The lack of foundation damage at the Pentagon is irreconcilable with the official reports and is strong physical evidence contradicting the 9/11 official story.
The ASCE Building Performance Report has meticulously documented the damage to the building and has come to the conclusion that all damage from the alleged plane impact was limited to the bottom two floors, but primarily below the 2nd floor slab so that 90 tons of jumbo jet would have slid on it's belly across the 1st floor slab all the way through the C-ring.
|The aircraft seems for the most part to have slipped between the first floor|
slab on grade and the second floor.
They also suggest that the right wing of the plane had to have been tilted up to account for the generator trailer and the anomalous damage to the facade.
With a finite amount of space between the bottom two floors and the required wing tilt that they report, the ASCE report illustrates that about half of the left engine would have burrowed into the foundation of the building:
Here is an RB-211 for scale:
The engine is about 6 tons and would necessitate an incredible amount of kinetic force attached to a 90 ton jet traveling 535mph.
Yet the ASCE report does not list any significant damage to the 1st floor slab and it appears relatively untouched in all photographs all the way through to the C-ring hole.
All of these images from the FEMA site were taken by Jocelyn Augustino on 9/21/2001 just 10 days after the event:
Here is an example of what a plane crash would do to a ground slab:
What underscores this irreconcilable anomaly is that the topography and trends reported in the FDR prove that the alleged aircraft would have had a noticeable descent angle as depicted in these images created by Pilots for 9/11 Truth based off trends in the final values of the 2006 released NTSB black box data:
Based on the descent rate provided by the NTSB in the FDR data, due to the G loads required for that vertical speed; it is aeronautically impossible for this aircraft to have pulled out of that dive instantaneously and be level with the lawn as depicted in the 2002 leaked and 2006 released Pentagon security video.
Further, the FDR does not show and has not recorded any positive load required to pull out of this dive. In fact, it shows less than 1 G for that segment which represents a "pushing forward" motion on the yoke, as seen in the animation reconstruction provided by the NTSB (See Pandora's Black Box - Chapter Two - Flight Of American 77), instead of a "pulling level" motion required.
Based on the descent angle, vertical speed and G Loads observed in the FDR data, descent and vertical speed required due to topography, the 90 ton jet would only compound the damage to the first floor slab if the plane hit the building where it meets the ground as reported.
The physical evidence at the Pentagon is anomalous on many levels and irreconcilable with the official reports. The DoD itself called the damage "counter-intuitive". The animation released by Purdue University actually omits the engines from the airframe and does not continue vertical stabilizer path, most likey due to the fact they cannot account for the lack of damage observed at the pentagon from these heavy airframe structures.
Questions like this are why so many who research 9/11 initially had issues with the Pentagon attack. The anomalous damage and lack of parts recovered -- which were never positively identified as having come from American Airlines Flight 77, nor will government agencies release such information via FOIA, giving unlawful excuse to withhold this information -- is just as observably questionable as the collapse of WTC 7.
Some researchers have abandoned the Pentagon attack primarily due to the mainstream media published eyewitness accounts of a plane. However, when analyzed, many of the witness accounts vary from what Mainstream Media has published. Witness list has been analyzed here.
When considering the eyewitness reports and on location research of Citizen Investigation Team and the Flight Data Recorder analysis by Pilots for 9/11 Truth, there can be no other conclusion than that both sets of data are irreconcilable with the physical damage to the building. Government agencies refuse to comment, mainstream (and some alternative media) refuse to report it.