What Level Of Skill Was Required To Fly A Plane Into The Pentagon ?

a reply to: Jacobu12

What missile 4 foot in diameter, or bomb, would punch a hole in the front of the pentagon shaped like an upside down T. The length at least 70 feet wide and two stories tall. What missile or bomb would explode to create a 70 foot wide hole in the front of the pentagon and leave no interior of the pentagon on the pentagon's front lawn.

Do you even stop to think how utterly ridiculous and impossible the narratives you push are?

Ahem, excuse me, are you for real

Do you even slow to let the thought process have time to be a viable response?

a reply to: neutronflux

Hi, Sammy,baby

The scene was reported by a news crew before the parts were planted......hey

Friggin same at Shanksville.....refuse to be a victim

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
Hi, Sammy,baby

The scene was reported by a news crew before the parts were planted......hey

Friggin same at Shanksville.....refuse to be a victim

Then if a bomb or missile went off at the pentagon, why was there on interior of the pentagon exploded on to the from lawn?

What missile or bomb would make a very clear hole like a upside down T, 70 feet wide, and the tallest part where the tail section went through a breech two stories tall.

How were the remaining windows not blown out, no car windows blown out near by, and there is no evidence of a shock wave from an exploding bomb or missile.


The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact
First Published January, 2011. Version 3, April 2016.
By John D. Wyndham (PhD, Physics)
www.scientistsfor911truth.org...

Conclusion
Clearly, the main theory, that a large plane such as a Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, is by far the most plausible theory compared with the alternative theories. The main theory still has some unanswered questions, but it is much stronger than any of the alternative theories.

However, the essence of this paper is that the scientific method proves all alternatives to large plane impact virtually impossible. It is hoped that the 9/11 truth movement will accept these current findings and acknowledge the preeminence of the large plane impact theory at this time.

It's almost as "conspiracists" on this thread are acting like stereotypical tinfoil hat large jet deniers to hurt the credibility of the truth movement by design.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jacobu12

What missile 4 foot in diameter, or bomb, would punch a hole in the front of the pentagon shaped like an upside down T. The length at least 70 feet wide and two stories tall. What missile or bomb would explode to create a 70 foot wide hole in the front of the pentagon and leave no interior of the pentagon on the pentagon's front lawn.

Do you even stop to think how utterly ridiculous and impossible the narratives you push are?

We have already got proof Hani Hanjour was a terrible pilot and we know Ted Olson claims are dubious also.

The plane coming in just above the ground to strike the Pentagon, is next.
prntscr.com...

He's the only person controlling, the plane, has no-pilot. He got no landing gear down, when just barely above the ground? The pressure and natural forces is the pilot experiencing and feeling holding the side stick?

We know the FBI confiscated 9/11 Pentagon footage surrounding the area where the plane allegedly crashed. Why is it 16 years later, we only still got a 1 still of camera footage? Is there wing damage we can point to where the plane hit?

Another red flag for me is how can 4 flight recorders be broken? Flight recorder are designed to survive crashes and impacts? Flight 93 hit the ground?

a reply to: Jacobu12

If you are going to make wild claims, maybe you should do real research. The 757 doesn't have a side sick. It isn't fly by wire and uses a control column.

Data recorders are always damaged in crashes. They're not designed to survive undamaged, they're designed to survive. There have even been a number of crashes that were less severe than these crashes that destroyed them.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

If you are going to make wild claims, maybe you should do real research. The 757 doesn't have a side sick. It isn't fly by wire and uses a control column.

Data recorders are always damaged in crashes. They're not designed to survive undamaged, they're designed to survive. There have even been a number of crashes that were less severe than these crashes that destroyed them.

So the 747 that crashed at the Pentagon, had no steering device?
www.airliners.net...


Data recorders are always damaged in crashes? 4 of them, from different planes, same day?

a reply to: Jacobu12

Crash a car against a wall, will the car be sucked in by the wall? The plane is going to explode apart upon impact.

depends on the car, the speed traveling and the thickness and composition of the wall.

Do you know what Kinetic damage is?

originally posted by: InhaleExhale
a reply to: Jacobu12

Crash a car against a wall, will the car be sucked in by the wall? The plane is going to explode apart upon impact.

depends on the car, the speed traveling and the thickness and composition of the wall.

Do you know what Kinetic damage is?

Yes i agree, but the 747 has two long wings. The shell of the plane is the part that collides and hits the wall first. The wings will collide with the wall further away. I just find hard to believe part of the wing would not be broken off when it collided with the wall.

And lets not forget Hanjour flying straight and narrow just above the ground . How did he get it down to level the plane off straight and controlled when he's a inexperienced pilot? Why did he not just come down towards the top of the Pentagon, it's an easier attack ?

a reply to: Jacobu12

The wings will collide with the wall further away. I just find hard to believe part of the wing would not be broken off when it collided with the wall.

So I take it that its a No, you don't understand kinetic damage.

And lets not forget Hanjour flying straight and narrow just above the ground . How did he get it down to level the plane off straight and controlled when he's a inexperienced pilot?

Seriously are you trolling?

Why ask this specifically?

I actually answered this in one of my previous posts to you in this thread.

Why did he not just come down towards the top of the Pentagon, it's an easier to do?

Is it?

a reply to: Jacobu12

First off, Do. Real. Research.

Boeing 747 (NOT Flight 77):



Boeing 757 (Flight 77):



The two are nothing alike, and on matter how many times you call it a 747, it doesn't change the fact that Flight 77 was a Boeing 757.

Second, how do you get "it had no steering device" from "it used a control column"? Side stick controllers are only used in fly by wire aircraft. Thank you for proving my point though with that picture. Side stick controllers are designed to have very little movement, because they're fly by wire. You don't have to move them at all to input a control movement.

Side stick:



The 757 has a control column. A control column is designed to move by physical strength. It's attached to cables, and when you move the column, it moves the cables, which are attached to the flight control surfaces. A fly by wire system sends a signal to an actuator, which moves the control surface. The two are radically different and not interchangeable.

Control column:



As for the data recorder, every crash that has ever happened had a damaged recorder. Here are a few examples:

Boeing 737, Rostock:



Douglas MD-88 off California:



West Air Sweden CRJ-200:



EgyptAir 990 Boeing 767:



They're not designed to survive undamaged. The memory module is designed to survive intact, and is the important portion of the recorder. The only time a recorder might survive undamaged is when a plane lands, and catches fire. When there is a serious crash involved, no recorder survives undamaged.

I wonder about this too. This tiny piece of metal is the only bit thrown away to the side from the impact? You see where the firetrunk is watering the fires, that's a fair distance away from the blast. This photo just looks odd out of place to me? Is it fake did the conspirators release this to fool people.
pop.h-cdn.co...

a reply to: Jacobu12

As for your claims of the turbine wheel being from a cruise missile, you couldn't be more wrong.

This is the turbine wheel, next to a person for perspective.



You can clearly see that it comes up to about his knee.

This is a Slam missile(the one on the bottom).



It's clearly far smaller than the turbine found at the Pentagon. Cruise missiles are designed to be small, and carried either by aircraft or ships. That turbine wheel is far too small to have come from any missile.

As for the Global Hawk claim, again, the engine is too small.



The entire engine might come up to someone's knee. You have to account for blade length, so the turbine wheel in that engine is going to be far too small. The turbine wheel at the Pentagon was either a low or high pressure turbine from inside the engine, with the blades snapped off.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

First off, Do. Real. Research.

Boeing 747 (NOT Flight 77):

Boeing 757 (Flight 77):

The two are nothing alike, and on matter how many times you call it a 747, it doesn't change the fact that Flight 77 was a Boeing 757.

Second, how do you get "it had no steering device" from "it used a control column"? Side stick controllers are only used in fly by wire aircraft. Thank you for proving my point though with that picture. Side stick controllers are designed to have very little movement, because they're fly by wire. You don't have to move them at all to input a control movement.

Side stick:

The 757 has a control column. A control column is designed to move by physical strength. It's attached to cables, and when you move the column, it moves the cables, which are attached to the flight control surfaces. A fly by wire system sends a signal to an actuator, which moves the control surface. The two are radically different and not interchangeable.

Control column:

As for the data recorder, every crash that has ever happened had a damaged recorder. Here are a few examples:

Boeing 737, Rostock:

Douglas MD-88 off California:

West Air Sweden CRJ-200:

EgyptAir 990 Boeing 767:

They're not designed to survive undamaged. The memory module is designed to survive intact, and is the important portion of the recorder. The only time a recorder might survive undamaged is when a plane lands, and catches fire. When there is a serious crash involved, no recorder survives undamaged.

When people say to me do real research, for me you only showing off and being smug? I not a pilot, so if i use the wrong names for gadgets, sorry. I corrected in my next post what i meant the steering device.

Of course flight recorders are damaged, after a crash. You use examples here to highlight a point, so i will have to look this up to see if they still got flight information from it. My point was never about the damage to the flight recorder. My point is the flight recorder completely useless for retrieving information after the crash.

a reply to: Jacobu12

I'm not being smug at all. You were corrected multiple times in this thread, and you still insist on calling it a 747. Everything that has ever been published about 9/11 calls it a 757. So to me, that tells me that you either didn't pay attention to that (which is a fairly important detail), or don't care if you're accurate in what you're saying. If you're going to make claims, at least get the details right. I can understand the side stick mistake, as that's not exactly something the layman would know, but you can at least get the type of aircraft right if you have done good research.

As for the recorders, they recovered information from two of the four aircraft on 9/11. Every one of those recorders that I showed had recovered information. Flight 93 and Flight 77 both had data recovered from their recorders. The other two weren't recoverable. They were destroyed in the building collapses.

Flight 93:

On Thursday, September 13 at 4:20 pm, workers uncovered the FDR from the crater at a depth of 15 feet. The cylinder-shaped box was photographed as it was uncovered in the crater. FBI agents assumed custody of the box, logged it as evidence, and immediately removed it from the site, flying it to the NTSB laboratory in Washington, DC where its contents could be analyzed.

Because the memory board showed signs of impact damage, the FDR was taken from Washington, DC to Honeywell facilities in Redmond, Washington for evaluation and downloading. The data were extracted and electronically transferred to the NTSB.

Meanwhile at the crash site, the search continued for the second black box. On Friday, September 14 at 8:30 pm, the CVR was recovered from the crater at a depth of 25 feet. Again, the FBI assumed custody of the box, and flew it to NTSB headquarters in Washington, DC.

In the weeks following September 11, 2001, the fact that both flight recorders from Flight 93 were recovered and yielded evidence took on increased importance. At the World Trade Center site, none of the four recorders on the two hijacked aircraft were recovered in the building rubble. At the Pentagon site, both boxes from Flight 77 were recovered, but the CVR was so badly damaged that it did not yield usable information.

www.flight93friends.org...

Here is a list of destroyed or unrecovered aircraft data recorders. There haven't been a lot of them, but they do happen occasionally.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

As for your claims of the turbine wheel being from a cruise missile, you couldn't be more wrong.

This is the turbine wheel, next to a person for perspective.

You can clearly see that it comes up to about his knee.

This is a Slam missile(the one on the bottom).

It's clearly far smaller than the turbine found at the Pentagon. Cruise missiles are designed to be small, and carried either by aircraft or ships. That turbine wheel is far too small to have come from any missile.

As for the Global Hawk claim, again, the engine is too small.

The entire engine might come up to someone's knee. You have to account for blade length, so the turbine wheel in that engine is going to be far too small.

We looking at designs online to judge size, length, and width! We don't know if the conspirators put together and engineered a one of a kind SLAM (air to surface) missile and used it? They will not want this missile to be traced back to them.

I disagree i think the Global Hawk Turbofan could be a correct match? This disk at the Pentagon looks too small to be 747 part. Since it was never looked at by the 9/11 commission we never know?

a reply to: Jacobu12

My point is the flight recorder completely useless for retrieving information after the crash.

Does your point also include recordings from the cockpit?

If so,

How were cockpit recordings heard in court rooms and by Families?

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

I'm not being smug at all. You were corrected multiple times in this thread, and you still insist on calling it a 747. Everything that has ever been published about 9/11 calls it a 757. So to me, that tells me that you either didn't pay attention to that (which is a fairly important detail), or don't care if you're accurate in what you're saying. If you're going to make claims, at least get the details right. I can understand the side stick mistake, as that's not exactly something the layman would know, but you can at least get the type of aircraft right if you have done good research.

As for the recorders, they recovered information from two of the four aircraft on 9/11. Every one of those recorders that I showed had recovered information. Flight 93 and Flight 77 both had data recovered from their recorders. The other two weren't recoverable. They were destroyed in the building collapses.

Flight 93:

On Thursday, September 13 at 4:20 pm, workers uncovered the FDR from the crater at a depth of 15 feet. The cylinder-shaped box was photographed as it was uncovered in the crater. FBI agents assumed custody of the box, logged it as evidence, and immediately removed it from the site, flying it to the NTSB laboratory in Washington, DC where its contents could be analyzed.

Because the memory board showed signs of impact damage, the FDR was taken from Washington, DC to Honeywell facilities in Redmond, Washington for evaluation and downloading. The data were extracted and electronically transferred to the NTSB.

Meanwhile at the crash site, the search continued for the second black box. On Friday, September 14 at 8:30 pm, the CVR was recovered from the crater at a depth of 25 feet. Again, the FBI assumed custody of the box, and flew it to NTSB headquarters in Washington, DC.

In the weeks following September 11, 2001, the fact that both flight recorders from Flight 93 were recovered and yielded evidence took on increased importance. At the World Trade Center site, none of the four recorders on the two hijacked aircraft were recovered in the building rubble. At the Pentagon site, both boxes from Flight 77 were recovered, but the CVR was so badly damaged that it did not yield usable information.

www.flight93friends.org...

Here is a list of destroyed or unrecovered aircraft data recorders. There haven't been a lot of them, but they do happen occasionally.

I'm not a truther. I just have a passing interest. I don't have to get everything right about the details. I was just told some things recently by a friend who i worked with. He's works at a base remote viewing for the Pentagon. He told me of infighting about this event. It never come out because it would cause social unrest.

a reply to: Jacobu12

See, there you go again. You keep calling it a 747. At least get that much right in your claims. You say you aren't a pilot, and that's obvious, but you can at least get the type right.

For a missile to carry a turbine that size, it would have to be far too big to be launched by anything but a ground launch system. So they'd have to build a ground launcher, which is more that could be leaked that could give it away.

You're wrong. I have many years of actual hands on experience with aircraft maintenance, including some work on engines. You have to add in blade length on any turbines. They all have blades that attach to them.



Those rough bits on the edge, are where the turbine blades attach. That adds anywhere from over a foot, to about 6-8 inches to the diameter of the turbine, depending on which turbine you're talking about. That one came from the inside of the engine, and is about the right size for an RB211 engine, which is the type used by the 757 (oh, and it's also used by your 747 you keep claiming hit the Pentagon).

a reply to: Jacobu12

No, you don't have to get everything right, but you have to at least the get major details right. If you can't even get them right, how can you expect anyone to take you even remotely seriously?