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.

 

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

page: 6
40
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 08:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: hutch622

A plane 54 metres long going at 200 metres a second failed to show up on a video taking pictures a second apart . Get where i am going with this .


There were 2 gate security cameras operating that day.
I can make out the tail against the background in this gif I posted in another thread:


originally posted by: Pilgrum


Full credit to David Chandler for this work
The 2 security cameras at the entrance gate near the helipad were about 140mS out of sync and the plane appears in 1 frame from each camera. The frames have been adjusted for wide angle distortion and aligned to fix the background scenery overlap so the only thing moving in the 2 frames is the aircraft which can be seen with smoke billowing from an engine suggesting it ingested part of one of the light poles the plane struck coming in. Doesn't look like a cruise missile to me.




posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 08:54 PM
link   
The old game where debunkers answers quests with intellectual honesty and citing sources, while jet deniers play the but game and practical intellectual dishonesty by ignoring questions asked of them. Sad for people that want to get to the "truth".



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Pilgrum




There were 2 gate security cameras operating that day. I can make out the tail against the background in this gif I posted in another thread:


But but but , ok it wasnt a missile but it could be a weather balloon .



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: hutch622

But but but , ok it wasnt a missile but it could be a weather balloon .


I feel fairly safe ruling out swamp gas in this instance



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Oh god here we go again with the source cite crap.



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: hutch622

Only if it was stolen from a sunken Russian submarine......



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: DClark
Oh god here we go again with the source cite crap.


Or how about putting on big person pants, referencing the cited material, and form a fact based and rational argument to refute the cited material and source.

But but but I only got a biased YouTube video based on misquotes, photos out of context, and innuendo.

See the silver bits of foil at the pentagon, like that at the Roswell crash cite? Coincidence? I think not....



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:19 PM
link   
So when jumbo jets land they manage to guide themselves all the way to a linear runway before touching down and hitting the brakes.

I imagine it can't be too hard to guide a plane just a little bit further into a building.

What's hard about it?



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:21 PM
link   
a reply to: DClark

If you got time to rant, you have time to answer these questions you willfully ignore..,

a reply to: DClark

Very simple questions. How did the remains of the passengers and crew for flight 77 end up at the pentagon? The DNA testing proves the crew and passengers ended up at the pentagon. Are you saying the recovery of the remains is discredited? The people that recovered the remains are discredited? The DNA analysis is Discredited? The persons conducting the analysis are discredited? The coroner's office that issued death certificates and released remains are discredited? The families that held funerals and buried the dead of flight 77 are discredited?

Added to that, the hundred plus eyewitnesses that were victims and part of the tragic event at the pentagon that give an account of a large silver commercial jet hitting the pentagon are discredited?

Then add to that, the context that conspiracists use the wrong picture for the entrance hole into the pentagon, use quotes out of context, and only give a small portion of the whole story. Conspiracists are more about crafting a narrative than using all the evidence to create the most credible picture.

By the way, care to state the dimensions of the entrance whole into the pentagon?

Why are conspiracists mystified that a jet crashing into the pentagon would deposit a major of its wreckage in the pentagon. But don't question very little of the interior of the pentagon found its way to the front lawn. Especially if pushing a missile / bomb narrative?



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
So when jumbo jets land they manage to guide themselves all the way to a linear runway before touching down and hitting the brakes.

I imagine it can't be too hard to guide a plane just a little bit further into a building.

What's hard about it?


And they didn't even have to bother with the landing gear.



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:24 PM
link   
No don't cite a document......we like more tamper proof style evidence, see the diff?

I saw the news crew on the Jet Ranger live.....and the video on page four or so....

Don't be so like a HAL9000 auto reply program from Langley, please , I love you, man and we just spot this stuff being human.......what does that make your approach with it's painfully obvious devious bleached out emotions

That or unencumbered by the thought process.....dude, cmon....hear my words, you don't want to be known as a less than personable soul that lost his good sense God gave him.

editby]edit on 22-6-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2017 by GBP/JPY because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 09:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: hutch622

But but but , ok it wasnt a missile but it could be a weather balloon .


I feel fairly safe ruling out swamp gas in this instance


Did you use the official chart to make that determination?



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Another failure of the missile theory is a complete lack of awareness of the layout of the area. The Pentagon is in the DC metro area, one of the most congested traffic areas in the country. I've driven through there dozens of times.

At 9:37 in the morning the roads are loaded to capacity and traffic is often slow. Literally thousands of people in their cars would've seen this missile. And the government would have no way to determine precisely who was on the road at the time to track them all down to shut them up. There would be people coming out of the woodwork that they saw a missile. But no, they saw a plane. Not to mention that nobody in their right mind who was involved with cooking up this supposed plot would think they could get away with using a missile and then claiming it was a plane. There would be too many witnesses.

There are a bunch of eyewitness accounts compiled here, with sources.



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 10:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue_Jay33

More skill than any of the alleged hijackers possessed.

This according to Captain Russ Wittenburg who had piloted two of the actual planes:


edit on 22-6-2017 by gladtobehere because: typo



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 10:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
Ok this video is important



I like Russ, he's an entertaining kook. He likes to make up his own numbers and tell us its impossible.

"make high-speed high-banked turns, exceeding -- pulling probably 5, 6, 7 G's"

But when you look at the real numbers, the numbers from the FLT 77 FDR readout:

www.ntsb.gov...

You find out his numbers don't match the real numbers at all.

The maximum bank angle was 42 deg. BFD

The max G's pulled was 1.7 Again BFD

The Over Speed Warning, an alarm that tells the pilot he's going too fast, only went off twice. Once for about 8 seconds and again for about 12 seconds just before the crash.



And the plane spent less than 2 seconds in ground effect.


I would like to see Russ make a video telling us the real numbers are impossible

edit on 22-6-2017 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: waypastvne

I charted aileron & elevator controls along with pitch & roll from FDR data for that big turn some years ago.
Approx. final 4 minutes shown here and yes, 42 degree roll is the max but the entire maneuver looks very 'unsmooth' (non-expert that is) to me.



(Couldn't get the actual pic of the chart into my earlier post for some reason)



posted on Jun, 22 2017 @ 11:54 PM
link   
a reply to: waypastvne




I like Russ, he's an entertaining kook. He likes to make up his own numbers and tell us its impossible.


See my signature, nice try.



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 12:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
a reply to: waypastvne



See my signature, nice try.


Thats a nice signature. You must be proud.

BUT the debate is lost when you can't back up your evidence. Can you tell us were Russ got his numbers from?... No?

Can Russ tell us were he got his numbers from?... No?

I can tell you were he got his numbers from. He pulled them out of his .......

My numbers came from the FDR. They are the real numbers.



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 12:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: DClark

originally posted by: hutch622
a reply to: DClark




Where's the plane? Video Proving No Airliner Hit Pentagon


A plane 54 metres long going at 200 metres a second failed to show up on a video taking pictures a second apart . Get where i am going with this .

Which is physically impossible for a Boeing 757 to do at sea level. Get where I am going with this.


Um... you dont understand what those speed listings mean nor the difference between Vne, Vmo, and Vh.

A 757 at sea level in level flight can not reach those speeds but a 757 coming out of a dive can reach those speeds at sea level.



posted on Jun, 23 2017 @ 01:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: gusamaso
I suggest you save your amazement for later, as it was a missile that hit the pentagon


I guess the eyewitnesses who literally saw a jet fly towards the Pentagon were just.. that stupid?

Wait.. they were all actors, pre-positioned near the Pentagon.. right?! I wish you folks would get your stories straight. So many people ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN it was.. a missile.. or a bomb.. or a flyover.. or who knows what else. Maybe it was a multi-dimensional event, since you folks are SO certain you know what it was.. and all your stories differ from one another.



new topics

top topics


active topics

 
40
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join