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: 67
40
<< 64  65  66    68  69  70 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

You can't make a plane designed for one thing do another. The Global Hawk is designed for high altitude, slow flight. You can't bring it down to low altitude, make it do a bunch of maneuvers that convince people they're looking at a fighter, fly it even more over its maximum speed than flight 77 was, and fly into the Pentagon at high speed.
edit on 7/19/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

You can't make a plane designed for one thing do another. The Global Hawk is designed for high altitude, slow flight. You can't bring it down to low altitude, make it do a bunch of maneuvers that convince people they're looking at a fighter (again your claim) and fly into the Pentagon at high speed.



Think outside the box on this. If there was no 757 plane, then there was no plane going at 530mph at 20 feet of the ground! This narrative had to fit the government version of events. Where they tracking flight 77 or another plane on radar?

The globalhawk could be have been guided to the target with precision and not as fast. And you may not know this but the globalhawk can fly up to 629 km/h (310 knots (357 mph))
edit on 19-7-2017 by Jacobu12 because: (no reason given)

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



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:52 AM
link   

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



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:57 AM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

At 62,000 feet it can. It's even more fragile than the 757 at low altitude.

So according to this theory, they spoofed the radar data at the airport and made them think that it came in and made a high speed descending turn, let me guess, the C-130 controlled it, so they lied and were in on it too (despite the fact that no one else noticed the significant modifications made to the aircraft or the Global Hawk ground station rolled into it), not one of the eyewitnesses noticed it was actually white instead of silver, and so forth.

There are more holes in the Global Hawk theory than you claim there are in the 757 theory.



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

You are asking him to step out of the box of reality. You are asking him to ignore the wreckage of a 757. You are asking him to ignore the personal effects and human remains of people known to have been on Flight 77. You are asking him to ignore all of the eyewitnesses to the airliner slamming into the Pentagon. You are asking him to ignore the electronic data. You ARE asking him to believe you, based on your remote viewing friend.

Why would he want to step away from reality and indulge in fantasy?



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 11:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
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.


It don't, the plane was flying when the plane allegedly hit the pentagon. Why would the wheels have anything to do with when the landing gear was not down preparing to land? As you can see the plane would be even longer with the wheels down, its the lowest part of the plane to the bottom.
edit on 19-7-2017 by Jacobu12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

At 62,000 feet it can. It's even more fragile than the 757 at low altitude.

So according to this theory, they spoofed the radar data at the airport and made them think that it came in and made a high speed descending turn, let me guess, the C-130 controlled it, so they lied and were in on it too (despite the fact that no one else noticed the significant modifications made to the aircraft or the Global Hawk ground station rolled into it), not one of the eyewitnesses noticed it was actually white instead of silver, and so forth.

There are more holes in the Global Hawk theory than you claim there are in the 757 theory.


The wreckage don't match, American Airlines flight 77. I even posted a screenshot of the plane stopped on the tarmac in 1998. So if we got a problem matching the plane wreckage to this plane, what other details about this day will turn out to be not accurate?
edit on 19-7-2017 by Jacobu12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

Because. The. 20. Feet. 7. Inches. You. Keep. Quoting. Is. From. The. Ground. To. The. Top. Of. The. Fuselage. That. Means. Wheels. Down. And. Included.



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

Maybe in your eyes it doesn't match. To the rest of us it does. Especially when we understand the differences in the ambient light in the photos.



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

And nothing matches your Global Hawk theory. No wreckage, no radar data, no damage to the building, nothing.



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

Because. The. 20. Feet. 7. Inches. You. Keep. Quoting. Is. From. The. Ground. To. The. Top. Of. The. Fuselage. That. Means. Wheels. Down. And. Included.



It doesn't because the plane was flying not sitting on the runaway. The government version is 20 feet bottom/ground to the very top. Go outside measure 20 feet from bottom to up!!

Why would they measure the wheels if they are not down?




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



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12




This is why i think the Globalhawk may have hit the Pentagon.




You think that because you don't understand what kinetic energy is.




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


now back to explosives.




As i pointed it out the debris at the Pentagon don't match up with Flight 77.


Actually it does.




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!


yeah I do.

Its because its the white outlines around the red lettering.



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

Because they're using the standard measurements for the aircraft that are used in ground planning documents. Just like everyone questioning the events that day uses 44 feet for the tail height, which is also from the ground with the wheels down. The only measurement that matters is the fuselage diameter.



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Jacobu12

Maybe in your eyes it doesn't match. To the rest of us it does. Especially when we understand the differences in the ambient light in the photos.


lol so silly unbelievable. It don't match up and it's clear as day to anyone who has commonsense.
edit on 19-7-2017 by Jacobu12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12




Why would they measure the wheels if they are down?


I don't know about you but my understanding of "wheels" is that they touch the ground,

their round shape helps things move with less friction.

They measure from the wheels because the wheels touch the ground and the measurements are from ground up.



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

Because they're using the standard measurements for the aircraft that are used in ground planning documents. Just like everyone questioning the events that day uses 44 feet for the tail height, which is also from the ground with the wheels down. The only measurement that matters is the fuselage diameter.


How are they, the measurement is based off what they believed happened at the Pentagon. Why would they measure the wheels, when the plane was flying.



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Jacobu12

Maybe in your eyes it doesn't match. To the rest of us it does. Especially when we understand the differences in the ambient light in the photos.


lol so silly unbelievable. It don't match up and it's clear as day to anyone who has sense and has commonsense.


But sense, be it common or not has nothing to with vision.

People with vision see its the same.

Yes, its silly the nonsense you keep posting.



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: InhaleExhale

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: cardinalfan0596
a reply to: Jacobu12

Maybe in your eyes it doesn't match. To the rest of us it does. Especially when we understand the differences in the ambient light in the photos.


lol so silly unbelievable. It don't match up and it's clear as day to anyone who has sense and has commonsense.


But sense, be it common or not has nothing to with vision.

People with vision see its the same.

Yes, its silly the nonsense you keep posting.


We have photograph evidence, are we going to just ignore that, because you don't like it?



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12




Why would they measure the wheels, when the plane was flying.


The measurements you keep quoting, where did you get them from?

Are they measurements of the actual flight 77 plane taken on that day or are you getting measurements of a 757?

If the numbers you keep quoting are simply the size of a 757, then those sizes are measured from the ground up.



posted on Jul, 19 2017 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

No they aren't. They had to have measurements to compare things to. There is no way in hell that the altitude that they claimed it was flying at matches EXACTLY to the height of a 757 from the ground to the top of the fuselage when measured for planning documents. They had to have baseline measurements for the report.




top topics



 
40
<< 64  65  66    68  69  70 >>

log in

join