Originally posted by waypastvne
Originally posted by LaBTop
The above map with all those angles is meant to show that even when the ASCE members would come up with an explanation from fiction, namely that we
must measure their 42° angle as beginning from a perpendicular line to the west wall, in that case I have already offered the counter argument :
I finally took the time to look at what you're on about.
This is what the ASCE report says:
The site data indicate that the aircraft fuselage impacted the building at column line 14 at an angle of approximately 42 degrees to the normal to the
face of the building.
That means their impact angle is 48 deg from the face of the wall or 42 deg to a line 90 deg to the wall.
Look up the definition of NORMAL.
After doing the math I found the ASCE"s impact angle came out to heading of 58 deg true north.
The damage trail heading is 61.5 deg.
To sum up you are making a big fuss over "approximately" 3.5 deg.
I am familiar with the term "the normal to", and that's what I drew in my above GE-aerial.
The red normal to the west wall, and the dark-blue normal to true north.
I only seem to have been influenced by my good old friend Korsakov, who caused me to swap my "48° " with my "42° " annotation. And thus let me
draw the wrong 42° line.
Thank you for pointing that out to me. That's why peer review is so damn important, we will in the end come up with an acceptable theory for anyone.
With solid evidence, as laid before everyone, reading it.
No holding back facts and deductions. Saves a damn lot of time, Reheat.
I must not try to do analytical jobs when I am working up to the new morning light.
I knew very well of the "angle to the normal on the wall" - issue, since I have earlier in this thread posted an ASCE report impact drawing with
that angle shown as a little arc between the normal on the wall and the internal damage path line.
I did check it, as you can see in my text above, but I was probably so groggy from sleep deprivation that I couldn't think right anymore and swapped
the two values.
I hope that when we can get the exact impact point its latitude and longitude figures at last right ("exponent" already asked for it), I and anyone
else interested, could draw at last a GE map with the exact right impact point and the exact flight path lines in it. (ASCE and FDR)
I am only at lost how to use that angles feature in the Ruler window from Google Earth 07-09-2001 historical map.
I have tried to draw lines that should indicate an angle in that Ruler window field that would be either 62.5° or 42°, but always get totally
different values shown in that field, when I check these same angles with my own rulers, triangles and graduated arcs.
Can anybody explain that to me?
How I can use the much more precise degrees of the line angle indication in the Ruler function of Google Earth.
The lat and long is easy to set, you see them change in the bottom center of any GE map, when moving the pointer.
Because I am getting quite sure, that we end up with an exact drawing with no discrepancy anymore of 3.5°.
My use of graduated arcs etc, is not exact enough on these kinds of maps.
I have to look back at my own post where I posted that conversation from 2006, where magnetic heading, ground track, etcetera, were re-posted and
linked by me. In there was the real ground path based on the FDR data.
My drawn 42° to the wall path is not the 42° to the normal on that wall.
That one must be drawn somewhere in between the 62° FDR path and my light blue 42° to the wall path. Then it shows an 42° angle to the red colored
normal-line, drawn by me as 90° on the wall.
I am however afraid that we still end up with a few degrees difference, since about everyone here seems to agree on the 61 to 62 degree figure
deducted from the FDR's last fully readable data frame.
I however have found at several websites a drawing with an angle of 60.25° as the true north FDR flight path angle.