Blue flight path is the NoC one.
Green flight path is the officially endorsed SoC one.
Both flight paths were up to the FDR's last fully readable (by the NTSB) data block, at a steady heading of 070°, which is also an identical 60.25°
true north heading.
That last data block contained the latitudinal and longitudinal positions that indicated a position just south of the Sheraton Hotel's southern
That's just under my cipher 7 in my below drawing.
We do not have ANY officially endorsed further positional data offered by the NTSB investigators, only 4 seconds of further data extracted by Warren
Stutt, an Australian IT man who has no former experience with officially decoding recovered FDR data, as he admits himself. He used a home made FDR
data extraction program he wrote himself. The NTSB has never reacted on mails he send to them that their decoding technique must have a bug, since he
found 4 extra seconds of blocks with more and more missing data, but still with positional data.
Those are the four missing positional data seconds it took the plane to cover that slight NoC arc flown from below the Sheraton Hotel (the last
official NTSB position) up to impact.
I have extensive experience as explained in my 9/11 Watergate thread, that decoding FDR data and especially positional data, can be very tricky. You
have to use various decoding techniques and math to at last end up with the real D 26 departure gate for AA 77 at Dulles International Airport.
So I expect that the same problems will arise when decoding the last flight seconds for AA 77 its FDR. Many corrections will have to be implemented to
arrive at the exact positions on a map. Just as I found out for the beginning part of AA 77 its flight, namely the taxiing to the runway part of the
flight. When you used the original lat. and long. data, the planes position on a Dulles Airport map was offset for hundreds of meters, and took off
from a field beside the runway, that's why you know that you have to use corrections to arrive at the real-time positions of the plane at Dulles.
This is the NoC (blue) and SoC (green) flight paths drawing, both at a steady 070° heading up to a spot south of the Sheraton Hotel, where the NTSB
stopped providing positional data from the FDR.
Note that the green, SoC line does not fit the eye witnesses at all :
CALCULATION done in the online Turn Performance Calculator :
It's quite easy to give hundreds of slightly different bank angles at slightly different speeds in slightly different turns and with slightly
different arc radii for Flight AA 77, which all will cover all the known North of CITGO gas station witnesses their reported positions within
acceptable error ranges, and which all will lead to AA 77 still impacting the west wall of the Pentagon at its second floor slab height, and near or
at facade-column number 14.
But all these turns and radii will never ever follow a flight path like the officially pushed South of CITGO gas station trajectory. Which is a
straight attack path, under a 42° angle to the normal of the Pentagon's west wall.
Which should also be, according to the data found in the recovered FDR, a 60.25° true north straight flight path.
The problem with that is, that the recovered FDR stopped giving data 4 seconds before impact. And that was at a spot just south of the Sheraton
Hotel's southern facade.
Here's a drawing I remembered I found in the Purdue University animation files texts :
1. As you know by now, I do not believe anyone at first sight, so I checked that SoC impact angle depicted in the above drawing.
It's not 52°, but exactly 55°.
Which is by far not the 42° impact angle advocated by the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report, and from then on taken over by all official
institutions and thus also by all debunkers of the real, true 9/11-history facts.
2. I also checked the position of that generator unit, which we always have called the generator trailer. That position is not even the end position
of it after impact, it is depicted as far too far pushed around (It is photographed just after impact shifted around at about 45° max to the long
fence). That generator trailer unit stood in fact exactly parallel to the fence, just as the other depicted trailer and that storage building, at the
moment in flight of that plane which is depicted in the above position. Before it passed over that area.
3. The short fence is positioned wrong, it stood meters back to the south (upwards to the top of the drawing), and lead in reality towards that small
protruding piece of the west wall facade.
4. Do yourself a favor, and draw a line through the impact point of that nose cone, under a real angle of 42°. Observe where the body of the plane
should be drawn in reality.
And realize again, that not one guide rail under that wing could have made a gouge, without causing the right jet engine to fully impact at the side
panel of that generator trailer unit.
Which would have obliterated that whole unit. But we see it still standing quite unharmed in all photo's shot within minutes after plane impact at
the west wall.
5. I'll do you all a favor and draw that 42° attack angle line myself. Here it is, quite disturbing don't you think? It does not fit the 5 downed
light poles at all. So, I hear the debunkers already : Then that 42° conclusion of the ASCE report must be false.
Well, one slight problem with that is that you need that 42° angle according to the ASCE guys, to construct a flight and internal damage path which
leads through the 5 downed light poles, column 14 and ends at the "exit hole" in the C-ring corridor.
Which, as you can see below, is total humbug.
So, I measured that SoC attack angle which really runs through the 5 downed light poles, and you know what? It has an 52° angle, just as is typed
inside the above Purdue drawing, which was in fact a 55° angle.
Can you still follow all deceptions laid upon you by all these early officially appointed 9/11 investigators from ASCE, Purdue University, NTSB who
decoded the AA 77 its FDR, and the RADES radar mapping team which concluded that there were two final positions in front of the west wall which their
radars recorded, one just before impact at a NoC position, and one just after impact (impossible) at a SoC position..? I have those photo's from the
two radar recordings of AA 77 its position put up here below this following map :
This is the last radar return at a NoC position recorded by the RADES team just moments before impact :
And this is the impossible SoC position radar return recorded by the RADES team just AFTER the impact :
This is another drawing, but now from the ASCE Pentagon Building Performance Report :
1. Notice please, that the impact angle depicted as 42° is in fact 46°. Check it with your graduated arc.
Most officially revealed material regarding 9/11 is riddled with these kind of HUGE DECEPTIONS which already should make you VERY AWARE of the many
lies brought upon you by deceptive US government institutions.
By the way, many other western governments are just as guilty, since they could know just as easily as I, how one can find all these GLARING
discrepancies in the officially pushed 9/11 history, which is obviously not the real and truthful history of that day.
And I will keep working relentlessly to make you aware of that and to unearth the true history.
2. Notice also that if the plane followed the depicted flight path and angle, its right wing's jet engine would have cut through that generator as
butter, and the whole generator would have been obliterated. Just check the height of the nose cone impact point at the second floor slab on column
14. And the height of the generator trailer.
If that right jet engine's bottom has passed freely over the trailer's roof, the plane was in a ridiculous sharp vertical attack angle which does
not cope with all known observations at all.
I hope you understand that the plane's nose cone in that case was much higher above that generator trailer, than the height of the second floor slab,
where the ASCE report says it impacted.
3. Notice also that if the jet engine would have missed the trailer, in other words would have passed above its generator section's roof, there can
not be ONE part of that right wing that could have made the so clearly photographed gouge in its roof, since all 4 guard rails that stick out from
under that right wing are much higher placed then the bottom of the right jet engine.
Conclusion : that plane flew much lower, under a vertical attack angle of 8.18° and a horizontal attack angle of much more than 42° as the ASCE
report touts, according to that roof-gouge made by one of the guide rails under that right wing at an horizontal angle of about 62°, and its right
jet engine must have past beside that whole generator trailer. To offer room for the guide rail to cut at an 62° angle through the roof of that
4. Notice also that if you draw a straight line in above map, from column 14 under a real angle of 42°, that it ends not at the "exit hole", but
many meters to the right of it.