The Impossibility of CIT's Flyover... many SHOULD have seen it!

And Craig Ranke runs away from the evidence again.

Chicken.

reply to post by tezzajw

I wonder if the large fireball and huge cloud of debris may have obscured his view of a plane flying away? Read the quote, it hung around for several minutes and the initial burst was several hundred feet in the air.

Did you listen to the audio?

The controllers reported that the aircraft crashed. That fact alone confirms that they did not witness a flyover.

Did you look at the two images I posted?

Do you believe the fireball and smoke cloud expanded far enough and fast enough to the east to obscure the view of a fast flying 757 from the controllers that were located 1.25 miles from the Pentagon?

Originally posted by Boone 870
The controllers reported that the aircraft crashed.

If they couldn't see the plane, how could they report that it crashed?

Do you believe the fireball and smoke cloud expanded far enough and fast enough to the east to obscure the view of a fast flying 757 from the controllers that were located 1.25 miles from the Pentagon?

I wasn't there, so I don't know. Were you there to see how much vision the fireball and dust cloud obscured?

From a distance of 1.25 miles, a 757 (155 feet long) could be obscured in a fireball that shoots hundreds of feet into the air and produces a dust cloud lasting several minutes.

According to your quote, there was a fireball hundreds of feet, straight after the explosion, while a dust cloud persisted for several minutes, right?

[edit on 19-10-2008 by tezzajw]

Originally posted by Boone 870

About 9:30, the phone that connects his tower to the Secret Service rang. A voice on the other end said an unidentified aircraft was speeding toward Washington. Stephenson looked at the radarscope and saw that the jet was about five miles to the west.

I'm curious if that call can be confirmed? If so, who was it, from the Secret Service who made the call? People on telephones do have names. For how long had the Secret Service been tracking the plane before alerting the tower? Why was the aircraft 'unidentified' to the Secret Service - don't they have radar facilities?

I'm just wondering, that's all. The typical chorus can flame away, as per usual.

Official crash time is listed at 9.37.44, right? So if the call was made at 9.30, then the plane had 7 minutes and 44 seconds to travel a distance of 5 miles? I didn't think that planes could fly that slow! Wouldn't that be less than stall speed?

A plane travelling at 530 mph, will cover around 62 miles in seven minutes... What time was that call made again?

A plane travelling at 530 mph will take around 56 seconds to cover 5 miles. What time was that call made again?

[edit on 19-10-2008 by tezzajw]

reply to post by tezzajw


I'm going to answer both posts with one reply.

As for them not seeing the impact and knowing the plane crashed, the explosion was a good clue. But even if they couldn't figure out that it crashed, there is no way that they would have missed the plane flying out over the Potomac and flying off. Even at a mile or just over a mile a 757 isn't THAT hard to see.

As for the not being able to identify the plane, with no transponder they knew only that it was a plane. No radar station would have known WHAT plane it was. They could see that there was a plane there from the Primary return, but the Secondary would have been all the identifying information that would have told them exactly what plane it was.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
But even if they couldn't figure out that it crashed, there is no way that they would have missed the plane flying out over the Potomac and flying off. Even at a mile or just over a mile a 757 isn't THAT hard to see.

To see the plane 5 miles out, he must have taken the call at least a minute earlier. He would have finished the call around 9.36.44.

Now, he claimed the call arrived around 9.30. He's in error by about 6 minutes. How much can Stephenson recall, if he's not sure about the time by 6 minutes? Was he looking for a 757 flying away, given the size of the explosion that was larger than a 757 and may have obscured one flying away?

But the smoke column went straight up. Even if it obscured the 757 for a second or two, the plane supposedly flew out over the river and then turned and flew up the river. How could the smoke column going straight up obscure it up over the river if it was on the side of the building opposite the river.

As for the time difference I'm not surprised that he wasn't sure of the time with everything else going on that day.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
But the smoke column went straight up.

How do you know? Were you there to see it? If only we had some video footage, hmmm...

Read Boone's quote. There was a large cloud of dust and debris that hung in the air. That also may have helped to obscure a plane flying away.

I'm not sure how a debris cloud can go 'straight up' while at the same time it 'hung in the air' for several minutes.

As for the time difference I'm not surprised that he wasn't sure of the time with everything else going on that day.

Which is why I wouldn't be surpised if he didn't see a 757 flying away, with everything else going on that day.

[edit on 19-10-2008 by tezzajw]

Originally posted by Zaphod58
As for the not being able to identify the plane, with no transponder they knew only that it was a plane. No radar station would have known WHAT plane it was.

So how do they know that it was the alleged Flight AA77?

If it could not have been identified by radar, what proof is there that it was Flight AA77?

reply to post by jthomas

Yes, really. The photo does not show a jet flying over the Pentagon. Why did you lie about that, Craig?

actually it was a good idea to post those pictures

www.abovetopsecret.com...

it gives everyone a chance to see what a plane would look like in the sky..
I think it shows quite conclusively how hard it is to judge distance, when trying to determine where in the sky the plane actually is.. adds a lot of doubt to the validity of the "13 eyewitnesses".. this is the simple solution.. "they could not tell exactly where the plane was".. the only ones to have a legitimate vantage point where discernment of distance would not be a problem, would be those at the citgo station.. so that reduces the number of verifiable NoC witnesses..

maybe someone could produce a graphic to show how gauging distances can be deceptive..

if we are to consider that there was a grand illusion regarding an explosion, a plane, and media manipulation.. then why not something much simpler?
the witnesses' depth perception?

reply to post by tezzajw

If they couldn't see the plane, how could they report that it crashed?

They saw the plane before it crashed, it disappeared behind some buildings for a few seconds, and the plane never reemerged.

I wasn't there, so I don't know. Were you there to see how much vision the fireball and dust cloud obscured?

No. Have you seen the security gate videos that captured the fireball?

From a distance of 1.25 miles, a 757 (155 feet long) could be obscured in a fireball that shoots hundreds of feet into the air and produces a dust cloud lasting several minutes.

Flight 77 wasn't traveling vertically, it was traveling horizontally.

Originally posted by Boone 870
They saw the plane before it crashed, it disappeared behind some buildings for a few seconds, and the plane never reemerged.

So they never saw it crash, right? They presumed it crashed. Could they confirm that they were watching AA77? According to Zaphod, without a transponder code, there is no radar that could have confirmed that plane was AA77.

Have you seen the security gate videos that captured the fireball?

I've seen one video that allegedly shows about five (or six?) frames of something unidentifiable approaching the Pentagon, before a large fireball erupts. Do those videos also show the dust and debris cloud that hung in the area?

Flight 77 wasn't traveling vertically, it was traveling horizontally.

Explosions occur in three dimensions. They explode up and all around. A dust cloud that hung in the air would have covered a three dimensional space.

Have you managed to confirm the time that the call arrived at the tower, Boone? It will help us all realise how many minutes that Stephenson was in error when he estimated the time.

reply to post by tezzajw













Most of the smoke was going up in a column, with it eventually switching to a North-South direction. How is that smoke column going to obscure a plane the size of the 757? And an air traffic controller that works that airport for any period of time is going to notice a plane that is NOT under their control travelling in a direction that planes DON'T travel. Especially since they were looking AT the building at the time of the explosion. There is no WAY that the smoke column that came off that building in these pictures, or in any of the descriptions would have been anywhere nearly big enough to obscure a 757 travelling at high speed that flew west over the river and then turned north as is claimed.

reply to post by tezzajw


Yes, smoke and explosions do travel in three dimensions. However one direction that it would have gone was blocked off to it, so it would have gone more vertical and back into the open direction.

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
The plane would get a second glance from those that did not see the impact.

yes you're right.....

common sense tells us it would go like this :

honest citizen : while i heard the explosion i looked and saw a silver plane flying immediately away.

fbi agent : obviously that wasn't the plane that hit the building. must have been something coming in routine for a landing at reagan. there were a couple other planes in the vacinity.

honest citizen : oh.


and then the bush apologist asks "why aren't these people who believe they saw a 2nd plane that wasn't the plane that was said to have hit the pentagon goin public?" bush is telling the truth!!!!111!!!11 pwned.



what is 'throat yogurts' jref name? somebody clue me in.

[edit on 19-10-2008 by Terrorcell]

[edit on 19-10-2008 by Terrorcell]

reply to post by tezzajw

So they never saw it crash, right? They presumed it crashed.

The controllers could not see the point of impact, we've covered this already.

Could they confirm that they were watching AA77? According to Zaphod, without a transponder code, there is no radar that could have confirmed that plane was AA77.

No, but recorded radar data and the FDR traced the plane from its departure out of Dulles all the way to the Pentagon.

I've seen one video that allegedly shows about five (or six?) frames of something unidentifiable approaching the Pentagon, before a large fireball erupts. Do those videos also show the dust and debris cloud that hung in the area?

You seem to be missing the point, Tezza. CIT claims that Hollywood special effects type explosions were perfectly coordinated with the flyover to deceive everyone within view of the impact point.

That is, explosions were set off at the exact moment when Flight 77 was above the impact point. That means that the fireball would have had to out accelerate the airplane across the top of the Pentagon and east over the river.

Have you managed to confirm the time that the call arrived at the tower, Boone? It will help us all realise how many minutes that Stephenson was in error when he estimated the time.

Did you listen to the audio?

The controllers were made aware of the 757 when it was 5 miles west of the airport (approximation), 58 seconds later they mention that it crashed.






[edit on 19-10-2008 by Boone 870]

Originally posted by Boone 870
The controllers could not see the point of impact, we've covered this already.

So they didn't see the plane crash. Thanks.

No, but recorded radar data and the FDR traced the plane from its departure out of Dulles all the way to the Pentagon.

How can the recorded radar prove that the plane was AA77 if the transponder was turned off during the journey? Without the transponder switched on, those radar blips could have been any other plane with its transponder turned off. Were they real transponder readings or part of the training drills that were operating that day?

The controllers were made aware of the 757 when it was 5 miles east of the airport (approximation), 58 seconds later they mention that it crashed.

What time was the call made, Boone? It helps to know how much Stephenson was in error, from the 9.30 time that was mentioned.

Boone's quote mentioned 'west' not 'east'. I'm presuming you made a typo here, unless there's more to the story that we don't know about?

I can't download or listen to any audio right now. If there's something you want me to hear, then type me the transcript. I'll listen to it when I am next able.

reply to post by tezzajw


There were no training drills that involved false returns being put onto FAA radar screens. The only false returns were put on NORAD screens. So if they compare the radar data from the FAA and NORAD screens and one shows the blip that the other doesn't they can find the course for the plane. They eventually traced the route for Flight 77 from take off to impact with the Pentagon. The Primary return was identified from the time the transponder was shut off.

Controllers that day weren't able to track the plane on 9/11, but when they went back and went over the radar data when they weren't under the pressure they were that day, they were able to track the flight the entire time it was in the air.

reply to post by tezzajw


Hey Tezza:

You say you have only seen a six or so frame video. Here is the longer video.

www.youtube.com...

Curious, people think that there was any reason to fly the plane away? Why not just crash it into the pentagon? The terror attack was supposed to be planes. Why use hollywood effects? Why flyover if that was much more likely to be seen then actually colliding with the building. They could still set off explosives if they wanted to!

Why fly a plane out, get the plane into position, and then not use it? That does not make sense at all.

Also, when it comes to proof, people trust their eyes too much. Just because one guy though one of the WTC flights looked like a cargo plane does not mean everyone else is wrong or paid off. People show up randomly though they have schedules. Not perfectly on topic but insinuating that all witnesses were paid off insinuates that a large portion of the cities of DC and NYC are in on a conspiracy. That moves us closer to the infamous "everyone is out to get me situation."

If there was a conspiracy the perpatrators would have known in advance what the effects of a plane would be and known how much damage would be cause. They could have used bombs if they had wanted to and blamed it on the terrorists. What is THE POINT of using airplanes if you want bomb damage. No BS, "well they want to confuse you", etc.


[edit on 19-10-2008 by newagent89]

[edit on 19-10-2008 by newagent89]

Slightly off topic, but why weren't the attacks on the twin towers flyovers as well? if I was either a terrorist group OR a government group planning these attacks I would keep the plan simple, as in all planes fly over the buildings at the exact time of the planted explosions...OR All planes fly into the buildings creating the explosions.

Back on topic, witness statements from people on the non impact side of the Pentagon would be pretty definitive don't you think?