with comment inserts in video...

enjoy..

AA77 Maneuver

wow that was cool [salute] ....

what would cause it to stop recording there?......and does this mean, a 757 did hit the pentagon?....and is it possible it could have been remote controlled?..

it means the aircraft in that video did not hit the light poles.. thats all...

dont know if it was a 757.. or remotely guided... but its HIGHLY unlikely Hani controlled it.

Outstanding work johndoeX. Freaking amazing. Ain't no Hani Hanjour behind that "stick" I hear the details of how the plane made this 330 degree turn dropping 7,000 ft. in 2 minutes and it sounds "wow, must be one hellava ride." Then I see your vid from the FDR and words don't cover it. Thanks. I'll spread it far and wide.

simply amazing.......

When I saw Jhondoex the first day on this forum... my first thought was: This is the man!

But... btw.... you pilot... how difficult is this spiral manuveur ? (in B757) I know it is hard to explaine it to "non pilot"... but to me it must be VERY difficult... you know... it is not just "stearing" ?? Or what ?

One must know EXACTLY what he is doing ?

Excellent JDX.

Points:

The text slides seem to go by too quickly. I'm not through reading when they disappear. I can play it again, though.

I would like to see a slide at the beginning explaining what this is, where the data came from, how it was analyzed to create this animation and by whom (not names, but qualifications). As an interested, intelligent observer with no background in aeronautics, I have no clue.

I would leave out any 'clever' or 'sarcastic' commentary. Just keep it to the facts. This isn't funny. I know Dylan can get away with that in LC but I'm not sure it is a good idea in every case. Just MO.

-----

Questions I have at this point are, How do we know that the data from this black box came from flight 77 and not some other aircraft executing these maneuvers either before or after 9/11?

Is it possible from this point for whatever plane this is to completely MISS the pentagon (doing a fly over) landing at Reagan International?

Is it possible to completely FAKE this data one way or the other. In other words, how can we be certain of the authenticity of the data?

To: Painter
#1 We don't and we can't, until we obtain the crime scene photo evidence (pending) of the actual box recovery in the Pentagon rubble. At some point, people are going to have to believe SOMETHING. Unless we living in the Matrix and nothing is real anymore.

#2 Very possible to miss/flyover, extremely highly unlikely a Reagan landing could be made at this point however. Impossible I would even say yes.

#3 Anything is possible, but refer to #1

/thanks

Great work indeed!

The full description and where it came from is to the right of the video. Open the commentary.

There is a pause button on the video. Its my first video.. sorry.. i dont have a Universal Studios budget or professional editor. ;)


Inserted comments in the video are meant to be mocking the official story. Its part of the effect for the video. The comments do not make fun of the emotional part of that day, the comments make fun of the story we are expected to believe.


Everybodys' a critic... ;)

I appreciate it though.. thanks pantier...

[cheers]

METAR KDCA 111251Z 35005KT 10SM CLR 21/14 A3021
SPECI KDCA 111341Z 33010KT 10SM CLR 23/14 A3022
METAR KDCA 111351Z 34009KT 10SM CLR 23/14 A3023
METAR KDCA 111451Z 32008KT 4SM HZ CLR 24/14 A3022
METAR KDCA 111551Z 33009G15KT 7SM CLR 26/14 A3021

Wow, JDX.

Excellent stuff bro. Exactly what we need. Will forward to every pilot I know.

This video has stirred up 6 pages so far on the Sternfannetwork...

http://www.sternfannetwork.com/forum/showt...15&pagenumber=1

I feel the need to correct those poor souls... unless someone beats me to it..

There is a way to deal with each situation.

uploaded to google as well...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3221196662653785623

Thanks johndoeX. Spreading it where I can.

i was told that there was an error factor of 300 feet. wouldn't that mean that the altitude was anywhere from 480 to ground level?

Not sure who told you that. Let me know when you're ready to give a reference or something.

Like
~~~~~~
THE TESTIMONY OF JAMES W. ANGUS BEFORE THE NTSB
examination of altimeters and air data computers recovered from the Boeing 737, United Airlines Flight 553

Q. Mr. Angus, I would like for you to start by describing the altimetry system that is install in Boeing 737, and you may use Exhibit 9E for referral. I would like you to point out those components furnished by Kollsman.

A. Our involvement with the 737 air data computer and the servo-automatic computers for this particular aircraft. The central air data computer is a device which accepts inputs of static pressure, total pressure, temperature and electrical power. We sense the pressure functions and by means of servo systems, compute associated outputs that are used in various positions around the airplane. The sensors, sender portion of the air data computer ,consist essentially of mechanisms somewhat similar to what is contained in altimeters and airspeed indicators. That is, capsules which are responsive to the particular air pressures being supplied. And this particular information is converted into angular motion which ultimately becomes part of a synchotel system and combined with a servo, it positions all of the necessary output devices in accordance with program established by the specification for the air data computer, the output devices are in the forms of syncros, potentiometers, decoders, and reliability signals.

Included with the air data computer is a monitor system for each loop. This monitor determines that the servo system is properly following up each of the sensed values. If, as in the case of the altimeter, the servo system were to get out of track by as much as 100 feet, it would automatically disconnect the system. The way it does this, it cuts off the reliability signals that are sent to each of the using devices. So that any device in the airplane receives not only data from the air data computer, but it receives a validity signal which indicates whether or not the information should be used. The functions that are sent out are sent to indicators on the panel, auto-pilot, the flight recorder, the cabin pressurization system, and the transponder for reporting altitude. The altimeters are what are sometimes referred to as servo pneumatic altimeters. These altimeters have two modes of operation which are selectable by the pilot. In the standby mode of operation, the instrument will operate as a normal pressure sensitive device in accordance with the requirements of FAA/T on C10 Beacon. If it is elected, the indicator my also operate as a servo-repeater from the altitude data transmitted by the central air data computer. In order to operate in this mode, the pilot must actuate a switch knob on the face of the altimeter, which puts it in corrected mode of operation. In this mode of operation, the overall accuracy is improved from approximately ½ a percent system to about 2/10 of a percent accuracy.
~~~~~
Just pasting :)


Now, if you are adventorous, and you find the rest of his testimony, you will find a remark about a 350 foot error in the captians altimeter. But don't stop there. Read the whole thing.

hey can someone help me out? i have been following all the (heated) debate (about the FDR data) for the past few days, but because so much of it is technically based, i havent been able to fully understand all of it.

is the point of contention the height (altitude) of the plane in the the video? The video is based on "official" data, right? which officials? the NTSB?

i was also wondering about wether or not the FDR info could be based on a simulation? or is there specific (indisputable) info that ties this particular set of FDR data to the specific (alleged) plane in question?

btw- i do NOT think it is a simulation, but i am wondering if that is possible.



also, please look at these screenshots from the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzR-q0ijbV0


in the above pic i have estimated the location of lloyde's cab in orange, and the two fallen light poles in red.




the next second in the video shows the plane going over the highway considerably farther to the left of the fallen light poles:


in this view, it appears (based on my guesstimation) that only the far left pole, the one that fell backwards on to the hill, is in view, marked by a red circle. Lloyde's cab and the other fallen pole are to the right, just out of the frame).

for referrence (yellow path is an estimation by me):



one of the last frames before end of video, passing over highway (at the far left you see the opening to the Columbia Pike/Navy Annex exit):



according to the video it appears the plane passes over the highway just ahead of here at the Columbia Pike / Navy Annex exit:



near here:



or almost directly overhead here:

(NOTE the BUSH/TREE off in the distance under the NEXT overhead sign, at the lower center of the above pic, that is where lloyde's pole fell):


but the plane in the FDR video does NOT fly over the area where Lloyde's damaged cab and the "broken" pole were seen/photographed:





NOTE: there are 3 overhead signs, and the FDR's plane appears to pass between the green marks (first 2 overhead signs), but NOT the red marks (between the 2nd and 3rd overhead signs) in the following pic:



or in the following video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NotKY2y75oc


can anyone help explain that (inconsistency) please?
[hmm]


are my rough estimations of the pole and cab locations too "rough"? As in lacking accuarcy?
[flustered]

or is there some technical aeronautical stuff that is missing from my evaluation of the FDR video?
[dunno]

Wow! Great work!

The animation is made by the NTSB based on the FDR data downloaded directly from AA77 (again.. according to the NTSB). It is NOT a simulation. This data is plugged into software and is an exact duplication of the flight... according to the NTSB.

UnderTow can probably get you the cover letter sent by the NTSB included in the FOIA package.

I never knew one pole fell backwards... is that accurate? If so... :blink:

Keep up the great work! And thanks!

[cheers] [salute]

Yeah wow! Great work paranoia. And I think JDX was so impressed with your work he missed the question above. Yes, from everything I've read in JDX's interpretation of the technical "stuff" (adjusting the altimeter reading for atmospheric pressure) the plane would have been at an altitude of about 480 ft. one second before impact. It would also place the plane directly over the interstate at that time. Way to high to hit any light poles. And moving at something like 780 ft. per second (going from memory, put a correction in if I'm way off), the plane would have had no time to drop and hit the Pentagon at ground level.

Basically that's it.
The FDR is in DIRECT conflict with the Light Poles and Gate Cam Footage.

Wow ! Great work, guys

I wrote this in another thread today, and it was off topic in the other thread... :)

I think the FDR data is very precise about what the plane is doing in the air, but Im not so sure about the accuracy of anything ground-related...