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: 66
40
<< 63  64  65    67  68  69 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 03:17 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

The pentagon was rebuilt to handle missile blasts that was the renovation. Had it been a missile damage would have been minimal as the steal mesh they installed would have mitigated the effects. You could shoot a cruise missile at that building and not do that much damage.




posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: dragonridr

I have no idea what happened to "those people", but the case that AA77 struck the pentagon is weak to non-existent.

What happened to those people has no bearing on what was observed at the pentagon, and what information has come out since regarding flight data and more.



Would you like to state a theory to supersede large jet impact and create a logical and rational supporting argument.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 07:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: MrBig2430

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: Jacobu12


And so, it means Hani The Magnificent had to be flying as close to the ground as if he were taxiing, in ground effect, at Vmo +90 and that's ridiculous.



Yeah that's nuts.

Fly like that and you're gonna crash.

Oh, wait.....


A handful of guys who fly that airplane for a living are on record as saying they would have a difficult time flying the maneuver Hani is alleged to have flown.

?


And again, the Sharpshooter Fallacy. First, you need to prove that THAT EXACT SPOT is what he was trying to hit. I suspect that you can't. No I know you can't.

I agree that most would find it hard to replicate Hanis exact flight path. Especially the last few seconds. But that's irrelevant.

The real question that you nutjobs never consider is that his target was a 24 acre building that he just needed to hit anywhere.


No, not really did he need to hit it just anywhere. In fact, if he had been just 20 feet higher, the upper half of the fuselage would have ended up somewhere way beyond the building. If he had been just 50 feet higher out by the road and antennae, at that speed he would have missed the building in the bowl completely.

His target might have been a 24 acre building, but for the story to be true, his target was less than 70 feet above the ground. 24 acres looks really big looking straight down, but he was hitting a very small part of a very very low profile building. We know James Bond can fly a BD-5 through a barn, but that was a BD-5 microjet with Bond at the controls, not a 757 90 knots over Vmo with a really lousy pilot at the controls.


He was in a shallow dive, And he almost missed too low. Even Labtop has confirmed by looking at fdr data that he was pulling positive g's in the last moments. That means that he was coming in low. Proven fact.

If anything, his shallow dive profile is evidence that he intended to drive that fat pig into the roof and destroy a lot of the building and let fire do more damage.

24 acres.

That's equivalent to 24 football fields.

That's a pretty big target.

But of course you will deny that he was in a shallow dive and knowingly repeat the lie that he was in level flight cuz, well, it's what you guys do.

Go ahead and prove me wrong by acknowledging that he was in a shallow dive.

This is a direct challenge for you to deny ignorance.

Try it for a change.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 08:18 PM
link   
a reply to:

The pentagon was rebuilt to handle missile blasts that was the renovation. Had it been a missile damage would have been minimal as the steal mesh they installed would have mitigated the effects. You could shoot a cruise missile at that building and not do that much damage.
2469953">dragonridr


NO

Pentagon was rebuilt with blast resistant windows which would not shatter if a car/truck bomb was set off outside
the building

An inner liner of Kevlar was inserted in wall as a spall catcher to absorb ant fragments



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 09:02 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr




The pentagon was rebuilt to handle missile blasts that was the renovation.

Repeat this a few time and the truth movement will take it as gospel.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 11:28 PM
link   
Conspirators messed up how did i not notice this before, i don't know. The metal debris found at the Pentagon don't match up with American airlines flight 77.

prnt.sc... This is flight 77 in 1998 Notice the strip and width colors are spread apart and even

The Pentagon debris. prnt.sc... White strip is too small, bad paint job or spray job. Where is the blue strip, it's missing. Not sure if it's just the sun but the blue above the red strip is too light?
edit on 18-7-2017 by Jacobu12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jacobu12

The Pentagon debris. prnt.sc... White strip is too small, bad paint job or spray job. Where is the blue strip, it's missing. Not sure if it's just the sun but the blue above the red strip is too light?


Looks about right for part of one of the letters in 'American' though.



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 11:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: Jacobu12

The Pentagon debris. prnt.sc... White strip is too small, bad paint job or spray job. Where is the blue strip, it's missing. Not sure if it's just the sun but the blue above the red strip is too light?


Looks about right for part of one of the letters in 'American' though.


Those are letters, the debris at the Pentagon has just a horizontal white and red strip. To match there should be a dark blue strip just above the white strip. The size of the strip looks wrong also.
edit on 18-7-2017 by Jacobu12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2017 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Pilgrum is the part you meant photographed at the Pentagon?

prnt.sc...



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 02:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: Jacobu12

The Pentagon debris. prnt.sc... White strip is too small, bad paint job or spray job. Where is the blue strip, it's missing. Not sure if it's just the sun but the blue above the red strip is too light?


Looks about right for part of one of the letters in 'American' though.


the debris at the Pentagon has just a horizontal white and red strip


You mean EXACTLY LIKE the red letters with a white border on the photo you posted?



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 03:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: Jacobu12

The Pentagon debris. prnt.sc... White strip is too small, bad paint job or spray job. Where is the blue strip, it's missing. Not sure if it's just the sun but the blue above the red strip is too light?


Looks about right for part of one of the letters in 'American' though.


Those are letters, the debris at the Pentagon has just a horizontal white and red strip. To match there should be a dark blue strip just above the white strip. The size of the strip looks wrong also.


Your evidence of a bomb or missile was used at the pentagon is a photo of a bent and deformed piece of wreckage with no scale to give the context of the wreckage? Because you don't like how the paint looks in the photo?

edit on 19-7-2017 by neutronflux because: Added



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 04:03 AM
link   
And I thought there was no wreckage to photograph?



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 09:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: Jacobu12

The Pentagon debris. prnt.sc... White strip is too small, bad paint job or spray job. Where is the blue strip, it's missing. Not sure if it's just the sun but the blue above the red strip is too light?


Looks about right for part of one of the letters in 'American' though.


Those are letters, the debris at the Pentagon has just a horizontal white and red strip. To match there should be a dark blue strip just above the white strip. The size of the strip looks wrong also.


I have to agree it's a red letter with a white boarder on the way the red and white curve away from the blue stripe.



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 10:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: Jacobu12

The Pentagon debris. prnt.sc... White strip is too small, bad paint job or spray job. Where is the blue strip, it's missing. Not sure if it's just the sun but the blue above the red strip is too light?


Looks about right for part of one of the letters in 'American' though.


Those are letters, the debris at the Pentagon has just a horizontal white and red strip. To match there should be a dark blue strip just above the white strip. The size of the strip looks wrong also.


I have to agree it's a red letter with a white boarder on the way the red and white curve away from the blue stripe.


I uploaded a few pictures to highlight the point, i am making.

United Airlines flight 77. The color strips are equal in size.


This is picture of the Plane with the Letter C.


C wreckage photographed.We have no background image of the Pentagon to know if this was taken there, either way it looks like silver aluminum. I can not see if there is a dark blue color strip below the white unfortunately. It looks ok though, that this came from the plane.



All good till we see this photograph and we know it was taken at the Pentagon! Notice how narrow the white strip is compared to the red part! For sign this don't match up. Never mind the aluminum body has tint of light blue to it and just above the white strip. Above the white strip it completely devoid of the blue dark metal strip that was placed near the Windows of the plane?


This is the same problem.


edit on 19-7-2017 by Jacobu12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:11 AM
link   
This is why i think the Globalhawk may have hit the Pentagon.

Notice the hump in the back and it's rounded front and the two things ( i don't know what that is?) just under the body.

The blob has a hump, the back wings have not yet entered the frame. And there is two things just under the body, well least it looks like there is?



I know this is just speculation and who knows what the blob is really!



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

Except for the really minor problem that a Global Hawk would have done even less damage to the Pentagon than was done. It would have hit at a far lower speed, it's far lighter, probably would have had even more trouble than you claim Flight 77 did making that "ace maneuver"(your claim), and it wouldn't have been painted white if they were trying to fool people into thinking it was an American Airlines plane.
edit on 7/19/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:30 AM
link   
This what i meant when i said 12 inches maybe less or more off the ground.. Government said 20 feet ground to top of he plane, only!!

You can see the engines extend much further than 12 feet 2 inches or 12 feet 4 inches. The wheel on the runaway got nothing all to do with the size!



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

Except for the really minor problem that a Global Hawk would have done even less damage to the Pentagon than was done. It would have hit at a far lower speed, it's far lighter, probably would have had even more trouble than you claim Flight 77 did making that "ace maneuver"(your claim), and it wouldn't have been painted white if they were trying to fool people into thinking it was an American Airlines plane.


Globalhawk can be guided to the target, it unmanned, precision.. It can carry a payload of explosive material.

As i pointed it out the debris at the Pentagon don't match up with Flight 77. Could the photographs be fake?



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Why are we discussing metal shards and Pentagon structural enhancements in a thread that was started as a means to discuss pilot skill?




edit on 19-7-2017 by cosmania because: Wanted to add funny picture of X Wing guy



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

The wheels have EVERYTHING to do with the 20 feet that you keep claiming. How many times does it have to be said that all dimensions relating to height of the aircraft are with the landing gear down, and going from the ground to what's being measured?

The 20 feet 6 inches has nothing to do with the altitude. The fuselage is 13 feet 4 inches tall, and just over 12 feet in diameter.



new topics

top topics



 
40
<< 63  64  65    67  68  69 >>

log in

join