It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

# G Force calculations prove official Pentagon attack flight path impossible

page: 21
40
share:

posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 07:26 PM
Can you say "Inside Job?"

911Truth.org...

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 02:26 AM
Craig, stop ignoring my questions just because the answers don't support your point of view and start answering them.

1) What is the +/- accuracy level of the black box data? 5 centimeters? 5 billion light years? Until you've answered this question, by the principle of the benefit of the doubt, the the accuracy is +/- 200 ft and therefore you have evidence of nothing.

1b) Being as specific as possible, where does the black box data place the plane at its closest point to the tower? What coordinates?

2) What is the +/- accuracy level of the tower location data? +/-5 centimeters? +/-The entire estimated span of the universe times 5 hundred trillion? Giving the benefit of the doubt to the plaintiff, I believe that the the accuracy is +/- 200 ft, which means again you have shown nothing to anybody with your research as of yet if that person follows the benefit of the doubt principle.

2b) Being as specific as you can, where is the tower by the data you have? What coordinates?

3) Same as question two, but related to the light pole. What are the coordinates of the earliest struck light pole? Also, (3b) what is the altitude of the light pole in relation to the Pentagon? You claim the jet was approximately level before striking the Pentagon. Now provide the evidence of this by answering the question. Until you've answered the question, you have not even shown that your most basic premise that the plane leveled off is true, even if you were to answer the first two questions well.

4) What is your data sources for the above mentioned information? The benefit of the doubt requires me to believe you pulled all data out of your behind until you've shown otherwise. You've shown some data sources but not all of them, most glaringly the black box data.

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 02:36 AM

The most important question to ask them is where was the AIRCRAFT? If they answer correctly, they will say we're not sure.

They don't have a clue where the aircraft is for those FRAUDULENT calculations.

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 03:38 AM

Originally posted by Reheat
The most important question to ask them is where was the AIRCRAFT?

Great question, Reheat. What did happen to the alleged Flight AA77? If it hit the Pentagon, then surely it would have been identified by now?

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 10:56 AM

Originally posted by tezzajw

Originally posted by Reheat
The most important question to ask them is where was the AIRCRAFT?

Great question, Reheat. What did happen to the alleged Flight AA77? If it hit the Pentagon, then surely it would have been identified by now?

Since the FBI had the investigation at the Pentagon, actual experienced aircraft crash investigators were prevented from collecting the serial numbers and other evidence which is normally collected and tagged after an aircraft crash. The FBI was too busy confiscating and censoring evidence to conduct a serious aircraft crash investigation.

Here is an alleged Flight 77 aircraft part at the Pentagon which actual experienced aircraft crash investigators would have positively identified. There is only one known photograph of this mystery object and Congresswoman Shelley Berkley took the photo on 9-13-2001 and posted it on her website. It apparently sat there out in the open for three days surrounded by yellow tape and tents and undamaged lawn. Why was this object excluded from the official Defense Dept Pentagon 9-11 book? Because it was a planted piece of evidence? Would actual experienced aircraft crash investigators have proven it could not have come from the Flight 77 757? Obviously this mystery object has been removed from the official Pentagon 'evidence'.

Original Shelley Berkley photo

Mystery part from Berkley website - blowup

How come this is apparently the only known photo of this mystery object? There should have been hundreds of photos of this piece if it was on display out in the open for three days. But just this one photo. Isn't that odd? Did somebody high-up order no photos be taken of it? Should Congresswoman Shelley Berkley be arrested and charged with endangering National Security because of her photoshoot?

Congresswoman Shelley Berkley website containing Pentagon 9-13 photos

[edit on 10/2/08 by SPreston]

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 11:44 AM

Originally posted by SPreston
Since the FBI had the investigation at the Pentagon, actual experienced aircraft crash investigators were prevented from collecting the serial numbers and other evidence which is normally collected and tagged after an aircraft crash. The FBI was too busy confiscating and censoring evidence to conduct a serious aircraft crash investigation.

Are we to gather from your above quoted words that you claim the FBI does not have any "actual experienced aircraft crash investigators"?

Ok. Thanks.

Another feather in the cap of the CIT/PffT Sleuths.

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 12:12 PM

Weird....the one link to the Shelley Berkely website has no mention.

The other link, from your (SPreston) post....the 'close-up'....actually looks like a real fragment of an airplane, based on all of the fragments I've ever seen.

AND.... the cordoning off of an 'area of interest'....such as, say, a piece of debris, is commonplace.

Wouldn't you think it is appropriate for the FBI, and any other 'alphabet soup' organization to wish to contain, and prevent, contamination?

BECAUSE, by this point, we KNEW that this was a terrorist attack. And, not just some random airliner accident, where the NTSB would have full jurisdiction.

Yet, becuase of this careful decision to contain evidence, we now have a 'Conspiracy Theory'????

I'd invite all of these 'CT' believers to look into the Oklahoma City Federal Building bombing....of around 1992.

Do some due dilingence, for yourselves. See how OBVIOUS terrorist attacks are investigated, as compared to obviously simple accidents, which happen every day.

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 12:51 PM
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions

posted on Oct, 2 2008 @ 09:49 PM

I had no chance to read what your wrote to bring a T&C Warn. And, I really don't really care to know.

However, in the realm of 9/11 'conspiracy theories...'

I think the discussion was balanced.

Hope you have chance to redeem yourself, with a cogent argument.

Good luck!

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 11:47 AM

That looks like one of the flaps from the wing which are extended for landing and for braking. You can see them here deployed:

cdn-www.airliners.net...

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 12:06 PM

Originally posted by beachnut

The yellow dot is the NTSB reported position, and that is good to 1500 feet, from a fully working INS (FMS system on Flight 77).

How can an INS which was never aligned at the gate,

i47.photobucket.com...

become more accurate inflight?

Answer, it cant. This according to 757 Captain Ralph Kolstad (who flew INS equipped 757's for American) and Rusty Aimer (a United 757 Captain).

From: Pilots For Truth [mailto:pilotsfortruth@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 11:16 PM
Subject: INS/IRS

Hi Guys,

Quick question...

If the INS/IRS was not aligned at the gate first flight of day, and the INS was off by more than 3000 feet at take off, can the INS/IRS realign itself inflight?

See this picture...
i47.photobucket.com...

The above is lat/long plot for AA77 first flight of day obviously out of IAD runway 30. Clearly the INS wasnt aligned at the gate. Can it realign itself in flight without GPS? (AA77 didnt have GPS on board).

I already know the answer speaking with a few others, but also wanted to get your take on it for a possible quote.

RE: INS/IRS
Saturday, September 27, 2008 10:08 AM
View contact details
To: pilotsfortruth@yahoo.com

In a word, NO.... navigation functions will have huge errors in them.

Ralph

From: Pilots For Truth [mailto:pilotsfortruth@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 10:56 AM
Subject: RE: INS/IRS

Morning Ralph,

The whole purpose of the video is to demonstrate that it would be impossible to record 1.5 DME if the FDR terminated recording at the last lat/long.

Govt apologists claim the FDR stopped recording all parameters at the last lat/long.... They do this to justify too high altitude.. etc...

We (P4T) contend that its impossible the FDR stopped recording at the last lat/long because it recorded 1.5 DME DCA VOR.... Not to mention the NTSB did not stop their plot at the last lat/long.

Considering the Lat/long was off by more than 3000 feet at departure and cannot realign in flight, and INS is prone to errors such as drift, etc... the DME is more accurate. Especially within 1.5 NM of the facility. Agree?

Regards,
Rob

Monday, September 29, 2008 12:22 PM
View contact details
To: pilotsfortruth@yahoo.com

I agree with all that you just said. Good job on the video!

Ralph

Rob,

Fantastic job on the new video!
Keep searching for the truth brother and the truth will set this nation free.
You will be ridiculed, hunted, and persecuted.....
Those of us who still have many questions will support you.

Best,

Ross Aimer

Source

Credentials/Experience for Capt's Rusty Aimer and Ralph Kolstad

23,000 hours
27 years in the airlines
B757/767 for 13 years mostly international captain
20 years US Navy flying fighters off aircraft carriers, TopGun twice
civilian pilot flying gliders, light airplanes and warbirds

Captain Ross "Rusty" Aimer
UAL Ret.
CEO, Aviation Experts LLC
40 years and 30,000 hrs.
BS Aero
A&P Mech.
B-777/767/757/747/737/727/720/707, DC-10/-9/-8 Type ratings
Command time in:
- N591UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 93)
- N612UA (Aircraft dispatched as United 175)
www.AviationExperts.com

Source

Also, the INS position derived from "RO2" was based on a decode Pilots For 9/11 Truth did. It is NOT a position "reported by NTSB" as Beachnut claims above. No one else here or elsewhere have the experts to decode the 'raw file' into a rough "RO2" as did P4T. Pilots For 9/11 Truth add the disclaimer that the software used for the RO2 decode is not meant for Accident Investigation. There are many anomalies in the RO2 decode, which is why Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not write any articles on the main site based on RO2 nor do we argue points with govt agencies based on RO2. We can only use the plotted and produced csv/animation files and NTSB Flight Path Study to determine conflicts with the govt story, of which there are many.

We also created this diagram recently to offset the often spammed picture Beachnut uses based on a decode P4T did, in which P4T admits RO2 cannot be used for anything. Feel free to save this picture and use as you wish.

The only position we can use is the position plotted and provided by the Experts at the NTSB in the form of the csv file (not a 'working copy') and the NTSB Flight Path Study (also not a 'working copy') who have the proper software to decode FDR files. The NTSB does not make any claims of positional error in their plot, "time of impact".. etc. The NTSB Flight Path Study is not a "working copy".

The animation reconstruction produced and provided by the NTSB was stated to be a "working copy". The NTSB notes in the same cover letter that they want everything as accurate as possible when providing information through the FOIA, however they note one error which was made to the clock annotation in the animation reconstruction. They do not account for any other possible errors regarding the animation in this cover letter.

Hope this helps.

Regards,
Rob
(Permission was granted to post above emails.)

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 12:48 PM
A bunch of e-mails from Terrorist Apologists. Yeah, ok.

Rob, have you been to JREF where one of your "members" made a complete fool of himself. "Turbofan" You know who he is... he is the "Auto mechanic" you said was proving Mackey and the rest of them wrong. He shifted away from the FDR garbage and started with the towers C.D. theories.

NICE

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 01:09 PM

posted by ThroatYogurt
A bunch of e-mails from Terrorist Apologists. Yeah, ok.

How dare you call a former US Navy Top Gun fighter and commercial pilot with 23,000 hours and a commercial aircraft pilot with 30,000 hours, 'Terrorist Apologists'. All they were doing in those e-mails was giving their expertise on INS. They wrote nothing about 9-11 perps. You are the person who is doggedly defending the true 9-11 perpetrators.

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 01:15 PM

Originally posted by johndoex

How can an INS which was never aligned at the gate,
become more accurate inflight?

In a word, NO.... navigation functions will have huge errors in them.

You are using two different terms describing two different aspect of an INS. There will still be errors, but INS's in this application are UPDATED and if they are functioning correctly, will become more accurate. That is NOT a complete answer.

From: Pilots For Truth [mailto:pilotsfortruth@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2008 10:56 AM
Subject: RE: INS/IRS

Morning Ralph,

The whole purpose of the video is to demonstrate that it would be impossible to record 1.5 DME if the FDR terminated recording at the last lat/long.

Govt apologists claim the FDR stopped recording all parameters at the last lat/long.... They do this to justify too high altitude.. etc...

We (P4T) contend that its impossible the FDR stopped recording at the last lat/long because it recorded 1.5 DME DCA VOR.... Not to mention the NTSB did not stop their plot at the last lat/long.

Considering the Lat/long was off by more than 3000 feet at departure and cannot realign in flight, and INS is prone to errors such as drift, etc... the DME is more accurate. Especially within 1.5 NM of the facility. Agree?

Regards,
Rob

Monday, September 29, 2008 12:22 PM
View contact details
To: pilotsfortruth@yahoo.com

I agree with all that you just said. Good job on the video!

Ralph

Rob,

Fantastic job on the new video!
Keep searching for the truth brother and the truth will set this nation free.
You will be ridiculed, hunted, and persecuted.....
Those of us who still have many questions will support you.

Best,

Ross Aimer

In one case, (Kolstad) you have an incomplete answer and in the other (Aimer) you have a POLITICAL STATEMENT.

Your "appeal to authority" is rejected. Without giving the answer you want in the question, get a complete answer from a "non-truther" and the answer will be different.

Beachnut is correct.

[edit on 4-10-2008 by Reheat]

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 01:31 PM

Originally posted by Reheat

Beachnut is correct.

[edit on 4-10-2008 by Reheat]

How is Beachnut "correct" when he didnt even perform the decode? How is Beachnut "correct" when those who did perform the decode Beachnut uses to cherry pick his theory, admit the software for the decode has many anomalies?

Yeah, we know,

The NTSB is wrong
Pilots who flew 757's for American and put their names to their claims are wrong.

Everyone else is wrong, but "Beachnut" is correct.

Did you miss the part where both 757 Capts watched the video presentation based on DME vs. INS and agree with the conclusions made? They even went so far to say "Nice Job".

Did you see the video yet?

Here it is...
AA77 Flight Recorder Position Data

Heres one for ya Reheat. How does an INS become more accurate inflight using DME which Beachnut claims is less accurate?

We know the answer... and Beachnut is very wrong.

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 02:38 PM

Originally posted by SPreston

posted by ThroatYogurt
A bunch of e-mails from Terrorist Apologists. Yeah, ok.

How dare you call a former US Navy Top Gun fighter and commercial pilot with 23,000 hours and a commercial aircraft pilot with 30,000 hours, 'Terrorist Apologists'. All they were doing in those e-mails was giving their expertise on INS. They wrote nothing about 9-11 perps. You are the person who is doggedly defending the true 9-11 perpetrators.

Govt apologists claim the FDR stopped recording all parameters at the last lat/long.... They do this to justify too high altitude.. etc...

that was from PFFFT people. NOT from the e-mails.

But as they say.. ."we are the company we keep."

You hang around supporting PFFFT... .your are no better than PFFT

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 02:51 PM

Originally posted by johndoex

Heres one for ya Reheat. How does an INS become more accurate inflight using DME which Beachnut claims is less accurate?

The INS updates using VOR/DME, NOT just DME. Stop trying to twist words to perpetrate your fantasy. You need to read what Beachnut actually says and not twist it to meet your criteria.

I'm busy and don't have time to reply to your nonsense, post for post. Get it right and I won't post. Get it wrong and I'll be back later.....

You don't know where AA77 is so stop claiming that you do.....

Tootle de doo.

[edit on 4-10-2008 by Reheat]

[edit on 4-10-2008 by Reheat]

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 02:51 PM
ThroatYogurt/CaptainObvious/Mr Herbert,

How does the FAA issue and/or allow pilots to be hired and obtain SIDA clearance at airlines if they are "Terrorist Apologists"?

Are you familiar with the PRIA? The New Homeland Security procedures required for pilots? No? Google it.

Yawn.....

Regards,
Rob
(PS, keep an eye out for a major core member update coming soon at Pilots For 9/11 Truth. I havent had a chance to update the core member page in awhile. Its going to be fun watching the "Opposition" go ito convulsions after the update is posted
)

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 02:55 PM

Originally posted by Reheat
The INS updates using VOR/DME, NOT just DME.

So how exactly does an INS become "more accurate" inflight when using VOR/DME?

A VOR Radial spans several hundred miles depending on service volume. How does an INS determine a position more accurate than DME when the position along that radial is based on DME and is less accurate than INS (according to Beachnut)?

Reheat, us pilots can see why you will never put your name to your claims.

Too funny.

edit to add: Note - Reheat convenietly omits the fact INS also updates using DME/DME. lol

[edit on 4-10-2008 by johndoex]

posted on Oct, 4 2008 @ 03:05 PM

Neither VOR/DME or INS (in an airline application) are very accurate. That's why most everyone has gone the GPS route for updates.

AA77 did not have GPS, therefore you don't know the position of the aircraft accurately enough to draw the conclusion you do.

You're a comedian to say that you do. That's what's really not funny, it's pathetic and it's also dishonest.

[edit on 4-10-2008 by Reheat]

new topics

top topics

40