• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

AA77 FDR Data, Explained

nicepants said:
I think you meant that as a question. The reason you don't see any landing gear is because the camera was aimed at the hole, and not at landing gear. The fact that no landing gear is within the frame does not mean that it wasn't there.
Click to expand...


Well, we know for a fact that the next wall, 30 or so feet away suffered zero damage from the "landing gear"

We dont see the landing gear in any photos shot from inside the hole looking out.

So if you are correct, the landing gear MUST be somewhere between the hole and the next wall, laying out in the open. In a perfect place to get a nice photograph of, and nicely tie the story together.

Kindly show me a photo of it, and you win the arguement.

Face it, if the landing gear existed, there would be scores of photo's of it, and they would all support the official story.

The fact is, there are zero photo's, you lose.
 
Last edited:
nicepants said:
I think you meant that as a question. The reason you don't see any landing gear is because the camera was aimed at the hole, and not at landing gear. The fact that no landing gear is within the frame does not mean that it wasn't there.
Click to expand...

Also if you look at the top of the hole there are significant soot marks, yet no smoke/flame is coming out from the hole so that suggests it wasn't necessarily taken any time soon straight after the impact.
 
Last edited:
cludgie said:
Also if you look at the top of the hole there are significant soot marks, yet no smoke/flame is coming out from the hole so that suggests it wasn't necessarily taken any time soon straight after the impact.
Click to expand...

The Wall breaching kit leaves exactly the soot you describe, and wouldnt leave smoke flame except for an instant.

You are making my case for me, thanks.


Not to mention there is ZERO evidence of the landing gear that supposedly made the hole. None, Zilch, zero.
 
nicepants said:
I think you meant that as a question. The reason you don't see any landing gear is because the camera was aimed at the hole, and not at landing gear. The fact that no landing gear is within the frame does not mean that it wasn't there.
Click to expand...

Did it bounce back a few feet after hitting the wall? I can see into the hole,
but I still don't see any landing gear.
 
Hmmm, it also occurs to me maybe roundhead is under the impression that we're saying that the landing gear, and the landing gear alone, went skipping off the columns and knocked the hole in the wall? No roundhead, it was a big old pile of debris of which the landing gear was just a part of.

Can you identify airplane parts in that debris roundhead? I can! Fuselage bits even...
 
From fbo.gov


Description
The United States Army Joint Munitions & Lethality Life Cycle Management Command (JM&L LCMC), Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey 07806-5000 intends to issue a solicitation for the production of the Rapid Wall Breaching Kit (RWBK) requirements. The RWBK is a man portable, rapidly deployable kit that provides a capability for dismounted soldiers to create a man-size hole through 8 inch double reinforced concrete walls and triple layer brick walls. The one man portable kit, is held in a carry bag, has the capability to cut, 32 #4 rebars in less than 4 minutes, and requires no longer than 60 seconds to be prepared for transportation to the target after it is removed from the carrying configuration. The RWBK requirement consists of; M322 Tactical Kit, M323 Force-on-Force Trainer Kit for the M322 and the M324 Inert Trainer used in classrooms. Also, the solicitation will include an option to procure the Technical Data Package. The U.S. Army intends to satisfy this requirement for the above through a sole source contract with Ensign-Bickford, Simsbury, CT. This action is based on other than full and open competition procedures utilizing the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c)(1), as implemented by FAR 6.302-1, Only One Responsible Source and 10 U.S.C. 2304 (c)(3) as implemented by FAR 6.302-3, Industrial Mobilization for the Load, Assemble and Pack effort. It is anticipated the Government will issue a three (3) year Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity type contract with firm fixed price delivery orders. The contract will contain quantity ranges up to 5000 units for M322, M323 and M324 for the first year and up to 2700 units for the M322, M323 and M324 for year 2 and year 3. The Request for Proposal (RFP) will be available electronically at the following Internet address: http://procnet.pica.army.mil on or about 15 days from the date of this announcement. Proposals will be required within thirty (30) days from release date of the RFP. Point of Contact for this requirement is Elizabeth Stoddard, Contract Specialist, AMSML-AQ-CC, Building 9, Picatinny Arsenal, New Jersey 07806-5000, email elizabeth.stoddard@pica.army.mil, telephone number 973-724-4268. Instructions for downloading the RFP: go to http://procnet.pica.army.mil click on Business Opportunities, click on solicitations, scroll down to W15QKN07-R-0111, open the notice, and at the bottom of the page click download solicitation. Proposal will be required within 30days after the release of the RFP, addressed to: Joint Munitions & Lethality Life Cycle Management Command (JM&L LCMC), Attn: AMSML-AQ-CC, Elizabeth Stoddard, Building 9, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000. See Notes 22 and 26. NOTE: THIS NOTICE MAY HAVE POSTED ON FEDBIZOPPS ON THE DATE INDICATED IN THE NOTICE ITSELF (02-APR-2007). IT ACTUALLY APPEARED OR REAPPEARED ON THE FEDBIZOPPS SYSTEM ON 21-SEP-2007, BUT REAPPEARED IN THE FTP FEED FOR THIS POSTING DATE. PLEASE CONTACT fbo.support@gsa.gov REGARDING THIS ISSUE.

Web Link
US ARMY TACOM-Picatinny Procurement Network
(http://www.fbo.gov/spg/USA/USAMC/DAAE30/W15QKN-07-R-0111/listing.html
 
Turbofan said:
I already proved it wasn't AA77. You're just not smart enough to understand
the flight data. That's OK, I understand everyone isn't technically inclined.
Click to expand...
And you have proven that you have zero knowledge of what you are talking about. You talk about specs as if all equipment performs to spec 100% without fail. When it is shown that is not the case, you ignore it a spew about what some salesman says. So the only thing that you have proven is that you have no idea of what you are talking about.
I thought the diagrams, and explanations would help you, however some
people learn at slower rates.
Click to expand...
Of course, you are incapable of knowing that your diagrams and explanations are completely wrong. Someday you may just pull your head out of the sand and see this. However, I'm not holding my breath.
Really? An E4-B over the white house just about the time the explosion occured? Didn't the official story say they couldn't get any jets there
in time? No fighters, nothing at all was mentioned. Forget?
Click to expand...
What difference would that E4-B made? Does it normally carry weapons?
Right...so how do you position the overlay to miss the fence, spools, and
ground...but still line up with the entry hole? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Miss what fence? It hit the fence AND the generator.
generator_fence11-full.jpg

Most of you forget about the objects in the path of the hole. Poor research, or selective theory I guess.
Click to expand...
Like the fence and generator that have a nice engine size gouge in them?
See reply to first point. I'm sorry that you're not on a level to comprehend the presented data. Even with the last recorded values, it doesn't work out.
Sorry I can't help you further.
Click to expand...
Too bad you don't have the intelligence to comprehend that you are plainly wrong. Please, let us know when you evolve enough to form your own coherent thought.
 
Turbofan said:
I already proved it wasn't AA77. You're just not smart enough to understand
the flight data. That's OK, I understand everyone isn't technically inclined.

I thought the diagrams, and explanations would help you, however some
people learn at slower rates.
Click to expand...

No you most certainly did NOT. Not even in the least bit. You pretending you did does not make it true, it simply means you are living in vast denial kiddo. your evidence also proved that the easter bunny was responsible and that Santa Clause helped in the diabolical caper.

YOU are the least technically inclined person here, so don't kid yourself. And you're the one who goes around thinking things like how 2.3 trilliondollars went missing and how something magical hit the pentagon while the real plane flew over top in front of 1000s of people with no one noticing and people even seeing the plane hit the building.

!!!! You're the one who expects everyone to believe that someone faked a plane crash and planted evidence that proved they planted the evidence !!!

You didn't really think this through did ya?

Really? An E4-B over the white house just about the time the explosion occured? Didn't the official story say they couldn't get any jets there
in time? No fighters, nothing at all was mentioned. Forget?
Click to expand...

No, you simply found an article from a NAZI anti-semitic propaganda conspiracy web site that thinks it was an E4-B. My God, you really didn't think this through at all did you? There is no evidence of an E-4b other than absurd assumptions and speculation. Your criteria for evidence is why you get laughed at and aren't taken seriously.

Right...so how do you position the overlay to miss the fence, spools, and
ground...but still line up with the entry hole? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

And how do you knock poles down, hit generators and spools,etc with a plane that flew over the pentagon? Or are you going to flip flop back to 2 planes that no one saw? You're eyes have been rolling so man times that I don't think there is much of a brain left behind them kid. But to be expected form someone who thinks that because the spools are there, they were always there sitting in that position. Form a kid who doesn't understand that those spools had been bouncing around and that is where they landed after the impact.

Didn't think this through did ya kid?

Most of you forget about the objects in the path of the hole. Poor research,
or selective theory I guess.
Click to expand...

This would simply be the result of you not being too bright. And again, don't pretend you actually do research. Someone who claims 2.3 trillion dollars went missing and who makes claims about what happened yet can't explain what happened is not someone who does research.


See reply to first point. I'm sorry that you're not on a level to comprehend
the presented data. Even with the last recorded values, it doesn't work out.
Sorry I can't help you further.
Click to expand...

Oh it's too funny when the retards start pretending it's everyone else in the world that is stupid. Can't be them, nope. Tell us again, why you don't start a lawsuit like the ACLU would do? Why aren't you taking the FBI to court and showing everyone your proven claim? I mean if it's proven, why do you need a new investigation? Shouldn't it be case closed? Shouldn't all the media be hounding you about how you cracked open the case?

Where is the fan fair? Why doesn't this get much notice outside of a conspiracy cult tabloid site that has 1 or 2 people posting a day on it (But with growing numbers!!!)?
 
roundhead said:
Not to mention there is ZERO evidence of the landing gear that supposedly made the hole. None, Zilch, zero.
Click to expand...

Wrong again lil' buddy. That debris to the right of the worker is a wheel hub.
 

Attachments

  • trou1moyenne.jpg
    trou1moyenne.jpg
    33.2 KB · Views: 4
Last edited:
turbofan, since you like diagrams so much, here's another one of the scene. Those blue ovals are where Flight 77 passenger remains were found. As you can see, it wasn't just airplane parts and office furniture that punched through that wall.
 

Attachments

  • Pentagonfatalities-full.jpg
    Pentagonfatalities-full.jpg
    81.3 KB · Views: 10
Turbofan said:
Did it bounce back a few feet after hitting the wall? I can see into the hole,
but I still don't see any landing gear.
Click to expand...

Then remove the denial goggles and look at what everyone else in the world has absolutely no trouble seeing at all.

PS - Love the "oh and if the FBI doesn't come give u our own personal copies of every picture of every piece of plane fro an accident scene, then it doesn't exist".

Still waiting for you to provide some pictures of whatever it is you pretend hit the Pentagon. Care to show us those missile parts? Funny how you don't require any evidence for your claims, only ones that you want to pretend don't exist.
 
WildCat said:
turbofan, since you like diagrams so much, here's another one of the scene. Those blue ovals are where Flight 77 passenger remains were found. As you can see, it wasn't just airplane parts and office furniture that punched through that wall.
Click to expand...

:( Very tragic.

To see that and then to witness some people here just pissing on their grave is just as tragic and sad.
 
TERRY MITCHELL (Chief, Audiovisual Division, Office of ASD PA): "It's more to the right of where we were at. This is the -- this is in a renovated section on the opposite side, if you were facing the opposite side. This is a hole in -- there was a punch-out. They suspect that this was where a part of the aircraft came through this hole, although I didn't see any evidence of the aircraft down there."
(News Briefing The Pentagon, Arlington, Virginia September 15, 2001, 11:00 A.M. EDT)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom