Why does FAA/Norad animation show NoC flightpath?

[Turbofan]

Hey Beachnut, you should get a copy of the latest presentation. The 11.2 g
has been updated.

The video also puts your calcs to shame, along with the single dimension
arithmetic used by Myriad.

I can't wait for you to see it. I'm placing bets on the excuses already.

 

[The Big Dog]

Hey Beachnut, you should get a copy of the latest presentation. The 11.2 g
has been updated.

The video also puts your calcs to shame, along with the single dimension
arithmetic used by Myriad.

I can't wait for you to see it. I'm placing bets on the excuses already.

Uh, why don't you link to it?

 

[Drudgewire]

I can't wait for you to see it. I'm placing bets on the excuses already.

What are the odds on "it's wrong?" Cuz I want some action.

 

[Miragememories]

It's sad watching another thread reduced to a mock-a-thon

Anyway, "grow up, get over it, the animation is legit and y'all
know it."

It was animation produced by a professional flight simulator,
designed to read flight recorder data.

It's logical to assume the FAA performed their duty and validated the flight data fed to the simulator.

Producing simulator-animations is a simple procedure.

Professional simulators are designed to be as detailed and accurate
as possible, making them a useful tool in aircraft near miss and after crash investigations.

Based on the evidence presented, I think there is little reason to
question the authenticity of the simulation's creator.

MM

 

[Caustic Logic]

It may just be authentic! Wow! I don't know how to gaugue the likeliness of that. Let's just say probably legit.

Why does that mean it's accurate? Based on flight data? That's an impossible maneuver! What plane flew this path and recorded this data? What data do you think they used, MM? FDR, radar, what? Be honest now - does the logic of this mystery-mongering really go anywhere?

 

[gumboot]

It was animation produced by a professional flight simulator,
designed to read flight recorder data.

No it isn't. It was produced by STK which is a situational analysis software, in this case apparently analysing Radar function. Nothing to do with the FDR, and the NTSB's FDR-based animation has already been released.

It's logical to assume the FAA performed their duty and validated the flight data fed to the simulator.

The FAA appear to have had nothing to do with this animation. Given the USAF spokesperson's comments on Farmer's website, I would say at a guess that this radar analysis simulation was included in the radar data the USAF gave to the FAA.

 

[TC329]

Uh, no: TC said:

"p.s. i think this is about as authentic as the fdr, 5 frames, citgo video, rades data, etc.
just for the record. its a total fabrication. but then again i'm the one who's been telling you guys the government was fabricating this evidence for years. maybe now you'll come around and admit they just invent this ****......."

Anyhow, DODGE NOTED. Now, Dom:

"give us the flight path and calculations for the CIT path: you know, over the Annex, bank north of citgo, dip below the level of the trees, arrest the descent and then pull up and over the impact site.
Prove that a plane can do what the CIT says it did. We've only been asking for, what, a year? C'mon Dom, step up to the plate, man. Do it, do it now."

i'm going to tell you one last time :

i just presented you that with this thread. now lets see how you duh-bunk it.

 

[beachnut]

i'm going to tell you one last time :

i just presented you that with this thread. now lets see how you duh-bunk it.

Still no flight path! Just impossible high g wings fall off lies.

Miller debunks your every thought on 93, the CIT witnesses prove 77 hit the Pentagon. When will you give up making up lies about 9/11?

The animation here is just used to show a plane hitting the Pentagon. It is correct a plane hit the pentagon, but the flight path is impossible like your flight paths, which you don't even have cause they are impossible each time you post them, then you retract them because they were made up by people who can't use physics to figure out anything.

Anything new?

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Animations are based on flight data. Too bad you can't grasp that concept.

None of the government supplied animations agree with the OCT. None of them
show an aircraft hitting light poles.

Good job.

So the animations are based on the flight data. That means that they perfectly agree with the data on the flight recorder? If you were to line up the FDR with the animations, the plane would match the flight data exactly? And this would be true for both animations despite them being different from each other?

In other words these 3 things are all in perfect exact agreement?

the first working animation
This new animation with the FAA logo
And the FDR data

And perhaps we could get a definition of OCT (not what words the letters stand for). Perhaps a link to this "OCT" so we can compare the differences.

 

[beachnut]

Yeah...only a kid in denial would continue to sweep all of the questionable
events under the "Pentalawn".

Nothing phases you loyalists huh?

Neither of the animations show the aircraft hitting light poles. All of them
support 'too high to hit poles' and a north approach.

None of the animations support the minimal damage, or damage path within
the Pentagon.

I'll have to dig into this FAA release a little more. I'd like to find out
some information about the reconstruction, and how they arrive at the
final impact leg...because as you say, it doesn't appear to support the
limits of a commerical jet.

Is nothing you make up, lacking in evidence, to produce lies from thin air, is too fantastic to and disrespectful to stop you from being an apologist for the terrorist?

Why do you lack the knowledge to see the flight path is wrong on the animation used to symbolize an aircraft impact at the Pentagon?

Is this another truther like thing...?

 

[TC329]

I would like an explanation from the nuts. If no plane hit the light poles, how did they rip out of the ground ?

at least 4 of them could have been done without being noticed in the middle of the night before.

How did no one notice them being ripped out of the ground by anything other than a plane ?

no one noticed them getting ripped out of the ground thats what you're missing. cit can't find one person to say they saw that and that list includes father mcgraw, mike walter, & joel sucherman.

What about the hundreds of witnesses that saw the plane ? Liars ?

only the ones who claim to have actually watched it enter the building. most likely they're not lying though because they don't know what they are saying isn't true. so technically not liars.

Where is the plane ?

not in the pentagon on 9/11

Where are the people on board ?

so are you joining our demands for a new investigation into the attacks?

How crazy do you have to be to claim the government planted pieces of an airplane around the Pentagon ?

how crazy do you have to be to send thousands of people off to die for a cause you know you fabricated like saddam's ties to al qaeda and massive wmd arsenal?

 

[jaydeehess]

no.

they faked it and now they're releasing fake evidence to corroborate cit's evidence and yet still try to prove an impact.
.

They faked a crash , then faked evidence to indicate that the original operation was indeed faked, all in order to prove to the masses that it was not faked.

That's all I needed to get to in this thread to reaffirm that TC requires the services of a health professional.

 

[TC329]

Why does that mean it's accurate? Based on flight data? That's an impossible maneuver!

ok adam since you declared this maneuver is impossible within a relative short time after the release of this video please show us the math done on this video which proves this plane cannot do the manuever it is depicted doing in it or admit that you once again are lying.

What plane flew this path and recorded this data?

be careful, you sound like one of us!

 

[jaydeehess]

at least 4 of them could have been done without being noticed in the middle of the night before.

How did no one notice them on the ground between sunrise and impact?

no one noticed them getting ripped out of the ground thats what you're missing. cit can't find one person to say they saw that and that list includes father mcgraw, mike walter, & joel sucherman.

Lloyd saw one crash onto his car.

only the ones who claim to have actually watched it enter the building. most likely they're not lying though because they don't know what they are saying isn't true. so technically not liars.

How does one get fooled into thinking they saw it enter the building?

not in the pentagon on 9/11

He asked where it was, not where it wasn't.

so are you joining our demands for a new investigation into the attacks?

Only if you can show that the occupants were not those discovered in the Pentagon. It would help if you could venture a theory as to where they are now.

how crazy do you have to be to send thousands of people off to die for a cause you know you fabricated like saddam's ties to al qaeda and massive wmd arsenal?

What has that got to do with the question you were asked?

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

How did no one notice them on the ground between sunrise and impact?

Also, there are people paid to notice when lights along the highway apparently aren't working (or completely missing, for that matter). It only becomes more obvious at night.

 

[beachnut]

at least 4 of them could have been done without being noticed in the middle of the night before.




no one noticed them getting ripped out of the ground thats what you're missing. cit can't find one person to say they saw that and that list includes father mcgraw, mike walter, & joel sucherman.




only the ones who claim to have actually watched it enter the building. most likely they're not lying though because they don't know what they are saying isn't true. so technically not liars.





not in the pentagon on 9/11




so are you joining our demands for a new investigation into the attacks?



how crazy do you have to be to send thousands of people off to die for a cause you know you fabricated like saddam's ties to al qaeda and massive wmd arsenal?

Oh, you lie because bush lied. Cool, you and bush are liars! Wow. What next? I knew your bad analysis had a reason, it is pure politics. You are them! Just like bush! How did you do it?

CIT/p3t/your logic is lie, because they lied?

Do you understand why the animation is not a correct depiction of what Flight 77 really did?

 

[Jonnyclueless]

I'm sure they trucked in all the body and plane parts when none of the 1000s of people who were there looking at the destruction and mess were looking. I'm sure they had someone to yell "Look it's a superman" and point to the sky. Then they planted all the plane and bodies, which they had to get there between the time the flight took off and the impact er "explosions". Then of course I am sure all the ATCs would have to be in on it too, right Cheap Shot?

 

[Jonnyclueless]

But Beach, They are lying for "truth". There's apparently a difference I hear. Not to be confused with NWO government op lying.

 

[TheGrunion]

at least 4 of them could have been done without being noticed in the middle of the night before.

Its absolutely impossible to pull this off without the public at large (and VDOT) noticing. There's still a good amount of traffic on this road overnight. VDOT's Northern Virginia Smart Traffic Center has cameras running on this stretch of road. These cameras are monitored overnight. I believe they would have taken exception to someone destroying their poles.

The amount of people that would have realized something is wrong overnight pales in comparison to the amount that would have noticed the destroyed poles after the sunrise.

Do you have any idea how many vehicles drive on this road in the early AM? Do you have any idea how many joggers used (and still use) the sidewalk along this stretch of Route 27? Do you have any idea how many pedestrians use this sidewalk to access the Pentagon from the North Parking Lot every morning. Do you have any idea how many people access the the Pentagon South Parking Lot via Route 27 so that they can use the Pentagon Metro Station in the early morning? Are you going to hand wave these questions away?

How do they swap out the light poles? Do you know what equipment is needed? Do you know how many lanes of traffic they need to close to remove the light poles? Do you know how they would obtain the permits from VDOT in order to close down the lanes necessary to deal with the poles? Do you know how one verifies what lane closures were approved by VDOT for a given day? Are you going to hand wave these questions away?

Do you have the answers to any of my questions?

I've yet to see a truther put forth a remotely plausible scenario to support your quoted claim. Most realize that they don't have a clue about what they are talking about and don't even try.

Are you up to the challenge?

 

[gumboot]

No one seems to have registered my posts so I'll try again...

This video carries the logos of NORAD and a private company called AGI which makes simulation software called STK (Satellite Toolkit) designed to simulate real world interaction of varies assets. This particular example appears to be a radar simulation.

In other words this video has nothing to do with AA77s FDR or the FAA.

The USAF spokesperson explained in response to one of Farmer's FOIA requests that all the radar data the USAF had in relation to 9/11 traffic had been handed over to the FAA, and that Farmer should approach the FAA for such data. I am of the opinion that this animation is an analysis of Long Range Radar coverage during AA77s flight, initiated by NORAD in response to their inability to locate any aircraft on radar during 9/11. The animation appears to have been created using AGI's software which makes sense as DOD is one of their major customers.

The USAF appear to have handed this animation to the FAA along with all of their other radar data.

Thus when the FAA received the FOIA requesting asking for "all information relating to radar" the animation from NORAD was included.

Consider the following scenario:

A boy gives a girl a rough picture of her pet horse.

A truther comes to the boy and demands all information they have about the horse.

The boy explains that he gave his picture of the horse to the girl.

The truther approaches the girl and demands all information they have about the horse.

The girl gives the truther a bunch of stuff including ownership papers, medical records, some measurements of the horse (by the vet), and the boy's rough sketch of the horse.

The idiot truther gleefully picks out the rough sketch of the horse, declares it the girl's "official" picture of the horse, and ignores the photograph the girl gave us a year ago.