Part 1 available here - http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=6559 .
Part 2 available here - http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=6594
"It's The End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine)" – R.E.M.
(8) Flight data recorder (Part II) – AA Flight 77
(8)-1 Integrated Consultants, Inc. created an animation of the Pentagon approach and impact of AA Flight 77 – click here . The animation was compiled from the FDR output, as published by the NTSB in the "Specialist's Factual Report of Investigation Digital Flight Data Recorder" for AA Flight 77 - http://www.ntsb.gov/info/AAL77_fdr.pdf .
The entity making the claim that the NTSB lied within their published reports that detail the flight data, when they are compared to the raw data in the comma separated value (CSV) database is Pilots for 911 Truth.org ( http://pilotsfor911truth.org/store.html ). Interestingly, though, and much unlike the NTSB, you have to purchase their DVD to see where the NTSB has lied (Chapters 1 and 2 of Pandora's Black Box). This act alone makes me question this group's motives and sincerity. We have only their "word" at their web site that we had been lied to - http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pentagon.html .
"1. The current FDR shows 480' MSL True Altitude, too high to hit the light poles. What are your findings of True Altitude at end of data recording 09:37:44. Why did you provide a Flight Data Recorder that shows the aircraft too high without a side letter of explanation? How did you come to your conclusion."
With respect to the claim that the aircraft was too high to have hit the light poles on approach, as well as the Pentagon itself, I do not have access to the CSV database that Pilots for 911 Truth.org references. The report mentioned above only presents an analog display of the flight parameters – Pressure Altitude as feet is one of them. This parameter is printed in multiple at the bottom of a number of the plots (pp. II-5 – 6, II-9 – 10, and II-14) but possesses a scale of 0 to 40,000 feet that is unable to discern (with much accuracy) gradients of less than 10,000 feet.
Pressure Altitude is typically used at elevations in excess of 18,000 feet for maintaining separation from other aircraft. Question 1 (Q1) at the linked web site is misleading. This parameter is NEVER a good indicator of actual altitude and why Pilots for 911 Truth.org even pursues it as an issue is confusing.
For clarification, the term "FL 180" mentioned in Q4 references an aircraft flying along whatever level in the atmosphere yields a particular atmospheric pressure, namely the pressure that's anticipated at 18,000 MSL under conditions of standard temperature and pressure (STP); this is usually set by the pilot to 29.92 inches of mercury (Hg). The aircraft will fly higher above the ground on a high pressure (or high temperature) day, and lower or closer to the ground on a low pressure (or low temperature) day. On a day with particularly low pressure, it's possible for the actual altitude associated with FL180 to be so low that this height can conflict with pilots flying an indicated altitude of 17,500 feet.
For reference, the remaining plots display altitude as Mean Seal Level (MSL) True Altitude with a scale of either 0 to 35,000 or 0 to 40,000 feet. The MSL True Altitude is a mostly arbitrary reference point. "Mean" details the "average", because sea levels do vary with the tides, and the wind causes waves, so mean sea level averages out all these effects to a single "mean" sea level. This too can vary significantly and is not viewed as a good indicator of altitude above the ground.
"3. What is the Absolute Altitude and end of data recording? How did you come to your conclusion."
Given how close to the ground the aircraft was on 9/11, the Absolute Altitude, noted in Q3, is the best indicator of the actual height of the aircraft. Where I do not have access to the CSV database, I cannot comment on what the Pilots for 911 Truth.org have noted on this parameter – other than they want to know what the NTSB recorded at the end. Why don't these Truthers reference the last known value for the absolute altitude...?
My guess is that it shows a value closer to the ground. Regardless, it makes me wonder why they do not include it with their questions...
A quick comment on the telephone conversation at the referenced web site, I didn't notice the caller informing the responders that they were being taped. Hmmm, any privacy violations there? Apparently NOT when the "truth" is on the line! This hypocrisy that Truthers practice in their zealous quest for the truth – infringement on other peoples' rights – is intolerable, you know.
(8)-2 Witness statements that detail the approach and impact of AA Flight 77 have been compiled here - click here . Where the assertions offered by Mr. Watts that "policemen" at the Citgo service station witnessed a path other than that which was reported on the FDR, I offer these testimonies:
Albert Hemphill – "...The aircraft was at a sharp downward angle of attack, on a direct course for the Pentagon. It was "clean", in as much as, there were no flaps applied and no apparent landing gear deployed. He was slightly left wing down as he appeared in my line of sight, as if he'd just "jinked" to avoid something. As he crossed Route 110 he appeared to level his wings, making a slight right wing slow adjustment as he impacted low on the Westside of the building to the right of the helo, tower and fire vehicle around corridor 5..."
Hmmm... the aircraft was left wing down right before the highway and corrects as he crosses the highway to fly level.
D.S. Khavkin – "First, the plane knocked down a number of street lamp poles, then headed directly for the Pentagon..."
Hey, here are those light poles going down that some seemed worried about.
Stephen McGraw – ""The traffic was very slow moving, and at one point just about at a standstill." "I was in the left hand lane with my windows closed. I did not hear anything at all until the plane was just right above our cars." McGraw estimates that the plane passed about 20 feet over his car, as he waited in the left hand lane of the road, on the side closest to the Pentagon. "The plane clipped the top of a light pole just before it got to us, injuring a taxi driver, whose taxi was just a few feet away from my car. "
Here's a reference to the light poles and closeness of the aircraft to the ground.
Mary Ann Owens – "I could see office walls through the broken outer walls, then smoke and flames engulfed the west wall. Perhaps 10 seconds had passed since I first saw the plane. At first no one moved. Then debris began falling over the cars."
Well, well – falling debris and she was on the highway between Arlington national Cemetery and Pentagon.
Steve Storti – "Time seemed to slip into slow motion as he watched the plane cross over Route 395, tip its left wing as it passed the Navy annex, veer sharply and then slice into the Pentagon."
Again, a left wing dip near the highway.
Okay, these are just a few of the witness in the listing. All of them seem to counter the testimony offered by Mr. Watts' assertion of the unnamed and unreferenced "policemen". Huh. I wonder if the Pilots for 911 Truth .org interviewed these people for the height of the aircraft immediately before impact, its flight path, and wing posture.
My guess is that they didn't.
How much more truth does a Truther need on these FDR concerns to accept the authenticity of the units and their outputs as the "real deal"?
