See other 9/11 Articles
Title: 9/11: PENTAGON AIRCRAFT HIJACK IMPOSSIBLE (FLIGHT DECK DOOR CLOSED FOR ENTIRE FLIGHT)
Source:
pilotsfor911truth.org
URL Source: http://pilotsfor911truth.org/american_77_hijack_impossible.html
Published: Nov 27, 2009
Author: unk
Post Date: 2009-11-27 21:43:30 by rack42
Keywords: 911, pentagon, flight 77
Views: 2065
Comments: 118
(PilotsFor911Truth.org) - Newly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes alarming evidence that the reported hijacking aboard American Airlines Flight 77 was impossible to have existed. A data parameter labeled "FLT DECK DOOR", cross checks with previously decoded data obtained by Pilots For 9/11 Truth from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) through the Freedom Of Information Act. On the morning of September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 77 departed Dulles International Airport bound for Los Angeles at 8:20 am Eastern Time. According to reports and data, a hijacking took place between 08:50:54 and 08:54:11[1] in which the hijackers allegedly crashed the aircraft into the Pentagon at 09:37:45. Reported by CNN, according to Ted Olson, wife Barbara Olson had called him from the reported flight stating, "...all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers..."[2]. However, according to Flight Data provided by the NTSB, the Flight Deck Door was never opened in flight. How were the hijackers able to gain access to the cockpit, remove the pilots, and navigate the aircraft to the Pentagon if the Flight Deck Door remained closed?[3] Founded in August 2006, Pilots For 9/11 Truth is a growing organization of aviation professionals from around the globe. The organization has analyzed Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for the Pentagon Attack, the events in Shanksville, PA and the World Trade Center attack. The data does not support the government story. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, there is a growing mountain of conflicting information and data in which government agencies and officials along with Mainstream Media refuse to acknowledge. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Core member list continues to grow. == [3] Right click and save target as here to download csv file with "FLT DECK DOOR" parameter.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-77) not displayed.
.
.
.
#78. To: Cynicom (#76)
And neither has the physics. The higher the frequency, the shorter the range, and the more line of sight it becomes. (Hint - think Inverse Cube Law). However, you do not understand the protocols of how a cell phone connects with a cell tower. Radio is only analogous up to a point. To make a connection with a cell tower to complete a call the phone transmits a coded signal which is then received by the cell tower, which then transmits back a validating signal establishing a connection. It is more analogous to the way a modem operates rather than an omnidirectional radio transmission, at a much lower frequecy and much higher power, which you tried using for an analogy. Again you talking apples and oranges.
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
Cynicom is a paid dis-info artist. His style and questions are just like all of the rest of the .gov losers trying to cover for the CIA/Mossad false flag event of 9/11. Don't believe him for a second when he tries to claim otherwise. I have seen many like him on many different forums to not know when I am dealing with one of their ilk. Not worth wasting breath or type on. He is here for one reason only, disinfo.
God is always good!
I don't think so.
I actually tried this on take-off once. The output of a cell phone is so weak - I think it's less than a quarter of a watt - you loss signal at about 500 feet. After the aircraft reaches 1500 feet or so, forget about it. Your phone doesn't have the strength to manage the handoff from cell to cell which it manages to do in an automobile traveling along the surface, but not aloft at any appreciable altitude. You might be able to maintain service flying an ultralight, but not as a passenger on an airliner.
Hello? Have all forgot that this started with "Hari H. NEVER OPENED THE COCKPIT DOOR" evidence from the NTSB? Someone please explain that, OK? And if Hanjour didn't pilot AA77 into the Pentagon, then who did?
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
The very reason I refuse to take part in discussions that are nothing more than a waste of time. We can't find the originators until we get the power to have a REAL investigation of the event. We can't get that power until we can adequately convince enough Americans that 9/11 was indeed an inside and or mossad job. In order to bring people over to our side, we need strong evidence supporting our position, therefore discussing stuff like this is vital. This is another strong piece of evidence that the official fairy tale is just that, a fairy tale.
Obama's health care plan shall be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, signed by a president who smokes and has no birth certificate, funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is overweight and financed by a country that is nearly broke. What could possibly go wrong? - buckeroo Then he enlisted a very tight and small group to "manage" the operation. At that point anyone else added to the operation was merely a drone that knew ONLY his own little part, nothing more. Exactly. In fact, the drones may not even have known anything about their own little part.
Obama's health care plan shall be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, signed by a president who smokes and has no birth certificate, funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is overweight and financed by a country that is nearly broke. What could possibly go wrong? - buckeroo Of course they have.
#1 If you suspect the government of wrongdoing, and Yukon calls you a lunatic, a conspiracy definitely exists.
Obama's health care plan shall be written by a committee whose head says he doesn't understand it, passed by a Congress that hasn't read it, signed by a president who smokes and has no birth certificate, funded by a treasury chief who did not pay his taxes, overseen by a surgeon general who is overweight and financed by a country that is nearly broke. What could possibly go wrong? - buckeroo Thanks bluegrass. I almost lost track myself.
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
It's hard to keep track. That's why do much disinfo is pumped out like bilge water day after day after day....
I'll let this go till 10:00 am EST. After that I have obligations. But I'm willing to "pick it up" after 7:00pm Jeez. How is it that so many on this forum don't "get it?" Makes me want to cry.
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
rack, did the plane fly into the pentagon or what do you think happened ? for me, the other evidence is much more credible and important...plz tell
It's not just this forum. It's the human way. By and large, most people would rather believe what they think they know rather than think at all.
The witnesses say the plane was over here and not over there where the poles were knocked down. Some say the airliner rose away from the pentagon after the explosion.
Someone please explain that, OK? And if Hanjour didn't pilot AA77 into the Pentagon, then who did? If AA77 hit the Pentagon we would have seen the video of it by now. It didn't happen. As far as this new evidence goes, could be disinfo considering it is put out by pilots for 9/11 truth and a government agency. The government would never knowingly release data that would indicate they are responsible for 9/11. If they had a video of AA77 hitting the Pentagon we would have seen it by now. They have a video of the time period it was suppose to have hit, but no 757 hit the Pentagon in that time, that's for sure.
God is always good!
i have an earlier post that shows it is. i'll find it.
"The only thing better than a Federal Reserve audit would be a Federal Reserve autopsy."
"The only thing better than a Federal Reserve audit would be a Federal Reserve autopsy."
Thanks! Well, many of these **** for 9/11 truth groups seem to be tainted now by putting out disinfo. These groups were never needed. You don't need any professional group anywhere to see 9/11 was an inside job. Just learn basic physics and watch the towers come down. It's just that simple!
God is always good!
Well, that is very interesting and disconcerning. *sigh*
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
Bummer. It makes sense though. Keep on kicking the fake info out until some of us just drift away in disinterest or confusion.
blue... Excellent... You are the first to express something that needed saying, and paying attention to. My very first post to this thread was posted under that very belief. We have been subjected for years to many blind alleys by "experts", both real and imagined that have led nowhere. Every time some "new" evidence surfaces, too many are too willing to accept it as the gospel. So far all are for naught. I believe it was an inside job just as you and most other people, however I will not waste my time fishing in rain barrels.
This is why I stick to what I *KNOW* and can intelligently educate people about. And there's PLENTY of that...I like now to start with Barry Jennings' eyewitness account of what happened in WTC7 (Barry was Arkancided shortly after going public).
Yep. I've gotten to the point that if the source is some kind ex-military brass, ex-intelligence officer or someone else with a deep vested interest in the System, I ignore them. I'll always leave an open mind if I see a special case, but overall I'm just running on common sense and the intuition that the good Lord gave me. I have no more appetite for dead ends.
Amen... If you read this entire thread, I was bozoed by someone because I refused to read a no name no credential piece of "new evidence"... Open minds are a blessing.
Open mind and a closed mouth...too bad I've spent most of my life doing just the opposite.
I wouldnt agree to that. I was taught while young, by my Father..."Keep your mouth closed, your ears open and you MIGHT learn something". He had his doubts. hehehehe
Agreed.
"The only thing better than a Federal Reserve audit would be a Federal Reserve autopsy."
for me, the other evidence is much more credible and important...plz tell I don't know whether it was a plane or something else. From what I've been able to gather, and given the FBI's reluctance to release videos, from the "impossible" "folding" of wings with engines that should have detached at sudden decceleration (as in Airbus 300 incident). But the engines didn't detach in the Pentagon crash eventhough the 3-point attachment should have sheared. I've found that the engines weigh about 3500 lbs. When I worked at Pratt & Whitney I was told that the engines weighed about 8000 lbs. Reguadless, I'll repeat myself: how do engine attachments that were designed to decouple from wings to prevent wings detaching (which did work well for Airbus 300, but not for AA77) fail when AA77 hit the Pentagon? There should be some evidence that the engines detached on decelleration when the plane struck the Pentagon, and that should have resulted is some impact evidence many feet from the impact hole. In other words, there should have been two engines lying on the Petagon lawn, or there should have been at least two impact marks of the detached engines. Perhaps the laws of physics were suspened. Or the engineers of the plane and engines made mistakes by a factor past 10. What to believe. Pardon my spelling mistakes. I did some math. If the the plane was traveling at 400MPH and the engines weigh 3500lbs, the momentum of the engines was over 2.5 million lbs/ second. Imagine stopping 2.5 million pounds within one second. However, you'd have to stop that at the point at which the engines contacted the Pentagon walls; much less than one second. Therefore, much more kinetic energy applied to the wall. Of course, this would be spread through about 8 feet for the rim of the inlet at first, then the fiberglass nose attached to the front blades, but then would come the bulk of the engine. So, the figure would drop from 2.5 million to something less. I don't know what that would be. I don't recall what each previous mentioned item weighed; It's been nearly 40 years.
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
that's the thing with this one, the size of the hole doesn't match the size of the plane.
"The only thing better than a Federal Reserve audit would be a Federal Reserve autopsy."
I did a bit of math and updated my response. We are in agreement on this. Some (in particular some guy named Cynicom) don't understand and never will.
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
I forwarded your post to my pilot friend from earlier. Course he thinks it was a missile as do I. You have to question why they would use a missile for the Pentagon while using planes for the other buildings. Makes me think getting a plane to do what they claim it did is impossible.
"The only thing better than a Federal Reserve audit would be a Federal Reserve autopsy."
Yes, that ties with my post about Hanjour and the "door that wasn't opened" post.
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
The speed of alleged plane, on the alleged flight path couldn't have impacted the Pentagon. Why? Because there is a phenomenon named "ground effect." At the claimed speed of the crash, the plane couldn't approach the Pentagon. It would have necessarily have approached at a much more severe angle. But then, the laws of physics were suspended (as per Cyincom).
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
Exactly what I had heard. Did you see my post on the open door thingy? I think it was post 67.
"The only thing better than a Federal Reserve audit would be a Federal Reserve autopsy."
Yes, I did. That was partly why I went into the physics tingy. The "folding wings" theory doesn't reflect reality nor design parameters. As above, does any thinking person believe that an object traveling at over 400mph would "fold back?" not to you: Hay, idiots, have you seen automobile crashes at 60mph? Do you understand the energy involved in those crashes? Think what a crash at 400mph would involve. I'm thinking that I'm wasting my time (not your fault farmfriend).
...with the power of conviction, there is no sacrifice.
well there's yer problem.
Being singled out from this lineup has definitely made me proud. As I doubt there was ever a state that Yukon didn't want to defend or have for his nanny.
Well even if it did it doesn't account for the engines as you clearly pointed out. Most people don't realize just how big those engines are. My grandfather worked at the American Airlines plant in Tulsa. I remember him taking us on a tour through the facility. I was clueless until I saw the engines up close. As an aside, on that tour I went through a 747 for the first time. It was in a hanger. It was scheduled to be stripped as it had been sold to NASA. It was the 747 they used to fly the shuttle.
"The only thing better than a Federal Reserve audit would be a Federal Reserve autopsy."
My dad was in the Army Air Corps as a plane mechanic during WWII. He just shook his head when he saw the pictures of the Pentagon and said no comment.
which really says a lot.
"The only thing better than a Federal Reserve audit would be a Federal Reserve autopsy."
The technology of radio/tv has never changed. Never.
#79. To: randge (#36)
#80. To: RickyJ (#79)
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#81. To: Cynicom (#76)
#82. To: all (#81)
#83. To: Phant2000, Cynicom (#22)
Do I believe the government??? Of course not. But after all these years it is time we focused our efforts on finding the ...ORIGINATORS OF 9/11 AND THEIR FEW MINIONS THAT CARRIED IT OUT...
Let me get this straight.
#84. To: Cynicom (#23)
The person that conceived this foul deed did not get his hands dirty in any way.
Let me get this straight.
#85. To: rack42 (#82)
Have all forgot that this started with "Hari H. NEVER OPENED THE COCKPIT DOOR" evidence from the NTSB?
#86. To: yukon (#48)
Top One Way to Be Sure a Government Conspiracy Exists
Let me get this straight.
#87. To: bluegrass (#85)
#88. To: rack42 (#87)
#89. To: bluegrass (#88)
#90. To: rack42 (#89)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#91. To: rack42 (#89)
How is it that so many on this forum don't "get it?"
#92. To: Rotara (#90)
#93. To: rack42 (#82)
(Edited)
Hello? Have all forgot that this started with "Hari H. NEVER OPENED THE COCKPIT DOOR" evidence from the NTSB?
#94. To: RickyJ, rotara (#93)
As far as this new evidence goes, could be disinfo
#95. To: RickyJ, rotara, rack42 (#93)
#96. To: farmfriend (#95)
(Edited)
#97. To: farmfriend (#95)
post#67
#98. To: rack42, farmfriend (#97)
#99. To: bluegrass (#98)
It makes sense though. Keep on kicking the fake info out until some of us just drift away in disinterest or confusion.
#100. To: farmfriend (#67)
All this will do is give people who know that 9/11 was staged a black eye
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#101. To: Cynicom (#99)
Every time some "new" evidence surfaces, too many are too willing to accept it as the gospel. So far all are for naught.
#102. To: bluegrass (#101)
but overall I'm just running on common sense and the intuition that the good Lord gave me.
#103. To: Cynicom (#102)
#104. To: bluegrass (#103)
.too bad I've spent most of my life doing just the opposite.
#105. To: Rotara (#100)
I like now to start with Barry Jennings' eyewitness account of what happened in WTC7 (Barry was Arkancided shortly after going public).
#106. To: Rotara (#90)
(Edited)
rack, did the plane fly into the pentagon or what do you think happened ?
#107. To: rack42 (#106)
#108. To: farmfriend (#107)
#109. To: rack42 (#108)
#110. To: farmfriend (#109)
#111. To: farmfriend (#109)
(Edited)
getting a plane to do what they claim it did is impossible.
#112. To: rack42 (#111)
The speed of alleged plane, on the alleged flight path couldn't have impacted the Pentagon. Why? Because the is a phenomenon named "ground effect."
#113. To: farmfriend (#112)
Did you see my post on the open door thingy?
#114. To: Cynicom (#65)
in the Air force
The best gun to have, is the gun you have, when you need a gun.
#115. To: Critter (#86)
#1 If you suspect the government of wrongdoing, and Yukon calls you a lunatic, a conspiracy definitely exists.
#116. To: rack42 (#113)
The "folding wings" theory doesn't reflect reality nor design parameters.
#117. To: farmfriend (#116)
#118. To: mininggold (#117)
and said no comment.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest