It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A B757 hit the Pentagon, reported by GOFER06

page: 3
56
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Zanti Misfit

Step on the wrong part of the wing and you'll put your foot through the skin. But that was the exit hole in the inner ring wall.
edit on 3/11/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
a reply to: Snarl

Now this is getting interesting


I'll throw something out there that might surprise you.

The GOFER06 flight was able to continue on his way after the Pentagon crash. It just so happens his route of flight took him northwest near through PA. He was asked by the Cleveland Center controllers to verify a reported crash area. He reported smoke over the crash site. UAL93 was the crash.


ETA This was a coincidence, I don't anyone going away with the idea there was something nefarious about this.
edit on 3/11/2017 by pale5218 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:16 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

No, the FAA radar wasn't touched. The radar displays at NORAD had false targets displayed.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: PistolPete
a reply to: pale5218

Is that the FAA Command Center in your avatar? I do love threads authored by people that know the industry they're talking about and aren't just Google Induced Experts.

Great thread!


Yes sir, the old command in Herndon



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Snarl

Based on the debris found and other data, I'm firmly in the 757 camp.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: pale5218

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
a reply to: Snarl

Now this is getting interesting


I'll throw something out there that might surprise you.

The GOFER06 flight was able to continue on his way after the Pentagon crash. It just so happens his route of flight took him northwest near through PA. He was asked by the Cleveland Center controllers to verify a reported crash area. He reported smoke over the crash site. UAL93 was the crash.


This would have been nice to see in the OP.

That's absolutely wild information.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: pale5218

Gee , that's Odd , I thought it was Already Proven that a Cruise Missile Disguised with Airline Markings Hit the Pentagon and left a Perfectly Symmetrical Round Impact Hole in the Building .





You forgot (SMALL) Symmetrical Round Impact Hole


Its funny how people still believe a plane hit it. On that very same day 2 planes hit 2 buildings and the wings of the planes left a definate impression on impact point, but the wings hitting the Pentagon left no mark at all.

Couple this with the fact, that a plane apparently in Shanksville impacted the ground so hard that it TOTALLY disintergrated, yet the plane that supposedly hit the pentagon with its aluminium nose cone managed to penetrate 5 massively reinforced concrete/steel walls.

Amazingly strong plane no ? A plane is just a caravan for the sky.
edit on 11/3/2017 by scubagravy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: TarzanBeta

originally posted by: pale5218

originally posted by: hiddenNZ
a reply to: Snarl

Now this is getting interesting


I'll throw something out there that might surprise you.

The GOFER06 flight was able to continue on his way after the Pentagon crash. It just so happens his route of flight took him northwest near through PA. He was asked by the Cleveland Center controllers to verify a reported crash area. He reported smoke over the crash site. UAL93 was the crash.




This would have been nice to see in the OP.

That's absolutely wild information.


Yes it is wild but not really what I was trying to convey here. The focus was the reporting by the pilot and his witnessing the B757.

It is wild, he was about 20 miles away from the crash site.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: scubagravy

So if you drive a car into two different types of solid objects it's going to leave identical damage? The Pentagon was made out of reinforced concrete, while the WTC towers were hollow steel shells. The impact of the planes broke the joins on the steel plates of the Towers.

That hole wasn't the impact hole, it was the exit hole.
edit on 3/11/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: scubagravy

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: pale5218

Gee , that's Odd , I thought it was Already Proven that a Cruise Missile Disguised with Airline Markings Hit the Pentagon and left a Perfectly Symmetrical Round Impact Hole in the Building .





You forgot (SMALL) Symmetrical Round Impact Hole


Its funny how people still believe a plane hit it. On that very same day 2 planes hit 2 buildings and the wings of the planes left a definate impression on impact point, but the wings hitting the Pentagon left no mark at all.

Couple this with the fact, that a plane apparently in Shanksville impacted the ground so hard that it TOTALLY disintergrated, yet the plane that supposedly hit the pentagon with its aluminium nose cone managed to penetrate 5 massively reinforced concrete/steel walls.

Amazingly strong plane no ? A plane is just a caravan for the sky.

The landing gear made that hole, not the nose of the plane.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:23 PM
link   
a reply to: scubagravy

Yeah I doubt the front landing gear and a bunch of paper thin aluminum punched that far into the building. But I know nothing of air crashes,just have a little nouse,that's all.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: hiddenNZ

There's a lot more to an aircraft that "paper thin aluminum". The keel beam, which is the strongest part of the structure, is like an I beam at the bottom of the aircraft. Not to mention a few hundred thousand pounds at that speed are going to do a lot of damage.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: scubagravy

So if you drive a car into two different types of solid objects it's going to leave identical damage? The Pentagon was made out of reinforced concrete, while the WTC towers were hollow steel shells. The impact of the planes broke the joins on the steel plates of the Towers.

That hole wasn't the impact hole, it was the exit hole.


The exit hole?

So i have my flight path out 180 degrees?

i.ve worked with concrete all my life, and seen a few good car crashes in my time, and i can assure you, stuff always leaves a mark.

It is my belief that the OS has some missing logic.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Interesting theory indeed.

However, holes start to appear in you story when you state:




At 13:38:19 the track on AAL77 stops, it has collided into the pentagon at a speed of 370 knots indicated or 425 MPH.


The average cruising speed "indicated" of a Boeing 757 is 528 mph or 850 kmh or 458 knots. This is cruising speed. Any deviation from that straight and level flight i.e. a descent, with throttles "pushed forward" will increase IAS. To say the pilot put the aircraft into a steep descent to hit the Pentagon without increasing IAS is complete rubbish.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: scubagravy

There were plenty of marks on the outer wall where the plane hit. There were marks consistent with wing impacts, as well as a hole larger than the aircraft fuselage, before the wall collapsed. That small hole is in the inner courtyard.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Plus, it would be extremely easy to place in or change the transponder code of a missile.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Sooo,in effect you are saying the Pentagon was stronger than the towers? I agree. But also the planes that hit the towers would have been at a higher rate of speed than the Pentagon missile, I mean plane,yet it penetrated a similar distance into the structure,even though it was steel/concrete reinforced? I dunno,um just asking. Either way lots of factors just don't seem to add up.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: CaptainBeno

Except they didn't make the descent at full speed. They increased speed as they approached the building after leveling off.



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Yeah but the keel beam is alloy is it now,again,I don't know?



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 10:35 PM
link   
Hmmm, I don't know about that?





top topics



 
56
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join