Flight 77 flight path

[beachnut]

Do you deny that the plane flew over the Navy Annex?
I´m presenting what witnesses described.
What I find ridiculous are the g-forces necessary according to the FDR data to substantiate the official path.
How many witnesses described it?

What g-forces? Please explain. You can't. Why do you post the lies of CIT and p4t when you have no clue about flying and investigation techniques?

The funny part is Balsamo comes up with 11.2 G by doing idiot hand-waving dirt dumb math. When in reality the G force to impact the Pentagon were recorded by the FDR exactly as predicted by physics as presented by real people who can do math. Balsamo has to look up formulas when most pilots can estimate the G-force in their head.

11.2 G is what Balsamo said it took, then he corrected his math and came up with 35G! p4t can't do math.

The real use of math came up with values of 1.4G to 2.0Gs for various scenarios to impact. Look what Hani poor flying skills came up with. By luck Hani did not smack into the ground he pulled up in time to miss the overpass and impact the Pentagon in his last 4 to 5 seconds of his murdering career you attempt as poorly as he flies to apologize for.

0.725 @8hz, (p4t have no clue what a hz is)
0.659
0.92
0.858
0.94
1.121
0.828
0.783
0.982
0.986
0.927
0.776
1.25
1.037
1.231
1.721
1.604
1.781
1.762
1.964
1.879
2.264
2.044
2.181
1.675
1.744
1.65
1.504
1.785
1.655
1.861
1.946
The last four seconds of G (average 1.4G)! IT is not 11.2, or 35 Gs needed to hit the Pentagon as the fraud Balsamo says. 8 years and p4t have no clue what happen on 911 as they choose to apologize for terrorists. Beat by hard evidence. Lost by this much!

 

[twinstead]

The vast preponderance of both physical and eye-witness evidence supports the "official flight path". Anybody who thinks otherwise needs to present more than a few anomalous eye witnesses to convince rational people.

 

[tj15]

The vast preponderance of both physical and eye-witness evidence supports the "official flight path". Anybody who thinks otherwise needs to present more than a few anomalous eye witnesses to convince rational people.

Do you know if the driving range is on the official flight path?

 

[twinstead]

Do you know if the driving range is on the official flight path?

The preponderance of evidence, both PHYSICAL and EYE-WITNESS, support the official flight path. I could care less about anything you have to say or ask unless you provide some evidence that physical evidence was planted, or a SINGLE eye-witness of a flyover.

See, it IS fun. I can play just like you guys

 

[tj15]

The preponderance of evidence, both PHYSICAL and EYE-WITNESS, support the official flight path. I could care less about anything you have to say or ask unless you provide some evidence that physical evidence was planted, or a SINGLE eye-witness of a flyover.

See, it IS fun. I can play just like you guys

"You guys"? I'm not a truther... I'm simply asking a question that I don't know the answer to.

 

[W.D.Clinger]

The last four seconds of G (average 1.4G)!

Yep. The last two seconds average a little over 1.8g, reducing the vertical velocity by a little less than 55 ft/sec.

I did a quick-and-dirty numerical integration to see how well the recorded vertical accelerations correlate with the pressure and radar altimeters. I'm seeing the right general shape of the curve, but I'm also seeing shifts that may be caused by the 1-second uncertainty in the times at which the altimeters are sampled during each recording interval. What is already known about that?

IT is not 11.2, or 35 Gs needed to hit the Pentagon as the fraud Balsamo says. 8 years and p4t have no clue what happen on 911 as they choose to apologize for terrorists. Beat by hard evidence. Lost by this much!

Balsamo knows a new member of his club is born every minute.

Over at the AboveTopSecret forum, the fake R_Mackey (evidently Rob Balsamo) quotes an email from Rob Balsamo in which Balsamo says my calculation of 1.9g for a path over the VDOT antenna "shows what we have already demonstrated in our presentation, that it is possible for a 757 to hit the pentagon when removing all the variables":
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread512723/pg17

On page 19, he's back to claiming 9g. On the basis of his very own favorite adjustment to the pressure altitude, he is claiming the plane is 129 feet above ground level 1 second before impact and descending at 59 ft/sec. He doesn't mention that the radar altitude is 4 feet:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread512723/pg19

 

[tj15]

So did the plane fly directly over the VDOT antenna?

 

[mudlark]

Nope. The witnesses were interviewed years later by idiots with an agenda. That some of them said that the plane flew on one side of a stupid gas station means precisely nothing. Especially when 100% of the physical evidence contradicts it.

A ´stupid gas station´?

Darrell Stafford
ANC parking lot

Original CMH interview

¨and this is just about on top of the building, scraping the building
.. guess it was pretty big to be on top of you......The wing span was out here somewhere¨

Darius Prather
ANC parking lot

Original CMH interview

Prather: The Navy Annex, above midway. You can see where is a little area on the roof... the lower roof [...]. Right along in that area is where the American Airlines plane came directly across that, and it was only about 3 and half or 4 feet above that. We thought it was the weirdest thing. "It is too damn low", we were saying ..it came on down in between where the gas station [CITGO] is and our parking lot

William Middleton
upper end of ANC buildings

Original CMH interview

William Middleton: As I made a turn to come back I heard this whistling noise as if it was coming behind me. So when I turned to look, I seen this big large airplane beside me.

CMH officer: Where were you at?

Middleton: Uh Patton Drive.

...And he glazed over like our parking lot here and made a turn toward the Pentagon….

George Aman
In his office in the ANC buildings.

Original CMH interview

I thought it was going to hit this building here. So I was just looking out here and I see this airplane coming down here and I thought it was coming, going to hit this building. And I said good God Almighty. So I'm just petrified. I'm looking. The plane flies right over the parking lot here...
When I seen he was kind of turning and gliding when he came across here, across the parking lot but when he got out right in front here

Chadwick Brooks
Citgo

Isn´t questioned about positioning of plane but mentions the lightpoles being struck.
In a CIT interview he admitted that he didn´t.

Roosevelt Robert Jr.
South parking loading dock

Original CMH interview

´the plane hit the building..I ran to the centre of the dock and I looked up and I saw another plane flying around the south parking lot..¨

During CIt´s interview with him

Aldo: So you- you heard the explosion and ten seconds later you were outside and you were able to see that plane?

Roosevelt: Correct. You could see that plane just as clear as day. Couldn't miss it.

CMH had an agenda too?

But all of your own witnesses say it impacted. It's really hilariously pathetic how you ignore that part.

All of them? No.
Brooks and Lagasse for example were visibly taken aback when they realised the implications of their placement of the plane.
You continually refuse to explain how the plane flew the above testified to route along NOC and managed to reach the lightpoles.

Magic would be fooling all witnesses from all angles into believing that a large jet flew into the Pentagon when it really flew over and then planting/faking all kinds of evidence without a single person noticing.

All angles? Who? The commuters on the motorway out of view of the Pentagon facade? Traffic was freely moving. Most would have seen the fireball after it had happened.
Airplanes are a common site flying over the Pentagon. How could they have possibly put two and two together at that time when this information has only come to light years afterwards?

The roads and motorways facing the west face of the Pentagon? Have you ever seen the topography of that area? Trees and bridges block most views.
Most witnesses in the area describe something along those lines blocking their view.

 

[Reheat]

"You guys"? I'm not a truther... I'm simply asking a question that I don't know the answer to.

Uh, huh.

Then why are you acting like one? It has been repeatedly suggested to you that you first use the search function rather than incessantly asking simple questions. You're behavior is becoming quite annoying. If you can't find answers then STFU and lurk for awhile until you learn more, to include not interrupting an intense debate with your inane questions.

 

[mudlark]

Classic quote by Mud:

I´m in no way saying that these people are liars. Just that testimonies
become polluted and altered by the time they reach us.
That all testimonies must be questioned.. - Mudlark

Say Mud, how many years after the fact was it before CIT interviewed these people?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=158703&page=11

 

[dtugg]

So did the plane fly directly over the VDOT antenna?

I don't think so. But even if it did, the g-forces that Cap'n Bob calculated are totally ridiculous. It's based on the assumption that the plane would have flown in a straight line to the light poles, then pulled up in a split second. In reality, only an idiot would believe that the "official" story has this happening; Hanjour certainly pulled up in a much more gradual fashion, as would any pilot.

 

[mudlark]

HI! Yeah, hot linking images from banned members is kind of frowned upon around here.

Especially ones that have been systematically debunked.

Say Mud, why do you call Boger a liar?

It is? I´ll check it out with the mods. NP.
I´ve been here 2 days and the only counterargument I´ve heard to NOC is that of phyical evidence that is not documented and ´hundreds´ of witnesses that I´ve yet to hear named.

When did I call Boger a liar?

 

[Reheat]

It is? I´ll check it out with the mods. NP.
I´ve been here 2 days and the only counterargument I´ve heard to NOC is that of phyical evidence that is not documented and ´hundreds´ of witnesses that I´ve yet to hear named.

Typical twoofer mentality. Only comprehend what coincides with your delusions.

 

[BigAl]

It is? I´ll check it out with the mods. NP.
I´ve been here 2 days and the only counterargument I´ve heard to NOC is that of phyical evidence that is not documented and ´hundreds´ of witnesses that I´ve yet to hear named.

You didn't read the link I provided then.

 

[The Big Dog]

Do you deny that the plane flew over the Navy Annex?
I´m presenting what witnesses described.
What I find ridiculous are the g-forces necessary according to the FDR data to substantiate the official path.
How many witnesses described it?

The CORKSCREW?

You are fantastic!

That path is so astonishingly idiotic that Craig and Fatty have completely abandoned it. The freaking plane would have had to be almost vertical on the first bank, pull out of it, and keeled over the other way to bank around the CITGO. At that point, here is what it would have looked like to all of your witnesses:

l

Is it wrong to say I love you? Keep posting!

 

[tj15]

Uh, huh.

Then why are you acting like one? It has been repeatedly suggested to you that you first use the search function rather than incessantly asking simple questions. You're behavior is becoming quite annoying. If you can't find answers then STFU and lurk for awhile until you learn more, to include not interrupting an intense debate with your inane questions.

Asking a question = truther?

Please ignore my posts from now on.

 

[dtugg]

A ´stupid gas station´?

Just as I said, few people even mentioned it prior to your heroes' "investigation."

All of them? No.
Brooks and Lagasse for example were visibly taken aback when they realised the implications of their placement of the plane.

Oh, I see. They now say that the plane did not impact the Pentagon and are supporters of the the CITiots. Right? No? Then what they hell are you talking about.

You continually refuse to explain how the plane flew the above testified to route along NOC and managed to reach the lightpoles.

It didn't. Your witnesses were mistaken. That was easy.

You've never explained why you ignore the part about the plane hitting the Pentagon but take everything that you want to hear as gospel.

All angles? Who? The commuters on the motorway out of view of the Pentagon facade? Traffic was freely moving. Most would have seen the fireball after it had happened.
Airplanes are a common site flying over the Pentagon. How could they have possibly put two and two together at that time when this information has only come to light years afterwards?

The roads and motorways facing the west face of the Pentagon? Have you ever seen the topography of that area? Trees and bridges block most views.
Most witnesses in the area describe something along those lines blocking their view.

If you CITiots were there, perhaps you may have been dumb enough to see a large fireball and a large plane flying fast over the Pentagon and not be able to put the two together but I assure you that the rest of the world is not so stupid.

 

[tj15]

I don't think so. But even if it did, the g-forces that Cap'n Bob calculated are totally ridiculous. It's based on the assumption that the plane would have flown in a straight line to the light poles, then pulled up in a split second. In reality, only an idiot would believe that the "official" story has this happening; Hanjour certainly pulled up in a much more gradual fashion, as would any pilot.

Truther lingo. Are you a truther?! Just kidding...

But yeah, truthers don't care about things like g-forces and the ridiculousness of their math.

 

[dtugg]

When did I call Boger a liar?

So was Boger telling the truth when he said he watched the plane fly into the Pentagon? Hmmmm?

 

[The Big Dog]

Sean Boger, Air Traffic Controller - "I just looked up and I saw the big nose and the wings of the aircraft coming right at us and I just watched it hit the building," Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower chief Sean Boger said. "It exploded. I fell to the ground and covered my head. I could actually hear the metal going through the building." dcmilitary.com November 16, 2001.

Mud accuses Boger of lying:

"How is it humanly possible to watch a plane fly at you from a confined space without flinching??
Not only that but now you are adamant that he watched a 200ft diameter fireball with the windows breaking around him and what some people described as the ´loudest noise´ they had ever heard.
His NOC testimony is corraborated. NOC and impact are impossible."

Mr. Boger, Mud thinks you are lying.

Keep it up Mud! Tell us more about the Hockey Stick Fraud your idiot pals at PFFT were talking about!