Pentagon no plane hoaxers take heed! The north of the Citgo flight path has yet another problem!
For those who don’t know, the new rage in no-757-strike-at-the-Pentagon is a double-corroborated "proof" that the plane posing as Flight 77 flew
at such an angle - north of the Navy Annex and the Citgo gas station - that it COULD NOT have clipped the five light poles or cause the angled
building damage attributed to Flight 77. This theory is bracketed on two ends by Citizen Investigative Team (featuring our very own ATS Conspiracy
Master "Jack Tripper") and their video The PentaCon (which covers the eyewitness end), and their "brother organization" Pilots for 9/11 Truth
(P49T, of which I believe fellow ATS master John Lear is a member), whose video Pandora's Black Box Chapter 2 calls on an "NTSB" flight
reconstruction derived directly, we are told, from the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) of flight 77. While the eyewitness end and the FDR (as seen in the
animation) disagree wildly on the plane’s altitude, they seem to agree on the damning flight path, and thus seemed well-poised to take down the
official story.
The final minutes of this animated NTSB file can be seen here:
For the moment I’ll ignore the CIT witness testimony (I’ve already said my bit over that, and don't have anything to add - yet) and look just at
this animation; it contradicts the official story on several points, but what I’m looking at here is the flight path, the direction it was pointed
in its final seconds.
The animation has other problems, which I feel a need to address again, including its NTSB authenticity
(
Paper Trail problems explained) It was supposedly sent to British
researcher Calum Douglas (aka "Snowygrouch") after an FOIA request, in July 2006. Some info on this receipt and the difficulties of getting
verifying data are recounted in this
presentation by Douglas in Ipswich in
March. Great viewing, some real WTF X-Files moments, like the (CSV file?) data being clandestinely translated for them by a corporate bigwig on
a laptop in a hotel room!
Anyway, as Douglas and the P49T guys will tell, you, it's complicated stuff, and they put a lot of work into understanding how the data and animation
fit together. Well, as "Snowygrouch" puts it, it’s not animation, since “animation implies some sort of fictitious content.” So he calls it a
reconstruction. I’ll continue to call it an animation.
He'd been analyzing it for over six months before that speech in Ipswich, where he gave no clue that he ever stumbled upon the real problem with his
animation I found in twenty minutes once I'd thought of it.
The American Society of Civil Engineers cite from the NTSB a magnetic heading for the plane at impact – 70 degrees from north - which they found
consistent enough with the building damage to use it as an explanation of
how the building was damaged the way it was. I Checked my jumbled
“CSV” file [
downloaded from P49T], and found a termination
magnetic heading of precisely 70.0 degrees in the last frame of data. Then I looked closer at the animation, and see in the final moments a dial there
reading 70, which I take to be the magnetic heading. Thus all FDR sources I can see match, even the animation. Yet one such mapping of that heading
matches the official story while the same trajectory, once animated as in this case, is on a path to miss the light poles and rule out the angled
building damage.
On further analysis I duly cheesed out. What was 70 degrees from what? How on Earth could I solve this problem? But after cutting my teeth on shadow
reading, I decided to try common sense to get to the bottom of this discrepancy and with it the animation’s corroboration of the too-north-path. It
wasn't too hard, really. I just checked that my map was oriented north, took that as 0/360 degrees, dropped a compass on it, drew a line at 70 deg
and it matched the official flight path, the light pole clippage, and building damage. This is from FDR data downloaded from Pilots for 9/11 Truth,
generally said to refute this path. This means we’re in business.
So I looked at how 70 degrees translated into that animation. I capped a frame of the plane passing over the Navy Annex area, nearly centered on what
I determined to be Southgate Road (at a mag heading of 70 it says) and mapped that. Lo and behold, the path from there to the Pentagon, the path taken
in the video, is NOT a 70 degree heading! It's 80 degrees, a full ten degrees off!
Thus claim that the FDR data shows a northern flight path contradictory with the official story is plain wrong. Actually looking at the data, all we
see is 70, 70, 70, even right there on screen in the animation's heading dial. But they don’t zoom in on the number, but on the picture, which, if
you map it out, is 80 degrees, not 70. Again, their too-north FDR data case is based on one thing and one thing only – the animation picture – and
that is
FLAT WRONG.
Can anyone here honestly see another explanation?
It’s still unclear whether the NTSB slapped this together themselves with such poor quality control and high mystery potential, if Calum had it made
"based on the data," or if it was slipped to him in some other way so he'd truly believe it. But it's wrong, and as for his apparently not
catching this simple-to-find discrepancy, well, that doesn't bode well for his credibility, nor that of the others who've cavorted with this
"smoking gun."
[edit on 27-5-2007 by Caustic Logic]
Mod Edit: cap title
[edit on 6/8/2007 by kinglizard]
