It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by LaBTopI am glad this one NoC debunker went to Paik to check up on CIT's interview, because I got the impression from CIT's Paik interview, that he stood outside. He did not, he sat inside his front office which front-window looks out on the Pike.
Originally posted by LaBTop
The problem is me not able to recognize what the man says. I think I picked up something like "VDOT mast, .......to the right of it......." and the rest I really can't understand.
What is it in his words that you find interesting?
"At 9:35 a.m., I pulled alongside the Pentagon. With traffic at a standstill, my eyes wandered around the road, looking for the cause of the traffic jam. Then I looked up to my left and saw an American Airlines jet flying right at me. The jet roared over my head, clearing my car by about 25 feet. The tail of the plane clipped the overhanging exit sign above me as it headed straight at the Pentagon.
"The windows were dark on American Airlines Flight 77 as it streaked toward its target, only 50 yards away."
"The hijacked jet slammed into the Pentagon at a ferocious speed. But the Pentagon's wall held up like a champ. It barely budged as the nose of the plane curled upwards and crumpled before exploding into a massive fireball."
He was right "alongside" the Pentagon. Only 50 yards away from its target.
[LT : However, that second 1x1 meter exit sign Onesliceshort seems not to know about, stands in a spot "alongside" the Pentagon, its southern wall. And Vin's car could have stood just in front of light pole 4, or 5..? If 5, he could not see the poles being clipped. But you should check the exact spot of that second exit sign beside Route 27 its north lanes..)
In Aldo Marquis' call :
ALDO: So you were under an overhead sign. Correct?
NARANYAN: ..I was under an exit sign, basically..I was just before the exit sign..the exit sign was on the approach.
ALDO: And you say the tail actually hit the sign?
NARANYAN: It clipped it..
ALDO: So did you see it clip any lightpoles?
NARANYAN : No, it didn't clip any lightpoles or anything like that..
it didn't clip any lightpoles, just the exit sign.
Was he referring to the exit sign that is just before the poles on the official path?
[LT : Actually, there are three exit signs there.
One on the huge board just before the Pike-underpass. That's in fact the only one you physically could stand under. And could have been clipped. But then no lamp poles clipped? Illogical and not fitting the 5 poles.
The next green one is standing beside the road, and that is the most interesting exit sign for now, because it stands at a spot with no trees at all near it, is about 1x1 meter, but perhaps had an extra sign above it that was clipped? You can not stand under it. And it is very near to, or even under the SoC flight path.
I have to look up that photo with it in it, so we can extract its position from that photo.
The third one is the small green one on a short pole, about 2.50 meter high, beside the road, just a few meters in front of the two trees that grew in front of the Heli Pad. It's the exit sign that indicates that the exit-lane begins, and you should choose that lane if you want to go to the Mall or River Entrances.
That's the third one, I think Vin stands just in front of, in a shiny darkgreen Pick Up van. In one of the Steve Riskus photos I already showed. You can not stand under it. It is under a NoC flight path.
It is too low to be clipped and then no light poles also standing there would have not been clipped, that is nearly impossible. The plane must have just cleared the lamp poles there and must have been in such a dive angle, that the tail could touch that sign. That's impossible, the nose of the plane would have shaved the lawn. ).
He saw no lightpoles being struck. He was adamant about that.
He also claimed that there were no trees obstructing his view.
These are the trees Aldo was referring to
(LT : 4 photos from under the I-395 overpass were inserted to show the three trees beside the huge traffic signs board.)
What did he tell you in your interview Shure?
No, there were no trees in my way, actually there were no trees there. I was right there where it happened.
The plane flew right over my head.
Now squeeze that neuron Shure, go on.
There's only one logical conclusion where he saw the plane enter Route 27 isn't there? Given he was in front of the Pentagon, no trees blocking his view just before a roadsign?
John McLain :
My suggestion is that, for any turns of less than five degrees, use rudder only to establish the desired bank. A slight application of rudder in the direction of the turn will produce a very shallow bank and eliminate the adverse yaw. Please note that I did not say to keep the wings level with aileron, which is a common misconception. The rudder application will produce the desired small bank, and you should let it. ... I am advocating using a little rudder-induced yaw, with no aileron, to produce a slight bank.
… once a medium bank is established you must neutralize both the aileron and rudder. A common mistake I see with pilots is the failure to neutralize the rudder. This results in a continued yaw in the direction of the turn and a tendency for the bank to steepen. The pilot’s tendency is to apply opposite aileron, and we then have the dreaded cross-control. Don’t let this happen to you.
Quote: John Bursill
"I agree absolutely that the pressure on the airframe changes massively at low altitude as Balsamo states and that the effective "drag" and "air pressures" are equivalent to super sonic speeds at 510 Knots at sea level yes, but this pressure is only a catastrophic structural problem when the aircraft is changing direction."
Albert Hemphill : The aircraft was moving fast, at what I could only be estimate as between 250 to 300 knots. All in all, I probably only had the aircraft in my field of view for approximately 3 seconds.
We get some speed of 330-350mph. Other sources give a speed up to 420mph.
NOTE: This image was resized. To view it full-size, click on the image.
So the necessary bank angle of 27° - 39° for a 6.5° trajectory change over a distance of about 500 meters is absolutely in the range of the possibilities. An angle of 27° is quite similar to the impact angle of the WTC1 plane and no witness I know described it as "high banking". However, some statements in the witness accounts are extremely interesting.
Hemphill describes "as if he'd just jinked to avoid something".
Morin described some similar sudden movement and interpreted it as a "right bank" may be because he just saw the tip of the tail moving to the right.
Steve Storti mentions a right bank before it reached the Navy Annex and mentioned some additional movement "veered sharply".
Lagasse described some yawing by the use of the rudder.
That movement will also cause some small banking if not prevented by some aileron movement. According to a flight instructor that yaw movement do not end just by turning the rudder into a straight position. I assume that such a maneuver is extremely difficult and even dangerous close to the ground. Imo it is far out of range for Hani Hanjour (and probably also for experienced pilots flying by hand and sight) and btw the start of that yaw movement would have pushed the pilot sideways with a lot more force than an un-banked turn in a roller coaster. But whatever piloted that thing it still had to end that movement by some similar complex and dangerous maneuver while leveling above the bridge.
A plane do not bank suddenly. The banking maneuver still needs some additional way to reach the necessary angle and to level the wings afterwards.
As I wrote before, the damage of the light poles show no detectable bank angle. Even the FDR data show no left bank but a lot of people believe that these data ended much earlier for whatever reason. Since the FDR doesn't "know" that the plane will crash in may be 4-8 seconds we definitely can exclude that it stopped recording. A yaw movement wouldn't appear in these data and even the rudder movement was probably not recorded (???).
Posted Image (LT :no image btw)
Hence, the jinked yaw movement appears like the best explanation so far.
also, are Mclain's comments all related to small aircraft?
Yes but the physics are the same. Problem, such a yaw probably could damage the entire plane.
I'm looking into the FDR with all the informations I could found
mag heading very precise
lat/long failure 3000ft
given the descent rate and the heading it looks like the last FDR was recorded about at
That's pretty close to Citgo but of course south. Furthermore it looks like the plane was high enough to pass over the VDOT mast.
--name-- Then when they (LT: the FAA officials on 9/11 afternoon) were satisfied, we landed, and then we went up a little bit later, taking video footage and downlinking it to the command center.
--name-- Do you still have a copy of that video?
--name-- He told me he does not have it.
(LT : thus, this photo you showed, John, is not a screenshot of that initial FAA officials flight, where the FAA officials asked the two pilots to fly over a small office building which the FAA officials heard from someone on the ground, that AA 77 had flown over that one. That photo you linked to, must have been one from the flight done by Dan, the next day. Other evidence for it is the small amount of smoke in it, just as Dan told that he saw the next day, 9/12. He said the major fires were out.)
--name-- (second pilot) 16 but I believe it was the next day we had a photo mission down there.
--name-- We took quite a few photos directly overhead of the Pentagon.
--name-- And would that have been yourself?
--name-- Yeah, I flew that. (the second pilot, named Dan. The first pilot had the next day off, on 9/12)
Page 25, (Dan, the second pilot, is back.)
--Dan-- 9 Yes, we did . We had a photo mission the next day.
--name-- All right.
--Dan-- On 9-12. 9-12. It was in Fairfax 2 with myself as the pilot, --name-- and --name-- as the flight officers and the photographer would have been, is it --name-- --name--: --name-- --name--: --name--, who works for the --name-- Fire department.
20 --name-- fire department, Fairfax County Fire Department. We took -- well, actually, we took off from
the base at 1555 and returned back to the base at 1650, so just under an hour flight. The main mission is to photograph the Pentagon. So we -- I don't remember the specifics of the route of flight. We approached it cautiously. By then ATC was back in business, and they were super jumpy and super cautious. (NOTE that air traffic control seems to him to have not been on the job for a full day. WHY? )
But we got our clearance to Washington Tower to proceed to the Pentagon (LT: the tower on Ronald Reagan Int.) Photography was around the perimeter of the Pentagon.
--name-- Who directed this mission?
--Dan-- I'm not certain. It was definitely requested and approved by I'm sure all the appropriate people. I think that the FBI was the initial requester of either that one or yours. I thought it was this one. I'm sure we can -- that can be researched. But it wasn't internally generated. It was definitely a formal request that we do it, and we supported it. So the perimeter shots, quite a few of them.
I think he took video as well as still pictures. And then we took quite a few directly overhead, looking down into the damaged area. By then, it was -- there was still a little bit of smoke, but most of the fire was -- I believe the major fire was out. We still have quite a number of these pictures, the stills, on computer here, if you were interested in them, if you don't have them already.
--name-- Yeah, we probably don't. The -- again, you know, (inaudible) the story for the Army.
--Dan-- And then returned to the base, cleared with Washington. The flight was uneventful. It was extremely interesting, being directly over the top of all of the devastation.
15 --name-- I imagine you've gotten with some of the photographers that were on the scene and gotten some of the pictures from them.
18--name--? There's a guy, a --name--. I don't know if you've got with him yet. --name--. He took quite a number of pictures, and he seemed to have an interest in the aircraft that were on the scene, too. He took quite a
few of them. And some of them are on our wall up front that he took. That's probably another source of possible photos.
--name-- I don't -- we have some aerial photographs, but not --
--name-- Well, these wouldn't be aerial, they would be --
--name-- (inaudible) took (inaudible).
--name-- I can certainly show you all of them that we have.
--Dan-- but that seems to be all the missions that we had related to the Pentagon -- two Fairfax County aircraft on 9/11, the third helicopter on 9/11, which is a private helicopter that we have that was offered up by the owner, that we used for various things that day, and then also the photo mission the next day.
--end of my typing of all of those excerpts--
It is clear to the thorough reader, that your photo posted in this thread is one of the set of photos taken during the next day flight flown by the pilot named Dan, and those photos were taken by a Fairfax Fire Department photographer.
They were handed over to the Army History Unit interviewer by Dan.
The video shot in the heli used by the two pilots, --name-- and Dan on 9/11, together with the FA officials on board, beginning at the small office building about .33 to .36 mile from the Annex ; from that one, the pilots told the interviewer, they had no copy of that.
I also remember that the two hires photos from that heli parked on the grass, were showing at least one tour bus parked just before the overpass on the Pike. And Dan told us that the next day tour buses were there. He parked on 9/12 at the same spot as on 9/11, since that still was a designated heli landing spot.
I also provided them with the original VCR tape (copy) given to Scott Bingham by the FBI from the Citgo.
Official Legal Documents
Pentagon security cameras footage #1 www.youtube.com...
Pentagon security cameras footage #2 www.youtube.com...
Footage from the Citgo cameras www.youtube.com...
Footage from the Doubletree cameras www.judicialwatch.org...
That means that Adam's thesis of an existing partial shadow of a plane flying and passing by the south side of the Citgo gas station is not synchronizing with the movements and reactions of the people seen in the video.
It's 3 seconds too early. No one in the video reacted in that moment as they did when the flash occurred.
And Craig, from the moment on, that I first viewed the testimony of sergeant Lagasse in your team's first video posted here, I was dead sure that there was a plane flying to the North of Citgo on 9/11.
It was the pure body language of this man (Lagasse), expressing his utter amazement when you told him that the cut light poles in the official southbound flightpath did not synchronize at all with his northbound observed flightpath, what convinced me on the spot that this was a genuine and honest testimony, implicating a huge military deception.
"I knew something was wrong. The planes come more from the north and west [to land at Reagan National Airport] not from the south. And not so low."
Velasquez says the gas station's security cameras are close enough to the Pentagon to have recorded the moment of impact. "I've never seen what the pictures looked like," he said. "The FBI was here within minutes and took the film."
Yet the problem with the Park Police helicopter scenario outlined by Sherwood is that its existence is based primarily on spurious evidence. His account is second-hand, and most likely third-hand. As far as I know, this pilot, nor his interview has never surfaced. There is some evidence (movement of debris on the ground) in the Pentagon gate footage of helicopter wash in the vicinity of the Mall gate about 8 seconds (if I recall correctly) after impact. There is the "flash" on the wall in the Citgo video that can be correlated to a low-altitude reflective source in the same general direction at the time of impact. There is an account by a ANC worker who saw a "plane" moments after impact in the same area. Now there is this little radar "track" (I am still suspicious of the Citgo canopy being the culprit in this case). Quite frankly, none of it comes even close to the evidence threshold required to say the darn helicopter ever existed.
Sure wish we had those Pentagon videos the FBI lost
Originally posted by LaBTop
John, on a side note, why are you, the one who clearly spend lots of time and effort on the radar issues of 9/11 and the 9/11 FDR's decoding issues, treated so hostile by the majority of the responders in your "Citgo Ghost" thread? Even straight out condescending. Really like you were the local idiot-savant.
Which you clearly are NOT.
This is by the way the exact same way the JREF migrants here at ATS act against me, as if anybody not choosing their side are idiot-savants, which we definitely are not.
This tactic has all the signs of a funded psychological operation effort to make 9/11 researchers the laughing stock of the Internet.
Originally posted by LaBTopIt is also totally suspicious that the main northern canopy camera was taken away by the FBI the next or the same day.
A helicopter and its crew that are always on standby for “contingency” missions in the Washington area are away from base early this morning conducting a traffic survey, but apparently return at some point before the Pentagon is hit. The crew belongs to the 12th Aviation Battalion. [US Army Center for Military History, 11/14/2001 pdf file; Army Center of Military History, 11/14/2001 pdf file] The 12th Aviation Battalion is stationed at Davison Army Airfield at Fort Belvoir, located 12 miles south of the Pentagon. It is the aviation support unit for the Military District of Washington, and operates UH-1 “Huey” and UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters. [Military District of Washington, 8/2000] According to a chief warrant officer with the unit, the 12th Aviation Battalion has “two crews that are always on standby for any kind of contingency mission.” It is one of these crews that is “out flying around doing a traffic survey.” [Army Center of Military History, 11/14/2001 pdf file] The exact time period during which the crew and their helicopter are away from base is unstated, but they apparently return to Davison Airfield before 9:37 a.m., when the Pentagon is hit (see Shortly Before 9:37 a.m. September 11, 2001). [US Army Center for Military History, 11/14/2001 pdf file] They will be the first crew with the battalion to take off in support of the rescue operations at the Pentagon once the unit’s aircraft are permitted to launch again following the attack. Others members of the 12th Aviation Battalion are also away from base this morning, for weapons training (see 8:46 a.m.-9:37 a.m. September 11, 2001). [Army Center of Military History, 11/14/2001 pdf file]
Entity Tags: 12th Aviation Battalion, Davison Army Airfield
Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline, 9/11 Timeline
“an aviation sergeant with the United States Park Police,” is “in the area [of the Pentagon] and he got a call saying, ‘Try to intercept this plane, try to distract the plane, try to do something to, you know, prevent the plane from going into the Pentagon.’” It is unclear from what Sherwood says whether the helicopter is on the ground or already airborne at this time. In response to the instruction, the helicopter goes “to try to distract” the approaching aircraft :
Shortly Before 9:35 a.m. September 11, 2001: Park Police Helicopter Instructed to Intercept Plane Approaching Pentagon
Nine different fire and medical service units are dispatched to 1003 Wilson Boulevard in Rosslyn, Virginia—within the vicinity of the Pentagon.
Assistant Chief James Schwartz of the Arlington County Fire Department will later recall that, around this time, firefighters are dispatched in response to an alarm at the high-rise USA Today complex in Rosslyn (see (Shortly Before 9:37 a.m.) September 11, 2001). The address of the complex is 1000 and 1110 Wilson Boulevard, suggesting this is in fact the same incident as the “apartment fire” at 1003 Wilson Boulevard.
A US Park Police helicopter that is responding to the attack on the Pentagon and flying above the building transmits a live video feed of the crash scene to the FBI and other agencies, providing them with instant information about the extent of the damage and destruction at the Pentagon. [US Congress. House, 9/11/2002; National Park Service, 9/21/2002] The helicopter, which has the call sign “Eagle I,” is one of two helicopters belonging to the Park Police Aviation Unit that arrived at the Pentagon minutes after the attack there (see Shortly After 9:37 a.m. September 11, 2001). [Rotor and Wing, 11/2001] It has microwave “downlink” capability, which enables its crew to fly over a particular location and transmit instantaneous video images to the Park Police chief’s command post and other locations.
FBI Requests Video of Crash Scene - Shortly after Eagle I arrives over the Pentagon, the crew receives a request from the FBI to send it information using the downlink on their helicopter’s video camera. [McDonnell, 2004, pp. 22 pdf file] According to Sergeant Ronald Galey, the pilot of Eagle I, the FBI arrives on the scene “within 10 minutes or 15 minutes” of his helicopter reaching the Pentagon. Galey will later recall: “We heard from them immediately: ‘Start your downlink, we want to capture everything that we can.’” [US Naval Historical Center, 11/20/2001] The downlink capability then enables the crew of Eagle I “to transmit real-time images and information to people who needed them to make decisions,” according to the National Park Service’s account of 9/11. As well as the FBI, the images are sent to the Secret Service, the Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police, and Park Police headquarters. Eagle I spends “the next four or five hours flying overhead and transmitting video images to the FBI.” [National Park Service, 9/21/2002; McDonnell, 2004, pp. 23 pdf file]
Originally posted by 911files
Originally posted by LaBTopIt is also totally suspicious that the main northern canopy camera was taken away by the FBI the next or the same day.
Why do you keep perpetuating this lie? The only thing the FBI took was the video. Show me a property receipt where the FBI took a camera at anytime. They do have to give receipts for everything they take, or did you not know that? It would look something like this one they gave for the Pentagon videos/hard drives.