911myths.com : WHY FAKING >73° BANK-ANGLES for a NoC FLYING PLANE.?

a reply to: skyeagle409

It has been shown that eyewitnesses accounts are highly flawed in regard to air disasters.

Has there been a scientific study that confirms this?

If so could you post the paper?

a reply to: Informer1958

We can take a look here.

For Air Crash Detectives, Seeing Isn’t Believing

WASHINGTON— HUNDREDS of people watched the crash of American Airlines Flight 587 near Kennedy International Airport in New York on Nov. 12, and in the course of 93 seconds they apparently saw hundreds of different things.

According to the National Transportation Safety Board, which announced this month that it had gathered 349 eyewitness accounts through interviews or written statements, 52 percent said they saw a fire while the plane was in the air. The largest number (22 percent) said the fire was in the fuselage, but a majority cited other locations, including the left engine, the right engine, the left wing, the right wing or an unspecified engine or wing.

Nearly one of five witnesses said they saw the plane make a right turn; an equal number said it was a left turn. Nearly 60 percent said they saw something fall off the plane; of these, 13 percent said it was a wing. (In fact, it was the vertical portion of the tail.)

www.nytimes.com...


Reliability of Eyewitness Reports to a Major Aviation Accident

We have long known eyewitness testimony to be less than completely
reliable (Loftus 1996; Toglia, Reed, Ross & Lindsay, 2006).

At an airshow in 1952, a supersonic fighter disintegrated in the air causing the death of both crew and 29 spectators (Staff, 1952). Over 100,000 people witnessed the accident. A public appeal was put out for witness accounts and
photographs to help solve the mystery, resulting in several thousand letters being collected. Rivas and Bullen (2008) found “many of the accounts are touchingly detailed and well intentioned, but the whole of the vast mail was of little use” (p.186). The vital clue that led to determination of probable cause was supplied by a cine film.

The in-flight breakup happened in less than a second, and almost all the eyewitnesses, including experienced pilots, gave grossly inaccurate accounts when compared to the film record.

commons.erau.edu...

www.abovetopsecret.com...
The post where you can find the video in which Darius Prather said he and his colleague saw the NoC plane damage done to two lamp posts on Columbia Pike, not Route 27 :

--- Darius Prather
20:33 : one of its wings passed over the parking place in front of us.
20:48 : we did see the damage to the two street lamp posts that's out there ---

LT : That parking place was just behind the ANC's stone&steel bars fence, and those two street lamp posts were standing on Columbia Pike.! NOT on Route 27.! Look where he points at.

And this is the video where you can hear him say that sentence at 20:48 :
www.youtube.com...

Particularly this post shows the already doubting reader, that there's more than an DFDR chip, 5 broken light-poles, a generator's roof gouge, an internal debris path and an "exit hole" to the Pentagon attack full story.

Every single indication in those earliest witness interviews points at a totally different flight path than the official one.
Its the positional specifics which stand out in all these witness statements. And every single one of them is devastating for the official story.

On top of that we have the additional evidence from the 4 ANC personnel, from multiple EARLY interview sources per person.
Especially the other, 2 Pentagon Police officers interviews are devastating for the official SoC theory.
Since its utterly impossible for an eyewitness like Sgt Lagasse, standing under a wide ceiling, with the whole northern front of the station's shop behind him, two low foliage trees to his right and a row of high trees on the other side of Joyce Street to his left, while looking northwards as seen in the FOIA freed CITGO video, to mistake a NoC flying plane for a SoC flying plane, flying THUS behind his back and fully blocked from his view by that building.
It was physically impossible for Sgt Lagasse to even see a glimpse of that officially proposed SoC flying plane.

And all of you OS-trusters can throw as many psychological witness reliability reports at us as you want, not one sane reader will believe you, after viewing all these videos of honest men who saw that plane flying to the north of the CITGO gas station, let it be, after additionally reading all my explanations of the earliest impact witness statements from Route 27, which clearly indicate a NoC approach by that attack plane.

And you can also keep on trying to confuse other readers by constantly posting clearly wrong air speeds for a NoC plane, while all these sane witnesses saw with their own eyes that specific NoC plane flying at the north of the CITGO, which thus instantly proves that it could fly a NoC trajectory, and also instantly proves that it had to be flying much slower than the officially proposed SoC plane, with its offered crazy end speed of 470 KTS, around 815 km/hr or 0.8 times the sound barrier speed. In densest air at ground level, not 30,000 feet up in the air, where the air density is much thinner.

And the moment you start understanding, that all these eyewitnesses were just as patriotic to the max as you, and still not one of them ever withdrew their statements about what they witnessed on 9/11, you should start wondering why the positional data from the NoC witnesses are in complete disrespect of the other positional data for the SoC physical evidence.

I too have had years of doubt. Viewing these 5 broken light-poles, the internal damage path, and asking myself, why would some heinous planners go to such ends to persist that path in the minds of all 9/11 data readers and viewers.

And every time, those interviews made it clear to me, that those 5 SoC pointers must have been falsified, and so perfect, that any not too deep delving reader would quickly accept such abundance of physical evidence, and go on to the next 9/11 challenge.
Because planners of the biggest false flag operation in history, knew very well that they had to use an abundance of false evidence trails, to be able to withstand the growing opposition in the years after their 9/11 plan came into existence.
It was that, or their neck in a noose. Like Saddam Hussein. Not such a difficult decision, and money was surely no game changer.

History Navy Mil : The Pentagon on 9/11/2001 Very interesting reading, for some facts instead of rumors about the Pentagon construction details as in place on 9/11, and a detailed report of all events after the impact..
Have a look at the top of page 81, the "Inbound Plane Rumors and Evacuations" chapter, covering a few pages :

The first warning came before the 10:15 a.m. E Ring collapse, when FBI agent Chris Combs received a call through his FBI radio that a hijacked plane thought to be headed toward Washington was only 20 minutes away.

The problem is, that Combs knew by his direct line with his FBI radio, while the FBI was in tele conference with the FAA at Reagan since 09:40, that that plane, UA93, had already crashed 12 minutes earlier, at 10:03 in Shanksville PA.
So, why this strange full retreat, when this man must have known that there was no threat anymore? And several more full retreats followed that day, and even the next morning....Five in total..

One of the additional things that made me doubt, were these totally stripped from its concrete, sand and pebbles, left behind re-bar "pillars", stripped from bottom to ceiling. These were square concrete columns with a special double helix curled-up steel re-bar reinforcement in them. This is a picture of ONLY these re-bar remnants of a TOTALLY stripped from its concrete, bungling former square Pentagon reinforced concrete column :



We also see the next formerly square column to its left, stripped circularly from its outer concrete and showing these telling remnant ribs where the circular re-bar is still situated just under the concrete surface. The further from an RDX-type HE explosion, the less stripping effect. A number 9 with a dot under it is painted in yellow on that left from the totally stripped column remnant, which is then column 8. If that is really column nine as described in the ASCE Report and the ACAAR report, then the explosive force on that column, 6 columns from the, by the nose cone impacted, column 14, makes you doubt the OS even further.
We should expect to see in fact these two following kind of damages, when columns deeper in the debris path were impacted by heavier parts of the plane that still had enough mass and speed to inflict serious damage to these extra strong, square concrete plus re-bar, columns:




Since that total concrete stripping effect is well known for high velocity explosives like RDX and others, that have brisance speeds of over 8000 meter per second. And thermobaric bombs have reportedly brisance speeds of over 20000 m/sec after ignition. These speeds also bleed off quickly over distance, but will strip all these columns within a radius of 10 to 15 meters from all there concrete, depending on the amount used, and the shape used.
There are also columns photographed with a lot less damage, like the two above examples, but its quite impossible to find out their original positions, i.o.w., how deep in the building?

And then the realization hits in, that we are officially talking here about an outer wall impacting SoC plane with a speed at impact of max 470 KTS = a mere 242 m/sec (however by far not anymore that speed in the milliseconds after that). The outer brick and limestone wall was reinforced with structural steel and KEVLAR nettings. The deceleration and bleed-off of the plane debris particles their speed started directly after the first plane metal from its nose, cockpit and first class cabin deformed in the first milliseconds already.
And yes, 220,000 kg of mass will deliver quite a punch. But just as in boxing, directly after the hit, the exponentially growing deceleration hits in. Caused by the snow shovel effect of all that heaping up building debris in front of the massive front of plane debris and west wall remnants.

RDX its explosive gas and metal lining particles their initial speed is thus 33 times faster than those plane-debris-particles and jet-fuel-particles at their initial first milliseconds after impact.
Those plane debris parts will have lost quite a bit of their initial speed, and increasingly more after each impact with dry-walls, steel cabinets, tables, seats, computers, cubicles, wooden doors, steel door frames and reinforced concrete columns, light brick walls, first and second floor slabs and lowered ceilings with all their cooling and heating pipes and air-con equipment.

I do not believe that relatively slow plane parts could ever strip such a reinforced concrete to the bare steel re-bar. That can only be done with a lot faster particles, especially the ones thrown around when a HE explosive is ignited, and such brisance can perform that stripping, not these 33 times slower plane debris parts.

Then you start to look at this next drawing with another opinion, that of doubt.
Doubting if it perhaps were explosives that made all that extra damage, to create the illusion of a debris path.
Without that dubious "exit" hole, which looks awfully like a wall breaching hole made from the outside with det-cord, to create an entry hole, it would be much more difficult to come to a consensus, where exactly you had to construct a main debris direction line.
There are a few astray regions, where relatively heavy damage occurred, without logical debris paths.
And there was a copious amount of time to arrange some plane debris on the outskirts of that entry hole, to make it look as an exit hole. Which could have been done very early already, or during that first full rescuers evacuation after 10:15 a.m.

SOURCE :
This is a somewhat exaggerated conclusion in the above paper on the discrepancies in the reported event times for the collapse time of the Wedge I portion of the Pentagon's west wall and the UA93 crash time, but this writer's time line observations are correct, there is something fishy about the huge difference in reported times :
FBI Agent Combs and Fire Chief Schwartz manipulated 911 Pentagon Firemen to evacuate at 10:15 a.m. for the wrong reason : a second plane heading for the Pentagon.

Flight UA93 was however already 12 minutes down, as reported by Minnesota Air Guard pilot Steven O'Brien in his C-130 who said over the radio that he saw dark smoke rising from the crash site in Pennsylvania 2 minutes after 10:03:11, the official crash time of UA93.
The ACAAR report time-line even gives a far too late time : 10:37 a.m. for the UA93 crash time. (Page 200 of the ACAAR time-line).
The Arlington County After-Action Report (ACAAR)) printed this line :

10:37 a.m. United Airlines Flight #93 crashes 80 miles south of Pittsburgh, PA.

Chief Schwartz ordered a full evacuation at 10:15 AM, based on the remarks of FBI Agent Combs that the FAA said a second plane was on its way to the Pentagon, while that plane was known to the FAA to have CRASHED, already at 10:03:11 a.m. And since the FAA was video teleconferencing already from 9:40 a.m. on, together with the FBI (see ACAAR-proof further down), Combs was either confused, or worse, used a lie to force all nosy bystanders away to make the disaster area free to roam for spec-ops teams, to finish their jobs, and blow that circular hole in that C-Ring brick wall with a Wall Breaching Unit, to have faster access to the ONI mainframes without prying eyes or cameras.

The next three evacuations were full site-clearing evacuations caused by reports of additional threats of hijacked aircraft heading toward the Pentagon.
The first of these occurred at about 10:15 a.m. on September 11, when Special Agent Combs told Chief Schwartz another hijacked airliner was flying on a trajectory toward Washington, DC, and was 20 minutes away. Special Agent Combs got this information from the command center at the FBI WFO, which was in direct contact with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). Using a radio belonging to an airport firefighter, he confirmed the information directly with the control tower at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport.

Realize that Combs ought to know that UA93 had crashed already at 10:03 a.m., but still he managed to get Schwartz so far to fully retreat with all his personnel from the west wall scene and retreat to take shelter under the overpass bridge in Route 27.

This is the 9/11/2001 Pentagon attack coverage by TV-station CBS 9, from 9:54:32 EDT up to 0:41:41 minutes later (10:36 a.m. ).
Click for VIDEO.

At 15:42 in the video, the reporter says "--Another explosion of some sort, now it could be a secondary explosion here from something happening, we heard a loud POP --".
At 15:58 in the video he says "--because we had a number of smaller explosions after the fire occurred.--".
At 19:42 another reporter Frank Cussack says "--I'm on the west grounds of the Washington Monument (LT : other side of the Potomac) and I think I can answer Dave Statter's question about that secondary explosion, it wasn't an explosion, it was the sonic boom of jet-fighters that were scrambled from Andrews Air-force base, we believe, they just circled the Washington area flying from the east up to the west and they were in a hurry and they were high up in the air. So jet fighters, at least one, probably two were scrambled, hopefully its a precautionary measure.--"

It's obvious that this second reporter never heard those secondary explosions, which could of course have been firetruck tires blowing up from the heat of the fire in its back, cutting torches their gas cylinders, even helicopter fuel containers, or whatever other lame excuse.

The Wedge I portion was still standing, so it's before 10:15, when that portion collapsed. It's easy to pinpoint that moment, since we know the start time of the video, so that secondary explosion must have happened a few seconds before 10:10:14 a.m., the reporter needed some seconds to contact his editor to put him on broadcast again.
9:54:32 + 15:42 = (15:42 - 5:28) + 10:00:00 = 10:10:14. Let's say, around 5 minutes before the Wedge I its E-Ring partially collapsed. And in the video you see the roof line is still intact.

At the White House, the video teleconference was conducted from the Situation Room by Richard Clark, a special assistant to the president long involved in counter-terrorism. Logs indicate it began at 9:25 and included the CIA; the FBI; the departments of State, Justice, and Defense; the FAA; and the White House shelter. The FAA and CIA joined at 9:40.

Air traffic controllers have a direct pipeline into the FAA Office of Civil Aviation Security, which means the FAA is advising the FBI and FBI Special Agent Combs was well aware of the fact that UA93 had crashed in the Shanksville field at 10:05 AM; using reports by C-130 pilot Steven O’Brien. There is no reason for FBI Special Agent Combs to use any fireman radio to confirm anything with the FAA, because the FAA is teleconferencing with the FBI directly to receive live air traffic control updates on a minute-by-minute basis.
ACAAR page 52 continues :

Chief Schwartz issued a warning with each flight status update until the last warning when the airliner went below radar coverage in Pennsylvania, an estimated 4 minutes flying time from the Pentagon. Five minutes later, Special Agent Combs told him the airplane had crashed in Pennsylvania and the all clear was sounded. At 10:37 a.m., United Airlines Flight #93 crashed into a field near Shanksville, PA. The heroic actions of doomed passengers had thwarted the terrorist plan.

The authorities responsible for ACAAR sworn testimony are living inside a Combs/Schwartz-created bubble and the ACAAR is deliberately stating an incorrect UA93 crash time by more than a half hour. The reason that we see this 10:37 AM UA93 crash time is because FBI Special Agent Combs and Chief Schwartz are desperately trying to cover up the truth about exactly when the E-ring roof collapsed. Time-stamped Live News Video shows that the E-ring parapet wall began to collapse at exactly 10:15:16 AM. However, the corrupt ACAAR will report that the E-ring roof collapsed at 9:57 AM (Page 200).

See my channel CBS 9 linked to video, where you can easily measure that E-Ring's west wall collapse-time against the starting-time of that TV News video.

a reply to: LaBTop

Great post, thanks for the hard work...

a reply to: LaBTop

The post where you can find the video in which Darius Prather said he and his colleague saw the NoC plane damage done to two lamp posts on Columbia Pike, not Route 27 :

It has been shown that eyewitnesses accounts are so unreliable that investigators usually use other means to determine the cause if an air disaster. As a reminder:

Reliability of Eyewitness Reports to a Major Aviation Accident

We have long known eyewitness testimony to be less than completely
reliable (Loftus 1996; Toglia, Reed, Ross & Lindsay, 2006).

commons.erau.edu...

So once again, documented physical evidence does not support claims that American 77 flew a NoC flight path.

a reply to: LaBTop

And all of you OS-trusters can throw as many psychological witness reliability reports at us as you want, not one sane reader will believe you, after viewing all these videos of honest men who saw that plane flying to the north of the CITGO gas station, let it be, after additionally reading all my explanations of the earliest impact witness statements from Route 27, which clearly indicate a NoC approach by that attack plane.

That is false and here is further proof that American 77 flew a SoC flight path.

Depiction Proof: American 77 Flew SoC Flight Path

About your eyewitness accounts, let's do a review.

For Air Crash Detectives, Seeing Isn’t Believing

WASHINGTON— HUNDREDS of people watched the crash of American Airlines Flight 587 near Kennedy International Airport in New York on Nov. 12, and in the course of 93 seconds they apparently saw hundreds of different things.

Nearly one of five witnesses said they saw the plane make a right turn; an equal number said it was a left turn. Nearly 60 percent said they saw something fall off the plane; of these, 13 percent said it was a wing. (In fact, it was the vertical portion of the tail.)

www.nytimes.com...

In other words, there is no case for a NoC flight path and documented physical evidence of a SoC light path speaks louder than words.

a reply to: LaBTop

RDX its explosive gas and metal lining particles their initial speed is thus 33 times faster than those plane-debris-particles and jet-fuel-particles at their initial first milliseconds after impact.

Let's do a review about RDX..

RDX

Demolishing steel columns is a bit more difficult, as the dense material is much stronger. For buildings with a steel support structure, blasters typically use the specialized explosive material cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine, called RDX for short. RDX-based explosive compounds expand at a very high rate of speed, up to 27,000 feet per second (8,230 meters per second). Instead of disintegrating the entire column, the concentrated, high-velocity pressure slices right through the steel, splitting it in half. Additionally, blasters may ignite dynamite on one side of the column to push it over in a particular direction.

To ignite both RDX and dynamite, you must apply a severe shock. In building demolition, blasters accomplish this with a blasting cap, a small amount of explosive material (called the primer charge) connected to some sort of fuse. The traditional fuse design is a long cord with explosive material inside. When you ignite one end of the cord, the explosive material inside it burns at a steady pace, and the flame travels down the cord to the detonator on the other end. When it reaches this point, it sets off the primary charge.

science.howstuffworks.com...

Now, with that fact in hand, provide evidence that RDX was used at the Pentagon during 9/11.

Just to let you know that there were no secondary demo explosions as American 77 slammed into the Pentagon, which in itself, further debunks the claim that explosives were planted at the Pentagon.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Since all eyewitness accounts are discredited, then you have no evidence to support your OS of the Pentagon.

That means ANY Government reports as well.

a reply to: LaBTop

From your reference:

Air traffic controllers have a direct pipeline into the FAA Office of Civil Aviation Security, which means the FAA is advising the FBI and FBI Special Agent Combs was well aware of the fact that UA93 had crashed in the Shanksville field at 10:05 AM; using reports by C-130 pilot Steven O’Brien.

That pretty much sums it up that United 93 did in fact, crash near Shanksville despite claims that no aircraft crashed in that field.

At 15:42 in the video, the reporter says "--Another explosion of some sort, now it could be a secondary explosion here from something happening, we heard a loud POP --".

At 15:58 in the video he says "--because we had a number of smaller explosions after the fire occurred.--".

That had nothing to do with demo explosives. Explosions during building fires are quite common.

Severed Gas Line Fuels Fire After Car Crashes into Cafe

Firefighters responded to an initial 911 call of a car driving into a building in the 700 block of Montana Avenue. Moments later it became a fire as well, as leaking natural gas ignited. Early on a series of small explosions could be heard, said Luis Rodriguez, a tailor at the dry cleaners across Montana Avenue, seeing smoke rise when he looked outside.

www.nbclosangeles.com...

a reply to: Informer1958

Since all eyewitness accounts are discredited, then you have no evidence to support your OS of the Pentagon.

There is radar data that tracked American 77 to the Pentagon. B-757 wreckage was recovered from inside and outside the Pentagon, not to mention that human remains from passengers and crew of American 77 were recovered and have been identified.

We also have altitude data on American 77.

American 77 FDR Pressure Altitude Data

American 77 Flight Path

We have documented physical evidence inside and outside the Pentagon that depicts the SoC flight path of American 77, but most of all, American Airlines, operator of American 77, announced the loss of American 77 at the Pentagon.

a reply to: skyeagle409

C-130 pilot Steven O’Brien did not witness any crash period.

O'Brien witness some kind of crash scene while flying over, furthermore he is an eyewitness and according to you ALL eyewitness accounts are no good.

a reply to: skyeagle409

There is radar data that tracked American 77 to the Pentagon. B-757 wreckage was recovered from inside and outside the Pentagon, not to mention that human remains from passengers and crew of American 77 were recovered and have been identified.

All confirmed by eyewitness accounts, and as you said ALL eyewitness are not credible any longer.

a reply to: LaBTop

Chief Schwartz ordered a full evacuation at 10:15 AM, based on the remarks of FBI Agent Combs that the FAA said a second plane was on its way to the Pentagon, while that plane was known to the FAA to have CRASHED, already at 10:03:11 a.m.

Further confirmation that United 93 crashed near Shanksville.

And since the FAA was video teleconferencing already from 9:40 a.m. on, together with the FBI (see ACAAR-proof further down), Combs was either confused, or worse, used a lie to force all nosy bystanders away to make the disaster area free to roam for spec-ops teams, to finish their jobs, and blow that circular hole in that C-Ring brick wall with a Wall Breaching Unit, to have faster access to the ONI mainframes without prying eyes or cameras.

The landing gear from American 77 punched out the C-ring hole, not explosives. Note the tire and wheel rim outside the C-ring hole.

C-ring Hole Wreckage

a reply to: skyeagle409

Chief Schwartz ordered a full evacuation at 10:15 AM, based on the remarks of FBI Agent Combs that the FAA said a second plane was on its way to the Pentagon, while that plane was known to the FAA to have CRASHED, already at 10:03:11 a.m.

Not credible.

According to you, all eyewitness and government hear say accounts can not be trusted and we all know how the government loves to lie.

a reply to: skyeagle409

The landing gear from American 77 punched out the C-ring hole, not explosives. Note the tire and wheel rim outside the C-ring hole.

There is no evidence that can prove your OS claim of the C- ring hole.

The landing gear could have been planted there for all we know.

a reply to: skyeagle409

There is radar data that tracked American 77 to the Pentagon. B-757 wreckage was recovered from inside and outside the Pentagon, not to mention that human remains from passengers and crew of American 77 were recovered and have been identified.

We also have altitude data on American 77.

So said the government, who are well known to manipulate data to fit an event. They can not be trusted especially when there is proof the government covered up their blunders during 911.

a reply to: Informer1958

C-130 pilot Steven O’Brien did not witness any crash period.

O'Brien witness some kind of crash scene while flying over, furthermore he is an eyewitness and according to you ALL eyewitness accounts are no good.

The aircraft that struck the Pentagon was American 77, which was confirmed by ATC radar and by American Airlines.