated shortly after the fact, and the tapes never released to the public. I don't think the administration have officially said something like "The tapes from the hotel/gas station/etc unfortunately did not capture the aircraft or the impact". To some extent, they have themselves to blame for the "birth" of some of the other theories out there. I also find it a bit difficult to believe that there is nothing better out there (video/picture-wise). Didn't the airplane "circle" over DC a few times before hitting the Pentagon? And, given the radar tracks, you'd think someone at the Pentagon were warned that a hijacked airplane was heading for DC?

 

[RJPilott]

That white blur also confused me so i started to do some research. You guys are looking at the wrong area. We have the media to thank for that. They were highlighting the white blur and calling it a 757, when in fact, the white blur is actually a smoke trail and/or a fuel leak from the 757 after hitting the light poles when it crossed the highway. The actual 757 is in front of that white streak. Here is a picture highlighting the actual airframe. If you look at the video again, you can see the Vert stab appear and disappear before it slams into the pentagon. Ironically, this picture came from a Conspiracy Theory site, to set the record straight where the media was highlighting the wrong area.

Here is the picture..

I have been doing alot of research on the issues since the video confused me as well. Conspiracy theorists range from the tinfoil hat wearing chemtrail freaks to the LIHOP (Let it happen on purpose) crowd to the MIHOP (Make it happen...) crowd to the radical "Illuminati New World Order" is responsible crowd, which goes back to WWII, JFK assasination, to the declassified Northwoods project (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods) where our govt actually planned to stage a terrorist event and blame it on Cuba for justification for war.

I personally have many concerns as well and am researching the issues presently. The Conspiracy crowd (those that make sense and arent chemtrail freaks) arent so much concerned with the 757 at the pentagon, because they feel it is a 757. They are more concerned with WTC 7, eyewitness testimony of secondary explosions, controlled demoltion, steel melting temps, what appears to be Thermite captured on video, squibs being detonated.. etc. MIT Scientists and scholars from around the world have raised many interesting questions regarding the events of that day. If you want to do more reasearch yourself, here is a site with some videos to get you started. Some of it is over-the-top in my opinion, but there are good questions raised by some very educated individuals in other areas.

http://www.universalseed.org/


And most of all, make up your own mind....

 

[RJPilott]

Also, i'd like to say,

Its not dishonoring the families and friends of loved ones lost, when the victims families are asking these questions themselves. Search around some sites. You'll see.

 

[RJPilott]

Im doing some research regarding the flight path and maneuvering involved that American 77 had to perform in order to impact the Pentgon where it did, without turning into a fireball long before getting near the Pentagon.

I have looked through the 9/11 report and it says that the plane was about 5 miles west southwest of the pentagon (couldnt find altitude, but other sites say 7700 feet). He started his 330 degree spiral dive and was at 2200 feet when he rolled wings level and continued his dive for the pentagon. Standard rate turns on aircraft are 2 mins for a 360 degree turn. Im figuring Hani had a steeper bank angle as he performed the spiral dive. So therefore he probably did the turn in about a minute. That means he was diving close to 5000 feet per minute (maybe more). Which is a very excessive dive at those speeds (9/11 report says 530 mph), very close to the ground, and then he was able pull out of a dive close to 5000 fpm and hit a 77 foot target without a scratch on the front lawn. Hani must have had Allah on his side that day, because that is one helluva precise maneuver for such a bad pilot with zero time in type (his instructors say he could barely handle a 172). Especially being able to pull out of that dive, so close to the pentagon, without stalling or ripping the wings off.

If anyone has a graphical simulation of the maneuvers he performed on that day, since we do have the black box, it would be a major help. Usually the NTSB makes a graphical animation for most crashes, re: American 587. I'll do more searching on my end to see if i can find anything. But if anyone knows where to find such an animated reproduction, please post it. Thanks.

 

[Gorilla]

I have looked through the 9/11 report and it says that the plane was about 5 miles west southwest of the pentagon (couldnt find altitude, but other sites say 7700 feet). He started his 330 degree spiral dive and was at 2200 feet when he rolled wings level and continued his dive for the pentagon. Standard rate turns on aircraft are 2 mins for a 360 degree turn. Im figuring Hani had a steeper bank angle as he performed the spiral dive. So therefore he probably did the turn in about a minute. That means he was diving close to 5000 feet per minute (maybe more). Which is a very excessive dive at those speeds (9/11 report says 530 mph), very close to the ground, and then he was able pull out of a dive close to 5000 fpm and hit a 77 foot target without a scratch on the front lawn. Hani must have had Allah on his side that day, because that is one helluva precise maneuver for such a bad pilot with zero time in type (his instructors say he could barely handle a 172). Especially being able to pull out of that dive, so close to the pentagon, without stalling or ripping the wings off.

I have trouble trying to figure out where this is so difficult. "Close to 5000 fpm..." Idle descents, straight and level, from altitude, are often much greater than 3,000 fpm. 5,000 fpm is not some freak excursion. We strive for 1.0 to 1.2 G... these guys obviously don't have passenger comfort in mind, are ignoring redline, and probably pulled 2 or 3 G. Given Boeing's engineering, I haven't the slightest doubt that a 757 will shrug off 3G, and probably 4G, depending upon its weight, and keep flying. Same deal with redline, which was proven by the 767's that hit the WTC.

There's nothing in this profile that requires great skill. In fact, I'd say the profile describes a total noob pilot, because it is set up so poorly. Anyone with an ounce of experience in transports would have set the attack run up in a much better way, including a longer run of straight and level flight, when he could acclerate the aircraft, and make the final transition much more controlled and accurate.

Hitting a stationary object is one of the easier things to do in an airplane. Keep it steady in the windscreen, watch it get bigger. The Kamikaze pilots of WW2 had very little flight time, yet despite horrendous flak and fighter opposition, managed to smack much smaller, and moving, targets on the ocean.

 

[RJPilott]

Try it on a flight sim. Try to hit a 77 foot target at 530 mph. Without even doing the spiral dive. Let me know how many tries it takes you without touching the front lawn or overshooting, or spreading your wreckage. Then after you try it. Put a Private pilot with about 50 hours in there to try it. I play modern jet combat sims. Sometimes when i know im going to die, i'll kamakzi my fighter into a Sam Battery. Albeit, its alot smaller.. maybe 20 or 40 feet high at the most. But i havent hit one yet...

Although its interesting you bring up WWII. Cause i also play some WWII combat sims. Much easier to kamazi at slower speeds with a straight wing... trust me..

Im not saying its impossible, but its harder than you think. But again, if you know where to find the NTSB animation, that would be a big help. Usually the NTSB creates animations for al lthe big crashes. I googled NTSB flight 77 animation and nothing comes up. But Flight 587, TWA 800.. etc, many hits from the NTSB. Thanks in advance for your help.

:cheers:

 

[RJPilott]

Lets just put it this way. The pentagon is 77 feet high. The 757 is 44 feet high. That means Hani had 33 feet to play with. Since there are no scratches on the lawn, and the Vert Stab wasnt "clipped" off by the roof (remember, everything vaporized). He hit smack dab in the middle of that 33 foot margin... with a sweep wing airplane.. after a 330 degree sprial dive at 5000 fpm.. at 530 mph...

Also, dont forget those huge cable spools that werent touched. Which are probably 3-7 feet off the ground, reducing the margin to 27 feet.


Impossible? no. However, hopefully the NTSB has something showing this maneuver.... it may quiet down the "missle crowd"....

 

[RJPilott]

I just read an article with this sentence,


"the National Transportation Safety Board was unable to get information from either of the black boxes because the computer chips inside the boxes were severely damaged. "

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/345.htm

Oh well, so much for the request. Thanks anyway guys...

 

[SeanD]

From my witness friend he said the banking of the airplane was almost out of control looking, after the shock of it wore off he was wondering how the hell the guy managed to make a bullseye without a lot of ground damage. He then recalled that the aircraft's left wing tip struck a few car roofs (caused fuel to leak). Hani then pulls up causing the engines bottom edge to strick a light pole seconds before slamming into the Pentagon. He seems to think the pilot instinctivly pulled up when he noticed the impact with the vehicles. He said it was at "light pole" height when it hit the building. My father is a retired 757/767 Captian and Uncle is a current one. Both have said the 757 is the most durable aircraft at all speeds and can do things no other airliner its size can do.

 

[Bjammin]

Anyone who lands an airplane knows that you can almost always hit within a couple feet of centerline when landing. My first landing EVER was probably within 5 feet of centerline, i'm sure most people's are. I was able to hit within 5 feet of centerline on a pitching rolling deck almost everytime, as does everyone else.

Granted, you're going alot slower, but airplanes, especially airliners, are more responsive at higher speeds.

Flight simulators are AWEFUL for practicing precise flying. Even the multi-millon dollar sims we had for the EA-6B sucked at replicating air-air refueling. It was not hard for real, but very few pilots could hit the basket in the simulator.

 

[urflyingme?!]

I just read an article with this sentence,


"the National Transportation Safety Board was unable to get information from either of the black boxes because the computer chips inside the boxes were severely damaged. "

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/345.htm

Oh well, so much for the request. Thanks anyway guys...

Thats was Flight 93.

Meanwhile, investigators tell Fox News they are getting "good, solid readings" from American Airlines Flight 77's data recorder. That plane crashed into the Pentagon, killing a total of 188 people in Washington — a combination of military and civilian employees on the ground and the passengers in the plane.
According to data on the recorder, the plane was going 345 miles per hour when it crashed at about 9:30 Tuesday morning. Investigators also say the recorder has speed an altitude information for the plane's entire flight.
The plane's voice recorder was also recovered, but National Transportation Safety Board officials say it was too damaged in the fire to obtain any information from it.