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.

 

New Footage 9/11 Second Tower Explosion Incredibly Clear Video From Helicopter - Where Is The Plane?

page: 45
106
<< 42  43  44    46  47  48 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


WHAT ORDER WAS THAT ALFIE?




posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

NORAD's efficiency in responding that day is a large and seperate issue and it has nothing to do with the falsely alleged "stand down" order.


Wrong!

Stop spreading LIEs.

911 Commission - Trans. Sec Norman Mineta Testimony



www.youtube.com...



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Going on about what? You looking for what?
Need to add more numbers to your post count?



Here, never mind I cant expect you to be honest.

Take a look here: ========>>>>>>>www.youtube.com...


"of course the order still stands, have you heard anything to the contrary!"







Yes, I've just been through all this with Danbones (see above).

Are you going to show me where Mr Mineta acknowledged a NORAD stand-down order ? He couldn't.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


I just posted two videos that prove it.

I cant stop you from spreading your LIES.

However I am pointing out that you are purposely presenting disinformation,
and refuse to acklnowledge that the videos clearly show "the stand down".

Any who watches the videos will see your spreading LIEs. You may
refuse to acknowledge them however others will watch, and your credibility
just went BYE BYE.
edit on 17-3-2012 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones
reply to post by Alfie1
 


WHAT ORDER WAS THAT ALFIE?


What order are you talking about ?



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird

The actual turn made by AAL 77 was a normal, very normal hand-flown right turn, while descending. It happens every day, everywhere in the world. The ONLY aspect of that turn that was outside the "norm" in regular airline operations was the angle of bank.



Wow, blatant disinformation tactics.


So, it was normal, but it was not normal.


Kind of like YOU Proudwacker.
(YOU know, kind of like keeping YOUR 'pilot" "log book" you got tired of keeping.
)
edit on 17-3-2012 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by Danbones
 


You are referring to the ONE person....Ralph Kolstad, right?


top gun pilot instructors who actually flew aircraft involved:


And, actually "flying the aircraft involved" means nothing. A Boeing 757 is identical to all the others, basically....only thing is there are options up to the buyer, as to engine choice, and other details. The BASIC jet remains the same.

He's a poster boy for the "P4T"....and, incredibly wrong. He may have been trotted out to simply give misinformation, or he was originally given misinfo, and then repeated it.

He says the airplanes were flown in a manner that "even he could not".....which is ridiculous!

The oft-cited American 77 turn, overhead the Pentagon.....Kolstad, as a former military pilot, should know full well what an overhead pattern is.....fly over the intended point of landing, then make a descending turn back around to line up to land....only, with American 77, his intent was not to land....still, the technique in the air is the same.

The actual turn made by AAL 77 was a normal, very normal hand-flown right turn, while descending. It happens every day, everywhere in the world. The ONLY aspect of that turn that was outside the "norm" in regular airline operations was the angle of bank.

It reached over 35° a few times....(was variable, the bank angle, because of the pilot's sloppiness). In normal airline operations we limit to 25°, routinely. 30° is the absolute maximum, except in an emergency.

His speed, in that large turn, also varied....but, it was well within normal limits. An average of about 280 knots. This was 'illegal' because of his altitude......in the USA the regulations stipulate a max speed of 250 knots below 10,000 feet MSL. But the hijacker pilot didn't care about regulations, did he??

So, whether at 250 knots, or 280 knots, the turn was exactly normal, and certainly even "Top Gun" Ralph Kolstad could do it, easily.

Is he lying, then? I mean, what pilot in his right mind would claim that he could not make a simple descending turn?? I'd look to motive, with Mr. Kolstad........








posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   
I had to split the post because of character count
so the post and my response can be compared easily
now now, PB
you just commited a classic straw man

Please tell the whole truth:


U.S. Navy 'Top Gun' Pilot Questions 9/11

by Alan Miller Page 1 of 1 page(s)

September 5, 2007 - U.S. Navy Top Gun pilot, Commander Ralph Kolstad, started questioning the official account of 9/11 within days of the event. It just didnt make any sense to me, he said. And now 6 years after 9/11 he says, When one starts using his own mind, and not what one was told, there is very little to believe in the official story.

Now retired, Commander Kolstad was a top-rated fighter pilot during his 20-year Navy career. Early in his career, he was accorded the honor of being selected to participate in the Navys Top Gun air combat school, officially known as the U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School. The Tom Cruise movie, Top Gun reflects the experience of the young Navy pilots at the school. Eleven years later, Commander Kolstad was further honored by being selected to become a Top Gun adversary instructor. While in the Navy, he flew F-4 Phantoms, A-4 Skyhawks, and F-14 Tomcats and completed 250 aircraft carrier landings.

Commander Kolstad had a second career after his 20 years of Navy active and reserve service and served as a commercial airline pilot for 27 years, flying for American Airlines and other domestic and international careers. He flew Boeing 727, 757 and 767, McDonnell Douglas MD-80, and Fokker F-100 airliners. He has flown a total of over 23,000 hours in his career.

Commander Kolstad is especially critical of the account of American Airlines Flight 77 that allegedly crashed into the Pentagon. He says, At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757s and 767s and I could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.

Commander Kolstad adds, I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these beginners did. Something stinks to high heaven!

He points to the physical evidence at the Pentagon impact site and asks in exasperation, Where is the damage to the wall of the Pentagon from the wings? Where are the big pieces that always break away in an accident? Where is all the luggage? Where are the miles and miles of wire, cable, and lines that are part and parcel of any large aircraft? Where are the steel engine parts? Where is the steel landing gear? Where is the tail section that would have broken into large pieces?


So, one of the world's best pilots says he CANNOT duplicate the maneuvers of Flight 77, and that it's not possible. What does that tell you?

Are you more qualified than Commander Ralph Kolstad to comment on the maneuver of a 757? Do you have similar qualifications that he does? Have you logged 23,000 hours of flight time? Have you flown fighter jets and 757's for 40 years? What are YOUR qualifications against his?


Kolstad is describing not just the little section you opinionate he says, he is looking at the whole story.
What you just did there is a clear case of OBFUSCATION via strawman arguement
Classic OS as I contend likely is the case in the creation of the obfuscation in the vid in the OP
edit on 17-3-2012 by Danbones because: spelling grammer



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Alfie1
 


I just posted two videos that prove it.

I cant stop you from spreading your LIES.

However I am pointing out that you are purposely presenting disinformation,
and refuse to acklnowledge that the videos clearly show "the stand down".

Any who watches the videos will see your spreading LIEs. You may
refuse to acknowledge them however others will watch, and your credibility
just went BYE BYE.
edit on 17-3-2012 by burntheships because: (no reason given)


Not in those two videos, nor the transcript posted earlier, is there any reference to a NORAD stand-down order.

It is perfectly obvious from the context that any reference to an order meant the shoot-down order. Mr Mineta refers to planes being scrambled and that he learnt of the shoot-down order after hearing Cheney's conversation.

Readers can look at the videos and the transcipt and make up their own minds.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:34 AM
link   
It was previously given that the cruising speed of a 757 is approx. 600 mph. According to the FAA report, AA77 was last reported doing 458 kts, which is 527 mph at 8:56 am. Just prior to the strike, the jet passed over the White House then completed a hair-pin 270 degree turn before slamming into the Pentagon. This hair-pin turn would have bled-off a lot of air-speed; however the dive into the Pentagon with engines at full thrust might have brought the final approach speed back up to around 600 mph/521kts. So let's take that as a worse-case scenario. (The plane's air-speed was most likely slower than 521 kts. due to the hair-pin turn it just completed.)

Assumed AA77 Inbound Velocity: 600 miles/hour = 10 miles/minute = 1 mile or 5280 feet every 6 seconds = 880 feet/sec.


Most North American A/V equipment operates at a rate of 30 interlaced frames per second (NTSA). That is one complete frame every 30th of a second and one partial or interlaced field scan every 60th of a second, which is essentially slaved to the AC line frequency of 60hz.

So if you take the plane's velocity of 880 feet/sec. and divide that by the full frame rate of 1/30th of a second, the camera will capture a complete image of the plane every 29.3 feet, given a constant speed of 600 mph. Or if your video equipment can freeze-frame on individual interlace fields it will capture a partial scan (every other scan line) of the plane's travel in 14.6 foot intervals, given a constant rate of speed of 600 mph.

According to the surveillance video the plane crossed the camera's field of view on an inbound trajectory of approximately 35 - 45 degrees, so the apparent velocity of the plane across the camera's field of view will be approximately 1/3 less than that actually travelled by the plane along its inbound trajectory.

www.democraticunderground.com...

hmmm
PB
seems 77 may have been going a lttle faster and at a steeper angle then you opinionated
kolstad 1
pb 0

edit on 17-3-2012 by Danbones because: scorecard

edit on 17-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-3-2012 by Danbones because: fixed quote box



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by burntheships
reply to post by Alfie1
 


I just posted two videos that prove it.

I cant stop you from spreading your LIES.

However I am pointing out that you are purposely presenting disinformation,
and refuse to acklnowledge that the videos clearly show "the stand down".

Any who watches the videos will see your spreading LIEs. You may
refuse to acknowledge them however others will watch, and your credibility
just went BYE BYE.
edit on 17-3-2012 by burntheships because: (no reason given)


Not in those two videos, nor the transcript posted earlier, is there any reference to a NORAD stand-down order.

It is perfectly obvious from the context that any reference to an order meant the shoot-down order. Mr Mineta refers to planes being scrambled and that he learnt of the shoot-down order after hearing Cheney's conversation.

Readers can look at the videos and the transcipt and make up their own minds.


right allfie
WHAT SPECIFICALLY WAS THE ORDER MINETA REFERED TOO?
Im sure the readers will note your failure to answer that..
edit on 17-3-2012 by Danbones because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by pianopraze


You assume much, and wrong.



Likewise yourself. You will still be flapping about gathering 'evidence' on these click do donate websites for the rest of your life. When is the great bubble going to burst? When is it all going to unravel on the heads on these 'false flag' perpetrators? Who is going to be first to come out and spill the beans? P4T and the other websites you required your 'evidence' from have been stumbling about since day one jumping from one crazy theory to the next. Balsamo has become a laughing stock and he still persists with the crazy theories. It is like a comedy channel when he stumbles on yet another bogus trail. Gullible people like yourself only feed his market and he continues to make money out of it hand over fist. One day the penny will drop. Think on when in decades to come the great 'evidence' has not been unveiled or proven by these people.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:43 AM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


As I said in response your mate burntheships, it is patently obvious the order was the "shoot-down" order.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by tommyjo

Originally posted by pianopraze


You assume much, and wrong.



Likewise yourself. You will still be flapping about gathering 'evidence' on these click do donate websites for the rest of your life. When is the great bubble going to burst? When is it all going to unravel on the heads on these 'false flag' perpetrators? Who is going to be first to come out and spill the beans? P4T and the other websites you required your 'evidence' from have been stumbling about since day one jumping from one crazy theory to the next. Balsamo has become a laughing stock and he still persists with the crazy theories. It is like a comedy channel when he stumbles on yet another bogus trail. Gullible people like yourself only feed his market and he continues to make money out of it hand over fist. One day the penny will drop. Think on when in decades to come the great 'evidence' has not been unveiled or proven by these people.


Im sure truthers would love to actually believe the OS

But after all the obfuscations shown on this thread we have to ask:
When are OSers gonna quit with the invective usually attributed to wrestlers and put up some truth
oh,
then they would be truthers

ooops
what was i thinkin



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


Whoa, there Bucko!!!


It was previously given that the cruising speed of a 757 is approx. 600 mph. According to the FAA report, AA77 was last reported doing 458 kts, which is 527 mph at 8:56 am. Just prior to the strike, the jet passed over the White House then completed a hair-pin 270 degree turn before slamming into the Pentagon. This hair-pin turn would have bled-off a lot of air-speed; however the dive into the Pentagon with engines at full thrust might have brought the final approach speed back up to around 600 mph/521kts. So let's take that as a worse-case scenario. (The plane's air-speed was most likely slower than 521 kts. due to the hair-pin turn it just completed.)



Let's take this slowly.

First, understand the difference of KNOTS versus MPH. Knots are based on Nautical Miles....one NM is 6,076 feet. "MPH" (as in, on your car's speedometer) are based on STATUTE miles....a SM is 5,280 feet.

OK?

Is this clear, yet??

A rough number to use, to convert from SM to Knots is 15%. (6,076 divided by 5,280 = 1.15)....Grab a calculator, and check my math!!!


Next.....the 757 "typical cruise speed" is a value that applies when it is AT cruise altitude. There are a LOT, a LOT of things to explain about that.....but, I won't here.

Now, picking this from the quoted text, above:


According to the FAA report, AA77 was last reported doing 458 kts, which is 527 mph at 8:56 am.


Yeah.....and, the jet (AAL 77) was still over one-half HOUR away form impact!!

(Impact was at 09:37 EDT, approximately)

The FDR video made by the NTSB clearly shows that by the time the jet was in the D.C. vicinity its airspeed and ground track velocity was lower.....for the turn (which was NOT a "hairpin turn"!).

Man, this is so easy to explain....to pilots it would be.

No, the turn made by AAL 77 was perfectly ordinary. His speed, there, as an average of about 280 knots. His angle of bank was more than "normal" for airline operations....he got as steep as 35° angle of bank, but it varied a lot (due to his lack of precision skills).....but, got the "job" done.

In airline operations, the normal "Max" angle of bank is 25°. With up to 30° allowed. In the simulators, for the "skills" demonstration, we do "steep turns" at 45 °......this also involves, as part f the "skills" demonstration, proper altitude and airspeed control.

When an airplane is banked into a "steep" turn, the lift component that counters normal Earth gravity is diminished....(BECAUSE, the lift generated by the wings works perpendicular to the wings....in a banked turn, that lift vector is angled......)....

Here, am editing in...this is a FREE lesson for you!! (Well, free to all that read this, as well)....go, Learn To Fly!!


This image explains how lift vectors work, in a banked turn:



(You only need to pay attention to the image at left....the others show 'slipping' and 'skidding'....other things taught to pilots, but not relevant to this discussion....)




so, to maintain BOTH altitude, and airspeed, engine thrust must be increased. THAT is the "skill" part of a "steep turn skill demonstration". Keep in mind that AFTER the "steep turn", the added thrust "during" the "steep turn" has to be removed..."backed off"....to keep the airspeed the same at the end of the "steep turn skill demo" as it was at the beginning, or "entry".

Again, a pilot understands this. Writing it out is much more difficult than actually doing it......(or teaching it, in a real airplane!!)

edit on Sat 17 March 2012 by ProudBird because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by Danbones
 


As I said in response your mate burntheships, it is patently obvious the order was the "shoot-down" order.

and not giving it is ipso facto telling


On September 18, 2001, NORAD issued a press release containing a timeline of the events of the September 11, including when they were contacted by the FAA. This page has been removed

en.wikipedia.org...

hmmmpage removed I wonder why?

For the sake of arguement lets say I have the TERM NORAD mixed up with the TERM SHOOTDOWN as you suggest
What we call Cheney's intereference in the defence of the pentagon is niether here nor there compared with the fact that he did in fact INTERFERE and PREVENT the defence of the PENTAGON with an ORDER

so
the fact that you have admitted Cheney refused to give the shoot down order that would have saved the pentagon from attack
IS A FAR WORSE ADMISSION!!!



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones

what was i thinkin


Yes what are you thinking? Yet another poster stumbling about dodgy conspiracy websites and repeating garbage. Remember to get back to me when you are proven correct in your assumptions. Any indications on when it will all unravel for the 'elite'?



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 12:04 PM
link   
reply to post by ProudBird
 


the survelance cam calculation is from the footage released of the plane at the pentagon as it crashed



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Danbones

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by Danbones
 


As I said in response your mate burntheships, it is patently obvious the order was the "shoot-down" order.

and not giving it is ipso facto telling


On September 18, 2001, NORAD issued a press release containing a timeline of the events of the September 11, including when they were contacted by the FAA. This page has been removed

en.wikipedia.org...

hmmmpage removed I wonder why?

For the sake of arguement lets say I have the TERM NORAD mixed up with the TERM SHOOTDOWN as you suggest
What we call Cheney's intereference in the defence of the pentagon is niether here nor there compared with the fact that he did in fact INTERFERE and PREVENT the defence of the PENTAGON with an ORDER

so
the fact that you have admitted Cheney refused to give the shoot down order that would have saved the pentagon from attack
IS A FAR WORSE ADMISSION!!!


I can't for the life of me see where you dreamed that up. Cheney was confirming that the shoot-down order stood. Mineta says he later realised this.



posted on Mar, 17 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


Huh??



the survelance cam calculation is from the footage released of the plane at the pentagon as it crashed


The parking lot gate camera?

That is the only footage of AAL 77.

But, there is NO NEED for camera footage to know there was a plane crash!

Check out the history of ALL major airliner crashes, and then come back and tell us how many of those KNOWN crashes had video footage to record them, in process of crashing?



new topics

top topics



 
106
<< 42  43  44    46  47  48 >>

log in

join