Engine Experts?, hi res. FEMA photos Options

[tocarm]

Sorry MuhammedColumbo...but I simply do not 'buy it' - that ANY SORT of commerical airliner hit anything on/in the Pentagon.

For ANY commerical airline's fuselage to be THAT LOW to the ground at the point of impact/contact with the Pentagon - there are going to be SKID MARKS of some sort some distance from the point of impact on the lawn. BOTH engine nacelles would be low enough then to have swept away ANY object directly in it's path - to include industrical cable spools.

I see an industrial cable spools still standing upright where the right engine is supposed to have traversed. I see some sort of panelling where the left engine is supposed to have traversed. And I see an industrial cable spool right where the bottom of the fuselage is supposed to have traversed.

Consider this picture and what it conveys with respect to a "mass" proceeding from 'Point A' to 'Point B' at some relatively SLOW 'feet per second' as it impacts a huge mass of STEEL REINFORCED concrete 'wall':

http://media.conviveon.com/sites/FDOT/cont...ngBall_Spot.gif

The LACK of amount of damage to the wall of the Pentagon as well as the immediate surrounds if 'Proof Positve' to me that NO COMMERICAL AIRLINE was involve in the 9-11 "Arab terrorist" attacks. None whatsoever!

- tocarm

P.S. find me a single photo of a KIOTO or SIMCA or BRITISH AEROSPACE passanger seat - it dont' matter whether a FIRST CLASS passanger seat or a COACH CLASS passanger seat in >>any Pentagon 9-11 photo<<.

Do THAT and I'll get you Boeing technical drawings of a Boeing 737-400 landing gear struts, okay???

No PASSANGER SEATS = NO COMMERICAL AIRLINER

It's a very, very simple!

- tocarm

This post has been edited by tocarm: Jan 6 2007, 10:49 AM

[rob balsamo]

P.S. find me a single photo of a KIOTO or SIMCA or BRITISH AEROSPACE passanger seat - it dont' matter whether a FIRST CLASS passanger seat or a COACH CLASS passanger seat in >>any Pentagon 9-11 photo<<.



No PASSANGER SEATS = NO COMMERICAL AIRLINER



- tocarm

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

[muhammadcolumbo]

tocarm,

Your comments are right and justified. But I still tought to them:

- For the dimensions of the plane according to the picture here down, I must tell that it's not perfect. Because the picture is not made from the place where the plane came. Any way I tried to compare the dimensions of the plane and the damages. Even if the right side looks enough precise, the left side is to much lower than the reality.
(IMG:http://users.swing.be/muhammadcolumbo/Pentagon_737-400_Entry.jpg)

Longtime after that, when I got enough data about the dimensions of the Pentagon and the diesel generator, I decided to create a 3D drawing of the Pentagon, diesel generator, ... and added the plane at the right dimension. So the 3D construction has better precision.
(IMG:http://users.swing.be/muhammadcolumbo/Pentagon_Approach-737.jpg)

-The cable spools were moved by the plane. Before they were at other places. One of them crossed the left side ventilation wall and moved in near the facade.

- As the engines of a 737-400 are nearly inside the wing and not too much bottom to the fuselage, they didn't touch the ground. That can be seen in the 3D construction.

-The concrete wall will be broken at the most heavy parts hit places. That's what we see in that image you have posted. Only mass impact is broken. On the Pentagon, only impacted parts have some damages.
(IMG:http://media.conviveon.com/sites/FDOT/content/live/9017303b307f00fce415fd26007c7f/1033/WreckingBall_Spot.gif)

-You are right also for the seats and the difficult approach of any airliner at that very low height. There is no seat inside the debris. Because that plane was specially prepared to hit the Pentagon at this very low height. And it must be a special plane which can hit a building with such precision. That's the behaviour of a Tomahawk missile! The changes on the plane to get such precision are very big. So the plane had to be specially prepared for that strike. That's why they may have used an old plane without seats.

Do THAT and I'll get you Boeing technical drawings of a Boeing 737-400 landing gear struts, okay???

Don't feel yourself obliged to do anything. If you want to collaborate to find the truth about 911, let's do it. I am sure, we can do it.

[tocarm]

I know how 'near & dear' your attachment to asserting a Boeing 737-400 (and NOT a Boeing 757-200 as claimed by our US Government and all the wonderful folks at AA such as their Chief Pilot, Director of Maintenance, CEO, COO, CFO as well as every last FAA rep that is assigned to 'oversee' AA's operations at all levels - flights op, maintenance, etc.) struck the Pentagon is:

"Because that >>PLANE<< was specially prepared to hit the Pentagon as this very low height. ... et al"

If you'd drop the word >>PLANE<< from your statement above - well then - we might break out of this 'rut' we find ourselves in and start considering which US or UK military ordinance was used vs. the Pentagon. If it was US military ordinance - well...that would be HIGH TREASON by any number of US Government officials as well as HIGH TREASON on the part of every last supposed 'US citizen' involved in carrying this ACT OF TREASON out.

If it was UK military ordinance used vs. the Pentagon...well then..that is an ACT OF WAR!! And as a veteran of the USAF, I say we go CARPET BOMB >>LONDON<<, making DARN SURE we "wipe off the map" the #1 target:

>>> THE BANK OF ENGLAND!!! <<<

And if it turns out to be ISREALI military ordinance - an airborne EXPLOSIVE DEVISE - I don't have the words to describe what we ought to do to the Zionist Israeli State - (forget "Iran" wiping Israel off the face of the earth!)

In the future, should ANYBODY SO MUCH as open their mouths and either loudly pronounce or cowardly whisper that it was an AMERICAN AIRLINES BOEING 757 that was used against the Pentagon by "Arab terrorists" - then YOU shove the following print out in front their faces and INTO their OPEN & LYING MOUTHS while demanding THEY show you a single Koito seat of ANY KIND or CLASS inside or amid the Pentagon wreckage photos!

"American Airlines KNOWS Best - AA is the 'EXPERT' on/about their own B757s!"

http://www.aa.com/content/aboutUs/ourPlane...57Seating.jhtml

(and BUSH and his BUDDIES in Washington D.C. are planning in using yet an additional 40,000 members of my former US Armed Forces like TOILET PAPER in Iraq! And all those 'biological bodies' who have the audacity to call themselves 'MEN' or 'MALES' in both the US Senate and US Congress can only manage to bat their eyelids and use their voices in about a 3 or 4 octave higher pitch!)

- tocarm

(with each passing day watching this KEYSTONE COPS CAPITOL COMEDY, the more and more I personally entertain EMIGRATING from this NutCase Nation of mine!)

This post has been edited by tocarm: Jan 6 2007, 12:20 PM

[muhammadcolumbo]

I know how 'near & dear' your attachment to asserting a Boeing 737-400 struck the Pentagon is:

"Because that >>PLANE<< was specially prepared to hit the Pentagon as this very low height. ... et al"

If you'd drop the word >>PLANE<< from your statement above - well then - we might break out of this 'rut'

tocarm,

Again you may be right asking to let drop the word PLANE. But considering the number of people who may see the plane before it hit the Pentagon, they can not use other object than a civil airliner. Because if they use any military plane or missile the eyewitnesses can easily recognise that it was not a civil aircraft. But if they use an other civil aircraft from the same manufacturer (Boeing) and having similar size, only very used people will recognise it. And there is ONE eyewitness who reported a Boeing 737.

Why a 737 and not a 757? I don't know yet. Some theories are possible:
- They needed a scrapped aircraft, so it must be an old one.
- A smaller aircraft is better to have better dynamics and get a good precision.

Any way, we must work more professionnally to proof everything in a way that it can be used in justice.

(with each passing day watching this KEYSTONE COPS CAPITOL COMEDY, the more and more I personally entertain EMIGRATING from this NutCase Nation of mine!)

Not at all. It's important to have good and right people also in USA!

[tocarm]

Dear MuhammedColumbo,

Ya gotta understand something very VITAL about living here in the USA at it's 250 million + 'citizens'.

Each and every day on and over about a ga-zilliong TV stations, TV channels, radios (in short, EVERY LAST means of mass media communication), hundreds of thousands of US citizens GET PAID FOR SAYING SOMETHING SOMEONE ELSE TOLD THEM TO SAY!

Millions upon millions of US citizens watch TV, movies, DVDs, etc everyday for perhaps 5-8 hours straight. They watch ACTORS who get paid big bucks to say, speak and ACT OUT THE PARTS somebody else "scripted" for them.

Accepting "payment" in order TO SAY, in order TO PERSUADE others, in order TO AFFIRM something as "true" by a Somebody Else Paymaster is as 'American' as Mom, Hot Dogs and Apple Pie.

News anchors are paid BIG BUCKS to "act" like highly respectable journalists intent on presenting facts, truth, etc. .... but the truth of the matter is that ALL OF THEM read pre-scripted words written FOR them by a 'someone else' via what is called a Teleprompter.

Every last member of our US (elected) Government ACTS his/her/their bit-parts on the floors of the US Senate and US Congress - saying the 'words' and displaying the appropraite 'gestures' that their MAJOR CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTORS want them to say AS WELL AS saying those words, acting those gestures IN ORDER TO ENRICH THEIR OWN PRIVATE PORTFOLIOS that the financial and/or economic "WINDFALL" profits/revenues which will result from their personal pet legislation.

MuhammedColumbo - millions upon millions of US citizens - both in the 'private' sector as well as in the 'public' sector SELL THEIR SOULS and SELL THEIR 'BROTHERS' OUT TO OTHERS for $$$$ on a regular, routine basis.

We never ever got rid of "Slavery". Everyone makes others "slaves" here in the USA by their self-interests, their deceits, their personal agendas, etc. And by their lying to others, the LIE TO THEMSELVES that they are 'respectable', that they are 'noteworthy people', that they are a REAL human being fulfilling his/her/their human nature potential "to the fullest".

I live in a nation of WALKING CORPSES - my US NutCast Nation is like living in a perptual decades long rendition of the movie 'The Night Of The Living Death' where one is surrounded by and hunted down by ZOMBIES fully intent on keeping their own miserable existance going by eating the economic, financial, political, emotional and intellectual FLESH RIGHT OFF OF YOUR OWN BONES.

Native US citizens learn REAL EARLY what many IMMIGRANTS to the USA learn very quickly as well about 'Life and Living In America':

>>IF YOU DON'T/WON'T LIE - YOU DON'T/WON'T EAT!<<

As for myself, I've always wanted to retain my personal integrity AS a person, AS a human being since I was a 'Boy Scout' <g>. I make my 'living' here in the USA by adopting the 'Wage Slave' SURVIVOR stragety - I do work with my mind and two hands that all the LYING WORD CRAFTING LAWYERS/POLITICIANS, the BOOK COOKING LEDGER KEEPERS as well as the CELEBRITY MYTH-MAKERS desperately need in order to keep their 'Castles of Sands' about themselves in their own minds look down their noses as a 'Common Wage Slave Activities'.


- tocarm

This post has been edited by tocarm: Jan 6 2007, 08:09 PM

[Cary]

I don't understand all the details, but you're looking good tocarm. Thanks man.

[tocarm]

Dear MuhammedColumbo,

Now then - BACK TO THE PENTAGON & BOEING 757/737 JET ENGINES

I'm quite certain that your photographic anaylsis of the HOLE IN THE WALL of the Pentagon where the alleged Boeing 757 (or 'your' Boeing 737) went entirely into (fuselage, wings, vertical & horizontal stabilizer, engines and nacelles and all) upon striking the Pentagon measures right at/around 16 feet in diamater.

And yes, it's true, that the fuselage diameter of a Boeing 757 is right at/around 13 feet making it a 'possibility' of fitting the entirety of a Boeing 757 (or Boeing 737 for that matter) FUSELAGE into and down its lenght into the Pentagon.

But I do want for you do notice the diameter of that hole not only 'across' by in its 'vertical' mode.

In order to preform that 'feat' of getting its 13' feet diameter fuselage into a 16' feet in diamater hole (measuring from THE GROUND and to the top of that hole), the alleged Boeing 757 (or Boeing 737 for that matter) would have to have been virtually flying about 1 to 1 1/2 feet ABOVE the Pentagon's lawn.

I trust that you will agree/concur with my personal A&P's dimensional assessment of the circumstances/flight conditions necessary for a Boeing 757/Boeing 737 to neatly and cleanly 'disappear' INTO the Pentagon's 16 foot diamter hole in its outer wall.

NOW THEN, my dear MuhammedColumbo - its is a PHYSICAL FACT that the bottoms of the TURBOFAN ENGINE NACELLES on Boeing 757s and Boeings 737s are 3 to 4 feet BELOW the lowest point of the very bottoms of their respective B757/B737 fuselage.

In other words, in order TO FIT either a B757/B737 fuselage 'neatly' into a 16 ft hole in the Pentagon's outer wall - one must BURY about 1/2 of the engine intakes INTO the Pentagon's lawn!!!

Do you see any B757/B737 RB211/PW2000 or CFM56 turbofan nacelle TRENCHES or SKID MARKS leading up to and/or into the outer all of the Pentagon???

Again, my dear MuhammedColumbo - there was NO AA COMMERICAL AIRCRAFT of any Boeing type used in the 9-11 attack on the Pentagon.

Yet everyone at the FAA (to include the FAA Director who appeared just the other night on a 'History Channel' 9-11 special) STILL PUBLICLY ASSERT 19 Arab terrorists were involved in the 9-11 attacks using HIJACKED US commercial aircraft at NYC, at the Pentagon and at Shanksville PA!!

Ditto goes for everyone at the DOD, everyone at FAA ATC, everyone at the FBI, everyone at every last mass media public outlet here in the USA - and MOST ASSUREDLY, that 'ditto' goes for EVERYONE in the WHITE HOUSE as well as in and throughout WASHINGTON, D.C.!!

There were NO US COMMERICIAL AIRPLANES used vs. the Pentagon. And FYI, there is NO LEGITIMATE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT as well. Both 9-11 and a Legitimate US Government are >>BOTH<< MYTHS!

- tocarm

[muhammadcolumbo]

At first, my precedent posts has been removed, erased. Could anybody tell me why it was erased? I am ready to consider all arguments. But I need an explanation to do not repeat any wrong statement that it may contain!

tocarm,

Dear MuhammedColumbo,

Now then - BACK TO THE PENTAGON & BOEING 757/737 JET ENGINES

I'm quite certain that your photographic anaylsis of the HOLE IN THE WALL of the Pentagon where the alleged Boeing 757 (or 'your' Boeing 737) went entirely into (fuselage, wings, vertical & horizontal stabilizer, engines and nacelles and all) upon striking the Pentagon measures right at/around 16 feet in diamater.

And yes, it's true, that the fuselage diameter of a Boeing 757 is right at/around 13 feet making it a 'possibility' of fitting the entirety of a Boeing 757 (or Boeing 737 for that matter) FUSELAGE into and down its lenght into the Pentagon.

But I do want for you do notice the diameter of that hole not only 'across' by in its 'vertical' mode.

In order to preform that 'feat' of getting its 13' feet diameter fuselage into a 16' feet in diamater hole (measuring from THE GROUND and to the top of that hole), the alleged Boeing 757 (or Boeing 737 for that matter) would have to have been virtually flying about 1 to 1 1/2 feet ABOVE the Pentagon's lawn.

I trust that you will agree/concur with my personal A&P's dimensional assessment of the circumstances/flight conditions necessary for a Boeing 757/Boeing 737 to neatly and cleanly 'disappear' INTO the Pentagon's 16 foot diamter hole in its outer wall.

NOW THEN, my dear MuhammedColumbo - its is a PHYSICAL FACT that the bottoms of the TURBOFAN ENGINE NACELLES on Boeing 757s and Boeings 737s are 3 to 4 feet BELOW the lowest point of the very bottoms of their respective B757/B737 fuselage.

In other words, in order TO FIT either a B757/B737 fuselage 'neatly' into a 16 ft hole in the Pentagon's outer wall - one must BURY about 1/2 of the engine intakes INTO the Pentagon's lawn!!!

Do you see any B757/B737 RB211/PW2000 or CFM56 turbofan nacelle TRENCHES or SKID MARKS leading up to and/or into the outer all of the Pentagon???

Here are the the dimensions of both 757-200 and 737-400 aircrafts. As you see the engines of a 737-400 are only 1.99 ft lower, while the 757-200 engines are 3.76 ft or 5.13ft under the fuselage. There is a big difference. That's why a 737-400 were just nor touched the ground nor the laun. But a 757-200's left engine had to touch the ground as shown in the ASCE report.
(IMG:http://users.swing.be/muhammadcolumbo/757-200_737-400_Face_Dim.jpg)
(IMG:http://users.swing.be/muhammadcolumbo/737-757_Side.jpg)

That's shown in these two 3D constructions: 757-200 touches the ground, while the 737-400 doesn't.
(IMG:http://users.swing.be/muhammadcolumbo/Pentagon_Approach-757_2.jpg)
(IMG:http://users.swing.be/muhammadcolumbo/Pentagon_Approach-737.jpg)

Again, my dear MuhammedColumbo - there was NO AA COMMERICAL AIRCRAFT of any Boeing type used in the 9-11 attack on the Pentagon.

I think there was a civil aircraft, painted to the colors of AA, containing no passengers seats, which hit the Pentagon. More than 100 independent people can not lie. We can not forget that. And many eyewitnesses reported a civil aircraft.

For the official people, they will continue to lie and tell that 19 arabs hijacked 4 planes. ... Let them continue to lie.

And let's continue our investigation as sincerely as possible.

This post has been edited by muhammadcolumbo: Jan 7 2007, 03:00 PM

[rob balsamo]

At first ONE of my posts were removed, erased. Could anybody tell me why they erased it? I am ready to consider all arguments. But I need an explanation to do not repe

tocarm,

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...3700&st=0&#last

stay on topic please.. and please look around the boards before accusing us of deleting or erasing.. we DO NOT delete any posts on this board. But we will move them if you cannot stick to topic.

[muhammadcolumbo]

At first ONE of my posts were removed, erased. Could anybody tell me why they erased it? I am ready to consider all arguments. But I need an explanation to do not repe

tocarm,

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...3700&st=0&#last

stay on topic please.. and please look around the boards before accusing us of deleting or erasing.. we DO NOT delete any posts on this board. But we will move them if you cannot stick to topic.

johndoeX,

Sorry for that. But I do not have enough time to look everywhere to find my post! So a small post like the precedent one, signalling the move and the new link can be very useful!

Thanks for your understanding.

Muhammad

[rob balsamo]

Considering im working 16 hours a day on my research.. AND having to move posts that are off topic.. i'll keep that in mind for the next time if i have to move one of your off topic posts.

At your service.. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/worthy.gif)
Rob


now lets get back to topic.. engines and the pentagon.

[rob balsamo]

I think there was a civil aircraft, painted to the colors of AA, containing no passengers seats, which hit the Pentagon. More than 100 independent people can not lie. We can not forget that. And many eyewitnesses reported a civil aircraft.

Please post a FULL list of 100 people and their names that saw a transport category aircraft in AA paint. Thanks!

(hint: you cant.. we have researched it)

Also, when you make claims such as "100 people saw it" please post source in the future.

Eyewitness testimony ranges from small corporate jet, commuter plane, large plane, airliners, C-130, no marking on the side, AA markings on the side, to about 5 witnesses that saw a 757, 3 who saw a 737 including a Marine Aviator ... and a partridge in a pear tree...

I think they are ALL right.. and you will find out why in Pandora's Black Box Chapter Two based on the information we have.

[muhammadcolumbo]

johndoeX,

When I told 100 eyewitnesses, I do not mean exactly 100 people. I mainly means there are many people.

For the eyewitnesses, see that link :
911research.wtc7.net

All of them do not tell an AA aircraft. But most of them told that it was a civil aircraft. We can not expect more from common people. Most of them are unable to recognise a 737 from a 757. But if they saw the plane before the impact, they must be able to tell if it was a civil aircraft or a missile or a fighter jet. It's sure, some of them may have lied, but ce can not tell ALL HAVE LIED! Isn't it?

And the damage span is consistent with an aircraft of about 95 ft wingspan. That can not be a missile, or a smaller military aircraft. The damages also fit to an aircraft with wings under the fuselage and angines close to the wings.

I also think that there was a military C-130, as reported by officials and that the crew recognised the 757 of AA77! But I think that crew was member of the perpetrator team. That's why they also saw the UA93 before it crashes! Really unbeliavable! The same C-130 saw both 757s and that look natural, normal!

Ok, many of us told that it was a missile, an A-3, a military aircraft, ... I was also telling that at first. But when doing such investigation with almost no evidence (because all evidences are classified), it's natural that we make wrong claims at the beginning, like Meyssan did. When the investigation continue, it's normal that we find more evidences and better focus the truth.

I also think that Meyssan has big feeling when seeing the red-yellow color of the explosion and told there is an explosive! Yes the plane have an explosive on board.

I think, for our credibility, we must be able to say that our initial claim as "there was no aircraft" is wrong, and further investigation shows that there is a plane, but it's not a 757. And the ASCE report claiming that both wings extermities did no damage on the facade is WRONG."

I understand that accepting we were wrong in ONE point may be used as being wrong at all! But I prefer to be in the side of the truth and continue to tell the truth even if it's against our previous statements. Don't you think?

Please, take the time to read my power point presentation at http://users.swing.be/muhammadcolumbo/indexe.htm It will help for better understanding.

I think they are ALL right.. and you will find out why in Pandora's Black Box Chapter Two based on the information we have.

I didn't understand? Can you give me the link of that information.

This post has been edited by muhammadcolumbo: Jan 7 2007, 06:52 PM

[tocarm]

Dear MuhammedColumbo,

It's virtually been YEARS since I had to use an trigonometry! Sines, Cosines, Tangents, Adjacent, Opposite angles, Hypotnues (sp?)....

There was no need for me researching the actual dimensions for B737-400 and B757-200s! You already have them and did a good job of posting them here already.

Now how about this....take the dimension from right around the bottom of the fuselage of both B737 & B757 corresponding with the location of their nose wheels at the front of the fuselage to the aircraft station corresponding with their respective nacelle inlets, form a "right angle" with the vertical dimension of how much nacelle hangs down below their fuselage(s) - and with a little trig functions magic - one derives an ANGLE at which either B757 or B737 would have to be flying at SO AS TO 1) not touch a single blade of grass on the Pentagon's lawn and 2) make the appropriate contact with the Pentagon corresponding with the numerous 911 photos of the Pentagon AFTER 'Flying Thing' impact.

THEN, you can compare those "flight attitude" ANGLES of either B737/B757 with the flight angle of whatever 'thing' people briefly in the Pentagon video.

If one CANNOT match up the necessary flight angles necessary for B737/B757 tht would be needed to ensure that neither the RB211 nacelle of a B757 OR the CFM56 nacelle of a B737 could possibly touch the ground in the last 1 second of flight going whatever airspeed in multiple hundreds of KIAS(knots indicated airspeed), then we have to ELIMINATE giving any consideration to either a B737 or B757 used against the Pentagon.

We would have to start examining the use of ANY OTHER sort of 'flying thing' capable of reaching such airspeeds which would have a powerplant either built INTO its fuselage OR mounted to outside of its tail section.

- tocarm

This post has been edited by tocarm: Jan 7 2007, 07:16 PM

[tocarm]

Dear MuhammedColumbo,

Amongst the many occupation hazards faced by A&P mechanics (i.e. accidental electrocution, chemical/solvent poisoning, loosing limbs and heads in hydraulically powered flight control surfaces and other sorts of stuff) in order to keep pilots, flight attendants, coach class vacationing passangers as well as all the all bankers, lawyers and business people conducting BIG MONEY DEALS with US Federal Government agencies such as the DOD, the FBI, the CIA and not to forget mentioning the FAA as well - oh, and let me not forget all of the manifold US corporations such as Boeing and every last US commercial air carrier - happy, content and comfortable in their "who gives a flip about 9-11, Iraq, Afghanistan, US Armed Forces" lifestyles, there is this other A&P mechanic occupational hazard as well. Ya get to watch the video describing it:

http://www.nearlygood.com/video/jetintake.html

If a relatively LOW POWER jet engine is capable of doing THAT at idle setting, then a vastly MORE POWERFUL turbofan found on either a Boeing 757 or Boeing 737 is capable of even MORE 'suction'.

For a Boeing 757 or Boeing 737 to fly VERY FAST at such a low altitude barely skimming over the Pentagon's lawn - those nasty 'Arab terrorists' had to have their B757 (or B737 if you prefer/insist) turbofan engine throttles at maximum power (or maximum 'PLA' (power lever angle)).

With the engine nacelles of either a B757 or B737 just barely 'skimming' a foot or so above the Pentagon's lawn at such a power setting, one would expect to see some sort of bits/pieces of both grass, lawn and turf having been sucked into the respective RB211 or CFM56 engine inlets - leaving a kinda/sorta "lawn mover" type trail indictating WHERE those RB211s or CFM56s traversed OVER the Pentagon's lawn about a foot or so.

Check the Pentagon's lawn's photos here - all of them:

http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html

Do you see ANY tell-tale signs that high powered RB211 or CFM56 turbofan engines
skimmed right on top and over the Pentagon's grassy lawn???

- tocarm

[rob balsamo]

johndoeX,

When I told 100 eyewitnesses, I do not mean exactly 100 people. I mainly means there are many people.

For the eyewitnesses, see that link :
911research.wtc7.net

All of them do not tell an AA aircraft. But most of them told that it was a civil aircraft.

The average layman cannot tell the difference between civilian or military counterpart... especially in less than a split second. There are also MANY there that saw a small commuter plane, corporate jet and/or missle. You think they're lying?


I understand what you're trying to do muhammad... and i too once thought it might be a 737 (although a 200 series due to the compressor disk looking more like a JT8D.. and due to Terry Morin)... but i have come to possiblities based on all the available evidence, including most, if not all the eyewitness.... you'll see it next week. It doesnt include a 737 hitting the building. Remember, the Flight Data Recorder shows the aircraft too high.

Cheers!
Rob

[rob balsamo]

With the engine nacelles of either a B757 or B737 just barely 'skimming' a foot or so above the Pentagon's lawn at such a power setting, one would expect to see some sort of bits/pieces of both grass, lawn and turf having been sucked into the respective RB211 or CFM56 engine inlets - leaving a kinda/sorta "lawn mover" type trail indictating WHERE those RB211s or CFM56s traversed OVER the Pentagon's lawn about a foot or so.

Check the Pentagon's lawn's photos here - all of them:

http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/pentalawn.html

Do you see ANY tell-tale signs that high powered RB211 or CFM56 turbofan engines
skimmed right on top and over the Pentagon's grassy lawn???

- tocarm

You're gonna love this one Joe.

There is one eyewitness which claims to have seen the whole crash and 'dove out of the way of the plane' just before it hit.

I believe he said he was no more than 6 feet from it when it crossed the lawn in having to dive out of the way. We went over this on the old Loose Change forums and as i was trying to tell some people that this man would have been sucked into the engine in a NY minute.. some were coming up with excuses faster than that man supposedly dove out of the way.

I forget the witnesses name.. but he was one of the guys working on the renovation and was walking across the front lawn when the 'plane' came in.

By the way. .according to the FDR.. the aircraft was at full thrust.. 101% IIRC.. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[rob balsamo]

Joe, do you have that video of the Continental contract mx guy getting sucked in the 73.. down in El Paso?

That was messy.. im sure the guy didnt know what hit him.. you remember what im talking about? It was last year. I know there is a video out there... i seen it. .just cant find it.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/01/16/airplane....lity/index.html

[tocarm]

Dear Rob,

About that contract Mx getting sucked in and turned into hamburger meat in El Paso - yeah, heard all about it. Gosh...how I >>HATE<< hearing about stuff like that. Nobody but nobody deserves to die that way....but it DOES happen in this aviation business of ours.

Back when I was wearing fatigues in the USAF - working A-7Ds - we did have this one Airman who DID NOT mount the 'Military Order Directed' intake screen for an engine trim check/vib analysis - got sucked up and SOMEHOW wasn't pulled into the engine proper - but got "hung up" by his belt or legs INSIDE of the engine inlet duct.

His LUNGS were ripped out from his chest and where hanging out of HIS MOUTH via the trachea/esophagus <sp>?. Eye balls were sucked out as well. Miserable way to say 'goodbye' to your wife, girlfriend, children, family and friends. I think that took place in a PA ANG unit.

And regarding these LYING SACKS OF FRIVOLOUS 'FELLOW US CITIZENS' LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH about "what they saw" and "what they witnesses" at the Pentagon - Boeing 757's flying 5 feet above the lawn after having flown across the adjoining highway THEY just so happened to be riding on 'JUST MISSING THEM' by 6 feet...

...they are all LYING ACCOMPLICES TO THE >>MURDERING<< of innocent Iraqi children - boys and girls - and their mothers and fathers - not to mention their participating in GETTING KILLED FOR NOTHING BUT LIES 'fellow US citizens' serving in any of the Branches of the US Armed Forces!

ANY USELESS/LYING ABOUT 9-11 US CITIZEN who sez they had a Boeing 757 or Boeing 737 "fly right over them six feet away" with that B757 or B737 hitting the Pentagon ought to be strapped into an ORANGE MAINTENANCE TRUCK - bound with handcuffs and chains INTO the cab of an ORANGE MAINTENANCE TRUCK - and drag towed INTO the jet exhaust of a large US commerical jet airliner as shown in THIS one video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1...et+engine+blast



-tocarm

This post has been edited by tocarm: Jan 8 2007, 01:25 AM