A B757 hit the Pentagon, reported by GOFER06

www.veteranstoday.com...
www.veteranstoday.com... 3 pages with 15 articles each by Dennis Cimino himself or as co-writer. To me it seems he has strayed a bit from his expertise.
pilotsfor911truth.org...
Which is a 16 pages long discussion of Dennis Cimino at Pilots for Truth, with the usual outcome there : Dennis is now nicknamed a troll there.
Many others experienced the same, the moment they contradict Balsamo and friends their wisdom.

www.veteranstoday.com...
A few misconceptions in the above "Reflections" article by Dennis :

There are two guardrails; not one, and the police cruiser is parked in between them.
The second one, is not oxidized on its just barely visible front side, in the first photo,
and in the second photo it's very obvious, that furthest one is not oxidized :



The "clean" lawn picture (it was 100 meters=yards wide, from wall to road) where the camera focus was set on the wall, leaving the foreground less sharper :



Its text is nullified by his own next posted picture with all the debris near and on the helipad, which is an early photo of the torn out fuselage piece on the lawn (left bottom), I never saw before, taken from under one of the two trees along Route 27, where the focus seems to be on that piece of fuselage already in that early stage laying there; where we see it in later, much more crowded photos too :



It's time stamp of 8:46 seems to have been off-set for 1 hour, in that case, this photo was shot 8 minutes after impact of AAL77 at 09:38. Not really much time for planting evidence.

And this photo is the source of all misconceptions about the size of the entry hole :



The hole on the second floor where the biggest fire is, is where the fuselage slid in, and the long stretch out hole to the right (also to the left) is where the wing struts plus the jet engine hit and slid in.
Question : and what about those 3 grayish white vertical columns then, to the right of that fire?

Those 3 are not columns, but sandstone deck stones plus their rebarred concrete girders behind them, that hang down from their bended rebars under a 20 degrees angle to the left.
Only the 4th, really white, perpendicular to the ground standing line we see, is a still standing column, and the fifth and sixth column are also still standing, but with their masonry wall fill-up plus windows, totally gone. That's where the right wing impacted, and that huge dent in the second floor slab and the dented masonry above it (which was a double masonry wall with no window) was the spot where the right engine impacted, and then its remnants, already broken off from its wing-pylon, slid inside the hole under that second floor slab dent.

For a lot of personal professional info on Dennis Cimino, view :
Posted 23 April 2011 : Interview With Flight Data Recorder Expert - AA77 (1:01:40) :
www.youtube.com...


He clearly knows where he's talking about regarding anything based on CSV files retracted from DFDR's.

Regarding a few other aspects of 9/11 he follows a few of the misconceptions still floating around in those days (2011).
At 22 minutes in and on : he mentions 35 instances of power resets to that flight data recorder, indicating tampering with it, and that in fact it was a bench created false record.
I checked it in the CSV file and it's true. One minute it flies f.ex. steady at 9950 feet, the next moment at 10230 feet. And there are many more instances like that.

The DFDR also did not indicate any impact with light poles, while other planes that hit trees and other objects while in a landing flight path pattern, had all many indicators in their DFDR's that that hitting of objects happened.
AAL77 its DFDR shows nothing like that in the last 5 seconds. No sudden pressure waves.

Flight 77 The Flight Data Recorder Investigation Files 1 (10:10):
www.youtube.com...


Posted 8 September 2016 : Midwest 9/11 Truth Conference Session 2: Dennis Cimino: "Who was responsible and why" (1:51:04) :
www.youtube.com...

Well, of course you wanted to know more after viewing those 10 minutes of part one of that FDR investigation :

www.youtube.com... 2


www.youtube.com... 3


www.youtube.com... 4


www.youtube.com... 5


www.youtube.com... 6

a reply to: LaBTop

Thanks, excellent research.

If you can prove just one part of the OS of the Pentagon crash a lie, which you have, then why on earth would anyone believe the rest of the OS of the Pentagon alleged attacks.

I only need to be lied to once, it works the same way in a court of law, once a witness has been proven a liar, in many cases the Judge may ask the jury to ignore the rest of their testimony. Because they are no longer credible.

That goes with the OS of 911 as well.

a reply to: LaBTop

All your work discredited by one article....

Scientific method shows large jet strike at the pentagon!

Bringing Closure to the 9/11 Pentagon Debate
www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...
By John D. Wyndham (PhD), Coordinator of Scientists for 9/11 Truth

It seems poster neutronflux is still seriously lagging behind in reading comprehension, since he seems not to have noticed that in the first few posts by me in this thread, I explained that I am a firm proponent of the B757-200 impact at the west wall of the Pentagon.

On to more serious subjects :
At 3:00 / 5:11 on in the last part 6, you hear Mineta tell the story about the plane 50 miles out etcetera.
Now, after you have read my excerpts from the military telephone conference :

PEOC: We've got confirmation of an airplane 60 miles out. We think it is Flight United 93. Apparently, we're hearing weapons freeze right now. Do you know what the status of the Atlantic City assets are right now? (Then some asking around about jet fighters)
PEOC: DDO, this is PEOC. The Vice President has just confirmed fighters are cleared to engage the aircraft.
--Page 169 : inbound if we can verify that it is, in fact, the hijacked aircraft. Can you confirm with FAA? DDO: This is the DDO. I'm checking with the FAA at this time.
(They want NAOC airborne, and some AWACS over Louisiana, then this : )
-- g 10:03 to 10:06 DDO: FAA report of aircraft down in Pennsylvania.

I think it is quite obvious and logical by now, to get rid of all the confusion about what orders VP Cheney had given regarding AAL77 :
WEAPONS FREEZE..!

a reply to: LaBTop

Your posts have no statement nor conclusions.

They are just a long jumble with no stated stance to push all the other posts into the background. Filled with link after link of filler YouTube references with no stance on how they support your mishmash of thoughts. No coherent idea expressed on how all your referenced video supports anything.

If you got something to say, stop relying on videos nobody has time to watch and state it!

Garbage in, garbage out.

A reply to: neutronflux

A keen observer would have read that article with more precision :

Engineers and scientists working in the aerospace field feature an article which explains that, because of the high speed and low angle of attack, ground effect is not a relevant factor, particularly with an aircraft that is under automatic control, as was likely the case for Flight AA 77 at the end. According to Jeff Scott, “ground effect would have been quite small on Flight 77 given its high rate of speed and small angle of attack.” See Aerospaceweb.org and the answer by Jeff Scott, “Pentagon & Boeing 757 Ground Effect.”

Scientific Method, my BOTTOM END,!
It seems that they have read all my posts on the subject of the Pentagon attack, but removed all VERY EARLY 25 NoC witness statements, AND my Auto pilot OFF statements, which does not seem to fit their personal bias.

I told everybody who can read here, many times alone in this thread already, but years earlier already, that that phony DFDR "shows" that AAL77 was flown MANUALLY for the last 10 minutes of its flight, all three autopilot functions were switched OFF.!
And also MANUALLY in the last 5 seconds, or during 1.5 km (1500 yards) at that crazy speed.

And that the angle of attack as "evidenced" by those 5 cut light poles (their cut height indicates the height of the wing ends off the lawn, for the not so mathematically inclined readers under us) nullifies the crazy end speeds as "shown" in that false DFDR, since the security boot cameras show a perfectly horizontal smoke cloud coming from the right jet engine. At those crazy speeds, under THAT angle diving to the lawn from over the top of WING 8 from the Navy Annex building, it's impossible to pull such a big plane UP a few degrees, flying at 825 KMH in dense air, to force it from flying from a dive, into a sudden horizontal flight path over the lawn and leaving such a perfectly horizontal smoke cloud as seen in that DoD video.

originally posted by: LaBTop

PEOC: We've got confirmation of an airplane 60 miles out. We think it is Flight United 93. Apparently, we're hearing weapons freeze right now. Do you know what the status of the Atlantic City assets are right now? (Then some asking around about jet fighters)
PEOC: DDO, this is PEOC. The Vice President has just confirmed fighters are cleared to engage the aircraft.
--Page 169 : inbound if we can verify that it is, in fact, the hijacked aircraft. Can you confirm with FAA? DDO: This is the DDO. I'm checking with the FAA at this time.
(They want NAOC airborne, and some AWACS over Louisiana, then this : )
-- g 10:03 to 10:06 DDO: FAA report of aircraft down in Pennsylvania.

I think it is quite obvious and logical by now, to get rid of all the confusion about what orders VP Cheney had given regarding AAL77 :
WEAPONS FREEZE..!

Perhaps some confusion involved here as I've never heard the term 'weapons freeze' used before and it could be catastrophically misinterpreted over radio comms as the commonly used standard 'weapons free' order which means permission to fire at will.

The plural of 'weapons free' is 'weapons frees'?
The opposite of 'weapons free' is 'weapons hold' and 'weapons tight' is in-between meaning ID targets as unfriendly before opening fire (eg fire if fired upon).

Perhaps someone here more familiar with US military commands could clarify further.

A reply to: Pilgrum

I think you are reaching too far.
Remember, this was HEAVILY redacted by the Judicial department of the military, AND rewritten by the Top Brass, we may expect they know the proper use of military commands.

And this specific remark came from PEOC, the conference room in the secure and save spot deep under the White House, with the VP Cheney, Mineta and a lot of military brass sitting in it there.
And THIS SPECIFIC REMARK was THUS also CHECKED by military LAWYERS and military TOP BRASS. Who both heavily redacted this whole conference piece.!
And we don't know if they saved the original papers at all.

By the way, I would have given the same orders IF the plane was above a densely populated town area, you're not going to shoot down a huge passenger plane above Washington DC.!
The problem is, as you also very well understand, that Cheney did not order to shoot it down when it was still flying 50 miles away, above rural areas.

Perhaps however..... he has given orders like this :
Shoot above rural areas, don't shoot above densely populated areas.
That would have been a quick, decisive and logical order, to be expected from a commander in Chief.



It also fits the 10 miles out remark from the young man, and THEN his next question :
"Do the orders still stand, Sir.?"

a reply to: Pilgrum

Weapons FREEZE would never be used. For the reasons you stated

a reply to: LaBTop

Show pictures where the light poles were cleanly cut?

Did you read my reasoning above, and did you both forget about this explanation in that FOIA freed file? :

The entire transcription was redone by USD(I) staff in conjunction with Joint Staff because there were many inaccuracies in the original.
This italics is military repair-speak for : Damn! What we saw we didn't like, so we rewrote the damn thing ourselves until we DID like it.
USD(I) = Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. Joint Staff = All top Brass.

Or, was this whole redacted piece written by someone who has not the faintest idea about military speak.?
So, not at all by top military brass and their military lawyers.?

a reply to: LaBTop

Who says the flight data recorder data is phony?

a reply to: LaBTop

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...

Bringing Closure to the 9/11 Pentagon Debate

The radar track of AA 77 is continuous from Dulles to the vicinity of the Sheraton Hotel and is supported by the FDR data. From there, the FDR data and many eyewitnesses tracked the plane all the way to impact at the Pentagon. The eyewitness and physical evidence fully support impact by a large plane with dimensions matching a Boeing 757.

originally posted by: neutronflux
A reply to: LaBTop

Show pictures where the light poles were cleanly cut?

Are you on a quest to disrupt a good thread?
Unwilling to even read the last few pages?
Let it be, to read the whole thread FIRST, as any genuinely interested reader would do, before asking already pages ago answered questions?

I posted ALL of them, ALL 5 :
www.abovetopsecret.com... page 28
www.abovetopsecret.com... page 28

And the reasoning and calculation why the resulting angle does not fit the CRAZY SPEED, the DENSE AIR, the AUTOPILOT FUNCTIONS OFF and the necessary PULL UP MANEUVER to level out over that last 150 meters of lawn, coming out of a dive from over that hill side where the Navy Annex with 5 floors high is on top of, and it flew over the roof of its Wing 8 while diving down. Go look those posts up yourself, I'm not reacting anymore on TEASERS, who cost me precious time.

a reply to: LaBTop

Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon
Frank Legge, (B.Sc.(Hons.), Ph.D.) and Warren Stutt, ( B.Sc.(Hons.) Comp. Sci.) January 2011

Segment:
There do not appear to be any published measurements of the impact points on the poles, the vertical portion of which was 36 feet in height. There is, however, a photograph which suggests that about 5 feet was chopped off the first pole by the impact, showing that the plane’s wing would have been about 31 feet above ground level.



From summery:
The recent complete decoding of the FDR file has enlarged and clarified the information available and has thereby enabled resolution of the contradictions. It is clear that this file supports the official account of the course of flight AA 77 and the consequent impact with the Pentagon. The file thus also supports the majority of eyewitness reports.

originally posted by: LaBTop

And that the angle of attack as "evidenced" by those 5 cut light poles (their cut height indicates the height of the wing ends off the lawn, for the not so mathematically inclined readers under us) nullifies the crazy end speeds as "shown" in that false DFDR, since the security boot cameras show a perfectly horizontal smoke cloud coming from the right jet engine.

You speaking with such authority, I thought you had credible data on five light poles.

I guess I was wrong, my bad.

Oh, who says the flight recorder data is phony. Who would fake the data? What's the motivation?

originally posted by: LaBTop

Or, was this whole redacted piece written by someone who has not the faintest idea about military speak.?
So, not at all by top military brass and their military lawyers.?

As I don't have the complete history of this information I'll assume that it was originally a recorded audio file and someone was assigned the task of transcribing it to text. Who would be given such a lowly job? Certainly not the top brass who'd look it over after it was completed, even checking it with a spell-checker at some point. It does seem strange that such a (correctly spelt) error could get past them but, to me and others, the use of 'weapons freeze' in this context is far worse as it would never be used in field communications. If 'weapons free' was declared in 2 or more areas they could be described as 'weapons frees'.

More military input is needed to resolve this but it appears to me that it's a transcription error that slipped through the cracks somehow.

'We've got confirmation of an airplane 60 miles out. We think it is Flight United 93. Apparently, we're hearing weapons frees right now. Do you know what the status of the Atlantic City assets are right now?'

Originally posted by: neutronflux
A reply to: LaBTop

www.foreignpolicyjournal.com...
Bringing Closure to the 9/11 Pentagon Debate

The radar track of AA 77 is continuous from Dulles to the vicinity of the Sheraton Hotel and is supported by the FDR data. From there, the FDR data and many eyewitnesses tracked the plane all the way to impact at the Pentagon. The eyewitness and physical evidence fully support impact by a large plane with dimensions matching a Boeing 757.

What a bunch of baloney.
He totally discards all the 25 NoC flight path witnesses. Who saw AAL77 fly in its LAST few seconds at a totally different flightpath, at a totally different speed, and in a standard right bank, which is ALL not to be found in that PHONY piece of DFDR falsification.
The FDR data from later than at the Sheraton Hotel its last measured OFFICIAL data point, and "found" by Farmer, Stutt and Legge and friends has never ever been acknowledged by any official source. That's 4 to 6 seconds of UNRELIABLE data.
It's exactly inside those last 5 seconds of flight time, that the ANOMALISTIC flight path, leading NoC, is registered by 25 witnesses.

a reply to: LaBTop

Vs the 100 plus eyewitness that give a different account?

The 25 probably whould not be confused by lack of landmarks and items of depth reference while looking into the sky?

Again who faked the flight recorder data and why?