The Center for Cooperative Research
U: P:
Not registered yet? Register here
 
Search
Advanced Search


Main Menu
Home
History Engine Sub-Menu
Timelines
Entities
Forum
Miscellaneous Sub-Menu
Donate
Links
End of Main Menu

Submit a timeline entry
Donate: If you think this site is important, please help us out financially. We need your help!
Email updates


Click here to join: Suggest changes to existing data, add new data to the website, or compile your own timeline. More Info >>

Welcome to the Center for Cooperative Research forum. This forum is intended to enable additional collaboration and facilitate the sharing of information, which is what this site is all about. Any questions / suggestions / criticisms regarding the site in general are also welcome.

Goto Thread: PreviousNext
Goto: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
THE 9-11 PENTAGON PROBLEM. WHY IT WASN'T HIT BY A BOEING 757.
Posted by: TheTruth (IP Logged)
Date: June 16, 2004 11:15PM

THE 9-11 PENTAGON PROBLEM.

The following diagram concisely summarizes the problem with the "official line" concerning the Pentagon crash. The diagram is from this document.

In the diagram a Boeing 757 has been superimposed on the plan of the damaged section of the Pentagon. The Boeing 757 wingspan is 125 feet. Using this fact, the image of the Boeing 757 has been scaled to its correct size. The angle of impact of the aircraft was very close to 50 degrees (to the wall).

Using basic trigonometry, one calculates that the width of the visibly damaged section of the Pentagon wall should be about 164 feet. However, pictures of the Pentagon after the crash show that the damaged area is at most 120 feet across. Some 44 feet too narrow. In fact, a number of windows remain unbroken within the area that should have been impacted by the wings-tips and tail.

The width between the undamaged concrete columns of the ground floor of the outer wall, is at most 100 feet. Wing damage extends a further 20 feet across the next floor (second floor) for a total width of 120 feet.

In the diagram the undamaged columns are colored light grey, while the heavily damaged columns are colored blue and brown.



How The Measurements Were Made.

The distance from the Pentagon wall to A-E Drive is 220 feet (see the arrow on the right).
Distances in pictures can be measured in terms of the number of pixels (picture elements) that are spanned.
The distance from the Pentagon wall to A-E Drive can be measured and is 355 pixels (which we know corresponds to 220 feet).
This means that to convert pixels to feet, we have to scale, that is, multiply by a factor of 220/355 = 0.619718
This reference allows us to establish other distances in the picture.
(To convert feet back to pixels, we would multiply by 355/220 = 1.6136)
The wingtips of the 757 are found to be 202 pixels (between the inner sides of the black lines) apart.
This is 202 x 0.619718 = 125.183 feet, which is pretty damn close to the real wingspan of 124 feet 10 inches.
As a check we know that the columns in the diagram are 10 feet apart.
On measuring we find that they are 16 pixels apart.
Now 16 pixels = 16 x 0.619718 = 9.91549 feet apart. So things are looking good.
Other distances can be established similarly.

So What Does This Mean.

So, it appears that the outer half of both wings failed to hit the Pentagon wall. How can this be? Of course, a pertinent question is:

How much damage would one expect the outer half of the wings to do?

The following photo shows the damage (circled in red) inflicted on the steel columns of the World Trade Center by a wing-tip of a Boeing 767.



Since even the wing-tips did massive damage to the steel columns of the WTC, we would expect that the outer halves of both wings of the Boeing 757 would do even more damage to the Pentagon's brick-fill walls and reinforced concrete columns (these were hidden behind a limestone facade). That is, we would expect extensive damage along the entire 164 feet of the wall (that would have necessarily been impacted by any plane with a 125 foot wingspan, hitting at 50 degrees). But pictures of the Pentagon show a much smaller zone of impact. This leads one to believe that the Pentagon was hit by a significantly smaller aircraft.



The above composite photo shows the Pentagon wall as it would have appeared before the collapse of the upper floors. It gives a great visualization of what has been discussed above. Where is the damage from the outer part of the wings? Where is the damage from the tail? Below we provide close-ups of the (lack of) damage to the areas that have been circled in red.



The three ground floor windows in this picture are the windows in the lefthand circle of the composite photo above. The left wing-tip should have impacted these windows. Note the unbroken window. This photo clearly shows the lack of damage by the outer left wing to a section of wall that it should have impacted. Another view of this section of Pentagon wall is provided in the last photo.



The windows in this picture are in the righthand circle of the composite photo above. The aircrafts tail should have impacted to about the top of the unbroken windows. Yes, the unbroken windows. This photo clearly shows the lack of damage due to the aircrafts 44 foot 6 inch high tail.



A closer view of the (lack of) damage due to the outer left wing. The windows in this photo are the two leftmost of the three ground floor windows shown in the above photo of this section of wall. This photo was taken considerably later than the one above, but sometime before the burnt out car was hauled away.

So, all in all, there is a huge amount of doubt concerning the validity of the official Pentagon story. Assuming the Bush administration has nothing to hide, much of this doubt could be removed by the administration allowing independent investigators to inspect the crash debris recovered from the Pentagon and by allowing independent investigators access to the black boxes and voice recorders.

Since the Bush administration has refused any such access, one can only conclude that they are hiding something.

From The Pentagon Problem in a Nutshell.

[members.fortunecity.com]
[911review.org]
[guardian.150m.com]
[guardian.250free.com]



Edited 1 times. Last edit at 06/16/04 11:37PM by TheTruth.

Re: THE 9-11 PENTAGON PROBLEM. WHY IT WASN'T HIT BY A BOEING 757.
Posted by: bonkedproducer (IP Logged)
Date: June 21, 2004 01:30PM

[www.snopes.com]

Next topic please.

Re: THE 9-11 PENTAGON PROBLEM. WHY IT WASN'T HIT BY A BOEING 757.
Posted by: TheTruth (IP Logged)
Date: June 23, 2004 07:21PM

As regards snopes.com

Thierry Meyssans theory is not a Mason Theory or is it (more likely a Jewish Mason theory)?

Anyway, the missile aspect of it is disinformation, as is obvious to any thinking person.

Re: THE 9-11 PENTAGON PROBLEM. WHY IT WASN'T HIT BY A BOEING 757.
Posted by: ecco (IP Logged)
Date: June 29, 2004 03:16PM

I'm gonna go along with your contention that the Pentagon wasn't hit by an airplane.

That begs the question...where did the plane go that supposedly hit it?



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Except where otherwise noted, the textual content of each timeline is licensed under the Creative Commons License below:

Creative Commons License Home| About this Site| Development| Donate| Contact Us
Terms of Use