Pentagon "NTSB animation" is wrong!

Originally posted by johnlear

Talk about a mess! Let me respectfully suggest that neither you or CL have any idea what you are talking about concerning magnetic heading and true heading. I tried to make it clear in my post but obviously have failed miserably.

Yes, becuase I'm not even aware you were trying to counter what we are saying.

You are mixing apples and oranges and potatoes and calling it carrot juice. From what I am able to figure out here CL is using the term "true heading" erroneously. True heading is magnetic heading less westerly variation or plus easterly variation. True heading should not enter into this debate as it is not relevent or germaine to the issue.

You need to stick with magnetic heading and forget 'true heading', we are not concerned with 'true heading'.

I disagree. But I'm no expert. Perhaps it's all in terminology, since I was thinking of "true" as being relative to geographic north and measured with a compass on a map. Call it what you will... it is supposed to be the same as what you're calling true, but arrived at differently.
The animation's dial shows a mag bearing of 70, the animation next to it shows a path that, when mapped out is 80 from geo north, so about 90 true by your definition, and the animation is therefore internally inconsistent to the tune of 20 degrees. I could not have found this by ignoring what I've called "true heading." I would've just looked at the mag heading and presumed that's what 70 degrees looks like, or 70 after correction, which seems to have been the plan.

To clarify then how to word this truth:
the 70 degree heading from the plane's compass is termed: magnetic?
the 80 degrees from geographic north shown onscreen is 80 degrees what if not "true?"
The 90 degree magnetic heading that would give us is: also magnetic?
And what's the proper term for an internally inconsistent piece of evidence passed off as solid enough to question the official story?
I mean no confusion, so please ask if this is baffling. Just trying to make sure we're all on the same page.

Now from what I understand the magnetic heading to the Pentagon from north of the Citgo would have been 080 degrees magnetic. The heading over the light poles to the Pentagon 070 magnetic.

As above, 90, not 80, once corrected for declination.

If someone wanted the FDR to portray an airplane flying over through the light poles they would have faked a magnetic heading of 070 on the tabular data whether or not it was 080 or whatever.

The CSV shows just that heading, as does the animation dial. Only the screen is 20 deg off, which is what someone might do if they were trying to fake the plane NOT flying into the poles or building.

No, I did not get into the question of where the video or anything else came from. What I was trying to do was explain what the terms meant so that those who really cared could dilly dally around with them at their leisure but not at the expense of misrepresenting what the terms of 'true' heading and 'magnetic' heading really meant.

When I got through reading CL's posts I thought to myself, "There is nothing here that can't be fixed with 120 hours of basic aviation navigation ground school". CL got so deep into mxing it up that I even got confused and heck...I was a pilot who taught navigation!!!

Well I've put in a few hours here, and that's about all I can spare until I feel I NEED to learn more. Please feel free to school me by re-posting some of the graphics used with corrections inserted, because I'm not seeing it yet... Terminology problems, sure, but so long as you understand WHAT I mean (read slow if need be) I can't see how it's wrong.

(To Nick)

Your post "For FL 77 to come in north of the Citgo with a heading that actually matched the video, the true heading would have been 80 degrees. However, the magnetic heading of 70 which is shown on the video, and shown in the csv file corresponds to a true heading of *60* degrees. This puts the flight path even further SOUTH of the Citgo, not north," is so misleading and so inaccurate its downright discouraging.

Disagreed. Nick has it right. It's not that hard, and I'm starting to wonder what you find ENcouraging. I have a witness here who'll testify it was a Global Hawk...

I'm not even sure I want to help you guys sort this out but if you want my help you are going to have to throw away the term 'true' heading and start using 'magnetic' and or 'correct' heading. There is no reason to use true especially when you do not even know what it means.

Although I have been retired for 6 years I still consider myself an expert aviator and navigator and I will help you if that is what you desire. If you wish to continue wallowing in your own gobbledegook...be my guest.

Here I must correct you. What you have so expertly labeled "gobbledegook" is what we call an "investigation." If the facts we're proceding on are flawed, I would like to know. Is there really a problem beyond terminology? (I'd recommend checking the maps, the declination, and reasoning used in this thread carefully before deciding it's off-base - for your own reputation's sake). Then by all means I'll listen.

Thank you

edit to fix quote boxes

[edit on 3-6-2007 by Caustic Logic]

[edit on 4-6-2007 by Caustic Logic]

If it helps to clarify things:

If my magnetic compass is pointing at magnetic North (corrected for deviation), and magnetic variation where I am is 10° W, that means that True North is 10 degrees TO MY RIGHT.

To point my compass at True North, my magnetic heading must read 350°.

So, if my mag heading is 070°, my TRUE heading is 060°, etc...

Hopefully that eliminates any confusion.

[edit on 3-6-2007 by mirageofdeceit]

In Washington DC it's a -10W declination, so you would have to point your compass at 010 magnetic to get it North. It depends on what area you're at, but the NOAA has a good website for figuring out declination for your area. If you're on a West declination, you subtract your declination from your magnetic. If you're on an East declination you add your declination to your magnetic.

[edit on 6/3/2007 by Zaphod58]

West by definition is minus. As John wrote above "West is less, East is more".

[edit on 3-6-2007 by mirageofdeceit]

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit
If it helps to clarify things:

If my magnetic compass is pointing at magnetic North (corrected for deviation), and magnetic variation where I am is 10° W, that means that True North is 10 degrees TO MY RIGHT.

To point my compass at True North, my magnetic heading must read 350°.

So, if my mag heading is 070°, my TRUE heading is 080°, etc...

Hopefully that eliminates any confusion.

[edit on 3-6-2007 by mirageofdeceit]

Right, so if West is LESS, how are you getting a magnetic of 070 and true of 080, which is MORE? The only way that would work is if you were using a 10 degree EAST declination. Just look at the FAA information for Dulles. Runway 30 is a 300 magnetic, and 290 True. So in your example, you should have the same thing we're saying. If your magnetic heading is 070, and you're on a 10 degree west declination, your TRUE is 060. Not 080.

Ooops! Got left/right screwed up. Sorry. Corrected so 70°M = 60°T

[edit on 3-6-2007 by mirageofdeceit]

Originally posted by mirageofdeceit

If it helps to clarify things:

If my magnetic compass is pointing at magnetic North (corrected for deviation), and magnetic variation where I am is 10° W, that means that True North is 10 degrees TO MY RIGHT.

Incorrect. True north will be TO YOUR LEFT.

First:

Please forget deviation. It is an error due to internal factors in the specific airplane. It was used in the old days. Its not used anymore. If you correct for deviation the heading becomes 'compass heading'. For all practical purpose, these days, Magnetic heading IS compass heading because deviation is corrected for my the Air Data Computer or Flight Data Computer.

If your magnetic compass says NORTH or 0 degrees or 360 degrees (all the same thing) and the magnetic variation is 10 W then the true heading is 350, TO YOUR LEFT. (west is least going from magnetic to true).

Remember: when going from True to magnetic east is least (subtract)west is best (add); when going from magnetic to true east is best (add), west is least (subtract).

To point my compass at True North, my magnetic heading must read 350°.

No. When going (converting) from true to magnetic 'west is best': add 10 degrees: 000 (true) +010 (west is best)=010 degrees magnetic heading.

So, if my mag heading is 070°, my TRUE heading is 080°, etc...

No. When going from Magnetic to True, 'west is least' so 070 magnetic: west is least (subtract) 10W = 060 degrees.

If you measure heading on any map (meridians of longitude run from true north to true south) after you get your degrees then ADD westerly variation or subtract easterly variation. Meridians of longitude run from True south to true north and so headings measured in reference to these lines become "true" headings.

Pilots remember it this way:

TRUE VIRGINS MAKE DULL COMPANIONS and East is Least, West is Best.

T plus/minus V equals M plus/minus D equals C

True corrected for Variation equals Magnetic corrected for Deviation makes Compass. East is least west is best.

A "heading" is a course corrected for wind. A 'course' is a line drawn on a map. If there is no wind then the course is the heading (or the heading is the course.)

TC (true course) plus/minus Variation equals Magnetic Course plus/minus deviation equals Compass course:

corrected for wind:

TH (true heading) plus/minus Variation equals Magnetic heading plus/minus deviation equals Compass Heading.

Hopefully that eliminates any confusion.

I hope so too.

Originally posted by johnlear

Although I have been retired for 6 years I still consider myself an expert aviator and navigator and I will help you if that is what you desire. If you wish to continue wallowing in your own gobbledegook...be my guest.

John,

The source of the "gobbledegook" has bee Pilots for 9/11 Truth, of which you are a member. The P49T has made claims of the wrong flight path and wrong altitude, which it supported with both an animation and csv file that it claims came from the NTSB. Later, it is my understanding that P49T has claimed that both the csv file and the animation were subject to some fakery and couldn't be trusted as legitimate. In fact you yourself made this statement about the csv file.

So let's keep this simple. The P49T produced the video "Pandora's Black Box." This video shows an animation that P49T claims originated with the NTSB. The video animation shows a flight path north of the Citgo, which happens to match the eye-witnesses who later appeared in P49T's "brother" organization's video, The PentaCon. Here is a screen capture from the video of the final approach:





The P49T video shows Flight 77 approaching the Pentagon with a magnetic heading of 70 degrees. However, this approach path shown in the animation video is in reality 80 degrees, not 70 degrees. But none of the expert aviators at P49T seemed to notice this, and if they did, they failed to point out this discrepency. Instead, P49T decided to focus on the altimeter reset and the north-of-the-Citgo flight path as some sort of smoking gun.

Here is a graphic that shows the magnetic heading of the approach path and the take-off.





Now there are several issues.

1. The first issue that jumps out is why didn't a single expert aviator from P49T realize that the flight path shown visually in the animation didn't match the magnetic heading shown on the dial face in the video? P49T had this animation for months to analyze. In fact, the animation video and the csv files are the linchpins to justify the existence of P49T.


2. The next issue is why does P49T continue to promote "Pandora's Black Box" since it's based on two items that P49T apparently have claimed are fake -the animation and the csv file?

If the animation and the csv file are phony, then "Pandora's Black Box" is far more misleading than anything CL or I have posted. The whole video is based on the self-admitted faked animation and csv file. It would seem that if P49T had any intellectual honesty, they would pull down the YouTube and Google videos of Pandora's Black Box and admit the folly of spending months analyzing fake data.


3. Third, the csv file and the animation contradict each other. Yet as far as I can tell, P49T has never made an issue of this fact. And yes this is a fact, not an opinion. Again, it would seem to me that a group of expert aviators would have spotted this within the first week they received the CD from the NTSB.


4. And most importantly, if P49T has in their possession data disks from the NTSB that show a) falsified flight path data, and b) an animation that doesn't match the csv file, wouldn't this be big news that would blow open the entire 9/11 investigation? Wouldn't this be a bit more important in the big scheme of things than Hanjour and a co-pilot being able to reset the atlitude trims on descent properly?

So in summary, while I truly appreciate your gracious offer to school me and CL in the science of navigation, it's really a moot point. The animation that the P49T based the Pandora's Black Box video on is internally wrong -the flight path can't be where it's shown and have the heading be 70 degrees. Therefore, the entire premise of the Pandora's Black Box video is totally wrong as well. You can't use a *forged* animation to prove a point about the *real* flight path.

As a member of P49T, where do you stand?

If the animation is wrong, shouldn't P49T take down the Pandora video? Or is it bringing in too much traffic and too much money to take it down? Frankly, P49T is still selling a DVD that the members know, or should know, is based on fraudulent information.

So a "yes" or "no" is the only thing that's needed from you, not lessons in navigation. Does the animation's 70 degree heading match the visual flight path shown in the animation? If it doesn't, then imo if P49T had any intellectual honesty or integrity, they'd remove the Pandora's Black Box video from their site.


[edit on 4-6-2007 by nick7261]

Originally posted by johnlearYou need to stick with magnetic heading and forget 'true heading', we are not concerned with 'true heading'.

I think we are, since the track everyone has been plotting has been laid on Google maps with the North arrow oriented to TRUE north. If the attention diverting aircraft in question was pointed at 070 mag just before it "flew over the Pentagon while the missle w/ the DU warhead impacted the Pentagon" then it would have definitely flown over the south side of the Citgo if it passed anywhere near the Pentagon.

Originally posted by darkbluesky

Originally posted by johnlearYou need to stick with magnetic heading and forget 'true heading', we are not concerned with 'true heading'.

I think we are, since the track everyone has been plotting has been laid on Google maps with the North arrow oriented to TRUE north. If the attention diverting aircraft in question was pointed at 070 mag just before it "flew over the Pentagon while the missle w/ the DU warhead impacted the Pentagon" then it would have definitely flown over the south side of the Citgo if it passed anywhere near the Pentagon.

You're 100% right. Plus, if you look at the animation video it shows a magnetic heading of 70 which can't match the visual flight path shown in the video.

Originally posted by johnlear

No. When going from Magnetic to True, 'west is least' so 070 magnetic: west is least (subtract) 10W = 060 degrees.

This is exactly the point that Caustic pointed out, which proves the animation is wrong. If the magnetic heading was 70 degrees, then the true heading was 60 degrees. A true heading of 60 degrees means one of two things:

1) Flight 77 approached the Pentagon south of the Citgo, or

2) Flight 77 approached the Pentagon north of the Citgo towards the far left corner of the west face of the Pentagon.

Either of these two scenarios proves the animation that P49T used in their Pandora's Black Box video is wrong. The only question that remains is whether the P49T faked the animation to make their movie, or whether the NTSB or FBI faked the animation. Or maybe somebody else faked the animation and gave it to P49T, who somehow, despite their vast wealth of aviation experience, missed the obvious evidence that the video is fake.

Even if we completely ignore true vs magnetic, there's no way that the animation plane could have gone North of the Citgo. A 070 would have had it South, lining up perfectly with the light poles and damage. Which again, is the point of this thread. I've found at least two other places talking about the exact same thing, and both have found almost word for word what we have been saying here about this.

Havent read this thread... but heres a reply from P4T Co-Founder

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Sorry we got cross-threaded there JDX.
There's some stuff to learn over there.

Corrections Time!

Top o’ the page I said

80 from geo north, so about 90 true by your definition,

When I meant to say “90 mag, 80 true” Bolding errors baaad

Originally posted by nick7261

Originally posted by johnlear
No. When going from Magnetic to True, 'west is least' so 070 magnetic: west is least (subtract) 10W = 060 degrees.

This is exactly the point that Caustic pointed out, which proves the animation is wrong.

Props to MoD for pointing it out first when I plain forgot it. THEN I verified and vouched for it and stand by it as does Lear and Nick and Zaphod and I guess JDX and of course MoD when he doesn’t get momentarily mixed up.

Well, i briefly read over the top page...so i'll copy and paste the real work here.


From the Math/Statistics expert

I will attempt to explain why the animation is so critical. The fdr and csv files are altered in heading and coordinates (latitude and longitude). This is a FACT, and is not even open to debate anymore. The lingering questions surround at what point the alterations were made in the flight path. The animation is the result of physical parameters such as velocity, acceleration, and other established engineering parameters. It obviously does not care what the heading is set at or whether someone has changed it or not. Also, the animation was not sent to all of the FOIA requestors, but to only one individual. This leads me to believe that it was an inadvertent disclosure (or something else I won’t discuss at this time).

My readers will recall that I plotted one of the physical parameters, acceleration versus one of the suspected changed parameters, heading. The results were consistent with alteration. The correlation that indeed exists for the parameters do not intersect the origin of their graph (0, 0) as would be expected (fdr file) for a normal population. Instead, the data is offset to the upper right and the lower left quadrant is sparsely populated for the first half of the flight path and virtually empty for the later half. To someone like me that is VERY significant, but I wanted to wait for the full animation to verify my suspicions. Indeed I have verified that the animation represents the “real world” and the data files do not.

I will refer my readers to a previous post on magnetic heading and the corrections required to get TRUE heading. Just remember as I walk through the animation, subtract 10 degrees (approximately) from the display (magnetic) heading to get the “true” heading.



This frame is right at take-off from Dulles while Flight 77 is still over the runway. I would ask that the folks at P4T correct me in comments on any misconceptions that I may have about aviation stuff. What follows is my understanding of flight stuff based on more of an engineering perspective than that of a pilot. I have indicated the magnetic heading indicator which at this point reads 300 degrees. It is known that the runway at Dulles is oriented to 290 degrees. This enables me to verify that everything is good up to this point and the animation agrees with the fdr and csv file headings. It appears that the indicator is pulling the value stored in the fdr file for display. Also important to note is that the controller is giving AA77 the heading (270 degrees) it is to change to. I noticed that for most major changes in heading there are similar instructions EXCEPT at a critical point I will note later. The time is in GMT, so subtract 4 hours to get EDT.




In this frame, AA77 has completed the turn to 270 degrees. Note the black lines that form a grid on the “ground”. They represent latitude and longitude lines and a heading of 270 degrees would be due west and parallel to the grid lines. However, the TRUE path along the ground is to the left and angled (260 degrees) relative to the latitude lines. This is exactly what would be expected if the heading matches the animation (which it does at this point). Now note the turn ahead. I also find it curious that the fuselage of the model lines up with a “true” heading of 270 degrees while the ground path lines are definitely indicating a true heading of 260.

cont below...

The first thing I noted as odd was there was no clearance from the controller to make the turn. If there was, then it would be a matter of just comparing the controller instructions to the actual heading. What is important to note is, about halfway through the turn, the magnetic heading is still at 270 degrees when obviously the heading has changed. The true heading at this point is at about 270 degrees (parallel to the ground line), during the first half of this turn, the magnetic heading value was “trimmed” by 10 degrees.


I confess a little ignorance at this point. I’m not sure if the controller requesting a heading of 270 means “magnetic” or “true” heading. The end result is a true heading of 270 degrees. Regardless, the initial turn on departure has a true heading of 260 and a magnetic heading of 270. The magnetic heading remains relatively stable at 270 while the true heading changes by 10 degrees to match it during this interval.




In this frame, AA77 has completed that turn and is on a straight flight path. The heading indicated is 279 degrees which should represent a true heading of 269 degrees, or almost parallel to the ground grid lines (latitude). Clearly that is not the case. The magnetic heading indicator now indicates true heading and there is NO correction. Recall that the animation flight path is derived from the physics information and the most likely the magnetic heading is what is stored in the fdr file. What I believe to be the case is that the heading data in the fdr file has been “trimmed” by 10 degrees.





This is confirmed at a point later in the flight path when the true path parallels the ground grid lines and the heading indicator reads 270, which is equal to the true heading.




At the end of the first half of the flight path, the magnetic heading has been “trimmed” by 10 degrees. The magnetic heading and true heading are approximately the same at this point.



After the turn back east, the “trim” has remained unchanged. At a heading of 90 degrees, the true heading is indeed due east (90 degrees) and parallel to the ground grid lines. I must note however that in the previous lengthy interval the true heading appears to be a few degrees greater than 90 degrees.





(snip for space)

The folks at P4T have noted most of this already. My purpose was to see if the shift in the physics parameters versus heading parameters could be accounted for in the animation. I feel like they have been. Although the 10 degree heading “trim” is subtle in the final “turn” maneuver, the “trim” at the beginning of flight at 8:21:35 is downright blatant. An obvious 10 degree turn is made with NO evident change in heading (except to fluctuate between 270 and 271). I find it extremely curious after reviewing the United 93 controller transcript that giving heading via radio seems rather common, but in the case of AA77 the only heading given is the initial 270 heading. Later communications which refer to heading are ambiguous “turn 10 degrees right” or something to that effect. The obvious omission of such information in the controller transcript which could be used to verify heading elements strongly suggests to me that the controller transcript has been edited.


full article - 911files.info...

Summary - The animation heading (instrument reading) was altered to show a southern approach. If the heading wasnt altered it would show 090 Mag or 080 True. Just as the plot shows to the north of Citgo.

typos.


[edit on 4-6-2007 by johndoex]

Alteration between csv file and animation regarding altitude... to make animation aircraft/altimeter appear lower than actual...

The cvs shows pressure alt throughout


IAD Depature
cvs file
08:19:01 41 feet

animation
08:19:01 300 feet

Originally posted by johndoex
Well, i briefly read over the top page...so i'll copy and paste the real work here.

then a well-deserved multi-post plug. I scanned it too, and found nothing new, I'm sure you found nothing much new either, just that the animation the NTSB put out shows a mag heading of 90 mislabeled as 70, about what this guy found, but I'm just soooo DIY. So we're in rough agreement on the major points, and from there it's all opinion and how you weight the evidence, which version is true, etc.

If you have anything new to add, please feel free.


[edit on 4-6-2007 by Caustic Logic]

The above article shows how the animation heading was correct during departure and 'trimmed' 20 degrees of heading through the flight. If you follow the article in detail, it shows how this is blatant in the beginning of the flight (the first 10 degrees that was trimmed) as compared to the lat/long grid on the ground.. and a bit more subtle during the final 330 deg turn to trim another 10 degrees.

This is not opinion. It is demonstrated fact through research.

Feel free to show us where John Farmer was wrong in his thorough analysis and i'll be sure to let him know. So far his analysis looks spot on and is thorough through the entire flight showing details of exactly where the headings were 'trimmed'.


typos - again.. ugh... been up all night.. sorry folks.

[edit on 4-6-2007 by johndoex]

That wasn't the point. I'm pretty sure a couple pages back Nick also found the bearing at takeoff was correct while the end was not, and off by 20 degrees, so a 20 degree trim during the simulated flight and hence the accurate thread title "NTSB animation is WRONG." It's looking like your expert correctly analysed this animation as we have done. Question is, WHY is it wrong?

If you spot any errors or misrepresentation fell free...

ETA: seeing how you sum up the 20 degrees was split, w/10 shaved early on and ten in the turn. That I think is new and somewhat interesting. Thx. Hadn't located the change yet myself.


[edit on 4-6-2007 by Caustic Logic]