Alternate Analysis for light poles, Working backwards from impact point Options

[rob balsamo]

Without using FDR data as far as the barometric altimeter. I decided to work backwards from the impact point for further clarity that no matter how you slice it.. the aircraft was too high to hit the poles.

Pentagon impact ground elevation - 33'MSL
Light pole 1 elevation - 39'MSL
Light pole length - 40'
Total MSL height at pole - 79' MSL (top of light pole)
Total difference in height working backwards from impact to top of light pole 1 - 46' (79-33=46').


Distance to pole 1 - 1,036'
Speed - 781ft/sec at :44 (with speed trend 784ft/sec at :45 impact time)
Descent rate - 3980 fpm or 66 ft/sec
1,036/784 = 1.32 seconds
1.32 seconds*66ft/sec = 87.12 feet at that point in time.

Working backwards from the impact point based on descent rate of 3980 fpm
The aircraft was 87' above the impact point elevation. We need to be at 46' to hit the top of the pole as noted above.

Conclusion: Working backwards from the impact hole based on the elevations, speed and descent data, the aircraft is still too high to hit pole #1. 41 feet too high to be exact. 87-46 = 41.

Keep in mind this has nothing to do with the altimeter indication aside from descent rate. If the altimeter was lagging, the descent rate would be greater, therefore the aircraft would be even higher above the poles. We are basing the above information on elevation alone for height.

Once actual altimeter indications are introduced, we get a more accurate picture of how high above the poles the aircraft was.

Will be added to Pilots For Truth website in my signature.

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

[fransan]

The thing here is "I don´t question the fact that AA77 was hijacked and crashed at the Pentagon".
I have seen and read lots of evidence to that effect. There are dozens of eyewitness statements and there are lost of photos taken at the Pentagon, and (I´m guessing here, American Airlines officially tells us that´s their plane, they lost there, correct? Now there is plenty of stuff out there that warrants
an investigation for many people, I agree with that, and I´m being told there´s a big cover up by the
Bush Gov. and lots of obstruction to independant research and investigation like P4T is doing. On that I feel that the Gov. IS HIDING something, but then again this is something I have been told, I´m not possitive of.

[Sanders]

...On that I feel that the Gov. IS HIDING something, but then again this is something I have been told, I´m not possitive of.

Let me get this straight, I don't want to misinterpret. The idea that the government is hiding something (just hiding something - nothing more sinister than that) is something you've been told, and it's something you're leaning in the direction of believing but you're not sure ... is that an accurate representation of what you just said?