Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

C-130 video confirms 84th RADES Data

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 09:26 AM
link   
There is a new (to me) video of the Pentagon which shows the C-130. It appears to confirm the 84th RADES data. It is not a perfectly clear video, but that aircraft is quite obviously a C-130.

The C-130 comes into view @ 1:48, although you can only see it clearly in the close up view.

Distant view:

www.youtube.com...

Close up view:

www.youtube.com...

RADES Data (shown with blue stick pins):

i14.photobucket.com...

Based upon my experience of witnessing literally hundreds of explosions from 250 # bombs up to 3000 # bombs (no the Pentagon impact was not a bomb, but similar) Mr. Tribby's video appears to have begun closer to 30 seconds after impact than to 1 minute after impact as he estimated. Note that the smoke and debris is still billowing when the video begins indicating closer to 30 seconds or less, rather than 1 minute following the initial explosion.

Next, when we can first see the C-130 @ 1:48 in the close up view video the aircraft is well into it's turn. I don't know the exact position of the Camera, but it appears to be ~ South of the Pentagon at the beginning and ~ East near the end. The camera is obviously virtually due East directly opposite the impact point at the time the C-130 appears. The C-130's body is near perpendicular to the camera when it first appears indicating it is well established in it's turn. Basing the turn on the RADES data it would have already turned ~ 100-120 degrees when it first comes into view.

Doing a little timing math starting from where the RADES data shows the beginning of the turn we find that the C-130 began it's turn ~ 1:38 after the NTSB calculated impact time of 9:37:45. The video began ~:30 + 1:48 = 2:18 after the explosion when the C-130 comes into view. BUT, the C-130 is well established in it's turn, very near perpendicular to the camera when it comes into view. If we estimate the C-130 has turned ~110-120 degrees the timing is near perfectly correlated with the RADES Data. The timing of the 84th RADES data is therefore correct.

The turn radius observed also confirms the 84th RADES data. The RADES Data shows a turn of ~ 150 degrees total for the C-130. At 300 KIAS (typical speed for a C-130) the turn radius would be 13,867'. That's over 2 miles for those who can't convert feet to miles. The aircraft in that video DID NOT turn from the NW approach indicated by the CIT ANC witnesses, it was much further South. It was well south of that position when it first comes into view and it's already well established in the turn. This proves the ANC witnesses were wrong about the C-130's approach angle.

The 84th RADES Data for the C-130 is correct. It also agrees with Lt Col O'Brien's account. Another aspect of CIT's delusion blown to smithereens!

Just to preempt Alpo. Someone can pass the word to him that I don't care what he says about Wheelhouse, Sucherman, or Roosevelt. Spin away, but he'll have a hard time convincing any knowledgeable person that the RADES Data is wrong.

[edit on 14-8-2008 by Reheat]

[edit on 14-8-2008 by Reheat]




posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 09:44 AM
link   
hey just a thought, those video links need to be edited so I can watch what your thread is about...


I''ll check back in awhile to see if oyu have done that...



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by theability
hey just a thought, those video links need to be edited so I can watch what your thread is about...


I''ll check back in awhile to see if oyu have done that...


Thanks. The copy and paste from another site did not work and it's now corrected.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Reheat

There is a new (to me) video of the Pentagon which shows the C-130. It appears to confirm the 84th RADES data. It is not a perfectly clear video, but that aircraft is quite obviously a C-130.

Utter nonsense. Those two videos prove nothing of the sort. Is that all you do is make up ridiculous 'strawman arguments'? Do you ever come up with anything that is actually truthful?


Reheat

Based upon my experience of witnessing literally hundreds of explosions from 250 # bombs up to 3000 # bombs (no the Pentagon impact was not a bomb, but similar)

We are not the least bit interested in your experiences at Microsoft Flight Simulator. You are just another anonymous 'government loyalist'. These 'pseudoskeptics' swarming in here and at other forums are apparently dedicated to stopping the CIT investigators who they claim are accomplishing NOTHING, convincing NOBODY, and getting NOWHERE. It appears to be an obsession with them and simple common sense and deductive reasoning is never allowed to get in the way. Therefore CIT must be accomplishing SOMETHING, convincing SOMEBODY, and getting SOMEWHERE, and these 'government loyalists' seem as frightened and desperate as can be.

C-130 RADES Data flight path 15 miles to the southwest apparently headed for Arkansas instead of Minnesota (shown with blue stick pins) The yellow line is the actual C-130 path west. The red stick pins are the faked RADES data representing the faked Flight 77 FDR flight path loop southwest of the Pentagon.


The approximate actual C-130 flight path flying west, just after leaving Morningside One DP, just below the Washington Mall, and then turning to follow the decoy aircraft from about 12 to 15 miles behind. The RADES data and Flight 77 FDR are dead. These desperate status con defenders are grasping at straws.



[edit on 8/14/08 by SPreston]



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 11:46 AM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


When you're through babbling you might address the issue under discussion rather than post your delusions.

This video shows the RADES Data to be correct in both timing and flight path simply because the turn radius you imagine is impossible for a C-130 to execute. Your charade is over.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat
reply to post by SPreston
 
When you're through babbling you might address the issue under discussion rather than post your delusions.

This video shows the RADES Data to be correct in both timing and flight path simply because the turn radius you imagine is impossible for a C-130 to execute. Your charade is over.

Oh no!!!! More Reheat math which can never add up? Why is it the only flight path you have never applied your math to the official Flight 77 flight path south of the Navy Annex down the hill through the light poles and low and level inches above the lawn? Is it because no amount of Reheat magic will make that work? Have you called on the Amazing Randi to help you? Is it because with the aircraft actually above the Navy Annex, no tricky Reheat math will ever work?

Sorry guys, but this never could have happened in reality.


Nor could this have possibly happened. This is the real world folks.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

Oh no!!!! More Reheat math which can never add up? Why is it the only flight path you have never applied your math to the official Flight 77 flight path south of the Navy Annex down the hill through the light poles and low and level inches above the lawn?


Either post on topic or stay out of the freakin' thread,Snip.




Mod Note: Courtesy Is Mandatory - Please review this Link

Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 14/8/2008 by Sauron]



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat
Either post on topic or stay out of the freakin' thread, Bozo.


Is that all you can say when someone debates what you post?



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 01:54 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat
No, genius. I have lots to say on the topic of the thread. Obviously, you don't so why are you posting?


Then why don't you answer the post that debate your information?

Oh and i have a lot to say and can also post evidnece to support what i post. I have already proven many things that question the official story.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Reheat, I came up with nearly the exact same location as Caustic Logic.



I used the overhead signs, lamp post, and the two trees between the highway as references.

The two reference points are marked with the corresponding times.

Finding the radar data would be the next step, correct?



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 02:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
Reheat, I came up with nearly the exact same location as Caustic Logic.

I used the overhead signs, lamp post, and the two trees between the highway as references.

The two reference points are marked with the corresponding times.

Finding the radar data would be the next step, correct?


I can not argue with your positions along 395. That's pretty close.

The RADES path is posted in the OP. The one I posted appears to be like all I have seen. I don't see any reason it question it.

One thing to check if you're going to analyze the data is exactly to what heading the C-130 turned to on his departure from the area. Also, his exact heading inbound to the Pentagon, then we could plot the two and calculate a pretty exact radius of turn.

One thing is already for sure, what we see on the video matches the RADES plots close enough. I'm going to actually plot the speed and that would only leave the EXACT bank angle he used for the turn. However, just in looking at the aircraft it's pretty close to a standard rate for ~300 KIAS.

In my opinion, this wraps it up. The RADES data is correct and this video verifies it.

[edit on 14-8-2008 by Reheat]



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat
In my opinion, this wraps it up. The RADES data is correct and this video verifies it.


So does that mean that you are just going to ignore anything else posted as usual?



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Reheat
In my opinion, this wraps it up. The RADES data is correct and this video verifies it.


So does that mean that you are just going to ignore anything else posted as usual?


I see that in 3 posts in this thread you've had nothing to add regarding the topic, as usual.

I'm not encouraging you to post anything on topic as an NSA Agent is just too difficult to argue with.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reheat
I see that in 3 posts in this thread you've had nothing to add regarding the topic, as usual.


Why should i add something if you are just going to ignore it?

I was talking about you ignoring what someone else had posted. As usual you cannot answer back to someone who debates you.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 03:18 PM
link   
All right get this thread back on topic,C-130 video confirms 84th RADES Data Stop the personal swipes anymore after my post, and I will be forced to take stronger measures.

Thank you,
Sauron Forum Moderator.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 03:23 PM
link   
So what version of C-130 was flying that day? There are different versions of the H model.

[edit on 14-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So what version of C-130 was flying that day? There are different versions of the H model.

[edit on 14-8-2008 by ULTIMA1]


I have no clue and it's irrelevant anyway.



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Reheat

In my opinion, this wraps it up. The RADES data is correct and this video verifies it.

In your opinion? Of what value is that? In my opinion, the eyewitnesses who were there at Arlington Cemetary seeing the C-130 fly in across Arlington Cemetary on the north side of the Navy Annex, are of much greater value than you Mr Reheat who was not there.



All the C-130 video confirms is that the C-130 was indeed between the Navy Annex and Arlington Cemetary between 2.75 and 3 minutes after the explosion at the Pentagon wall. Depending on the speed of the C-130, that would equate to 12 to 15 miles behind the decoy aircraft at the time of the explosion, which Lt Colonel O'Brien testified he could not initially tell precisely where it was.

C-130 cruising speed of 374 mph
374 / 60 = 6.23 mpm x 2.48 min = 15.45 miles distant before start of turn over Arlington Cemetary
Or assuming a speed of only 300 mph
300 / 60 = 5 mpm x 2.48 min = 12.4 miles distant before start of turn over Arlington Cemetary



This red line is the RADES C-130 flight path as it allegedly passes by the Pentagon. Precisely how is this big turn reflected in the Tribby videos? In fact the C-130 turning in the zoomed video is a much tighter turn and it is not arriving from the southwest. In these videos, the C-130 is almost 3 minutes behind the decoy aircraft. According to the RADES data, the C-130 is about 1 minute behind the alleged Flight 77.

Therefore the RADES data is a fabrication and a LIE. Correct?

On the left side, several blue stickpins correspond to 2 red stickpins
C-130 time - 9:37:36 - - Alleged Flt 77 - 9:36:36 - 1 minute apart
C-130 time - 9:37:48 - - Alleged Flt 77 - 9:36:48 - 1 minute apart



posted on Aug, 14 2008 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

Reheat

In my opinion, this wraps it up. The RADES data is correct and this video verifies it.


In your opinion? Of what value is that? In my opinion, the eyewitnesses who were there at Arlington Cemetary seeing the C-130 fly in across Arlington Cemetary on the north side of the Navy Annex, are of much greater value than you Mr Reheat who was not there.


But, I have something better than being there. A video recording which is not subject to memory problems or influence by interviewers.


Originally posted by SPrestonAll the C-130 video confirms is that the C-130 was indeed between the Navy Annex and Arlington Cemetary between 2.75 and 3 minutes after the explosion at the Pentagon wall. Depending on the speed of the C-130, that would equate to 12 to 15 miles behind the decoy aircraft at the time of the explosion, which Lt Colonel O'Brien testified he could not initially tell precisely where it was.


The C-130 Pilot could not see the impact because the sun was in his eyes and reflecting off of the Potomac River.

Your timing is based on what Mr. Tribby said, not any analysis of the event as filmed. There are at least 4-5 people now who agree that the video began at ~ 30 seconds after the impact. Some are for different reasons and some are based upon a comparison with the other videos of the explosion.


Originally posted by SPreston
C-130 cruising speed of 374 mph
374 / 60 = 6.23 mpm x 2.48 min = 15.45 miles distant before start of turn over Arlington Cemetary


You're quoting a generic max speed at altitude. Only the J model might reach that speed at low altitude. The MN ANG C-130 was an H Model and it won't go near that speed at low altitude.


Originally posted by SPreston
Or assuming a speed of only 300 mph
300 / 60 = 5 mpm x 2.48 min = 12.4 miles distant before start of turn over Arlington Cemetary


The word is Cemetery. Please show some respect and learn to spell it, there are many honorable people buried there.

Apparently, your timing is based on the questionable video start time and without considering that the C-130 has turned approximately 100-120 degrees when it comes into view in the video. In other words, your timing sucks.


Originally posted by SPrestonThis red line is the RADES C-130 flight path as it allegedly passes by the Pentagon. Precisely how is this big turn reflected in the Tribby videos?


The fact that the C-130 has already turned ~100-120 degrees is how it is reflected.


Originally posted by SPreston
In fact the C-130 turning in the zoomed video is a much tighter turn and it is not arriving from the southwest.


Wrong. It is very apparent that he is coming from approximately where the RADES data shows he began the turn.


Originally posted by SPreston
In these videos, the C-130 is almost 3 minutes behind the decoy aircraft. According to the RADES data, the C-130 is about 1 minute behind the alleged Flight 77.


I don't want to repeat myself again and show you multiple times how your timing sucks.


Originally posted by SPreston
Therefore the RADES data is a fabrication and a LIE. Correct?


Wrong. I don't need to repeat myself and tell you again why. You have no clue what you're doing except to post your ridiculous videos and spew propaganda.


[edit on 14-8-2008 by Reheat]

[edit on 14-8-2008 by Reheat]





new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join