Pages: (9) [1] 2 3 ... Last » ( Go to first unread post )

 Vdot Traffic Camera Mast, New damage to consider.
Russell Pickering
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 06:59 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,114
Member No.: 1,722
Joined: 3-May 06



The following quote always made me curious.

"In the same area, the blast from the plane's impact damaged the lenses of one
of VDOT's traffic monitoring cameras and knocked the camera sideways."


http://www.roadstothefuture.com/VA_Sept21.txt

I talked to the guy who handled that camera and he described it to me. The lens was not broken just the protective glass in front of it. It made no sense to me that it could be jet blast from the angle. He showed me the same type of camera while I was in the VDOT yard when I asked about it.

user posted image

The camera on the left is the same type as the one on the pole on 9/11. It is the glass behind the little windshield wiper that was shattered - the lens was fine he said. The camera on the right is a photo I took on our trip and what they have on the pole today.

The other night JDX was analyzing the flight path and posted a graphic demonstrating that the right wing would have to have gone over the road sign. I looked at it closely and had to agree. I wanted to see if that was possible and dug into the new hi-res Ingersoll photos we acquired on the trip.

I was quite surprised to see what I found. The VDOT camera mast had been clipped by the very tip of the right wing. The vibration of the pole is what most likely shattered the glass.

user posted image

You can see on the left even one of the alternating climbing pegs was knocked off.

user posted image

This is what the overall scene looked like on that day. Pole one was out of the photo to the left and about 2-3 feet lower at the base than the VDOT mast. Foreshortening and lens distortion play a role in this photo. Look where the generator is to imagine the flight path coming from the left. I was told the mast was 60 feet but have not found secondary documentation on that. The road signs are generally 30 feet and it does work out to be half the pole. You can also see a regular 40 foot pole to compare it all.

user posted image

This is the scene from our trip. The photo is taken from what I estimated the flight path to be. You can see the wing damage on the pole still. You can also see that the wing could have clipped the VDOT mast shattering the glass with vibration, cleared the sign and hit pole 1. Keep in mind the wingtip on a 757 is slightly higher than the wing root.

That is the replacement for pole one. Notice how it is nestled in the trees? I heard it suggested somewhere on the forum recently that the leaves next to the cab had been sprinkled on the road or something. When it was ripped out it actually had to pass through the trees and thus the leaves on the road.

The inset in the left just gives some idea of an overhead view. The main photo is also another opportunity to see a different perspective on the bridge mound and its elevation from the lower roadway.

user posted image

Given that the pole was just clipped by the wingtip this is the part that would have done the damage. The shape is exact. It is composite material and would not cut into the metal of the pole. It would just scuff it like we see. There is some white debris on the road in the Ingersoll photos but it is too indistinguishable to prove anything.

user posted image

This graphic obviously has some problems because of the skew of the satellite angle. But it is a close representation. The white line at the top is a Google measure of 124 feet for the wingspan. The compass is to line up with the heading information of 61.5 degrees.

So, if you line up the wingtip to the approximate middle of the VDOT mast (accounting for foreshortening) it looks like some portion of the right engine may have actually impacted pole one. If it were pushed down for instance that could account for the glass being directly under the pole area as opposed to being sliced in half by the wing.

I am doing more work on backing out of the hole and pole height damage to see what it all lines out to be. I'll finish comparing it all within a week or so and hopefully make sense of it.

user posted image

This graphic is not finished yet in detail but gives a representation of how the overall scene fits together. Getting the 9-7-01 satellite photo that shows the generator and everything to line up perfectly with the current Google overlay is not easy because of the different perspectives.

I can already hear the objections to various aspects of this. I KNOW the FDR says this is impossible. But the coincidence of the damage height, the broken glass report and the heading all lining up with the mechanical damage path is pretty interesting. I also know my first graphics were off and am always looking at new things and trying to learn as I go. Test it all for yourself.

The one thing that has to be asked then I guess............is did they fake this too? Was it hidden to be discovered five years later by accident?
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 07:39 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



QUOTE (Russell Pickering @ Sep 28 2006, 02:59 AM)


user posted image


Wow... now it lines up more "perfectly" huh Russ? Amazing how that happens after i corrected your past errors which also lined up "perfectly". You're pretty good with that photoshop i notice too. Nice lines.. wink.gif

Unfortunately your picture shows the aircraft ingesting pole 1 into the #2 engine (a conflict you just created with your prior analysis of 31.5' pole impact height above ground) and all of the FDR parameters are showing normal operation for all systems. The descent rate would have the aircraft crushing the highway sign as well (but we already know the aircraft was too high for all of it).

Im sure there are other holes in your above analysis (no pun intended)...and i'll get to them eventually.. but if i wanted to read a report about a 757 hitting the pentagon.. i'll read the 9/11 Commission Report.

Thanks for the work. Still doesnt explain the hard data from the FDR.

cheers.gif salute.gif
Top
Russell Pickering
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 07:53 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,114
Member No.: 1,722
Joined: 3-May 06



What caused it then?
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 08:13 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



Your heading looks a bit off too... gotta move that line up a few feet for the impact hole in the pentagon. I just put this together really quick.. i'll get to the rest when i have more time..

user posted image
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 08:16 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



Picture to compare where aircraft hit (overlay with black plane courtesy of Russell).

user posted image
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 09:15 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



user posted image
The Red numbers above say 62' (measurement). Its kinda hard to make out.

user posted image
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 09:39 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



Looks like a new pole is hit with this new flight path too, while pole 5 isnt hit. (ok.. so i made some time for this.. wink.gif)

user posted image

So... either its VDOT or Pole 5... take your pick...

Please excuse the typo of "official", its late here.. smile.gif


salute.gif
Top
Drakey
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 09:57 AM


Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Member No.: 4,730
Joined: 6-September 06



worthy.gif @ JDX
Top
ronnny
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 10:46 AM


Regular Member


Group: Banned
Posts: 162
Member No.: 5,933
Joined: 26-September 06



QUOTE (Russell Pickering @ Sep 28 2006, 06:59 AM)
The following quote always made me curious. ....... The one thing that has to be asked then I guess............is did they fake this too? Was it hidden to be discovered five years later by accident?



Hello Russel,

what about all the frame-rates from the cameras? Do you have any info about that?


Top
paranoia
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 11:16 AM


Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 32
Member No.: 5,692
Joined: 19-September 06



hey im no expert, but i think what Russell is pointing out, actually proves tampering with the poles, while also establishing the near impossibility of that "supposed" attack angle.

i cant imagine a pilot alive who would risk cutting it this close:

managing to fly above the overhead sign holder, AND to the left of the vdot pole. You are asking me to believe that a plane, any commercial sized plane, passed by close enough to have scraped that pole? No effin way. Impossible. The precision required to graze that pole, but not have your wing rip off in the process, all at over 300mph, with a wingspan of 100+ ft (im sure its much more than that), is INSANE.

user posted image

it would be sheer lunacy. He has to clear the VDOTCAM pole on the right, fly over the 30 foot signholder base, but under 40ft inorder to hit the "lloyde" pole.

I have been thinking alot about this (the poles and lloyde's testimony) and i think the actual angles should look something like this:

user posted image

the white line is the "object" that hit the Pentagon for real. The yellow is the path that the decoy plane took. This decoy plane is what lloyde saw pass over at his location.

I am beginning to believe part of lloyde's story, the one that seems most outrageous. No not the pole, cuz he is lying about them (at least partially).

But the long delay, that part of lloyde's story is true. The one where he says he sees a plane, his windshield smashes, he gets out, stranger begins to help him, and then they hear an explosion.

The decoy plane flies over first, lloyde sees this plane, then the pole falls in to his windshield. The decoy plane passes over the Pentagon and continues moving along to wherever (possibly PA if u believe the decoy is the C130).

Lloyde hits the brakes, comes to a stop, and instead of worrying about the plane, he is involved with his car. He steps out, stranger pops up (as if on cue) and begins to help him remove the pole.

As this is happening the second plane, witnessed by at least the citgo guy, and the FDR (check my post in this thread: http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...howtopic=11377), flies over the poles and into the Pentagon.

This explains the long delay. This secondary path, the one actually targetting the Pentagon steers clear of all the poles and makes contact with its target, a specifically intended section of the Pentagon.

Plane 1, the decoy in my suggested scenario, also avoids the poles. Approaching at that slanted angle (the angle you are suggesting with the VDOTcam pole), is suicide.

It is more likely that he would approach the poles facing them head on to be sure he clears them vertically, and more importantly stay away from the mission-aborting crash into the VDOTcam pole.

Even if you dont buy my two plane theory, i would still like to meet a pilot who thinks he can steer the path that you are suggesting. One that is so confident that he actually scrapes a 60 foot tall, 1 foot diamatered pole, even though that would surely disrupt the entire mission if he miscalculated by even the smallest degree (he is allowed a margin of error of 10 vertical ft, over the sign, but under the pole).


Plus in your angle of attack you are suggesting the "lloyd" pole went into the engine of the plane? correct? is that possible? for it to stay aloft, hit 4 more poles, and then the Pentagon? or is the engine hitting the lloyde pole supposed to explain the infamous smoke plume from the gov. released footage?

i felt a little silly about posting the following pic and the possibility i thought it suggested. But now i dont feel so worried that it might be perceived as outrageous:

user posted image


do u see what i see at the top if that tree?

user posted image

does it NOT look like an engine may have chewed the top of that tree off?
notice it also fits in line with the decoy angle i suggested, where the plane steers clear of the (mission ending POLES - the vdotcam pole and the highway overhead sign structure), and is approaching the highway at an almost intersecting 90degree angle. *** this scenario assumes the lloyde pole and the on the hill have already fallen just before the plane's arrival.

The scrapes that Russell identifies could be anything. If indeed a plane struck such a pole, then that pole's structural integrity would be in doubt. I am civil engineer, but i have been cramming PDF's and various DOTS (dept. of tranportation) memos and proposals for a week now. I have been reading all about the REQUIRMENTS for roadside signs and objects, and they are detailed and quite specific. The reason is that if any of these poles ever falls into the road, it can KILL someone. SO all roadside objects are under contract to be constantly inspected and maintained. Factors such as weather and wind, vibration from sound, condition of soil near the base, all adversely effect the structural integrity of these poles, so crews are constantly checking on them.

It is highly unlikely that a poll would be left in place if was known to have been hit by a plane, no matter how slight that contact may have been. Of course such a contact is impossible imo.

PLUS i dont think a black-op planner would hang the success of their entire operation on these poles. Hitting a pole with a plane can have any various number of outcomes, too many in fact to be able to architect an operation that could cover all the contingencies of such an impact. Plus no pilot would risk his life and plane by hitting poles, even if those poles were not secured to anything at their base/bottom. The pole could be standing freely, and yet if a plane hit one at 300+mph, anything could happen.

So the poles were brought down. Afterall, only 2 of them count. The 3 on the other side of the road could have been there without being noticed until after the explosion. The 2 that would have and should have landed in the roadway, would be the ones to that would require some premeditation. And since one of them fell backwards, that one doesnt even count.

So the lloyde pole is the one and only "real pole" that would have to fall, simultaneous to any flyover. Since the poles are an x-factor, a variable, someone on the ground would have to be in charge of any pole contingencies.

Either someone stood ready and shoved the pole forward, or it was dropped out of the plane! Which one? Im not yet sure, im still working on it though. Anyhow, out of sheer dumb luck, lloyde happened to be passing by, where his car was speared by an upside down pole, something like this:

user posted image

why do i think lloyde was an accidental part of this, at least when it first occurred? Because of the mystery samaritan. His sudden and very quick arrival, added to his quick exit from the scene, suggest that he is the "contingency guy" on the ground. The pole fell, and instead of it landing in the road (as planned) it fell on a car.

But before anyone could see it that way, he and lloyde removed it. According to lloyde's story, this stranger was present to witness the "crash" or "explosion" at the Pentagon. Wouldnt any normal person hang around a while to see WTF is going on? Scores of others did, why not this mystery man?

i'll let you take some guesses at it, cuz i am outta time and have to head out. I admit my hypothesis has some holes, and doesnt cover all of "it", but i wanted to toss this scenario out there to see where/what exactly those holes are.


btw- it is a HYPOTHESIS, not a conclusion. In fact it is one of many such hypothesis that have been swirling arounf in my head lately. So im trying to get closer to the truth by a sort of process of elimination vs. inclusion. What fits and where, as well as what doesnt. The truth remains a work in progress, and this is part of that work, which hopefully will result in some progress.


ps-
to the op (russell) i apologize if i am so incredulous at your suggestion. i dont mean u any personal disrespect, but i believe you do need to re-examine at least the VDOTcam pole theory as you have stated it.



pps-
also: i intend no disrespect to any of the pilots here who may agree with Russell's assertions. I confess i have never flown a plane, so i am making certain assumptions about flight capabilities based on logic, not science. feel free (pilots) to correct any of these assumption accordingly.

thanx


EDIT:
somehow the first half of my post disappeare when i first posted, so i reposted it with the beginning included. sorry if it caused any confusion

doh1.gif

This post has been edited by paranoia on Sep 28 2006, 11:32 AM
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 11:39 AM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



Just one correction..

The aircraft was travelling at 530mph.. according to the FDR.

cheers.gif
Top
Drakey
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 11:55 AM


Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 35
Member No.: 4,730
Joined: 6-September 06



user posted image

never noticed that before, any before/after pics of this tree.. it definatly looks scorched ??

This post has been edited by Drakey on Sep 28 2006, 11:56 AM
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 12:01 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



QUOTE (Drakey @ Sep 28 2006, 07:55 AM)
user posted image

never noticed that before, any before/after pics of this tree.. it definatly looks scorched ??

That is interesting. The pole was right in that bush too.. right? And it didnt get ingested?

Also.. that radius looks awfully small to be a RB211.

Also.. i notice that the impact is well to the right of that bush.. doesnt seem to line up...

Top
Nevermore
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 02:31 PM


Regular Member
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 142
Member No.: 3,229
Joined: 5-July 06



QUOTE (johndoeX @ Sep 28 2006, 08:16 AM)
Picture to compare where aircraft hit (overlay with black plane courtesy of Russell).

user posted image

Is it possible that the difference you point out here is caused by the difference between "grid" and "magnetic" North?

It seems (though I can't find anything in the help file to confirm it) that Google Earth uses grid North.

The declination diagram at the bottom of a USGS map of DC would confirm the offset but I'm pretty sure a typical offset can be anywhere from 3 to 12 degrees depending on latitude.
Top
Russell Pickering
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 03:51 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,114
Member No.: 1,722
Joined: 3-May 06



As I mentioned under the graphic it is near impossible to get the flight path properly lined out with the angle the satellite was coming from on the current Google image. We would need one from directly overhead. The other graphic I said clearly wasn't finished.

The tree damage insight is very useful and interesting.

I don't know if the VDOT realized the wing tip had hit the pole or not. They seemed to feel it was a blast. Whether or not they would replace it from a scuff like that (if discovered later) from the composite end of a wing with no structural damage I don't know.

The putting in of another compass just gives more detail. If it is pointed straight north as is the Google compass is it should work.

The facts are the glass in the camera was broken and the pole has a wing tip shaped scuff at about the approximate height of the mechanical damage path.
Top
UnderTow
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 03:59 PM


Below the Waves
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 415
Member No.: 3,743
Joined: 2-August 06



How come there are no "scuff" marks on the poles that we actually bisected by this wing?
Top
George Hayduke
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 04:15 PM


Regular Member
Group Icon

Group: Debate
Posts: 234
Member No.: 4,607
Joined: 2-September 06



QUOTE (Russell Pickering @ Sep 28 2006, 03:51 PM)
I don't know if the VDOT realized the wing tip had hit the pole or not. They seemed to feel it was a blast.


A blast? Did they explain why they "seem to feel it was a blast?" What sort of blast? Was it one of the blasts that occurred in the Pentagon that stopped clocks and wrist watches at 9:32, roughly 5 minutes before the Pentagon's official time of the "attack?" We do know that a military surveillance jet flew low over the Pentagon at roughly 9:37, pulling off a difficult maneuver to view the damage to the West side of the building, damage that occurred, as I mentioned, at 9:32. The blip that appeared on FAA radars at 9:37 near the Pentagon was this surveillance plane, of course, and not F77 as the Pentagon would have us believe. Right? Because if the surveillance jet was reportedly over the Pentagon at 9:37 and 9:37 is now the official time of impact, then wouldn't the surveillance jet have seen F77, which it didn't. In fact, it reported that no plane had hit the Pentagon, which dovetails with reports from Pentagon personnel that bombs had exploded within the Pentagon, partially destroying the contents in and the room housing computers and the work stations of auditors tracking the $2.3 trillion Rumsfeld had reported 09/10/2001 that DoD had essentially "lost." These same personnel report smelling cordite after these "bombs" exploded and go on to say that no giant Boeing passenger plane hit the Pentagon that day. But WTF do they know? We should just trust Gary Bauer, F77 crash "eyewitness" and PNAC signator. No?

Or was this the result of a separate, later blast? Related perhaps to the explosion roughly 30 minutes after the "attack" that collapsed the facade of the Pentagon, destroying the crime scene.

In other words, ante up and give us what VDOT said, because there apparently were "blasts" reported at the Pentagon at at least three separate times (depending, of course, on who you trust): 9:32, 9:37 and the later explosion that caused the facade around the crime scene to collapse.

This post has been edited by George Hayduke on Sep 28 2006, 04:18 PM
Top
Russell Pickering
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 05:22 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,114
Member No.: 1,722
Joined: 3-May 06



George,

You have the exact same VDOT quote I do referenced at the top of the thread - "the blast from the plane's impact".

I believe this was an assumption. Obviously if that were the case we would have had destroyed cars etc. on 27.

I presume if it was a blast after 9:37 that would damage the camera clear back there all of the firefighters and people on 27 would have noticed it the same.

The physical damage to the pole was caused by something and the glass was broken is all we know. The physical damage height lines up to the height of other pole damage.

Russell
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 06:43 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



The glass shattered could be from a shockwave. The scuff mark could be from anything. A ladder falling on the pole, a bird flying into the pole.. etc. The pegs fall off all the time on these poles just from people climbing them. Or, it can be plainly photoshopped in. If you are speculating, i will too. wink.gif

As for the satelite angle... just use the base where it meets the ground. When adjusted for proper flight path, the wing covers that base by more than a few feet. It should have knocked that thing out of the ground or split it in two (unless of course you think the VDOT pole is able to withstand a 100 ton aircraft hitting it at 530 mph).

Again.. if i want to read about a 757 hitting the pentagon, i'll read the 9/11 Commission Report. For now, i want to get answers as to why the FDR is in complete conflict.

cheers.gif
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 06:53 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



QUOTE (Russell Pickering @ Sep 28 2006, 01:22 PM)


The physical damage to the pole was caused by something and the glass was broken is all we know. The physical damage height lines up to the height of other pole damage.

Russell

no it doesnt. If the wing tip clipped the VDOT pole, the dihedral alone would put pole 1 impact way lower than 31.5 feet (probably 15-20 feet lower). Add the fact that engine 2 basically ingests pole 1 with a VDOT "clip" and you have a major conflict with your prior 31.5' impact analysis of pole 1. Not to mention pole 5 wouldnt have been struck by your new path and a new pole would have on the south side.

Look up dihedral Russ. The fact that wing would have had to flex to come out of that dive, the wing tip could be as much as 30 feet above the centerline of the fuselage... (i personally think the wings would have had to break off pulling out of a 4000 fpm dive instantaneously.. the vert accel doesnt add up either to this level path.). That puts the engines in the ground and the fuse sitting on the overpass. Including taking out Lloyd and his cab.
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 07:04 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



user posted image

Above picture taken from here and expanded.
user posted image

Russ.. if you want to have your new VDOT hit... there is NO WAY Llyod and his cab would have survived just by dihedral and wing flex alone.
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 07:13 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



I just noticed something else...

Russ.. you estimated the impact hole was 10.38' above the ground? Impossible. Those engines would have been IN the ground and definitely would have taken out those spools. You sure you dont want to move that impact hole higher?

I always felt this picture didnt add up to a 757 in my minds eye.. (as most pilots realize after looking at this hole.)

user posted image
Top
Russell Pickering
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 07:31 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,114
Member No.: 1,722
Joined: 3-May 06



I will take your points and incorporate them into further analysis. The damage to the tree is something I have missed for 3 years too. This will all be refined. Thank you for the input. Nothing is perfect to start with!
Top
Russell Pickering
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 07:34 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,114
Member No.: 1,722
Joined: 3-May 06



QUOTE (johndoeX @ Sep 28 2006, 06:43 PM)
Again.. if i want to read about a 757 hitting the pentagon, i'll read the 9/11 Commission Report. For now, i want to get answers as to why the FDR is in complete conflict.


I made a major breakthrough on this today. I will post it later when I have all the info. It will get disseminated widely now through some major resources.
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 08:12 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



QUOTE (Russell Pickering @ Sep 28 2006, 03:34 PM)
QUOTE (johndoeX @ Sep 28 2006, 06:43 PM)
Again.. if i want to read about a 757 hitting the pentagon, i'll read the 9/11 Commission Report. For now, i want to get answers as to why the FDR is in complete conflict.


I made a major breakthrough on this today. I will post it later when I have all the info. It will get disseminated widely now through some major resources.

I look forward to it.


cheers.gif
Top
Russell Pickering
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 08:22 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,114
Member No.: 1,722
Joined: 3-May 06



QUOTE (UnderTow @ Sep 28 2006, 03:59 PM)
How come there are no "scuff" marks on the poles that we actually bisected by this wing?

A wing slicing through a pole and a composite material wingtip brushing one I imagine would look totally different.

Here are the closeups we have. We have no closeups of Pole 2.

user posted image

Notice this pole has a couple of different features than the others as you go. The break does not seem to be a pinch but more of a compression split. Also notice the significant bend more so than the other poles. Almost as if something came down on it rather than slice through it. It is also it wasn't ingested since the head remnants are right there.

user posted image

Appears to be a pinch/slice. The head shows in another photo.

user posted image

Pinch/slice. There is no head associated with this one in any photos including the ones of it neatly on the truck.

user posted image

Pinch/slice with scuffing. There is a head associated with this one in another photo.

I am working on an estimate of the height of the break in each one as we speak. Pole 1 appears to be at approximately 31.5 feet from the base on the ground.

The damage to the tree is going to be another factor to work into this as well.

Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 08:44 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



QUOTE (Russell Pickering @ Sep 28 2006, 04:22 PM)

A wing slicing through a pole and a composite material wingtip brushing one I imagine would look totally different.


Unfortunately, based on your new path.. it looks like it was more than a "tip" hitting the VDOT pole. It appears that the wing overlaps the VDOT base by quite a few feet... meaning.. it should have knocked that pole to Kingdom Come.. as should have been done to the other poles.

user posted image

...including the one that fell backwards. Not to mention it should have crushed that highway sign.

(i cant believe one actually fell backwards...lol)

By the way Russ.. i have some breaking news as well developing.. but i'll wait for yours first.. wink.gif
Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 08:53 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



QUOTE (Russell Pickering @ Sep 28 2006, 04:22 PM)


user posted image

Pinch/slice. There is no head associated with this one in any photos including the ones of it neatly on the truck.


No scuff mark on this pinch? Looks damn clean to me...

cheers.gif
Top
Russell Pickering
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 09:14 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,114
Member No.: 1,722
Joined: 3-May 06



JDX,

The analysis is appreciated. But you are working with images and backgrounds (as I am) taken from space. Some have angular distortions and they all have foreshortening. Last night I found the Google lat/long and the USGS disagree by multiples of feet. 3 meter resolutions and so forth. I also tested mounds and small elevation differences in other areas and found exact spots that differed between Google and USGS by up to 10 feet.

I have decided we are not going to thread a needle here with this data and the images. Who do you want to trust? A free program from Google? USGS data? A photo of a bridge that is obviously 20 feet higher than the surface below it? None of it lines up to the inch amongst themselves let alone reality. Is the cartoonistic compass on Google a good place to establish exact birth and base degrees from? I don't know.

Pressure altitude also has it's room for variation and error. The FDR has one calibration error in the lat/long (18 miles?) and one documented recording error in regards to the autopilot. Have you seen an inertial damage report on the FDR to confirm that some fields may or may not have been affected?

The fact is, in the same area and at the same elevation you have damage to the edge of a pole, the top of a tree and a light pole. Did the bird scuff the pole and the peg fall of at the same place by coincidence?

Did the perpetrator's trim the tree while they were removing the light pole and tossing it in Lloyd's windshield?

To say it was from a shock wave makes me ask why the glass on everything else between there and the Pentagon was not broken. All the other lamp heads in the photos?

Top
johndoeX
Posted: Sep 28 2006, 09:37 PM


Veteran
Group Icon

Group: Members
Posts: 6,434
Member No.: 2,197
Joined: 18-May 06



The fact is that the altimeter parameters are all accurate throughout the recording.. .but you want to omit the last part and think its due to errors.. damge.. or whatever as to "fit" your 757 into the pentagon. .and that is certainly your prerogative. I happen to disagree with you in trying to omit facts and hard data.. If you in fact bring the aircraft in low enough to hit the pole.. you have a major conflict with vertical speed alone. The longitude is off by 20 minutes throughout. If the altimeter was off by 400 feet throughout, i would chalk it up to altimeter error and we would go on thinking the plane hit, but unlikely Hani flew it. This is not the case. The altimeter is accurate throughout. The longitude is in calibration error. Longitude has nothing to do with altitude. (we went over this.. round-n-round).

The NTSB obviously offered an explaination on errors in the MCP parameter. But doesnt offer one on altitude? The MOST important part of the FDR? The NTSB omitted some parameters due to "unconfirmed" or "not working". One of those parameters was the Radar Altimeter on a Category 2 (possibly 3) airplane.. we know the radar alt was not "not working". It was "unconfirmed" because it probably confirmed the fact the aircraft was too high to hit the poles and they thought to themselves.. "Thats impossible.. we have all this damage", so they decided to not include it in the csv file.

The fact that Boeing doesnt want to help due to "corporate relationships" with the US Govt speaks volumes. You would think if this additional data (that we arent supposed to have) supported govt theory, they would put their name all over it a come out being the hero in govt eyes. They refuse to help. Draw your own conclusions.

But here i am repeating myself again... rolleyes.gif

Again. .be my guest if you want to waste all your time trying to fit a 757 into the pentagon when we already have data from a govt agency to start questioning the govt based on conflicts. As i said.. if i want to read a report about a 757 hitting the pentagon.. i'll go read the 9/11 Commission Report.

People that come here are looking for answers to conflicts with the official story that dont make sense to them. You are trying to convince them that a 757 hit. I am trying to show them the conflict and why we should be questioning the govt.
Top
« Next Oldest | The Pentagon | Next Newest »

Topic OptionsPages: (9) [1] 2 3 ... Last »



Hosted for free by zIFBoards* (Terms of Use: Updated 2/10/2010) | Powered by Invision Power Board v1.3 Final © 2003 IPS, Inc.
Page creation time: 0.2037 seconds | Archive