Flight Path And Pentagon Destruction Path Options

[Enver]

In virtually all the articles on Flight 77 (except the simulation based on the flight recorder data), Flight 77 is depicted as striking the west face of the Pentagon at about a 45 degree angle, and entering the Pentagon along the same path, i.e the flight path and destruction path form a straight line.

Assuming that the government account is true, for the sake of argument only, wouldn't the Boeing 757 have veered right when the right wing struck the face of the Pentagon?

The right wing would strike before the left wing, and cause the plane to swing to the right. This fact alone makes the official explanation not credible.

We also have the mystery of Fort Meyer Fire Department Foam Unit 161. It appears to have arrived at the Pentagon before Flight 77 is said to have struck, and the debris in the foreground appears to have been blown out of the Pentagon.

This post has been edited by Enver: Jan 31 2009, 01:28 PM

[dMz]

Hello and welcome Enver.

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/welcome.gif)

[I assume you are the same Enver M. whose website that I linked at post #16 here in our Research (reference) section:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10760429 ]

It looked like you had some very good information there (and I don't generally say that lightly) in my brief review of the website. Ours is primarily a research-oriented website (and not the most "debunker"/troll friendly, and most of us prefer it that way (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) ).

A related thread is in our Pentagon section at:

Pentagon Interior Damage Shots
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=15876

On those impact angles, I just happen to have a CAD drawing open right now from some work on a couple of nearby threads (involving the final "AA77" radar trends from "official" data). It would be quite easy for me to project a surface normal line at the "impact" location and dimension some angles. I am currently working from 2 different Google Earth image underlays (and the easiest references would be Img1 and Img2, with an initial offset between the CAD vector coordinates "southeast" about 50 feet relative to the new "Img2" that I just imported this morning for analysis.)

Most of the RADAR references were imported from "official" lat/lon data (to at least 4 decimal places in Google Earth). If you would like, I and possibly another researcher could probably export some Google Earth .KMZ dataset files for convenient import/verification. (I would recommend avoiding the beta version(s) of Google Earth, as that is currently giving me headaches).

Here are a couple more related reference threads:

Coordinates of Key Locations, Google Earth, etc., Split from RADES M2 TBI Aircraft
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=14832

Google Earth Howto, and a Bit on File Servers- split
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=16090

Let me know if/what you would like on those impact angles,

d

EDIT: I also have some Boeing 757-200 and 767-200 AutoCAD drawings that I obtained from the Boeing website (which I would think could be quite helpful in this inquiry).

[Enver]

Yes, I'm the same Enver Masud who has been writing about 9/11 since early 2002.

I appreciate your offer, but don't really understand it, or what results it would provide.

What I was writing about in my post was that depending on the angle of impact, and the distance of the leading edge of the wings from the nose of the aircraft, one or the other would strike the Pentagon first.

But regardless of which struck first, the impact of the right wing would cause the aircraft to veer right, after which the left wing would impact, and the path of destruction would no longer be in line with the flight path.

The the flight path and destruction would form a straight line only if the aircraft path was at 90 degrees from the face of the Pentagon.

I believe to model all this is quite difficult -- simple physics is sufficient to accept this basic fact.

This post has been edited by Enver: Jan 31 2009, 04:00 PM

[dMz]

A picture is probably worth several paragraphs, Enver.

Here is a CAD depiction of the "official" NTSB flightpath (according to Flight Data Recorder data released by NTSB), with the blue-green line at a last known true heading of 59.8 degrees clockwise of geographic/true North.

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/20298

Assumption 1: the Boeing 757 had "flattened" out over the Pentagon lawn (as claimed in the "official" accounts) during/after hitting the 5 light poles and 750 KW? generator trailer (2D simplified case with aircraft pitch angle=0.00 deg). For pitch angles less than 10 degrees, the "small angle approximation" should be in effect anyway.

If we define p₇₅₇ as the Boeing 757-200 momentum vector at impact (the blue green line), then the momentum transferred to the west wall should be close to p₇₅₇ * cos (theta) where theta is the angle between p₇₅₇ and a unit surface normal vector (perpendicular to the west Pentagon wall at the alleged impact point).

Then p₇₅₇ * cos (theta) = p₇₅₇ * cos (40.36 deg) ~=0.761990595 p₇₅₇

You can see that p₇₅₇ would have a maximum at theta = 0.0 deg (where all momentum is transferred directly into "punching" the alleged hole(s) ), and a minimum at theta = 90.0 deg. In this specific case, the Boeing 757 would have effectively lost ~24% of its "wall perpendicular" momentum, merely from the geometry of the problem. Of course anything other than "flat" in the 2D impact plane would also lessen this proportional to cos (aircraft pitch angle).

You are correct that the collision dynamics would be very complicated to model, and would likely require Finite Element Analysis (FEA). I am familiar with that too (as resources would permit), except my hypothetical B757-200 would actually have 2 high-bypass turbofan engines (unlike Purdue's for ASCE). (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif) Unfortunately, the Pentagon building specifications are not public knowledge, so that's effectively a dead end right now.

I would need to manipulate and import that Boeing 757 CAD drawing to look closer at the wing impact timing specifics, and more assumptions would need to be made based upon the twin turbofan engine cores (reasonable IMHO) and the C-ring "punch out hole" (less reasonable IMHO).

Here are the dimensioned drawing (in US feet, with angles in degrees) with the image turned off for clarity, and a "zoomed out" version of the above. That blue-green line is the NTSB "official" true heading (at 59.8 deg. clockwise from GeoN) and scaled 1 nautical mile long, and the little white lines are scaled to the B757 wingspan of ~124.833 feet.

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/20299

The pink "surface normal" line is perpendicular to the west Pentagon wall and is scaled 300 feet long (mainly for reference). Again, all this assumed the 2D "impact plane" case with zero aircraft pitch angle.

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/full/20300

---------------------
For the benefit other readers, here is a reference on scalar (dot) products of vectors:

http://www.math.oregonstate.edu/home/progr...od/dotprod.html

[Enver]

Thanks. I looked at your graphics, and will use them if I write another article on the Pentagon. Meanwhile, I think the graphics I have at http://www.twf.org/News/Y2009/0101-FMFD161.html may be sufficient.

[Enver]

I just uploaded a satellite photo of the Pentagon after 9/11 to http://www.twf.org/PentagonAfter9-11.jpg

If you could draw two parallel lines - separated by the wingspan of the Boeing 757 - indicating the flight path on this photo, I will add it to my article.

I would also appreciate the source for the flight path data.

Thanks.

This post has been edited by Enver: Feb 2 2009, 10:32 PM

[dMz]

Here is the NTSB data (obtained by a third party's FOIA request) Enver:

Download AA77 NTSB Data, DCA01MA064 Source
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=64

On the .CSV file, pre-2007 versions of Excel (or OpenOffice) only allow 256 columns, so the data is truncated at "IV" I believe. There is also a row limit at about 65500 rows in Excel. The newer version of Excel read all the data columns in for me recently.

I'll post a link to that image when I get it done (probably tomorrow though). Also that image appears rotated away from "North upward" orientation, if that matters.

[dMz]

OK, if I use the Google Earth/Wikipedia "impact" location (300.2 feet "northerly" of the southwest Pentagon corner) shown in this image:

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/20299

Here is the "zoomed out version" of Enver's newer image (with geographic North marked with a blue arrow):

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/full/20798

Zoomed in:

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/20799

and with the image turned off to see the dimensions easier:

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/20800

That is a CAD drawing of a Boeing 757-200 that I obtained from the Boeing website, scaled for this image size from the 921-foot Pentagon wall. Note: other sources put the alleged impact location at up to 330 feet "northerly" of that southwest corner (30 feet would be approximately 1/4 of that 124.833 foot wingspan), so there are uncertainties here. It would be fairly easy to adjust the planes/alleged impact in the CAD drawing now. It appeared to me that the original image linked above was rotated about 21.1 degrees clockwise relative to geographic (true) North, and I used a blue arrow to denote geoN in the modified images. I have read that Google Earth uses the WGS84 datum in its documentation.
------------------------
Regarding the magnetic declination at the Pentagon, on 9/11 If I use this page:

http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/geomagmodels/struts/calcDeclination

and the Wikipedia/Google Earth impact location of:

N 38.870950 W 77.058270 degrees

I obtain the Sep. 11, 2001 date-corrected:

"Declination = 10° 35' W changing by 0° 1' W/year "

I found a Pentagon ZIP code listed as 20050, but this page would not accept that for some reason.

[Enver]

I like the image at http://flickcabin.com/public/view/full/20798 and will insert into my articles on the Pentagon.

You have confirmed what I had expected to see. The highway sign on Route 27 is either in the flight path, or the "Flight 77" flew over it, and in the remaining 150 to 200 yards leveled off so that the top of the fuselage was "20 feet" above ground -- quite a feat.

The highway sign is visible in many pictures of the Pentagon, including the video in my article. In http://flickcabin.com/public/view/full/20798 the sign is the short straight line perpendicular to Route 27 just in front of the left image of the plane.

This post has been edited by Enver: Feb 3 2009, 11:47 AM

[dMz]

Some resources on the Pentagon damage particulars:

http://www.kolumbus.fi/sy-k/pentagon/asce_en.htm

http://cryptome.sabotage.org/dod091501.htm

WaPo/DoD diagram
http://911review.com/attack/pentagon/location.html

http://911review.com/attack/pentagon/imgs/...avy_command.gif

DoD DefenseLINK images:
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/briefingsl...fingslideid=129

--------------
911research (has some images)
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentago...lan_757traj.png
(IMG:http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/docs/floorplan_757traj.png)

[Enver]

I've updated my article with the info you provided -- note photos are linked to more info.

What would really add to the presentation is a section diagram (vertical plane elevation?) depicting in two dimensions the flight path from the top of the hill where a communications tower is located down to the point of impact.

One would need a topo map, location and height of tower, highway sign, light poles, etc. I've watched the recorder simulation at pilotsfor911truth -- it almost has this. But a clear diagram would be more easily understood by our readers.

Have you seen anything like this?

[rob balsamo]

Enver,

We built an entire scale model of the Arlington area including obstacles (light poles, road signs.. etc) and USGS topography which is diffrent than the "recorder simulation" produced and plotted by the NTSB. You can see the presentation/scale model in "9/11: Attack On The Pentagon" or the short clip on G Forces here...

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=14670

[dMz]

That is a CAD drawing of a Boeing 757-200 that I obtained from the Boeing website, scaled for this image size from the 921-foot Pentagon wall. Note: other sources put the alleged impact location at up to 330 feet "northerly" of that southwest corner (30 feet would be approximately 1/4 of that 124.833 foot wingspan), so there are uncertainties here. It would be fairly easy to adjust the planes/alleged impact in the CAD drawing now. It appeared to me that the original image linked above was rotated about 21.1 degrees clockwise relative to geographic (true) North, and I used a blue arrow to denote geoN in the modified images. I have read that Google Earth uses the WGS84 datum in its documentation.

Sept. 2001 Pentagon [magnetic] "Declination = 10° 35' W changing by 0° 1' W/year "

Here is a screencapture of the final portion of an excerpt of the NTSB-provided "AA77_tabular.CSV" file:

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/20896

If I use the ASCE/FEMA stressed "Wedge 1, column 14" and "42 degree" figures from this website:

http://www.kolumbus.fi/sy-k/pentagon/asce_en.htm

and this DoD briefing "Structural Damage" image:

http://www.defenselink.mil/dodcmsshare/bri...70C-008.jpg.JPG

here is the result:

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/20897

There are 46 columns per "wedge" per side, counting outward from the "wedge boundaries" with the Pentagon building protrusions sticking out roughly 8 feet at column #23 (about 235 feet "northerly" from the Section 4 Wedge 1 corner of the Pentagon). The dimensions are easier to see in this zoomed image, and that presumably more accurately places "column #14 impact" at 325-ish feet "northerly" of the southwest "wedge 1" corner:

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/full/20898
----------------------------
This really doesn't change much when maintaining the final NTSB-provided True Heading of 59.8 deg (clockwise of geoN), although this would move the nose of the B757-200 fuselage about even with/mostly over the freeway sign that Enver mentioned above:

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/20899

Zoomed in:
http://flickcabin.com/public/view/20900

Without image to see dimensions:
http://flickcabin.com/public/view/full/20901
-----------------
Offsetting the B757 "north-northwesterly" by one-half wingspan, there could still be starboard/right wing impact with the freeway sign, and this would require about ~63 degree True Heading in order to impact at column #14 (in conflict with the 09:37:44 EDT NTSB data). This is the faint orangish line (that is not valid for the blue angular dimensions)

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/full/20902

With image turned off:
http://flickcabin.com/public/view/full/20903

[Enver]

Enver,

We built an entire scale model of the Arlington area including obstacles (light poles, road signs.. etc) and USGS topography which is diffrent than the "recorder simulation" produced and plotted by the NTSB. You can see the presentation/scale model in "9/11: Attack On The Pentagon" or the short clip on G Forces here...

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=14670

Yes, I had seen this and appreciated all the effort that must have gone into this. For the average reader -- whom I try to write for -- it's too long and too complex. Even simple physics eludes my uncle who is a retired foreign correspondent.

That's why I was looking for a single diagram showing the alleged flight path from the top of the hill down to the Pentagon. Perhaps then someone like my uncle may appreciate the difficulty of leveling out at the reported speed in the distance available.

This post has been edited by Enver: Feb 4 2009, 11:25 PM

[rob balsamo]

It looks like short clips or screenshots showing the grid and flight path from top to bottom in the G Forces video might suit you well. The video was made for the average layman and for the technical minded. This is why many different views were used along with formula's.

There are many side views showing the vertical requrements for the path. Take a screenshot and you have your path. This is the only presentation i know of which has accurate scale and shows the path you need. Other than that, you'll have to make your own. Good luck.

[albertchampion]

FOR THE AVERAGE READER - IT'S TOO LONG AND TOO COMPLEX.

doesn't that say it all about the era.

the motto of which will always be, PLEASE DON'T CONFUSE ME WITH REALITY.

[dMz]

Enver, you may want to have a look at this older thread. I haven't read that one much or recently, but there might be something interesting. There are several "lightpole" [and Lloyde's cab] threads in the Pentagon forum- our search function is good, and I think I have bumped a couple of those recently too.

Alternate Analysis for light poles, Working backwards from impact point
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=84

[Enver]

The guys at Citizens Investigations Team have a lot on the cab. I'm in touch with them and Robert Balsamo. We're trying to get a presentation on the Pentagon setup in Arlington.

[dMz]

I inadvertently closed my browser tab on the "G forces?" thread that it comes from, but this graphic is informative, and related:

http://flickcabin.com/public/view/full/16266

[Enver]

Thanks, downloaded and saved. Note the faint line perpendicular to the highway about 0.2 inches south of the Pole 1 "Impact". That is a highway sign that would have been very hard to miss, and there are more light poses on the off ramp that would have been struck.

You can see them in the picture captioned "Light poles and highway sign in or below reported flight-path".