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.

 

Flight77.info - Pentagon video release imminent?

page: 28
1
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join
share:
SMR

posted on May, 19 2006 @ 10:05 PM
link   
There is no way it is a 1fps camera.Just watch the security car go through the gate.It is at the least set to 5fps which would stupid at a security gate leading into the Pentagon


Anyway, I just wanted to know one more thing.Why is this video cropped?
Looks to me like we might be able to see more had it not been cropped by whomever.
The area in green is a really nice chunk missing.

In the new video we get, they ZOOMED in so we couldnt get a clear view once again.Clever little buggers they are






posted on May, 19 2006 @ 10:07 PM
link   
2 fps... took a picture every half second, also a plane going 535 could easily pass by in a half second time period without a doubt.


SMR

posted on May, 19 2006 @ 10:19 PM
link   
A 2fps camera at the entry gate to the Pentagon.......ok

The fricken liquor store in the ghetto uses better than that man come on.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Why do they NEED a faster one? How long does it take you to pull up to a gate at the entrance to a parking lot, either pull a ticket, or use your pass, and then drive into the lot? A 2fps camera is all they need, and it stretches the time between changing tapes a lot.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 10:48 PM
link   
Which angers me just as much but oh well here it goes. To save money (see government spending and budgets) they decided on things like SECURITY to get as much recording time on a single tape as possible, so you're looking at all the video evidence they really have.... other cameras positioned around the building are decoys or due to construction on that particular wing they were turned off (???? WTF? ????).

you know..., either way we're doomed as a country. Americans have better security systems in thier homes and cars.

Conspiracy or Not, we're just f#$@..... and that's sad.

There can be no other alternative in this case... either the Government has depended on such an image of soffistication and technological savyness that they cut corners and put money into their pockets or projects outside of security, or we're not seeing the whole story....

BOTH CONCERN ME A GREAT DEAL.

IF you can think of some other explanation, I'd like to hear it.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 11:24 PM
link   
Where exactly do you think all the other cameras are pointed? They're going to be looking down along the building, or where the most heavily travelled areas are around the building, and probably didn't have an FOV that would show the plane.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 11:29 PM
link   
Who cares Zaphod

It's not good enough period. This is the Pentagon, the FOV should leave absolutely NO gap anywhere around the building period.

It's pathetic security.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 11:31 PM
link   
How do we know they DID leave a gap? But they're not going to be looking UP at the sky for planes coming in at them. They're going to be looking DOWN for truck/car bombs and people trying to sneak into the building.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 11:42 PM
link   
if some of the cameras are pointing at the Moon, the Pentagon should be under CONSTANT coverage regardless ...

It's pathetic security.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 11:49 PM
link   
So by not monitoring EVERY SQUARE INCH of airspace around the building, with cameras you think that the security at the Pentagon is pathetic.



posted on May, 19 2006 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Ever seen a B-52 doing a low level? They fly below the mountains at insanely low altitudes.


You obviously missed this part of that article...


Originally posted by alienanderson
In other words, if this were a Boeing 757 as reported, the plane could not have been flown below about 60 feet above ground at 400 MPH. (Such a maneuver is entirely within the performance envelope of aircraft with high wing-loadings, such as ground-attack fighters, the B1-B bomber, and Cruise missiles—and the Global Hawk.)


Military jets are designed to fly at low levels at high speed, commercial jets are not.
You can't compare the two in this case.

[edit on 19/5/2006 by ANOK]



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 12:01 AM
link   
The B-1 was designed for low level insertions. The B-52 was NOT.


By the 21st century, the Boeing B-52 was in its fifth decade of operational service. The eight-engine, 390,000-pound jet was the country's first long-range, swept-wing heavy bomber. It began as an intercontinental, high-altitude nuclear bomber, and its operational capabilities were adapted to meet changing defense needs.

B-52s have been modified for low-level flight, conventional bombing, extended-range flights and transport of improved defensive and offensive equipment -- including ballistic missiles that can be launched hundreds of miles from their targets.

www.boeing.com...

Early model B-52s were some of the worst flying low level planes to fly, because they weren't designed for it. But they performed the mission.



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 12:06 AM
link   
B-52s have been modified for low-level flight...

Maybe those you saw fit this criteria?


Even so miltary planes are not designed like commercial jets....



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 12:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
So by not monitoring EVERY SQUARE INCH of airspace around the building, with cameras you think that the security at the Pentagon is pathetic.


Becuase it's easy to penetrate an area if you distract the only camera looking at it.

Car Dealerships have more sophisticated cameras, I worked at a large multi dealership lot covering Bmws to VWs, every square inch of the place was under constant vision no matter where I positioned or zoomed a camera in for a better look.

I worked graveyard and moving those cameras around was the best thing to do in that control room to keep me from falling asleep and interested in any action I could find..... which I've caught rabbits, mice, rats, cats, possums, even gang bangers looking for trouble.

So excuse me if I'm REALLY dissapointed with this security system compared to what I've worked with which was years before 9/11 I might add.

yes, PATHETIC



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 12:13 AM
link   
So by looking at the TWO CAMERAS that have had videos released that showed the area the plane came in from, you can say that they don't have any other cameras that are better, that might be looking at a different angle, or anything like that.



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 12:20 AM
link   
What I'm saying is by the coverage and release of this video, it was the piece of evidence used in a court of law against a terrorist that should have gotten the death penalty.

You know, for evidence, this is #. And from what I've seen around the Pentagon from various photographs there are cameras positioned on and around the building to get a MUCH better shot.

Since the terrorist didn't get the death penalty and this released video is what was used as evidence I HAVE no other choice than assume that THIS video was the best and ONLY video.

Otherwise I expect terrorists to FRY



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 12:29 AM
link   
Of course the Pentagon was surrounded by cameras, that shouldn't even be up for debate. It just seems sort of short sided as to why the government would keep the tapes and some other information regarding 9-11 classified.

What's it going to hinder? "The War on Terrorism.." gimme a break --> Release the tapes, help stop controversy, can only help their part, yet hurt them if it's not what they want us to see.



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by SMR
A 2fps camera at the entry gate to the Pentagon.......ok

The fricken liquor store in the ghetto uses better than that man come on.

Lol even my cheap web camera that I got for 30$ has 30 fps per second.



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 02:04 AM
link   
Hi, I’m posting on behalf of IgnoranceIsntBliss because his browser will not let him log in for some reason. It just drops back to the front page when he tries to login. If you have any advice please post it here so he can read it. Also: he cant see the custom sidebar image avatar colors/graphics, if that helps.

Here are these choice images he made today and wanted you guys to analyze:



Note that the stated frames are just the ones given from Sony Vegas for refernce, they’re not literal. Also, it seems to fully change frames every 32 frames. Could it be that the cameras were hooked to 32 channel multiplexers, and each camera saved once per second, therefore dividing each second by 32?
www.multiplexertechnology.com...

Smoke trails:
i24.photobucket.com...
i24.photobucket.com...

New camera anomaly:


i24.photobucket.com...
i24.photobucket.com...
i24.photobucket.com...

Old camera anomaly:
i24.photobucket.com...
i24.photobucket.com...
i24.photobucket.com...

Slight fix to fisheye aspect?
i24.photobucket.com...

[Edit: resized image]

[edit on 5/20/2006 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on May, 20 2006 @ 02:32 AM
link   
[Mod Edit: removed unnecessary quote of Entire preceeding post]

WOW!!!!


This is unbelieveable! Now it all makes sense to me from those infrared photos. The squeally white thing accompanied by the dark blue thingy up top. That plowed directly into the pentagon. Now I get it. Thanks person posting for IgnoranceIsntBlisss, I now see the entire picture.





[edit on 20-5-2006 by commonsense4u]

Mod Edit: Big Quote – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 5/20/2006 by 12m8keall2c]




top topics



 
1
<< 25  26  27    29  30  31 >>

log in

join