The long awaited release from Pilots For 9/11 Truth analyzing the events which took place in New York City on the morning of the 11th of September 2001. Analysis includes Black Box Recovery, Radar and Speed data analysis, Aircraft Control, and "Hijacker" Pilot Skill. Interviews with 757/767 Captains from United and American Airlines.

This is the full film but keep in mind this online preview is compressed to almost 1/3rd of original quality in order to fit on the Vimeo site. To order the high quality version, please visit http://pilotsfor911truth.org/store.

9/11: WORLD TRADE CENTER ATTACK - Director's Cut also now available. Includes the FULL interviews with 757/767 Capts from United and American Airlines. Click here to order your copy today.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/wtca_dc


Thank you for your support!

Looking forward to watching it.

Congrats and thanks for all you've done.

DYEW

DVD arrived safely today - thanks Rob. Thanks also for the download link, sent immediately after I ordered the DVD.

A superb analysis, as per usual. It repays more than one viewing - especially to friends who are confirmed sceptics.

I remember Mike Ruppert writing that the Perps have got away with it - and will continue to get away with it. But, because of the ever growing truth movement, professionals like yourselves especially, that I firmly believe that one day it will prove impossible for any government to deny what really happened that day.



Lest we forget

If I understand the video correctly (and I may very well not), one of the aircraft, based on the Rades data, was going supersonic .

If that is the case, my question is wouldn't flying at supersonic speeds have caused sonic boom? Also, were there any witnesses that reported a sonic boom?

Hi RLW,

Thanks for asking this question as the information can be overwhelming and highly technical for some.

In a word, No. The aircraft was not going supersonic at or near sea level.

It is important to understand the definition of Equivalent Airspeed and Mach. Equivalent Airspeed is the airspeed at sea level which produces the same dynamic pressure acting on the airframe as a given airspeed at higher altitude in thinner air. The airspeed at sea level based on the NTSB Data produces the same dynamic pressure on the airframe as a supersonic airspeed at higher altitude. This is what we demonstrated and calculated in the above film and the reason we added the intro disclaimer letting the viewer know it might be beneficial to view the presentation more than once.

Also, our supplemental press release may help understanding the analysis as well.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/wtc_speed

Can one determine how fast the planes were going by watching the videos of the WTC attacks?

I think it has been tried, but no one knows if the footage they are analyzing is exact speed. Radar of course is much more reliable, if the data isnt fabricated.

I just watched the new video and I think you guys have outdone yourselves yet again.
I will be sharing this knowledge with everyone I know and I hope that we can keep the pressure up to
force an investigation based on valid information within this video.

You do your profession and your country a great service by continuing your quest for justice.
Thank you for making this video.

Branjo

Correct me if I am wrong please.

All the data received by the ATC control system aside from radar returns is broadcast via radio.

Radar returns can likewise be broadcast such as RACONS which in marine navigation send a blip out supposedly when they received in a radar signal, so radar also is a radio signal.

Further, at some point in a radar receiver the radio signals are converted into line voltage which appears as data on dispay screens and is recorded on drives or tapes or some medium.

If the above is basically true (I am not a EE)... then is it not possible to insert data into the system at various points?

Would it not be possible to simulate an actual plane by simply transmitting data from a "radio transceiver" which was pre programmed from a flight simulator?

And or couldn't this data be inserted via some back door into the ATC system. I can't imagine there are not "ports" to insert data for "alignment" and turning of the equipment.

Therefore if any of the above (or all) is basically factual, then it would be possible to create any "environment" of ATC "screens".

Further, even conversations with the cockpit could be likewise staged and there would be no way of know where the transmissions were coming from. The ATC might think he (or she) was speaking with a cockpit and they were conversing with a radio shack down the street in some undisclosed location.

Further, any black box which may be recovered may likewise be a substitute place in whatever aircraft crashed... with data created in a simulator. If each Box has a unique serial number it could even be removed from the plane which we were told was hijacked... programmed and placed into the one which was used to crash into the buildings on 9/11... or perhaps connected so SOME flight transducers and not others to use the actual data of the crashing plane...

Some might say this is overly complex. It doesn't seem so if one has a year to create these fakes.

There appears to be a lot of "illusion" associated with 9/11. We see something... but it happens rather quickly... we are told what we saw which seems to make sense. But we are denied the careful examination after the fact to actually determine what we saw... or heard.

Those phone calls made from the aircraft have this similar aspect. On the face they seemed compelling. But on further thought we learn that it was impossible that these calls took place.

The same goes for the Pentagon and Shanksville plane crashes. What were told and saw does not seem to make sense.... the evidence to support the official account stretches credulity.

The more we look closely at 9/11 the more it looks like a magic show - an illusion. Not the entire event for sure... stuff definably happened. But we don't know EXACTLY what it was or how it happened.

And the government has denied the people the ability to look at the evidence. Trust us they say and if you don't... you're a nut case.

On this:

"If the above is basically true (I am not a EE)... then is it not possible to insert data into the system at various points?

I'm not an EE either, but I 'used' to calculate the flight plans for one of the airlines involved. Specifically, overwater flight plans that do not operate in a radar environment. So you're right about the insertion of data. The contacts that an over-water flight makes with the various centers as they cross say, the Atlantic, are built into the flight plan that is uploaded to the Flight Deck Computer, prior to departure. That upload of course takes place from a central location, regardless of the physical location of the aircraft. In effect, the airplane itself is programmed to send intermittent information to the Centers that track over water flights. These SAME aircraft generally have a domestic portion to them as well, (ie AA flight 11 was at the time an Intercontinental/Domestic flight that continued on to Europe or the reverse) and I'm only adding that for the persons who may believe this to be irrelevant since these flights were not operating in a NON-radar environment at the time of the incidents.

Having said that, I suspect that all of the aircraft involved were probably equipped for over-water flights, and so this is of course a possibility, IF we believe that those were the aircraft that actually hit the WTC as well as the Pentagon and Shanksville. I personally cannot believe that, just because we know that the Northeast Corridor didn't all of a sudden turn into the Bermuda Triangle on Sept, 11, 2001, and manage to DISAPPEAR 4 commercial transport airliners. It just didn't happen. 767's do not simply VANISH without leaving a trace of debris, even if it's at the bottom of the Ocean.

Yet we are expected to believe that they DID. I have never seen any signs of an aircraft, (not even a wing light), at any of the sites. At the Pentagon, all we see is a hole. There are NO signs of any emergency response such as would be seen IMMEDIATELY after any incident, as we saw with AA flt 191 in Chicago back in 1978, or DL flt 191 (no error - same flight number, different carrier) back in the early 80's at DFW. Airplanes just don't do that, not even if they break up due to structural damage as the Egypt Air flight did. Even THEN, investigators could immediately find a debris pool.

The only people I saw in the images from the Pentagon attack were the ones being carried out by the likes of Rumsfeld and others, (have you ever seen that photo of him carrying someone on a stretcher?) and those were ONLY of the people actually in the Pentagon at the time of the attack. No passengers, no baggage, no anything from the aircraft itself. How can that be? Same thing at Shanksville...a little tiny depression in the ground nothing else.

OK, I think I get it now. The dynamic pressure is the same as the aircraft going supersonic at higher altitudes, even though it is subsonic.

Could a militrized version of the 767 go that fast on the deck (with say bigger engines and beefed up structure)?

Exactly...

Looks like Japan may have paid for developing just such a critter.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-767

[edit] From the above website it looks like these had the standard 767 General Electric CF6 engines. I wonder if those engine parts found at the WTC ever been (for sure) identified?

BTW, a quick Google search seems to indicate that the jury may still be out on that question.

You are absolutely right. This is a common pattern throughout the official story. There are many things that are loosely or vaguely or inadequately explained and then papered over by giving the public a simple, easily repeated slogan or theme to fill the gaps. Example - "Hot Jet Fuel Fires".

But such things are easily attacked and discredited. Just find one thing that can be easily proven to be false or incorrect and the rest of the phony edifice must fall.

Rob recognizes all of this. The video is great because it focuses on one specific aspect of aerodynamics to take one aspect of the OCT - that they planes were normal commercial airliners - and show such planes would fall apart from the stresses before they hit the buildings. Thus they must be abnormal commercial airliners that were beefed up structurally and/or souped up performance wise and/or fitted with a "remotely guided pilot assistance system". Having such a sharp focus keeps things simple.

Rob is concerned about the explanation being to technical compared to the government's simple slogans. He's right to be concerned. However, I think his presentation is simple and easy for anyone to understood once they grasp three things (1) the scientific fact that air is densest at sea level and gets significantly less dense at the altitudes where planes spend most of their flying time; (2) planes are designed and constructed as lightly as possible to maximize their flight efficiency while still being safe and (3) denser air and higher speed significantly increases the structural stress on a plane. Most people already know these three things separately but never have any reason to tie them all together into one train of thought, and with 911 providing a reason, all they need to connect them now is Rob's good guidance in the video.

So Rob is fighting the government's false simplicity with the simplest possible explanation, with the added advantage that what he says is both sensible and true. Not only that, everyone likes to think they are smart, so Rob's explanation should be appealing to people. It's not too complicated and at the same time sophisticated enough to make people feel smart because they understand it. The downside might be that some people will think that they were real dumb asses for not having already seen it and instead accepting the OCT explanation.

Nice Job Rob on the video.

It's also nice to see what you look.

The NTSB report indicated that United 175 attained 510 kts GROUNDSPEED, not Airspeed.

Please watch the video, it is addressed thoroughly. Those who make the excuse for the extremely excessive groundspeed, must also posit the theory there was a 85-90 knot wind pushing United 175 from the south.

Hint: The winds were light from the Northwest. Based on heading, groundspeed was virtually the same as its True Airspeed. If anything, True Airspeed was more than the 510 knot groundspeed making the govt story that much more implausible for a stock 767 to have completed such an approach intact.

Gotta love these armatures coming in here crying "Groundspeed!". Little do they know they need Hurricane force winds to hold onto their theory.

I am curious about the air speeds or ground speed of the planes which hit the Twins. Where are these speeds derived from? Personally I don't trust any data on a ATC screen.

Therefore to determine to speed you would have to do some sort of analysis of the video footage.

Maybe they were only going a few hundred knots.

Tell us about how we know the speeds of the planes.

We tell you all about it in the above film. Perhaps click play.

But if you need an official document, click here.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/p4t/Radar_Dat...AA11,_UA175.pdf

Rob,

I've seen the excellent film. And I understand the discussion about the limits of those air frames to move through the atmosphere at various elevations at various speeds. Likewise one can do the same calculations for hulls though water, flat water, waves and so forth.

However, my questions were:

Who supplied the air speeds/ground speeds of those planes?

Were the air speeds/ground speeds of those planes taken from RADES or ATC supplied information?

Has anyone calculated the air speeds /ground speed from the videos of the planes hitting the towers?

In general I find that so much of the information about 9/11 was supplied (without question or independent data) byu official sources. It is essentially a fiction, a myth... a 9/11 narrative and very little is fact based.

When you watch a "docu-drama" on TV you believe it to be a real depiction... even any movie... We give "the benefit of doubt" to the producers and story tellers.

However, in a court of law, or a laboratory, this sort of depiction has no validity whatsoever.

9/11 appears very much to be a "live docu drama"... with some actual events which people experienced but mixed in was all the production work... and connecting the dots into a convenient narrative for the American people.

We saw some planes hit the towers. They can't be ID'd from video. There are no identifying parts recovered. We are told they were various flights and individuals boarded those flights and were never seen again.

Yet we have ID'd their DNA, but not a single serial number of a part?

We have things like passports and bandanas recovered from the alleged hijackers?

We have no black boxes? (even though it is easy to plant them on site)

We are told that those airframes can't travel at the reported speeds... so what hit the towers? Slower planes or different planes than we were told?

There are too many odd coincidences and facts which don't add up to a coherent story... too many lies and fabrications. Yet people believe that we are being attacked and the enemy of Al Qaeda... so it all makes sense to them. Who else could do such a thing?

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/p4t/Radar_Dat...AA11,_UA175.pdf





http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.p...&p=10783680

The answer is that this was data from EWR and so it is likely been inserted.

It was not calculated. QED.

The data is from ASR and Rades Radar. We do not have any evidence that the data was "inserted", we can only analyze the data in which the NTSB claims is accurrate. If the data is accurate, the speeds are impossible for a stock 767 as demonstrated and calculated in the film.

Also, as pointed out thoroughly in the film, if you believe the data is fake, you may want to think twice about getting on your next flight as information gathered and reported by the National Transporatation Safety Board is used for determining changes in policy, regulation and/or technology in safety of flight.

If the NTSB data is impossible as you say it is.... and I believe you there are only two possible conclusions:

The data (speeds) were fabricated (a lie)

The data was accurate, but there were different planes which could achieve those speeds not the ones we were told. (a lie)

What air frames of that size... assuming that the videos are accurate... could make those speeds?

Is it more likely that the data was cooked or that the plane was not a 767?

The entire plane "thing" is a mystery.

No decent evidence of the hijackers boarding those flights
No serial number parts recovered
hardly any plane parts recovered
A wheel assembly which apparently was faked in photos on Rector Street
No video of the plane at the Pentagon
almost impossible flight path for the Pentagon plane
Bizarre speed data
no luggage etc recovered, but DNA was
Cell calls which were impossible made from the planes
Reports of a plane landing in Cleveland
WTC 2 hit in a manner which defies human controlled flight control

I have no idea. Feel free to speculate if you wish. Pilots For 9/11 Truth does not speculate. We seek answers from those who supplied and are responsible for the data. The list grows.



Again, you are asking us to speculate. If you know anything about P4T, you know, we don't speculate.

What we do know is that if the data is "cooked", it has MAJOR ramification for Flight Safety in general as we train by such data every six months to make flying more safe for the traveling public. Again, if one feels the data is "cooked", how much other data was "cooked" in which pilots, ATC, etc... have used to train?





I agree SanderO, none of it adds up. That is why P4T and numerous other organizations filled with professionals questioning 9/11, exist.

Hi Rob and SanderO!

Just wanted to say that it is a pleasure to watch two sound minds at work in the last ten or so posts.

SanderO for recognizing that "none of it adds up" and asking some damn good questions, but not expecting answers that will deliver the kind of satisfying certainty that small minds crave.

Rob for patiently and frankly giving answers that confirm that "none of it adds up" on the facts while acknowledging the limitations of those facts if you go into trying to find some certainty beyond that.

The bottom line is that the doubts justify a new and proper investigation. But if we don't get that, maybe it will be enough for the doubts to permanently discredit the OCT enough so that it doesn't become the version that historians accept in the long run.

Rational minds at work...

What you may fail to relize is that these Hijackers chanted "Ali Mack Ulbar" (or something like that)
That means that God is great, (or something like that) therefore all laws of physics were nuetralized and the planes were able to be guided into the bldgs as easily as playing a video game in a vacuum.

Chanting the ""ali mack albar"" also helped the hijackers overcome the effects of alcohol from the night before while attending the strip club in Portland Oregon.

PS: Great Video..Thank you for your dedication. I guarentee you I will be using this information...

I see the point. There is no way to controll the Jets at high speed.

I have a Macgregor 26X MotorSailer. The Sailboat has a flater type hull and with a 50 hp outboard motor it can reach speeds of 18-20 mph with the motor. The Manual for the boat warns that you must pull up the centerboard and rudders if you are motoring over 6 mph, or you risk capsize. I was motoring along at about 15 mph when the rope to the centerboard broke, suddenly the boat started swaying back and forth uncontrollably. I cut the motor to regain controll, as I started to speed up over 6 mph i could not steer the boat in a straight line. I motored back to the dock at less than 6 mph thinking I had some serious hull problem.. When I was returning to the dock I realized the board was down because the controll rope was broken. (The"" Ali Mack Ulbar" chant didnt work for me..)

The phrase is "Allahu Akbar" which translates as "God is great"

Yes!