Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome!

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Actual C-130 Interaction With The Decoy Jet; & the ACTUAL flight path of "Flight 77"
Topic Started: Jan 14 2008, 07:42 PM (11,678 Views)
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

The crew of Gopher 06 took off from Andrews Air Force Base, travelling NORTH AND WEST, which took him by the Washington Mall.

He was on the Southside of the Mall and had just passed it going WESTBOUND when he first saw the plane up and to the left(or in front of him) , about 4 miles out, at 10' Oclock/11 O'Clock/12 O'clock in a 30-45 degree bank descending to his altitude. He said it was like "coming up to an intersection" . While O'brien is traveling WESTBOUND, the plane's traveling EASTBOUND toward him, turning NORTHBOUND and back to an EASTBOUND heading while in the 30-45 degree bank. The plane essentially crosses in front of him, flies around/below them heading towards the Potomac/mall/whitehouse or Potomac/Pentagon, then down river near Reagan National before finally turning out of it's bank and to it's final heading toward the Pentagon.

As for when the C-130 turns to follow it, it is after the plane passes them. They have 3 radio calls before turning around to follow it. The C-130 turns from WESTBOUND to EASTBOUND to follow it according to O'brien, essentially doing a U-Turn. By the time he turns around, he see's it Southeast of the white house AND he has a hard time keeping the plane in sight (presumably it was coming out of the spiraled bank turn MILES AWAY near Reagan???). O'brien see's an explosion on the ground and "did not know what or where it had impacted" implying he is at a high altitude and far away.

Then, according to Scott Cook, a witness I believe to be genuine, on the other side of the river, he see's the C-130 about 60 seconds after the explosion approaching the Pentagon and then apparently see's it start "a steep decent towards the Pentagon. [...] descending at a much steeper angle than most aircraft... the plane reached the Pentagon at a low altitude and made a sharp left turn, passing just north of the plume, and headed straight for the White House. [...] But then right over the tidal basin, at an altitude of less than 1000 feet, it made another sharp left turn to the north and climbed rapidly. "

Here is an image I have created using his published account and his e-mail correspondence answers to establish what we believe he is telling us.:

Posted Image


How we arrived at this? From his earlier accounts:

Quote:
 
"When we took off, we headed north and west and had a beautiful view of the Mall," he said. "I noticed this airplane up and to the left of us, at 10 o'clock. He was descending to our altitude, four miles away or so. That's awful close, so I was surprised he wasn't calling out to us. It was like coming up to an intersection"


Posted Image

In another interview,

Quote:
 
"We were at about 3,500 feet at the time that I first noticed this commercial airliner in our 12 o'clock position in about a 45-degree bank[/u], which is unusual for a large aircraft to be descending and turning at a 45-degree bank turn like that, so that really got our attention."


Although the BBC documentary, 9/11 Conspiracy Files, is completely misleading and confusing regarding his interaction with the plane...

Posted Image

...his account still seems to correspond with what he has ultimately been saying-

he says he took off from Andrews AFB headed north and west to an altitude of 3000 ft to the "south side of the Mall".


Then it cuts to:

Quote:
 
"and as he moved to our 11 o' clock position..."
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e207/Mercury2/11oclock.jpg


"he started his turn..."
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e207/Mer...1oclockbank.jpg


"and by the time he got to our 12 O'clock position, right out the front of the aircraft,"
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e207/Mercury2/12oclock.jpg


"uh he was rolled up into 30-40 degrees of bank which is considerable for a commercial airliner."
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e207/Mer...ockrollbank.jpg



Clearly he has the plane entering from the left side of his windscreen ( If O'brien is moving WESTBOUND just past the mall then the plane coming from his left would be going NORTHBOUND like he said). Also, the event is clearly taking place around or near, or just past the mall.

If that wasn't clear enough. He CONFIRMED IT for us all in an e-mail exchange:

Quote:
 
Our first sighting of the AA flight was just after we had gone by the mall westbound.

[...]

The 30-45 degree bank I described was always in reference to the AA flight during its initial pass across our flight path when it turned from a northerly heading to an eastbound heading.


As the plane passes them headed EAST while the C-130 is headed WEST, it continues to bank past them and descend below them, on their right side...

Quote:
 
Maj. Robert Schumacher: "I remember looking out my right side windows, kind of down on it,


As the plane passes them in it's spiral/descent turn, it is headed from north to east, to southeast, to southwest...the C-130 continues on WEST without turning around until 3 radio calls later.

Lt. Col. O'Brien explains in the e-mail:

Quote:
 
There were 3 radio calls between us and Washington departure before we turned east bound to follow the AA flight.


Then before or after he turns around, the plane is reported southeast of the white house, as it is reported by Colin Scoggins:

Quote:
 
Posted Image

From BBC Documentary:

Scoggins: Just to report, be advised the aircraft is 4-6 miles SE (southeast) of the White House.

ATC: 6 miles SOUTHEAST of the White House?

Scoggins: Yup

ATC: He's moving away?


Oddly this is almost EXACTLY what the National Geographic radar tracking shows:

Posted Image

Fits with what I originally thought he was saying...

Posted Image

Posted Image


He tells us he turned back to the east to follow it. In reality it was an ATTEMPT to follow it. He never came close enough, other than the initial pass across his windscreen, coming from left to right at 10, 11, and 12 O'Clock, in a 45 degree bank. So he turned from WEST to EAST, basically doing a U-Turn. He says he has a hard time keeping it in sight, this would make sense since it was 3 radio calls later that he FINALLY turned around. He also states that he "DID NOT KNOW WHAT OR WHERE IT HAD IMPACTED"....

Quote:
 
I distinctly remember having a difficult time keeping the AA flight in sight after we turned back to the east to follow it per a request from Wash. Departure Control. When I saw the initial explosion I was not able to see exactly where or what it had impacted, but remember trying to approximate a position to give to ATC. It was then that I was able to see the sun reflecting off the Potomac and the runway at Wash. Nat'l and thought to myself that the AA flight must have had some sort of IFE and was trying to make it back to National Airport. It was a few more seconds on our eastbound heading before I saw that the aircraft had impacted the west side of the Pentagon.


Clearly it was headed east, turned to the northernly heading as it made it's bank/turn east again-turning then to the southern heading. It was north of the Pentagon (clearly since the C-130 was next to the mall and had just past it when he first noticed the plane), over/near the Mall/DC/The Monument/The White House. All of this is near Rosslyn and the USA Today building, which Norman Mineta stated FAA Deputy Director Monte Belger told him the radar track showed it near- Rosslyn/USA Today and coming DRA (Down River Approach) . THIS WOULD SUPPORT O'BRIEN'S DESCRIPTION OF WHAT HAPPENED.

Quote:
 
Posted Image

MINETA: So then someone came in, the same person came in and said, "Mr. Vice President, it -- the plane's 30-miles out." So I said, "Monte, can you see it, and where is it in relationship to the ground?"

He said, "Well, that's difficult to really determine. I would guess it's somewhere between Great Falls and National Airport, coming what they call the DRA, the down river approach."

...so I said, "Monte, where is it?" and he said, "Well, I'm not really sure but I'd be guessing somewhere maybe between the USA Today building and, and National Airport."

[...]

MINETA: Well, the question was where is it coming. And so as I was asking Monte, it was following pretty much the DRA, the down river approach, and it had not crossed over towards the White House or towards the Capitol. It was staying on its line towards what would normally be the traffic pattern into National Airport.

And in fact, later on, in looking at the radar track, the plane had actually over-passed the Pentagon, then turned around and then came back into it, and it never took a wide sweep to cross over to the east side of the White House.

[...]

MINETA: Oh, absolutely, it's something like that, but at least at the time the track of the radar was following what would be considered the down-river approach and it never came over to cross the east side of the Potomac River and it just followed the river all the way in.

http://www.msnbc.com/modules/91102/intervi...ineta.asp?cp1=1


EDIT: Thanks to Rob Balsamo for his original initiative with O'Brien and confirming these details.
Edited by Aldo Marquis CIT, Jan 26 2008, 02:54 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

continued...

It is clear from a number reports that the plane flew over DC or the Capitol, so we really can't accept that it "had not crossed over towards the White House or towards the Capitol", as Mineta tries to assert.

Quote:
 
"I talked to a number of average people in route who said they saw the plane hovering over the Washington Mall Area at an altitude lower that the height of the Washington Monument" (Bob) Hunt stated.

http://www.sierratimes.com/02/03/15/arjj031502.htm


Quote:
 
Tom Hovis, relaying what he had learned from reports: The plane had been seen making a lazy pattern in the no fly zone over the White House and US Cap. Why the plane did not hit incoming traffic coming down the river from the north to Reagan Nat'l. is beyond me.

http://www.beanerbanner.com/a_father____.htm


Quote:
 
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e207/Mercury2/JoeHurst.jpg

Joe Hurst: "I saw it go overhead, the plane."

-Oval Room restaurant at Lafayette Square.



Quote:
 
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e207/Mercury2/ClydeVaughn.jpg

Gen. Clyde Vaughn: "There wasn't anything in the air, except for one airplane, and it looked like it was loitering over Georgetown, in a high, left-hand bank," he said. "That may have been the plane. I have never seen one on that (flight) pattern." Georgetown is a sector of the District of Columbia jammed with shops and restaurants - it is one of the city's most vital tourist draws. Commercial aircraft that are either approaching or departing from nearby Ronald Reagan National Airport do not fly over Georgetown, and rather trace their flight route over the nearby Potomac River,


Quote:
 
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e207/Mercury2/JosephCandelario.jpg

Joseph Candelario: As I was looking across the river towards the direction of the Pentagon, I noticed a large aircraft flying low towards the White House. This aircraft then made a sharp turn and flew towards the Pentagon


Quote:
 
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e207/Mercury2/StuartArtman.jpg

Stuart Artman, walking near the Washington Monument: "I saw the plane that hit the Pentagon. It went behind some trees."


Quote:
 
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e207/Mercury2/ScottCook.jpg

Scott Cook: Later, we were told that it was a 757 out of Dulles, which had come up the river in back of our building, turned sharply over the Capitol, ran past the White House and the Washington Monument, up the river to Rosslyn, then dropped to treetop level and ran down Washington Boulevard to the Pentagon.

From E-mail: I remember reading a quote from a congressman at the time saying he saw the 757 approach the Capitol from southeast, make a "fighter-pilot
turn" directly over the Capitol, and head west before curving around
again and hitting the west side of the Pentagon going east.



Quote:
 
http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e207/Mercury2/KenFord.jpg

Ken Ford: flew up the river from National. ( Perhaps he is mixed up on South being "up river")


Then on 9/21/01, they tried changing what really happened...

Quote:
 
Sources say the hijacked jet continued east at a high speed toward the city, but flew several miles south of the restricted airspace around the White House.

[...]

"That is not the radar data that we have seen," Fleischer said, adding, "The plane was headed toward the White House."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/09/11/...ain310721.shtml



[SIZE=7]The Cover-up:[/SIZE]

Now that we have figured out exactly where the planes were at, they decided to bolster up their phony flight path:

First in Oct. 2001, with the Danielle O'Brien 20/20 interview, they illustrated the phony path:

Posted Image

...and the 911 Commission Hearings animated version, that of course shows the official flight path and the plane on the SOUTH SIDE:

Posted Image

Which of course led to the 2006 release of the NTSB Flight Path Study of "Flight 77":

Posted Image

The problem was, old versions of the original flight path were still floating around, here are two National Geographic versions:

Posted Image

And this one:

Posted Image

My confusion was always in the flight path of the C-130 bringing it by the Mall and the plane being able to come in from his left hand side of his windscreen, yet this did not jive with the official NTSB flight path:
Posted Image
http://z9.invisionfree.com/Pilots_For_Trut...topic=5665&st=0

Apparently, since we caught on to their crap they sprung into action and actually CHANGED the C-130's story and location, taking him away from THE MALL and placing him flying southwest to meet this phony flight path, in order to try and make their BS story work.

Posted Image

They apparently also try and support, many of the suspect witnesses' account of the this C-130 veering away before even reaching the Pentagon.

THIS DID NOT HAPPEN.

Scott Cook described it perfectly.

Quote:
 
Posted Image
Green: Scott Cook
Red: RADES Data, suspect witnesses.

Scott Cook: "Directly in back of the plume, which would place it almost due west from our office, a four-engine propeller plane, which Ray later said resembled a C-130, started a steep decent towards the Pentagon. It was coming from an odd direction (planes don’t go east-west in the area), and it was descending at a much steeper angle than most aircraft. Trailing a thin, diffuse black trail from its engines, the plane reached the Pentagon at a low altitude and made a sharp left turn, passing just north of the plume, and headed straight for the White House.

All the while, I was sort of talking at it: "Who the hell are you? Where are you going? You’re not headed for downtown!" Ray and Verle watched it with me, and I was convinced it was another attack. But right over the tidal basin, at an altitude of less than 1000 feet, it made another sharp left turn to the north and climbed rapidly. Soon it was gone, leaving only the thin black trail."


This jives with the C-130 pilot's accounts and actions. He traveled WEST, then flipped a U and traveled EAST.

Like I mentioned earlier, Kieth Wheelhouse, Joel Sucherman, and a few others have this "second plane", the C-130. veering off in a bank out of there, in a U-Turn to the West. The problem is he obviously didn't do this, is this what the flyover plane would have done?

From AVweb:

Quote:
 
C-130 followed 757 into the Pentagon?

"AVweb has also learned that this flight was being trailed by a military Lockheed C-130 Hercules transport during the final stages of its approach to the Pentagon. As the 757 struck the Pentagon and exploded, trained observers told AVweb that the C-130 executed what appeared to be "a high-G 180-degree turn" and departed the area."

What the hell?

2001-09-13 20:38:56+00

http://www.flutterby.com/archives/viewentr...date=2001-09-30



Perhaps this was the early stage for the covering up the flyover.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nevermind
Member Avatar
Oh, you didn't know?
Welcome back, Aldo.

Great to have you back!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

Good to be back, Gideon. Thanks for having me back. Now let's see if we can get something done.

Peace
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Boonedoggled
Member Avatar

Hi Aldo.

In the OP, you have the following conversation attributed to Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien;
Quote:
 
O'Brien?: Just to report, be advised the aircraft is 4-6 miles SE (southeast) of the White House.

ATC: 6 miles SOUTHEAST of the White House?

O'Brien?: Yup

ATC: He's moving away?


It's not O'Brien.

It's Colin Scoggins(Boston Center) relaying information to Senior Airman Stacia Rountree at NEADS(Huntress).

Vanityfair.com audiotape of the conversation.

Listen to the audio file in the link I provided. He goes on to correct himself and say Southwest, not Southeast.

No one reported flight 77 southeast of the White House.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

Boonedoggled
Jan 15 2008, 04:19 PM
Hi Aldo.

In the OP, you have the following conversation attributed to Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien;
Quote:
 
O'Brien?: Just to report, be advised the aircraft is 4-6 miles SE (southeast) of the White House.

ATC: 6 miles SOUTHEAST of the White House?

O'Brien?: Yup

ATC: He's moving away?


It's not O'Brien.

It's Colin Scoggins(Boston Center) relaying information to Senior Airman Stacia Rountree at NEADS(Huntress).

Vanityfair.com audiotape of the conversation.

Listen to the audio file in the link I provided. He goes on to correct himself and say Southwest, not Southeast.

No one reported flight 77 southeast of the White House.
Yeah sorry, that was an old copy and paste of an old copy and paste of mine, I had originally thought that was O'Brien from the BBC documentary. I'll fix it in the OP.

Regardless, Scoggins reports it being SE of the White House then says it is SW of the White House a minute later because the plane is moving, he even says it is deviating away from the White House then updates that it is SW. This falls in line with what the C-130 pilot reported the plane doing, heading into Washington at an unusual angle, which was thoroughly outlined in the OP.

There is also another witness who confirms the SE flight path who we will present in the new presentation we have. You saw him on the boat in the preview.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

Oops, I guess you can't edit.

Oh well. At any rate, I am not sure why you think that "no one" reported the plane SE of the White House, when Scoggins recieves that information from a second party.

Especially when it is clear from the C-130 pilot that the plane flew into DC and espcially when the fishing boat captain has it approaching from the east side of the river.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Craig Ranke CIT
Member Avatar

No matter how you look at it, O'Brien's description of where he personally flew and his interaction with the decoy jet BOTH prove the NTSB and 84 RADES data fraudulent.

When analyzed it is clear that Scoggins is simply corroborating where O'Brien claims the plane was headed when he says "southeast of the white house".

This is FURTHER corroborated by the new witness account we obtained.

Plus Scoggins actually confirms the SE claim/deviating away claim in the beginning of the statement.......and then updates it to southwest as the plane changes course on it's final loop before it reaches the Pentagon.

This all makes perfect sense with the true loop that we are reporting via multiple corroborated sources.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Boonedoggled
Member Avatar

Aldo Marquis CIT
Jan 15 2008, 04:52 PM
Boonedoggled
Jan 15 2008, 04:19 PM
Hi Aldo.

In the OP, you have the following conversation attributed to Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien;
Quote:
 
O'Brien?: Just to report, be advised the aircraft is 4-6 miles SE (southeast) of the White House.

ATC: 6 miles SOUTHEAST of the White House?

O'Brien?: Yup

ATC: He's moving away?


It's not O'Brien.

It's Colin Scoggins(Boston Center) relaying information to Senior Airman Stacia Rountree at NEADS(Huntress).

Vanityfair.com audiotape of the conversation.

Listen to the audio file in the link I provided. He goes on to correct himself and say Southwest, not Southeast.

No one reported flight 77 southeast of the White House.
Yeah sorry, that was an old copy and paste of an old copy and paste of mine, I had originally thought that was O'Brien from the BBC documentary. I'll fix it in the OP.

Regardless, Scoggins reports it being SE of the White House then says it is SW of the White House a minute later because the plane is moving, he even says it is deviating away from the White House then updates that it is SW. This falls in line with what the C-130 pilot reported the plane doing, heading into Washington at an unusual angle, which was thoroughly outlined in the OP.

There is also another witness who confirms the SE flight path who we will present in the new presentation we have. You saw him on the boat in the preview.

Quote:
 
Regardless, Scoggins reports it being SE of the White House then says it is SW of the White House a minute later because the plane is moving, he even says it is deviating away from the White House then updates that it is SW. This falls in line with what the C-130 pilot reported the plane doing, heading into Washington at an unusual angle, which was thoroughly outlined in the OP.


You are correct, he says that it was Southeast and then he corrects himself. It's not because the plane was moving. If you listen to the audio tapes you can clearly tell that he is relaying information to NEADS via another controller and the other controller corrects him. And it wasn't one minute, it was 30 seconds. Did you listen to the audiotape? It is very clear that there was an error in relaying the message.

6 miles Southeast does not fall in line with what the C-130 pilot reported. 6 miles southwest does.


Quote:
 
There is also another witness who confirms the SE flight path who we will present in the new presentation we have. You saw him on the boat in the preview.
I'm looking forward to seeing the interview.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nevermind
Member Avatar
Oh, you didn't know?
Aldo Marquis CIT
Jan 15 2008, 05:11 PM
Oops, I guess you can't edit.

Oh well. At any rate, I am not sure why you think that "no one" reported the plane SE of the White House, when Scoggins recieves that information from a second party.

Especially when it is clear from the C-130 pilot that the plane flew into DC and espcially when the fishing boat captain has it approaching from the east side of the river.
You guys can't edit your own posts?

We'll see if we can fix that.

I looked at the Admin CP and it's set to where member can edit their own posts. I don't understand why you guys can't but we'll try to hook you up.
Edited by Nevermind, Jan 15 2008, 05:45 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Ummm, well welcome back guys. This should be an interesting forum now. The description in the OP is good. I'm still a novice on the C-130, and I actually find that useful.

I think I can figure out what's wrong here, but I'll have to do lots of geometry and stuff, so later. But basically, as I read O'Brien's account of his flight path, it doesn't seem to contradict anything in the radar record, so why is it again that the 84 Rades data (viewable here w.audio) isn't being called on here? The only real difference I'm seeing here so far is the size and exact scale of 77's purported loop. One version based on an error (said SE instead of SW) and some erred graphics and what else? Please help me see what I'm missing. The other based on radar and FDR, which are questionable why again?

Quote Post Goto Top
 
Boonedoggled
Member Avatar

Aldo Marquis CIT
Jan 15 2008, 05:11 PM
Oops, I guess you can't edit.

Oh well. At any rate, I am not sure why you think that "no one" reported the plane SE of the White House, when Scoggins recieves that information from a second party.

Especially when it is clear from the C-130 pilot that the plane flew into DC and espcially when the fishing boat captain has it approaching from the east side of the river.
Did you listen to the audiotape?

To me, it sounds like he corrected a mistake.

Can you draw up a rough outline of the flight path that flight 77 would have had to taken to be 6 miles Southeast and deviating away and then be 6 miles southwest deviating away within 30 seconds?

That's some serious speed and maneuvering.

I'll have to wait to comment on the fishing boat captain until after I see the interview.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Boonedoggled
Member Avatar

Craig Ranke CIT
Jan 15 2008, 05:14 PM
No matter how you look at it, O'Brien's description of where he personally flew and his interaction with the decoy jet BOTH prove the NTSB and 84 RADES data fraudulent.

When analyzed it is clear that Scoggins is simply corroborating where O'Brien claims the plane was headed when he says "southeast of the white house".

This is FURTHER corroborated by the new witness account we obtained.

Plus Scoggins actually confirms the SE claim/deviating away claim in the beginning of the statement.......and then updates it to southwest as the plane changes course on it's final loop before it reaches the Pentagon.

This all makes perfect sense with the true loop that we are reporting via multiple corroborated sources.
Hi Craig

I have to disagree with you. Everything that O'Brien and Scoggins report fits with the RADES data perfectly.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

Boonedoggled
Jan 15 2008, 06:06 PM


Did you listen to the audiotape?

To me, it sounds like he corrected a mistake.

Can you draw up a rough outline of the flight path that flight 77 would have had to taken to be 6 miles Southeast and deviating away and then be 6 miles southwest deviating away within 30 seconds?

That's some serious speed and maneuvering.

I'll have to wait to comment on the fishing boat captain until after I see the interview.
I have listened to the tape.

It is not a mistake. It is exactly where the plane flew.

You don't think that the updates are separated?

Of course the plane is reported SE and then is UPDATED with the SW of the White House. You call it a correction, which I guess you could call it, not because he is wrong but because it is no longer SE of the White House when he is updated, it is SW.

A minute, 30 seconds...I am being general in regards to what is transpiring, especially considering you and I weren't there.

Did you ever come up with an answer for the DRA approach for the decoy jet blatantly admitted by Mineta and Belger? Because technically, that supports it being SE of the White House and it certainly blows the official NTSB/RADES path out of the water.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Craig Ranke CIT
Member Avatar

Caustic Logic
Jan 15 2008, 05:42 PM
Ummm, well welcome back guys. This should be an interesting forum now. The description in the OP is good. I'm still a novice on the C-130, and I actually find that useful.

I think I can figure out what's wrong here, but I'll have to do lots of geometry and stuff, so later. But basically, as I read O'Brien's account of his flight path, it doesn't seem to contradict anything in the radar record, so why is it again that the 84 Rades data (viewable here w.audio) isn't being called on here? The only real difference I'm seeing here so far is the size and exact scale of 77's purported loop. One version based on an error (said SE instead of SW) and some erred graphics and what else? Please help me see what I'm missing. The other based on radar and FDR, which are questionable why again?

Geometry?

How does reading the pilot's statements equate to geometry and why are you having problems comprehending his statements?

He says he travelled north and west to the south side of the mall and FIRST saw the decoy jet after passing the Mall still headed westbound.

The 84 RADES data shows him traveling southwest nowhere near the mall.

Posted Image


O'brien says the decoy jet was on his LEFT at his 10, 11, and then 12:00 positions as it was descending to their altitude making an uncharacteristic 30 to 45 degree bank, ending up on their RIGHT going from a "northernly heading to an eastbound heading".

This is irreconcilable with the 84 RADES data and means the plane was headed to the SE of the white house.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Craig Ranke CIT
Member Avatar

Boonedoggled
Jan 15 2008, 06:11 PM


I have to disagree with you. Everything that O'Brien and Scoggins report fits with the RADES data perfectly.
Boone,

We already went over this at ATS in this thread..

For some reason you refuse to acknowledge that "north and west" is completely different from southwest or westsouthwest as you put it.

I understand that you disagree with me but the difference is that we are explaining exactly HOW his statements contradict the RADES data and you are failing to explain how they make sense with it while literally denying the meaning of the words he uses such as north and west.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Aldo Marquis CIT
Member Avatar

Quote:
 
Ummm, well welcome back guys.


Umm, thanks?


Quote:
 
This should be an interesting forum now.



Indeed.


Quote:
 
The description in the OP is good. I'm still a novice on the C-130, and I actually find that useful.


Glad I could help.

Quote:
 
I think I can figure out what's wrong here, but I'll have to do lots of geometry and stuff, so later.


The only thing that's wrong is that the C-130 is by the mall when his interaction with the decoy jet took place, that he actually admitted it not knowing the implications, and that no one (not me) caught it until now.


Quote:
 
But basically, as I read O'Brien's account of his flight path, it doesn't seem to contradict anything in the radar record, so why is it again that the 84 Rades data (viewable here w.audio) isn't being called on here? The only real difference I'm seeing here so far is the size and exact scale of 77's purported loop. One version based on an error (said SE instead of SW) and some erred graphics and what else? Please help me see what I'm missing. The other based on radar and FDR, which are questionable why again?


Read the thread again, slowly and carefully. Then, when you're done with that, you might want to read it again. It can be pretty confusing.

I don't think Boone has caught on yet either, so perhaps you guys can learn together.

The key here is he had just gone by the mall, think long hard about that as you read his accounts.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Craig Ranke CIT
Member Avatar

Boonedoggled
Jan 15 2008, 06:06 PM
Did you listen to the audiotape?

To me, it sounds like he corrected a mistake.
Of course we have. In fact he repeats SE at first after he confirms it and comes back later with an update of SW which is exactly what the plane would have to do on the way to the Pentagon.


Quote:
 

Can you draw up a rough outline of the flight path that flight 77 would have had to taken to be 6 miles Southeast and deviating away and then be 6 miles southwest deviating away within 30 seconds?


That's some serious speed and maneuvering.


The fact that it was 30 or 40 seconds after he reported the update does not mean the initial report wasn't an additional 30 or 40 seconds (or more) old when he said it. It's clear that he is getting the information from other sources.


We know that the decoy jet was doing some "serious speed and maneuvering" at this point. That has been the entire point of contention regarding this loop from day one.

We can simply prove with multiple corroborated sources that the loop was in a different place then what ended up being officially reported via NTSB and RADES.


Quote:
 

I'll have to wait to comment on the fishing boat captain until after I see the interview.


Even our trailer shows how he has it coming from east of the river.

Check it out again.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
insert new name here

I was wondering guys, how many witnesses you have gathered that saw the plane fly over the Pentagon.

Thanks,

Lloyd
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nevermind
Member Avatar
Oh, you didn't know?
CrazyBlackCabbie
Jan 15 2008, 07:04 PM
I was wondering guys, how many witnesses you have gathered that saw the plane fly over the Pentagon.

Thanks,

Lloyd
No need for sillyness, Mr. England. ^o)

If you're here to stir shit, you came to the wrong place. Watch what you say.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Boonedoggled
Member Avatar

He said, "Well, that's difficult to really determine. I would guess it's somewhere between Great Falls and National Airport, coming what they call the DRA, the down river approach."

...so I said, "Monte, where is it?" and he said, "Well, I'm not really sure but I'd be guessing somewhere maybe between the USA Today building and, and National Airport."

MINETA: Well, the question was where is it coming. And so as I was asking Monte, it was following pretty much the DRA, the down river approach, and it had not crossed over towards the White House or towards the Capitol. It was staying on its line towards what would normally be the traffic pattern into National Airport.

And in fact, later on, in looking at the radar track, the plane had actually over-passed the Pentagon, then turned around and then came back into it, and it never took a wide sweep to cross over to the east side of the White House.

MINETA: Oh, absolutely, it's something like that, but at least at the time the track of the radar was following what would be considered the down-river approach and it never came over to cross the east side of the Potomac River and it just followed the river all the way in.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mineta and Belger directly contradict the southeast side of the White House claim.

Lt. Col. Steve O'Brien's account of what he saw works out perfectly with the radar data if he was where the X is in this image when he first spotted Flight 77.Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Boonedoggled
Member Avatar

Craig
 
I understand that you disagree with me but the difference is that we are explaining exactly HOW his statements contradict the RADES data and you are failing to explain how they make sense with it while literally denying the meaning of the words he uses such as north and west.


North and west. Two different directions. Northwest. One direction.

Again, he was being vague. If he was being precise he would have given heading numbers.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Domenick DiMaggio

CrazyBlackCabbie
Jan 15 2008, 07:04 PM
I was wondering guys, how many witnesses you have gathered that saw the plane fly over the Pentagon.

Thanks,

Lloyd
Mr. England,

Can you explain how you and the stranger removed the pole from your cab for us?
I saw an interview where you were asked about this and had no idea how you did it.


Thanks in advance!!!

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dbalsdon

CrazyBlackCabbie
 
I was wondering guys, how many witnesses you have gathered that saw the plane fly over the Pentagon.

Thanks,

Lloyd


Why is that question "[stirring] s**t"?

It's a valid question.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nevermind
Member Avatar
Oh, you didn't know?
dbalsdon
Jan 16 2008, 12:04 AM
CrazyBlackCabbie
 
I was wondering guys, how many witnesses you have gathered that saw the plane fly over the Pentagon.

Thanks,

Lloyd


Why is that question "[stirring] s**t"?

It's a valid question.
Not the question itself..the guy is goofing around by posing as the taxi driver, Lloyd England.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Pentagon · Next Topic »
Add Reply