Thanks John, for that depository of your old FOIA acquired files once posted at AA77flight.com
One thing I still have to clear up : my remarks about the ASCE report angle of 42°.
When I was contemplating again on the below map with my deduction of the real attack angle which Google Earth provides, and its accompanying yellow
flight path line, based on two well-known by now, and also well-defined points; one thing came to mind, that I could calculate the ASCE internal
damage angle from this :
1. The last recorded Lat / Long positions of AA 77 that can be found in the recovered FDR.
That's the green dot I drew, the starting point of my yellow colored AA 77 flight path line, south-east of the CITGO gas station
2. The impact was on column 14 head on, but since I can't find a precise GSM value for that exact position of that column on 9/11, I used a
substitute, which is also very precise, enough for our purpose. It's clear to see in a few Riskus photos, that the broken off tree stump, left over
from the trunk of the tree that AA 77 must have hit head-on before hitting column 14, is situated nearly exactly below the center line through the
impact hole at column 14 and at the re-bar filled, second floor concrete slab.
GE gave me the heading angle, when I drew that yellow line from the last FDR position to that tree's trunk, even better to see in the 1999 GE
snapshot of the Pentagon area by observing the starting point of the foliage shadow.
Since I read in many posts, that in the Pentagon area the difference between magnetic heading and true north heading is 10.2°, it's easy to
calculate the resulting ASCE internal damage path angle :
62.21° true north heading - 10.2 = 52.0° magnetic heading.
That's thus 90° - 52.0° = 38° to the perpendicular on the west wall which is not the ASCE report's 42°.
That yellow line makes an angle with the 90° perpendicular on the west wall of 36° when measured with my graduated arc.
I measured the angle with the west wall to be 54°, thus to the perpendicular on the west wall is 90° - 54° = 36° which is not the ASCE report's
And one thing is also clear, there is a consistent 2° difference between what I measure with a good graduated plastic arc, and what the GE heading
calculator gives as their angles.
And I constantly use the GE function to reset the true north and true 90°-down map-view :
GE-menu : View-Reset-Tilt and Compass,
to be sure that I always have the exact same standard map views to work with.
One possible reason for the GE to arc-measuring anomaly could be something I discovered during enlarging of a GE map with the mouse its
In extreme enlarging cases, the heading angle of a fixed position, indicated by the little hand or bullseye, does move away considerably while the
Lat/Long position changes too.
However, the fixed starting position of the point on that map where my yellow line starts, clearly does not move during extreme GE-enlarging of the
When I then re-position my little hand icon back over the starting point of my yellow line, the exact same Lat/Long is indicated again from the
I do this to be able to measure angles with my graduated arc as exact as can be. And at the same time, being able to compare them with the GE heading
angle GE provides in its small Ruler _
For those reading this, and asking themselves what rare breed I must be, the answer is in a description from my home country. I am, literally
translated, what they call, an "ant-fornicator". With the accompanying occasional smile...
In your English it is something I can't type here (ant f......), but I hope you get it.
Someone dedicated to an extreme amount of detailed evidence, so he will be able to weed out his own research mistakes, and at the same time mistakes
made by others (f.ex. peer-reviewers).
That is the reason I also still have questions about this ASCE report drawing, where their 42° impact line when extended, does not fit the "exit"
And I do not understand how they superimposed their drawing of the columns and impact path plane, and internal damage drawing; over that pre-9/11
Because their plane cuts with its fuselage right through that generator trailer.
Either the fence corner in the underlaying zoomed-in aerial picture is situated in a very wrong position compared to their drawing, or their picture
If I see it right, the nose of their drawn-in plane does impact the tree stump in front of the later impact hole at column 14.
There's a faint greenish shadow of that tree under the plane's cockpit and nose cone, in front of column 16 and 15.
And I also see the two other trees in front of the west wall (at the dividing line between Wedge 1 and 2, in front of columns 3, 2 and 1 of Wedge 1,
and of columns 2, 3 and 4 of Wedge 2), The firefighter truck was parked a few meters northwards beside those two other trees, and got hit by debris at
impact, which caused its rear to be set on fire.
So, yes, it seems as if the overlay of the ASCE drawing on that aerial photo of the Pentagon's west wall is correct.
Why is it then, that my GE map with my drawn-in yellow line does not lead the plane's fuselage over the generator trailer, inside that fence corner
It misses the corner by a few meters !
And I got the last FDR position exactly right on my GE map, and i.m.h.o., the impact point too.
EDIT : After long staring at that impact point, I suddenly saw that the angle of the SHADOW of the protruding part of that west wall is a quite sharp
one in that 1999 GE aerial map.
So I made a positional error for the trunk's position in my above last posted picture of an impact angle of 62.21° true north, look below to see my
correction for that impact angle (GE heading angle in its small Ruler window) :
An additional error made by me, I just noticed. I placed the end of my impact line of 62.21° at the second Ring-D, and that must be of course at the
Ring-C wall with the AE Drive.
Now it suddenly doesn't look anymore as if the exit hole is the end-point of that impact-angle line !
It's too close i.m.h.o. to that connection bridge between Ring C and Ring B.
But it's not a real big difference, so perhaps, if someone comes forward with the precise impact Lat/Long values
, I can see if the resulting
exit hole position in Ring C will match what we see on photos of it.
Thus, the real angle of impact (the heading angle in the GE small Ruler window) is 64.64° true north.
64.64° true north heading - 10.2 = 54.44° magnetic heading.
That's thus 90° - 54.44° = 35.56° to the perpendicular on the west wall which is by far not the ASCE report's 42°.
I measure 34° to the perpendicular on the west wall with my graduated arc. Again, nearly 2° difference with GE its offered heading angle.
I really would like to know what on earth that consistent 2° difference between hand-measured angles, and GE angles can cause.
I have trouble letting the wing tips hit the cut lamp poles 2, 3 and 5 in this i.m.h.o.p. best official flight path drawing on the 7/9/2001 GE map, by
me, based on the known last FDR Lat/Long position and the tree trunk impact point under the column 14 double window spanning impact hole as seen in
the Riskus photos.
Note that the Lat/Long values at the center bottom of this last Dutch GE map I used, are the last known FDR its latitude and longitude values of Lat
38°52'8.77" N, and Long 77°3'45.82" W.