Aircraft in Pentagon security camera video

[Jazzz]

reproduced article source. I hadn't noticed identified the aircraft shape and I find this quite compelling. DrJazzz

Pentagon Plane Identified? By Leland Lehrman
leland@33o.com
12-31-4​

Esteemed Colleagues - frame one aircraft at Pentagon

I took the animated gif image from the website:
http://www.physics911.net/missingwings.htm which shows the five-frame government-released pentagon video zoomed in on the area where the plane went. Looking at it over and over and at 400% zoom, I have finally reached the tentative opinion that it may be a small black military aircraft shooting a missile. The image appears consistent with a black A3 SkyWarrior or similar aircraft as indicated by Karl Schwarz, both an aircraft specialist and a talented, resourceful investigator. http://www.karlschwarz.com To the right in html email is an illustrated version of frame one outlining the aircraft in red and the possible white missile trail in orange. Attached is the same file, larger, for those without html email.

In particular, the image is not consistent with a shiny airplane of any sort. The only reflection appears to come from the forward area, near where the cockpit windows or front edge of the wings might be.

Look at this image of an American 757. http://www.airliners.net/open.file/745215/L/ The plane is almost entirely silver, and the tail is close to white and has clear and large markings on it. Now look at the plane in the image attached [aircraftoutlined.jpg] or on the web. Everything is black, and the sun is shining directly on it, as evidenced by the angle of the shadow on the box-shaped thing in the foreground, so there is no way the darkness could be shadow..

In the image attached, aircraftoutlined.jpg, you will see the red outline of the likely airplane and the orange outline of the possible missile trail. If you look at the image directly following this one in the five frame animation http://physics911.net/e-pentagon_animation.gif, you will be able to compare and contrast the two frames in order to establish other parameters that require a relational view of both frames. It is useful to view the images at 200-400% zoom and frame by frame slowly. Programs like the freeware Irfanview http://irfanview.com/ can zoom the file adequately.

There is almost no question that there is in fact some sort of white exhaust trail consistent with a missile trail in this image [aircraftoutlined.jpg]. *

Any contention that a 757 hit the Pentagon must deal with what that white cloud-like apparition is and as well how come the tail of the plane in the photograph is black. *

Black ops comes to mind.

I would be interested in going over these two images on the phone (505.982.3609) with anyone interested in order to describe the many difficult-to-put-in-words nuances.

 

[Jazzz]

Pentagon Security Camera Frame 1 zoomed with outlines:

 

[Jazzz]

A3 SkyWarrior:

 

[Lock&Light]

Please, Dr Jazzz. Wait until the first of April before beating your breasts.

 

[Loki]

A conspiracy thread from DrJazzz citing some anonymous nobody with no qualifications on the internet? Well I never

 

[Jazzz]

Well thing is, regardless of what qualifications this chap has, I can't fault his logic. Perhaps you could help me out? Of course, I'm sure you two are much cleverer than I am.

 

[Lock&Light]

Of course, I'm sure you two are much cleverer than I am.

No, Dr.J.

You are the clever one; others are only right.

 

[editor]

Good grief. That article sounds like it was written by a schoolboy with an over active imagination.

Strangely enough, the author fails to mention why everyone else saw a plane hit the Pentagon and no one noticed this missile-spewing fighter plane. Missiles make a loud noise when fired from a jet plane and leave trails all the way to the target. So how come no one noticed a thing?

But just to get things straight: is he really saying that it was a suicidal fighter jet firing missiles from 30m away?

And his drawn over outline is fucking ridiculous. He may as well drawn a horse over the thing, the match is so weak!

 

[DexterTCN]

Well I have been fucking saying this for fucking years about the fucking pentagon fucking attack.

It was fucking not a fucking passenger fucking aircraft. But nooooooo...I am mad...I am fucked up.....something wrong with meeeeee

Now let's see this turned into a '911 conspiracy' burning.

I am sure I will be lumped in with other people and laughed at. But I stand by it.

Just makes me look good when we are all older

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Oh, for fuck's sake. There is no connection between the "plane" in the first shot and the plane in the second apart from them both being vaguely the same shape, and unless I've missed something, exhaust from a missile doesn't come from the back of the plane, generally it comes from the missile i.e. under the wings.

And I'd appreciate it if you could link to images rather than post them directly. Just to maintain a certain level of decorum in the forum.

 

[editor]

It was fucking not a fucking passenger fucking aircraft.

Really. So what was it and how come so many people clearly saw a passenger jet (see bin for a host of detailed eye witness reports as I can't be arsed to repeat them).

 

[Jazzz]

Good grief. That article sounds like it was written by a schoolboy with an over active imagination.

Strangely enough, the author fails to mention why everyone else saw a plane hit the Pentagon and no one noticed this missile-spewing fighter plane. Missiles make a loud noise when fired from a jet plane and leave trails all the way to the target. So how come no one noticed a thing?

But just to get things straight: is he really saying that it was a suicidal fighter jet firing missiles from 30m away?

And his drawn over outline is fucking ridiculous. He may as well drawn a horse over the thing, the match is so weak!

[sigh] As discussed many times, the eyewitness reports differ wildly. Some heard a missile. Some saw a plane hit the ground before entry - which we know is impossible. But repeat a lie often enough, and people will believe it, eh editor?

And the match looks pretty good to me. for a start, it's the right colour. For all my brain power, I hadn't noticed that the plane should be in bright sunlight - so why is it black? Secondly, have you seen the attempts to match a 757 on that footage (bloody enormous)? I'll see if I can find one.

 

[Jazzz]

unless I've missed something, exhaust from a missile doesn't come from the back of the plane, generally it comes from the missile i.e. under the wings.

yes here I would differ with the analysis. To me, it looks like exhaust from the aircraft itself.

I know the pics are large, but perhaps you will forgive me as they are very much the subject matter of the thread.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

There is no possible way that the outline in the first picture could correspond to the plane in the second - or, in fact, to practically anything. Thankfully, it is in fact just a random outline that could have been drawn around anything. The contents of which are exactly the same colour as the Pentagon in the frame i.e. black. Presumably the Pentagon is stealthed or something.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

yes here I would differ with the analysis. To me, it looks like exhaust from the aircraft itself.

I know the pics are large, but perhaps you will forgive me as they are very much the subject matter of the thread.

You'll notice that the engines of that plane are under its wings.

 

[Loki]

[sigh] As discussed many times, the eyewitness reports differ wildly. Some heard a missile. Some saw a plane hit the ground before entry - which we know is impossible. But repeat a lie often enough, and people will believe it, eh editor?

[double, nay triple sigh] So you're saying a professional journalist who witnessed the crash, along with many others was lying about the whole thing? He could have made a mint out of such a story, but instead he said that he witnessed a plane hitting the Pentagon.

 

[Jazzz]

There is no possible way that the outline in the first picture could correspond to the plane in the second - or, in fact, to practically anything. Thankfully, it is in fact just a random outline that could have been drawn around anything. The contents of which are exactly the same colour as the Pentagon in the frame i.e. black. Presumably the Pentagon is stealthed or something.

Yes, but the Pentagon is in shadow - whereas the plane is in bright sunlight.

 

[Jazzz]

You'll notice that the engines of that plane are under its wings.

So how is that inconsistent?

and editor I refer you to my comment in post #12

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Yes, but the Pentagon is in shadow - whereas the plane is in bright sunlight.

The top of the "plane" would be in sunlight (like the top of the Pentagon). The rest would not be.

And we only have this vague circling to indicate that this frame shows a plane in any case. Would you like me to show what else I can find in the frame?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

So how is that inconsistent?

Er, because the exhaust would be coming from under the wings, and based on the circling, it doesn't seem to be, but rather from the back of the plane?

 

[Jazzz]

Have a look at the next frame that was released - I will link to it this time

http://members.shaw.ca/freedomsix/pics/slide2.jpg

it does seem to me that the outlined object has gone.

 

[Jazzz]

Er, because the exhaust would be coming from under the wings, and based on the circling, it doesn't seem to be, but rather from the back of the plane?

No because there is a large box in the foreground obscuring it, along with the bottom half of the plane. Incidentally the side of the box facing the camera is brightly lit - which would suggest the plane should be too.

 

[DexterTCN]

Really. So what was it and how come so many people clearly saw a passenger jet (see bin for a host of detailed eye witness reports as I can't be arsed to repeat them).

No mate let's do it properly if you want to do it. Let's go with physics if you want a square go. We can start with the dimensions of the supposed suspect passenger jet and apply the physics of the blast.

I am not saying it was a jet fighter or a missile or a jet-fighter firing a missile. I am saying what it was not...just like Sherlock would. You can bring on the impossible while arguing the improbable because you are claiming that it was a vehicle that left no physical marks in a place where physical contact must have made place. I know it is xmas but we are not all believers in (insert sarcastic/ironic/topical/reindeer ) here.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

No because there is a large box in the foreground obscuring it, along with the bottom half of the plane.

Not buying that. I've seen shots of wing-launched missiles before. There's also *far* more flare from the rocket than is apparent from that outline, which is only a vague guess as I will keep repeating since it's important not to assume unproven predicates.

 

[Loki]

A3 SkyWarrior:

Oh and by the way, the last "A3" was retired and scrapped in 1991, er, some 10 years before 9/11. oops!

 

[Jazzz]

I don't understand though fridge. There is a box there and the smoke goes right up to it. There is no way it could be visible behind it. Your objection that 'the smoke doesn't go up to the wings' is simply not valid at all. And as I said, I don't think that's the missile exhaust.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

There isn't any "smoke", there is a light patch outlined by some guy on the internet.

That light patch clearly doesn't start from under the wings. Under no possible circumstance could it be said to start from under the wings. I would conclude that it is therefore not from under the wings. In which case, what is it? If it's just random light patterns being mistakenly identified, what can one conclude about the rest of the analysis?

 

[Jazzz]

Oh and by the way, the last "A3" was retired and scrapped in 1991, er, some 10 years before 9/11. oops!

The prototype, XA3D-1 (BuNo 125412) was first flown on Oct. 28, 1952 at Edwards Air Force Base, Ca. The A-3 was commissioned by the Navy and first delivered to active duty on March 31, 1956. After 39 years of faithful service, the A-3 Skywarrior was decommissioned during a ceremony at Naval Air Station Key West, Fl. on Sept. 30, 1991. But even now, in 2003, A-3s are still flying with Raytheon as test bed aircraft. It is a testament to the A-3's versatility and ruggedness that it is still in the air, 50 years later since that first flight.

http://www.a3skywarrior.com/

Curious that there was at least one top bod from Raytheon on flight 77!

 

[Lock&Light]

Why does anyone continue to respond? Wasn't it agreed that this sort of thread is unwelcome? Or has Dr. J come up with something new?

 

[Jazzz]

There isn't any "smoke", there is a light patch outlined by some guy on the internet.

That light patch clearly doesn't start from under the wings. Under no possible circumstance could it be said to start from under the wings. I would conclude that it is therefore not from under the wings. In which case, what is it? If it's just random light patterns being mistakenly identified, what can one conclude about the rest of the analysis?

Can you see the light box fridgemagnet? It clearly is not transparent. The smoke goes right up to it. You cannot conclude that it doesn't go up closer to the plane because the light box is in the way!

http://members.shaw.ca/freedomsix/pics/slide1.jpg