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.

 

Another Look At The Generator Trailer Damage

page: 1
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 29 2007 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Let's get our "groove" on!



This thread will demonstrate how the physical damage to the generator trailer does NOT match the official flight path or fit a 757.

Particularly in regards to the "groove" in the top of the generator that some researcher's have attributed to the flap track of the wing of a 757.

The official south side of the Citgo flight path requires the plane's right wing tilts up and the engine goes through the fence and generator trailer as the left wing tilts down and hits the ground.

Proponents of the official flight path claim that the damage to the trailer is proof that a 757 hit the Pentagon on the official flight path.

But there is very little to support this.

First of all the official story proponents claim that the trailer shows damage from a engine hitting it, when it is actually the thin shell of the trailer wall warping into an even bend from the heat of the diesel fuel fire:



They claim the fence shows foward moving damage. When it actually shows some strange inconsistencies. It shows the barbed wire hole just popped off, and while it shows one pole (yellow) bent down (which could have been fabricated since the "renovation" was drawing to a close) it shows a pole (red) uprooted, kinked in two places and blown AWAY from the trailer.



There are even poles on the other side that are still standing:



But the one thing that they have continued to point to is the groove in the top of the trailer as coming from the flap track of the right wing:



But generally they use poor representations such as the one above to illustrate how this would happen.

When taking a close look at the generator "groove", it holds the appearance of fabrication through the use of a welding torch, note the scorch marks and the uneven jagged cutting:



Does this photo reveal that the trailer already had the gouge or groove cut into it before 9/11?


Regardless of that the witnesses we spoke with adamantly state that the plane was on the north side of the Citgo. This would directly contradict direction and damage to the generator trailer, which require the plane to be on the south side of the Citgo.







One specifically stated that the plane pulled up over the highway sign on the way to the Pentagon.




And beyond that Undertow did a scale model of what it should look like with the plane hitting the building...THE FLAP TRACK STILL CANNOT REACH THE GENERATOR TRAILER TO CAUSE THE "GROOVE":





www.aa77fdr.com...

To top it off, the numbers and trends based on RAW DATA from the FDR which tries to show the south side flight path illustrates that not only can the flap track NOT reach, BUT NEITHER CAN THE ENGINE:


video.google.com...

So in closing, it is clear there is very little evidence to NO EVIDENCE to support that a 757 right engine caused the damage to the generator trailer.




posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 12:20 AM
link   
Dead video link at the end of OP corrected here:
American 77 Flight Path version2 - In 3D

I don't know why I can't edit the OP to fix it.



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 04:16 PM
link   
Craig,

Do you know what type of trailer that is? Can you find any photos of any of those types of trailers that was "hit" at the Pentagon on 9/11/01?



posted on Aug, 30 2007 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by BigMoser
 




specs on this mobile 40Ft containerized power station
CAT 3516B
V-16, 4-stroke-cycle diesel
Bore — mm (in) .......................170 (6.7)
Stroke — mm (in) .....................190 (7.5)
Displacement — L (cu in) ............69.0 (4210)
Aspiration............Turbocharged-Aftercooled

Approximate Weight (Dry) —
Container with Generator Set and Switchgear
Including Container kg (lb) 32,660 (72,000)
With Undercarriage kg (lb) 40,370 (89,000)



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 02:33 PM
link   
Any idea how that damaged dent could appear on this type of trailer? Or is it possible that these types of trailers can have that as a design?



posted on Aug, 31 2007 @ 03:10 PM
link   
There were likely explosives inside the trailer and the "dent" is really just the metal weakening and bending from the fire.



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
There were likely explosives inside the trailer and the "dent" is really just the metal weakening and bending from the fire.


This gif demonstrates how intense the fire on the trailer was:



But this old thread deserves a bumping in general since more information has been released regarding activity in this area prior to the attack.

For example this interview with a PenRen worker (we think it was Michael DiPaula but the name was redacted from the CMH interview) talks about moving around the trailers the day before.



"This area here is considered the---we call it the lay down area. It's the heliport area, and out there we---we have all the construction trailers. We were in the process right prior to September 11th cleaning out the area. Actually on the tenth we had some other trailers that were just leaving because we were getting ready to turn it back over to the building."
page 11



Here are trailers that he might have been talking about:




So they probably moved those trailers out, set the generator trailer at an angle as if getting ready to move it out, and moved in some dumpsters full of explosives and planted airplane debris to be spewed across the helipad.

It could have been all done under the rock solid cover story of wrapping up the renovation.

But the cover didn't stop there. We also know that Bush took off from the heliport on 9/10 and was scheduled to return there on 9/11 at 12:00 noon. This means secret service were crawling all over that place and so they had the excuse to basically do whatever they want to "secure" the place for the President no questions asked.

Heliport tower air traffic controller Sean Boger describes how it was a "dog and pony show":



On September 10th, it was kind of busy because the President flew out. He flew out that Monday, and whenever the President flies out, it is always a dog and pony show, you know.

You have got the Secret Service guys coming around and the dogs sniffing, and everything. So it was kind of like a big old deal. And so on September 10th, you know it was really kind of busy. And he was scheduled to come back on September 11th.
source



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 02:51 PM
link   
American 77 Flight Path version2 - In 3D


Google Video Link




Three Dimensional view of American 77 Flight Path according to data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board. Removing altitude and NTSB northern plot data as a variable (see pilotsfor911truth.org... for more information), we use the "impact point" as point of origin working outwards based on heading, descent angles and bank angles to analyze if the data can account for the physical damage path. Please visit pilotsfor911truth.org... for in depth analysis of complete data provided by US Govt Agencies who claim was generated by the aircraft which struck The Pentagon on September 11, 2001



posted on Jan, 16 2009 @ 02:58 PM
link   
This how the generator trailer damage was supposed to have occurred according to the official story:




The generator trailer and the light poles are what make it painfully clear why there is ZERO room for error in the official south side flight path.

But besides the fact that this low and level approach has been proven physically impossible due to the complex topography and obstacles, we now know how the witnesses unanimously prove that this is not where the plane flew.




[edit on 17-1-2009 by Craig Ranke CIT]



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
the "dent" is really just the metal weakening and bending from the fire.


This is great!!

From now on, whenever a truther claims that fire can't weaken steel, I'll refer he/she here, and you 2 can debate this.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Seymour Butz
 


What is more important it that April Gallop did not mention smelling burning Diesel. That has to mean that the generator was NOT on fire.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 11:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Seymour Butz

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
the "dent" is really just the metal weakening and bending from the fire.


This is great!!

From now on, whenever a truther claims that fire can't weaken steel, I'll refer he/she here, and you 2 can debate this.


At last, a constructive post from a debunker. Congratulations Seymour!

Incidentally, in your avatar, is that Buzz Aldrin repeatedly hammering Bart Sibrel to no effect?



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   
If the plane did not hit the trailer with its engine, and there was an explosion inside the generator trailer, why doesnt the trailer show any signs of metal bending outward..as it should if an explosion occured from within. ???


Some interesting theories I must say. And some good CGI animations. These based on actual data or eye witness testimony?

I ask because I have seen so many different analyzations of this, and every single one of them are different. This one is no exception.

They all cannot be right. So I am just asking what makes this analysis any different from all the rest?



Cheers!!!!



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Has anyone thought to try to obtain satellite photos of the Pentagon on 911 or have they been classified, distroyed or made unavailable to the public? How many debunkers or disinformation agents does anyone think have been hired by the government about the 911 staged or otherwise attacks?



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 11:53 AM
link   
Hmmm. If the plane came in at an angle, then why were the holes in a straight line?
An airplane could not have made such a circular impact on the rings.

If people are claiming to have seen an airplane hit the Pentagon, then they saw a holographic image.

They were happy to show the world the 2nd WTC plane hit.
I saw the first 'plane' hit the WTC...it was NOT a plane.

With all the cameras around the Pentagon, they cannot 'show off' their holographs?
Like the first hit on WTC, the 'program' failed.
Where is the wreckage...should be immense...

Cruise missile. No brainer there.
WWI
Pearl Harbor
D-Day
911
Engineered events to make us think,respond,and behave in certain fashion.

I personally can't wait until we send Muhammed to Tehran....with a handful of holographic Angels to back him up.....
Cause an earthquake, make it rain....or somthing stupid like that.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seymour Butz

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT
the "dent" is really just the metal weakening and bending from the fire.


This is great!!

From now on, whenever a truther claims that fire can't weaken steel, I'll refer he/she here, and you 2 can debate this.


You have got to be kidding.

Surely you aren't comparing the relatively thin metal of that trailer to this:



Right?

Certainly you aren't suggesting that a mobile trailer engulfed in flames for hours only causing a corner of it to bend down explains why this was reduced to complete rubble in 60 minutes.




Right?

Please tell me that's not your argument here.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox

What is more important it that April Gallop did not mention smelling burning Diesel. That has to mean that the generator was NOT on fire.


Why because she was inside the building and the trailer was outside?

You guys are coming strong with the irrelevant points today!




posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by RFBurns
If the plane did not hit the trailer with its engine, and there was an explosion inside the generator trailer, why doesnt the trailer show any signs of metal bending outward..as it should if an explosion occured from within. ???


Perhaps they merely used incendiaries of some sort to have it burn furiously like that as opposed to "explosives" to blow it up.



Some interesting theories I must say. And some good CGI animations. These based on actual data or eye witness testimony?


Absolutely not.

The animations show you what the official reports, data, and physical damage require the plane to do.

The eyewitnesses report a north side approach proving the plane did not hit.




I ask because I have seen so many different analyzations of this, and every single one of them are different. This one is no exception.

They all cannot be right. So I am just asking what makes this analysis any different from all the rest?


Because it's based on independent verifiable eyewitness evidence proving this is NOT where the plane flew as well as professional scale model comparisons to the official NTSB data scrutinized by true professionals, aviators, and pilots.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

Originally posted by RFBurns
If the plane did not hit the trailer with its engine, and there was an explosion inside the generator trailer, why doesnt the trailer show any signs of metal bending outward..as it should if an explosion occured from within. ???


Perhaps they merely used incendiaries of some sort to have it burn furiously like that as opposed to "explosives" to blow it up.


Right, the incendiaries would cause the trailer to get pushed towards the Pentagon. Sure.
So, uh, what kind of incendiaries can force a trailer to get pushed towards the Pentagon like that, and be able to withstand the "powerful explosives" that just must have been planted right there to blow up the Pentagon, which would have forced the trailer away?

So the trailer must have been blown back by the "powerful explosives" that went off at the Pentagon, and then the mighty incendiaries went off right away on the side of the trailer and pushed the trailer back towards the Pentagon. Is that it? Because this is what you are now implying Craig.
Are you even aware of how explosives work? Unless these are just part of the new arsenal of secret special bombs that cause blasts to behave inversely of how normal explosives go, and instead of exploding out, they explode in and cause objects to get blown towards the blast.



posted on Jan, 17 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Craig Ranke CIT

You guys are coming strong with the irrelevant points today!



It's called sarcasm Craig.

The timing of all these explosives were simply perfect.

Plane fly's up over and around the main explosion.

Good thing none of the shrapnel from the exploding generator go into the engines of the plane huh?

Everything went PERFECT...All this work...

But those idiots at NWO headquarters screwed up the FDR.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join