you refuse to watch it so how can you make any claims about facts? Do you want me to recite 5 hours of video? grow a pair.
New Study from Pilots for 9/11 Truth: No Boeing 757 Hit the Pentagon Share Article Pilots for 9/11 Truth obtained black box data from the government under the Freedom of Information Act for AA Flight 77, which The 9/11 Report claims hit the Pentagon. Analysis of the data contradicts the official account in direction, approach, and altitude. The plane was too high to hit lamp posts and would have flown over the Pentagon, not impacted with its ground floor. This result confirms and strengthens the previous findings of Scholars for 9/11 Truth that no Boeing 757 hit the buillding. According to the report issued by Pilots for 9/11 Truth, there are major differences between the official account and the flight data: a. The NTSB Flight Path Animation approach path and altitude does not support official events. b. All Altitude data shows the aircraft at least 300 feet too high to have struck the light poles. c. The rate of descent data is in direct conflict with the aircraft being able to impact the light poles and be captured in the Dept of Defense "5 Frames" video of an object traveling nearly parallel with the Pentagon lawn. d. The record of data stops at least one second prior to official impact time. e. If data trends are continued, the aircraft altitude would have been at least 100 feet too high to have hit the Pentagon. https://www.prweb.com/releases/2007/06/prweb534642.htm and this corresponds precisely with the e4b flight path as seen on tv!
So now we are flying a plane 300 ft over the Pentagon and then taking the FDR black box and placing it in the wreckage of the building. Damn this is one hell of a complicated plan …
Beta claims the 757 was going 540++mph, thats not possible either at sea level. shouldnt be quoting debunker sites
I only know what didnt hit the pentagon nice try! I do forensic examinations talk to a psycholigist if you want to know why
you should pick a new profession because you are horrible at this one. Posting gifs isn’t forensic analysis…
wow brilliant!! its the proof of the result of forensic analysis. got anything what so ever of value to add other than meaningless heckling?
Planes don't emit vapor trails at ground or low level. That only happens at high altitude. So whatever that object is it can't be a jet aircraft. But a missile will do that. And what about Rumsfeld's admission when he said, 'and the missile that hit the Pentagon' ?
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-scam-exposed-in-all-its-glory.458597/page-28 I posted a synopsis in the last 2 posts.
Whatever it is it's not from a jet aircraft. You can spend years at a busy airport watching jet aircraft take off and you'll never see that.
He certainly did say that about the missile. I saw the vid. Read the above again: planes do not emit that 'white plume' at ground level.
No, but then you'll never see them colliding with lamp posts, taxis, generators and doing what engine-wrecking speeds. He said this exactly: "They [find a lot] and any number of terrorist efforts have been dissuaded, deterred or stopped by good intelligence gathering and good preventive work. It is a truth that a terrorist can attack any time, any place, using any technique and it’s physically impossible to defend at every time and every place against every conceivable technique. Here we’re talking about plastic knives and using an American Airlines flight filed with our citizens, (garbled) missile to damage this building and similar (inaudible) that damaged the World Trade Center." Conspiracy theorist have deceptively changed the bolded garbled/unclear words to "and the" , from what he almost certainly said "as a". He is referring to "using a passenger jet" which logic denotes that he means AS something. Ergo a missile. Simple. See above" See this: https://videos.dailymail.co.uk/vide...0452680261470/640x360_4177810452680261470.mp4
Sure it's possible. The problem is when you do it you're going to trash the plane some. All the planes approached with steep dives over several minutes, no flaps and accelerating. Boeing and other plane manufacturers issue a VNE (velocity never exceed) as a legal fall back. In reality their planes can handle way more than this. Sure, once the plane starts to level off the drag will start to gradually slow it, but none of these planes did that. The impact for the Pentagon is estimated at 530 mph (460 knots) over the Navy Annexe. aircraft performance - Can a Boeing 767-200 fly at 510 knots at a height of 400 metres? - Aviation Stack Exchange "The speed is secondary - what determines the physical limits of the Boeing 767 is Mach number and dynamic pressure. 510 kts at 400 m in standard atmospheric conditions equals Mach 0.775. This is well within the limits of the Boeing 767. But at 400 m it produces a dynamic pressure of 40,567 N/m², and that is too much. The maximum dive speed vD of the 767 is 420 kts. This only means that flying at 510 kts is illegal, but it is still possible. If the airplane dove down to those 400m from enough altitude, it would entirely be capable to reach this speed, but would slow down once it stops diving. There are several effects which can cause a catastrophic failure when flying too fast: When the aircraft flies into a gust, the resulting load factor can overstress the structure. When the pilot commands large control inputs, he will also overstress the structure. Flutter might also cause structural damage. The maximum Mach number of the 767 is 0.91 (0.05 above the maximum cruise Mach number, which is 0.86), and this corresponds to 523 kts in 11,000 m. Thankfully, certification requirements demand a margin of 20% between the maximum speeds and flutter onset speeds, so flutter might be close, but is still tens of miles per hour away when diving to 510 kts. Remember, to experience flutter you need also to excite the motion first. Here is a good discussion of this topic. In short, flying a Boeing 767 in 400 m at 510 kts is not recommended, but is entirely possible and most likely even safe when done in calm air and by a calm pilot. It only won't last long, because the e In short, flying a Boeing 767 in 400 m at 510 kts is not recommended, but is entirely possible and most likely even safe when done in calm air ngines will not produce enough thrust to maintain that speed. Flying this dive requires guts, but no special skills."
