Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: 7000 Feet At Big Turn
Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum > Flight Number > American 77
Robin Hordon
The primary radar target "alleged to be" AA77 was also "alleged" to be at 7000' at the initiation of the BIG TURN-BIG DESCEND-BIG BULLSEYE.

Does anyone KNOW who has that altitude information? I know that NORAD has some primary target "altitude assesment" capability, I'm sure that the pentagon missle defense radar also has some "altitude reads" on primary targets for aiming/tracking. And for sure, the military IFF transponder radar has altitude readout capacity. The FAA radar does not have such capacity...and the target was FAA transponderless. So, how'd we get the 7000' number?

Please do not include any information derived from AA77's "alleged" FDR or the animation.

I think that the 7000' information came out years ago...can anyone direct me to such info?

Thanks,

Love, Peace and Progress...

Robin Hordon
waterdancer
I don't know of any early official documents released to that effect, the story seems to have emerged via news sources...

From a CBS story dated Sept. 21, 2001: (can be verified as online at least since April 2002 by Internet Archive)
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/11/...ain310721.shtml archive
QUOTE
New radar evidence obtained by CBS News strongly suggests that the hijacked jetliner which crashed into the Pentagon hit its intended target.

QUOTE
Radar shows Flight 77 did a downward spiral, turning almost a complete circle and dropping the last 7,000 feet in two-and-a-half minutes.

From a Boston Globe story dated 11/23/01 (verifiably on the net since at least January of '02)
http://www.boston.com/news/packages/undera...onstruction.htm archive
QUOTE
Because the plane's transponder was turned off, it was hard for controllers to track the plane precisely, but ultimately the controller who cleared the plane out of Dulles watched his scope as the aircraft flew back toward Washington.

QUOTE
Controllers say the plane crossed the Pentagon at 7,000 feet and then made a sweeping circle to the right, during which time it dropped down to near surface level.


Possibly among some of the documents archived at GWU's NSA site would be that initial information, but they don't seem to have been publically released until 2005 or so. http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB165/index.htm
rob balsamo
Its in the 9/11 Commission Report which references the NTSB Flight Path Study. However, being that the 9/11 Commission Report does reference the NTSB Study, they published many conflicting numbers with the study.

For instance, speed, altitude and distance at the turn started in the report conflicts with the study. Also, impact time. Attention to detail was not their strong suit.

But again, the aircraft was never positively identified as American 77 after radar contact was lost in either radar, visually by eyewitnesses, the FDR, or even the parts supposedly found.
seek_the_truth
QUOTE
Controllers say the plane crossed the Pentagon at 7,000 feet and then made a sweeping circle to the right, during which time it dropped down to near surface level.


See, thats what gets me. People will say "they didnt need to know how to land the airplane, they just needed to know how to fly it. Um yeah, a person with a Comm license in a 757 for the first time, not aware of the systems (BIG difference from a Comm to a left in a 757) and is going to fly a jet by dead reckongning at M.74 (at MOST), do a huge desending turn, in a PERFECT circle, they going M.74 with no flaps, fly the airplane direcily into the Pentagon. MMMM, throttle=altitude and with a jet, it works a bit different because of the huge engines (for a while). Wow, I don't know everyhting about avaition at all, but I can tell you that is pretty much impossible.

With a decsent rate of 2800 FPM and slaming into a building thats only what, 60ft high and going m.74? NO, no one is going to stand there and tell me that. You would go way tooo fast in that decent rate and flight path and lose control of the airplane is a basic spin configuration. Also, the 757 has autothrottles, good luck managing autothrottles for the first time. To descend at that rate, you would probably need about 60% on the throttles. While you can read all teh specs and limitations all you want, nothing is pilot training manuals tell you how to fly a plane or land it. FOr it to descend without gaining airspeed, it would need flaps. I have never heard anything about flaps yet.

Im only a student pilot, but I can tell you with what little experience I have, something is not right with the official story.
rob balsamo
Actually.. the descent rate is closer to 4600 fpm from inside Vmo to 1 second prior to reported impact at the pentagon.
seek_the_truth
QUOTE (johndoeX @ Dec 27 2006, 09:10 AM)
Actually.. the descent rate is closer to 4600 fpm from inside Vmo to 1 second prior to reported impact at the pentagon.

I am now sure it is IMPOSSIBLE. Thanks JDX
Robin Hordon
Waterdancer...thanks for the leads...looks like its inside some MSM [Main Stream Media] locales. I wonder who their source was.

Here is a good point for all to consider:

The term "controllers" has been deliberately confused so that the public, as well as folks on the 9/11 Commission, do not know who the reports are talking about. In previous postings I have tried to mention that the term "controller" is an FAA ATC person who actually controls aircraft...and that the NEADS-NORAD types are more "monitors" or flight followers and that they actually rarely "control" anything. There are military air traffic controllers at military airbases, aircraft carriers and the like...but in this instance, the term controller is co-opted.

It is my belief that the term "controllers" in the MSM articles actually refers to NEADS/NORAD/MILITARY BASE personnel. And this ALL would be good to know... because IF the "controllers" were in the military ranks...[those with some form of altitude reading capability], well then, Rummie's military would have been sitting by and watching the whole damn thing!

Now, what if that target were squawking the military IFF and giving SPECIFIC altitude information...like, ahhhhh, specifically 7000 FEET!...oh-my-oh-my...then that craft would have disarmed the missle defenses wouldn't it?

Boy, do we ever need a REAL investigation!

Love, Peace and Progress...

Robin Hordon
kahlmyishmael
QUOTE (seek_the_truth @ Dec 27 2006, 08:53 AM)
QUOTE
Controllers say the plane crossed the Pentagon at 7,000 feet and then made a sweeping circle to the right, during which time it dropped down to near surface level.


See, thats what gets me. People will say "they didnt need to know how to land the airplane, they just needed to know how to fly it. Um yeah, a person with a Comm license in a 757 for the first time, not aware of the systems (BIG difference from a Comm to a left in a 757) and is going to fly a jet by dead reckongning at M.74 (at MOST), do a huge desending turn, in a PERFECT circle, they going M.74 with no flaps, fly the airplane direcily into the Pentagon. MMMM, throttle=altitude and with a jet, it works a bit different because of the huge engines (for a while). Wow, I don't know everyhting about avaition at all, but I can tell you that is pretty much impossible.

With a decsent rate of 2800 FPM and slaming into a building thats only what, 60ft high and going m.74? NO, no one is going to stand there and tell me that. You would go way tooo fast in that decent rate and flight path and lose control of the airplane is a basic spin configuration. Also, the 757 has autothrottles, good luck managing autothrottles for the first time. To descend at that rate, you would probably need about 60% on the throttles. While you can read all teh specs and limitations all you want, nothing is pilot training manuals tell you how to fly a plane or land it. FOr it to descend without gaining airspeed, it would need flaps. I have never heard anything about flaps yet.

Im only a student pilot, but I can tell you with what little experience I have, something is not right with the official story.
.


Do we know anything about whether FLAPS were used or whether INDEED the airspeed remained constant during descent?

Is the amateur/novice use of autothrottles a good point to raise also in annihilation of the anybody with a commercial license could do that?


Would this posting by truth seeker THEN CONSTITUTE a complete annihilation of the "anybody with a commercial license could have done the same thing" motif...


...there ARE TWO arguments that seemed to be presented by the government loyalists..


CODE
[COLOR=blue]1)Auto-Pilot was used by the hijackers[/COLOR]


2)Anybody with a commercial license could do what they did---descent of 7000 feet in 150 seconds at 270 degree turn leveling off to strike Pentagon at 30 feet above ground level with no damge to lawn

1) If the Government Loyalists question BOTH the BaroAltitude and RadarAltitude figures... THEN HOW could they be certain AutoPilot could CORRECTLY POSITION plane 30 feet above lawn OR EVEN NOT fail to miss the Pentagon completely?

IS WHAT I JUST CITED a good answer to retort the autoPilot claim or could I say something better...

I am currently posting at truthabout911@yahoo!groups and PhysOrg Physics Forum


2)Is there anything anyone would like to add to what Captain Wittenberg states below THAT WOULD FURTHER annihilate "anybody with a COMMERCIAL LICENSE could have done the same thing" motif

QUOTE (patriotsquestion911)
Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force – Former Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions.  Commercial pilot for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years, flying 707, 720, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777 ’s.  Had previously flown the actual two United Airlines airplanes that were hijacked on 9/11 (Flight 93, which impacted in Pennsylvania, and Flight 175, the second plane to hit the WTC).

Article 7/17/05:  "The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total B.S. plain and simple." … Wittenberg convincingly argued there was absolutely no possibility that Flight 77 could have "descended 7,000 feet in two minutes, all the while performing a steep 270 degree banked turn before crashing into the Pentagon's first floor wall without touching the lawn."… 

"For a guy to just jump into the cockpit and fly like an ace is impossible - there is not one chance in a thousand," said Wittenberg, recalling that when he made the jump from Boeing 727's to the highly sophisticated computerized characteristics of the 737's through 767's it took him considerable time to feel comfortable flying." http://www.arcticbeacon.com


Audio Interview 9/16/04: Regarding Flight 77, which allegedly hit the Pentagon.  "The airplane could not have flown at those speeds which they said it did without going into what they call a high speed stall.  The airplane won’t go that fast if you start pulling those high G maneuvers at those bank angles. … To expect this alleged airplane to run these maneuvers with a total amateur at the controls is simply ludicrous...

It’s roughly a 100 ton airplane.  And an airplane that weighs 100 tons all assembled is still going to have 100 tons of disassembled trash and parts after it hits a building.  There was no wreckage from a 757 at the Pentagon. … The vehicle that hit the Pentagon was not Flight 77.  We think, as you may have heard before, it was a cruise missile." http://911underground.com


Editor's note: For more information on the impact at the Pentagon, see General Stubblebine, Colonel Nelson, Commander Muga, Lt. Col. Kwiatkowski, Major Rokke, and Steve DeChiaro.


Member: Pilots for 9/11 Truth  Association Statement: "Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe that have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day since the United States Government doesn't seem to be very forthcoming with answers."
Ricochet
The earliest MSM report I can find is Boston.com 11/23/01
QUOTE
Controllers say the plane crossed the Pentagon at 7,000 feet and then made a sweeping circle to the right, during which time it dropped down to near surface level

Full article here;
http://www.boston.com/news/packages/undera...uction.htm#aa77

Scratch that, New York Times 10/16/01
QUOTE
At 9:36 a.m., National Airport, which was on American 77's flight path, asked a military C-130 cargo plane, taking off on a scheduled flight from Andrews Air Force Base — in Maryland, on the other side of the District of Columbia — to intercept and identify the fast-moving target. The crew of the C-130 said it was a Boeing 757, moving low and fast.

The airplane was headed for the heart of Washington. But as it crossed the Pentagon at perhaps 7,000 feet — the exact altitude is uncertain because its transponder had been turned off — it began a 360- degree turn to the right that brought nearly to ground level. It crashed into the west side of the Pentagon at 9:38 a.m.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/16/national...2a8&ei=5070
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2013 Invision Power Services, Inc.