11/9

[Average Joe (POL)]

Certo ingiusto processo
Per favore, prove e argomentazioni se no torna su luogocomune.

[Breiner252]

Non dimentichiamoci che dopo tutto e' lo stesso paese dove un pompino fra due persone dietro una porta chiusa si e' venuto subito a sapere, e dove due giornalisti hanno fattto dimettere uno dei presidenti con meno scrupoli nella storia degli USA.

Sai proprio la storia del pompino...pare che a Clinton gliel'abbiano fatta sporca perche' stava facendo mosse non condivise da certi. (Storie di spionaggio, agenti Mega e porcate varie).

Ossia, non e' uan questione di trasparenza...gli hanno mandato un segnale.

In poche parole, questa visione di America terra di santarellini e persone perbene, eroi civili che smascherano i balordi, e' proprio una distorsione.
Sarebbe come dire che siccome hanno messo (finalmente) al gabbio Previti, l'Italia e' un paese meraviglioso. E sappiamo tutti che non e' cosi'.

[Daltanius]

Certo ingiusto processo
Per favore, prove e argomentazioni se no torna su luogocomune.

hai detto "luogocomune" e credi di aver esorcizzato lo sputtanamento della Menzogna ?!??

[Average Joe (POL)]

hai detto "luogocomune" e credi di aver esorcizzato lo sputtanamento della Menzogna ?!??

[Razionalista]

Il caso Watergate... confronto all'11/9 era un complotto da ridere, e non sono stati in grado di insabbiarlo. E farebbero il più grande complotto dell'umanità a insaputa del mondo? Senza che nessuno parli?

Non e' che nessuno parla.. sei tu che non li ascolti

Non e' il piu' grande complotto del mondo. Basta creare una procedura che prevede che gli ordini su eventuali aerei da bbattere sia gestita da una sola persona e che uesta persona non si lasci trovare..

[francamente]

Ah si assolutamente nessun boeing, e le parti del carrello non fanno parte del boeing, e i ritrovamenti e i riconoscimenti del Dna dei passeggieri non fanno parte del boeing, ci sono foto depositate al processo Massaoui con rottami di aereo scatola nera e altro, oltre a più di un centinaio di persone che hanno testimoniato di avere visto un aereo dirigersi o schiantarsi sul pentagono. E poi non dimentichiamo gli oltre 8000 civili abilitati ai soccorsi che non hanno trovato resti di un missile ma solo resti di aereo.
Poi quale missile fa una breccia al piano terra di 36 metri? O l'ha fatta una squdra di demolizioni invisibile che è arrivata prima dell'arrivo delle telecamere?

My calculations

To start off, it should be determined exactly where the point of impact was and the angles relative to the CCTV camera.

In the picture below I have determined the angles my measuring the x and y components of the red lines and using the atan function available of most modern calculators and spreadsheets. Here I've used the spreadsheet available in MSWorks 4.5a (a bit old but still does the job adequately). Here, I've rounded to the nearest 2 decimals points.


So, if we now look at the first frame of the CCTV and want to determine where the exact point of impact is, we have to add a straight line from one end of the mid-section to the other with a marker intersecting it to give the ratio of 10.34:1.31 or 100:12.63

But before we do that, it has also been pointed out to me that I haven't taken into consideration the distortion of the wide angle lens (this is a common problem with wide angled lenses) but until now have left this out to simplify matters. This is called 'barrel distortion' if you choose to look it up in your search engine.

A 'pin correction' for 'barrel distortion' correction has been forwarded to me by Ron Harvey:


I've zoomed in by x2 and added an outline of the mid-section wall.


The next step is to add the crossectional line to determine the entry hole.

I've done this below and extended the vertical line to the height of the mid-section wall.


From this I have a reference height in pixels from which to calculate determine the length of the plane. I measure this to be 112 pixels

We know the actual height to be 71 feet.

So 112 pixels : 71 ft at this distance from the camera.

From this it can be said that anything the same distance from the camera as the impact point has to be of this scale (112 pixels : 71 ft)

Below are the orthogonal dimensions of a Boeing 757.


In the above image, the length of the plane is 213 pixels. So we now have

213 pixels = 155 ft (1.374 pixel/ft) and have to scale it so it becomes
112 pixels = 71 ft (1.577 pixel/ft)

So the new length of the plane in pixels is

155ft * 1.577 pixels/ft = 244 pixels

By rotating the plane and lining it up with the poin of impact we get:



This would be correct if the nose was at the point of impact and the direction the plane is travelling in is at right angles to the camera.

The next step is to calculate for the angle of entry.

The following angles were determined from the structural intregrity diagram overlayed on the satellite image.


Now if we look at one of the photos taken from a helicopter survey of the damage we see an exit hole.

[Average Joe (POL)]

Non e' che nessuno parla.. sei tu che non li ascolti

Non e' il piu' grande complotto del mondo. Basta creare una procedura che prevede che gli ordini su eventuali aerei da bbattere sia gestita da una sola persona e che uesta persona non si lasci trovare..

Ma smettila non sparare cavolate. Oltre alle squadre di demolitori, bisogna prevedere nel complotto, soccorritori testimoni, dirottatori, più squadre di coordinamento, servono decine di migliaia di persone e nessuna di questa ha parlato, non ho sentito nessuno che abbia detto di avere nascosto alle indagini detonatori o di avere abbattuto l'aereo o di avere falsificato la scatola nera.... Pertanto meno fantasie.

[francamente]

Here I've overlayed the damage map.



Extending the line to the light poles that were damaged we get:


(I've made this using Ron Harveys plot of the light poles)

Previously I had place had overlayed on the satellite image where I calculated the angle of entry to be 55o.



To calculate an angle I used the following rule:
a = atan (w / h)

b = atan (h / w)

In Paint Shop Pro, I made a rectangular selection of a portion of line with the line passing thru the corners. I then copied and pasted the selection as a new image.

Then using:

Image -> Canvas Size...

to get the height and width of the selection. Then I used a spreadsheet to return the exact angle.

(My spreadsheet returns angles in radians, so I had to extend the function to: a = atan (w / h) * 180o / π -- to convert from radians to degrees.)

So, moving on, the angle between the impact point, the camera and the trajectory is 83 + 90 - 55 = 118o.

So the initial assumption of 90o has changed by 28o, i.e. the plane is at 28o to the camera.

This means an adjustment in the apparent horizontal length adjusted by

COS (28o) = 0.883 (= 88.3%)

Our plane should now have a new pixel length.

244 pixels * cos(28o) = 244* 0.883 = 215 pixels

and should have a perspective adjustment to the height of the tail by 88.3%.

Now if we place this horizontally with the nose lined up at the point of impact we get:


There is another step that should be added to be exact. That is the additional reduction in size to account for extra feet that the plane is away from the camera. Again, we can use triangles to calculate this.

First we need the distance from the camera to the point of impact. For this we need to go back to:

[francamente]

We know that the length of one side of the pentagon is 920 ft, which in this image is equivalent to 280 pixels. If we now rotate this image 7o clockwize, we can measure the distance between the camera and the point of impact in pixels. I make this 191 pixels. So the distance from the camera to the impact point is

920 ft * (191 / 280) = 627.57 ft

(Also, knowing that the plane is 155 ft we can calculate the length of it in pixels if it were in this satellite picture -
280 pixels * (155 / 920) = 47 pixels)

At the moment, if the nose of the plane is at the point of impact, the image is correct, but if we reverse the plane back so that it is in line with tail of the plane in the original image we get the following image with the angle between the plane's nose, the camera and the point of impact at 12o.
So if we rotate the image again, this time 5o anti-clockwise we can measure it to be 215 pixels.

920 ft * (215 / 280) = 706.43ft


So we can now calculate the addition scaling factor to be

627.57 / 706.43 = 0.88 or 88 %
(also = COS (28o))



So what do I have left when I apply this to the original image.




So it looks like we have a working model, if the plane is flying straight. Now assuming that the plane hit at the far corner of the mid-section we get a height of 97 pixels as apposed to 112 pixel measured at where I place the point of impact. That means that the size of the plane is reduced by 88.6%. However, looking at the satellite picture, we can see that from the collapse section corner to the mid-section corner is halfway to the opposite corner of the collapse section where I measured the angle to the camera from. So if it hit the other corner of the midsection at this angle, the size reduction would be halfway between 88.6% and 100%, i.e. 93.3%

(Below I have moved up the previous results and placed the next underneath)



Re-examine the angle of entry



If we take the shallowest angle possible (using what's 'missing' red dots as a guide), we get 50o, from which we can then say that instead of cos(28) we should have cos(33) as our persective correction, i.e. 84% (rather than 88%)

(Again I have moved up the previous results and placed the next underneath.)



So clearly, based on the assumption that it's flying straight, we cannot conclude that this is a match against what we are seeing.

Now if we assume that it is a B757 or of equal length, then the plane, I estimate, has to have spun round about 30o towards the camera at the moment in time that this frame was taken. Otherwise, if the plane is still flying straight along the line of trajectory, then it has to be about 20% shorter than a B757.

[francamente]

Ma smettila non sparare cavolate. Oltre alle squadre di demolitori, bisogna prevedere nel complotto, soccorritori testimoni, dirottatori, più squadre di coordinamento, servono decine di migliaia di persone e nessuna di questa ha parlato, non ho sentito nessuno che abbia detto di avere nascosto alle indagini detonatori o di avere abbattuto l'aereo o di avere falsificato la scatola nera.... Pertanto meno fantasie.

Ho sentito pompieri però dire che non c'erano resti evidenti dell'aereo...

La buttiamo in caciara, come vanno sempre a finire ste discussioni?
E allora famolo!