Tezzajw, you could begin by just reading my post here :
and Balsamo's answer on that. Btw, in his next post after that, he banned me for "trolling". Be your own judge.
And if you can't detect an obnoxious compulsive .... in there, then I start seriously worrying about you.
Balsamo : I missed it all, because you did not provide a radius. Just as you have still failed to provide one in every one of your posts for
any arc you have attempted to draw.
Let me know when you do, plug it into the formulas I have provided based on aerodynamics, and produce numbers based on speed. So far, you
I just gave him a viable arc
in my preceding post, he just has to pull up his pair of compasses, and he plainly rejects to, and says I did not
give him an arc. Anyone knows what word you have to fill in, after compulsive ......?
I have also posted in that thread a years old image by me, with a composite arc in it, based on all 13 CIT NoC witnesses.
I repeatedly attended him on the fact that the formula he used, is at best a simplified high school formula, it is a case where you assume both
constant speed and a constant arc. Basically, a description of a toy plane on a string.
Which of course is totally misleading, that plane descended down from the Navy Annex, corrected its lateral arc towards the space between the ANC and
CITGO (4 ANC witnesses, one Helipad operator) and changed engine power ( all witnesses) and then changed its vertical arc about 100 meters in front of
Route 27 (Turcios says it dipped its tail to hop over the light poles in front of the Helipad, six Route 27 witnesses in front of the Helipad said it
did ref up its engines, some say it made a slight left bank when coming out of its long right bank). That's not by far a plane in a constant arc and
with constant speed. Why on earth not one of his pilots there ever reacted on his fairy tale, is a mystery to me.
I also gave him all the real formulas to do the real math, from several online lecture courses by an American Aviation professor. He refuses or does
not know how to use them. Integral math too much for him?
It will be an immense task, since you have to guess the speeds, the partial arcs, the banking angles and a myriad of things more. He very well knows
that no one on this planet can do that, without a RELIABLE set of data, like a real true FDR. He uses a lot of techno babble, without explaining what
he means, every time he tries to convince his readers that he is right and everybody else is wrong.
I still haven't seen him answering my repeated requests to give more details from Dennis Cimino, the FDR expert who said the FDR was garbage, because
he did not find carrier and other data in there.
But we have some fifty witness interviews who all describe a huge plane descending down from the Navy Annex and that impacted at the Pentagon's west
wall. Passing over some heads inside cars, in front of some windshields or in some of their rear windows, or plainly over their heads, since these
people stood near the Helipad.
My arc you used is in the vertical. You have failed to provide a lateral radius for the turn NoC.
Do you even understand the argument? If past experience with you is any indication, you clearly do not.
See? Compulsive .......! Then as always when he has decided that you are his enemy (I just explained to him why I was not! ) the usual humiliation
I just gave him, in my preceding post, that lateral radius, and a much better one than his, since I used all the 13 witnesses interviewed by CIT and
their remarks about their positions. I did not use a fraudulent FDR to "conclude" to a fly-over, I used honest hardworking US citizens their
Btw, he keeps saying any poster is a troll, the moment you touch his immense ego.
He is really convinced that only him and a few other people with an "aviation" background can really count in his circle of friends. But he leans on
intelligent non-aviation people like Tumetufaisdubien who come up with the brainpower which puts his aviation background in the shadows.
Then he write articles in his front page where he copies all their hard work.
A generous guy would ask Tume to write that article, and he would make his own footnotes afterwards.
That's how it's done in scientific circles. And here at ATS.
You should really read some or all of his reactions on the hard work of Warren Stutt. That man was a Saint. Never seen a man with such stamina,
staying so civic under all the humiliation by Balsamo, and keep giving his discoveries away for free, so that everyone can read it and interpret it.
In normal scientific circles we expect help from our peers, in this case I suppose that Warren genuinely expected help from Balsamo and friends, since
Warren honestly said that he had no aviation background, and hoped to get assistance from all those airliner pilots over there.
Are there really so many of them, actively participating every day in those forums? Looks to me there are a lot of "sleeper cells".
What he got in the end is humiliation, a "troll" vignette, and constant attacks so vicious, that he moved on to Official Theory Followers forums
like JREF. Where he hoped to get better assistance. He did not, they pulled him into writing together with two others there, a thesis which was not
fully thought out, and has serious flaws in it. At least the version I read months ago.
QUOTE.I gave you the means to calculate the whole flight path after the return to level flight.ENDQUOTE
Do you think a 757 has an instantaneous roll rate?
Do you even know what a roll rate is?
Let us know how much time you will allow for the aircraft to roll "level" from your NoC turn, after producing the numbers for radius, bank angles
and G Loading for the NoC turn, combined with my vertical arc "pull" (which doesnt even impact the first floor). Good luck!
I just gave him the links to the lectures from that US university Aviation professor. I had meticulously tried to implement all those Greek
mathematical characters in their posting window, so, I did during three weeks a lot of previewing those characters in my posting windows,quite some
complicated formulas and long explanations which could be seen by an admin (or the CIA, the perpetraitors, etc, who want to discredit a pilots forum?)
without posting. I have the feeling that some admin there followed me to every post I looked into, there were on the latest and earliest moments
always two visitors, one member, me, and one guest (an admin (or a hacker/cracker) can easily hide himself).
Then after three weeks of very hard work, I saw my 89 MB Wordpad with all that text, images, photos and video links disappear in a few seconds, and I
could not do anything to stop it, even pulling the Internet cable did not interrupt it. So I immediately tried to use my backup file on the desktop,
that one was also EMPTY. Can you understand my frustration now ?
And I am honest to myself, I first considered an outside P49/11T source, nested in between their server and the first backbone, or just somewhere
routed to that server first. Seen that done too, in my forum years. Always Virginia servers first, then routed further.
Thus, after a few days off, I posted plainly the links to the Aviation professor, and told them to try those themselves.
However, the reactions from Balsamo and friends were so puzzling to me, and then that ban from nowhere ( see those two posts before he banned me) made
me rethink my options. I decided to wait three months, since any sane human being would after that contemplating time, see that my simple math on
Balsamo's single image with the UnderTow offset-plotting of 3000+ ft in it, would convince everyone. It did not.
So, quod erat demonstrandum, I have now a strong distrust in the real task of P49/!!T, and if all what is posted there is truly true. That's why I
decided to engage Balsamo on neutral grounds, since you have not a shimmer of a chance at his own site.
Btw, I have more than a million miles in passenger airplanes behind me. I'm old, despite my Avatar.
Do you really think that a meticulous guy like me, steps in an airliner without studying what the risks really are, and not delve after that in all
kind of books to be able to talk to pilots and cabin personnel on another worldwide flight sequence? They tended to stroll around quite a bit on long
flights, and I learned a lot of them.
Ever hear the term, "When in Rome..."?
In other words LaBTop, if you are going to discuss the information with verified professionals, you may at least want to learn the terminology as
you'll only end up confusing yourself, while the rest of us laugh.
As the clever ones will have seen, English is not my real language. We tend to need more time for posting, and think longer. We use dictionaries a
lot, despite the spell-checking functions nowadays.
Thank you btw, for another attempt on humiliation, Ace.
Let's see how you try to wriggle yourself out of this one again.
You saw what I did? I admitted I made an error, and went on with life.
I will keep a keen eye on you, to iron your errors out.
To the one poster, onesliceshort, before I got banned : do you want to continue our discussion about a fly-over, or an impact? I do. You seem to be
gifted with a good analytical mind, just as Tumetufaisdubien/Jan Zelman, so I am eager to extend it to here. Please do not as Balsamo, but use your
own screen name, or say in the first post here who you are there. But learn to have some patience with the elderly, we are slower, but meticulous.