UK, September 11, 2009 (Pal Telegraph)- It is time again to reflect on the 9/11 disaster as we reach yet another anniversary. Many questions keep burning deep within our hearts as to who was responsible for this evil act and was there any evidence of a conspiracy theory? On the left we see a size comparison of a Boeing 757 at the Pentagon.
It has been some considerable time since this sad event and many experts have had the time to evaluate all of the evidence. Experts from all sectors within the aviation industry have looked into this possible conspiracy and indications suggest it certainly wasn't a very large airliner such as the Boeing 757 that hit the Pentagon.
I myself worked in the aviation industry over a very long period of time, covering both military and civilian aviation. As a senior executive in airline operations, I can say with great confidence that what the authorities are telling you and what actually happened is certainly not authentic. The Pentagon, I believe, is certainly a conspiracy that deserves re-examination under an independent enquiry. Let's now look at some of the evidence provided in an attempt to demonstate that whatever hit the Pentagon was certainly not a large aircraft such as the B757.
Almost every crash site turns up large amounts of aircraft wreckage no matter what the circumstances. If the aircraft was fully intact and flying perfectly straight at the point of impact many items would have been scattered around the crash site.
An examination of a diagram of the pentagon raises some interesting aspects. First of all, just note the enormous size of the aircraft compared to that the building. Let's assume the nose impacts the building and penetrates deep within the outer wing of the Pentagon. Was the line of impact perfectly square to the building? The answer is no.
The aircraft approached the building at almost a 45 degree angle. With such an angle approach to the Pentagon why wasn't there any wing damage to the building? Surely major parts of the wing structure would have remained outside the building, with the rapid deceleration of the fuselage once the impact sequence started. What happened to theenormous tail fin?
Finally, we come back to the two huge High-Bypass Turbofans, many parts of which are almost impossible to perish (as they are made of Titanium) and frequently survive in most air disasters.
The other aspect is that the shear size of such engines gives them a very clear identity when compared to other smaller Low-Bypass Turbofans.
The parts of the engine recovered from the crash indicate that this was a much smaller engine that resembled an engine fitted to a military aircraft.
Take a look again at the height for such an aircraft to hit the Pentagon between the ground floor and first floor. We are talking here about an aircraft approaching at high speed at zero feet. Who could fly an aircraft so skilfully in such turbulence without causing the engines to scrape the grass and detach or the high risk of the aircrafts wingtips digging in either side?
Let's also look at the incredible talent required by any of today's best airline pilots to get off height so quickly and, at the same time, have the ability to fly in a very tight arc whilst descending.One would have to say that such a pilot does not exist and certainly not a pilot who had only every flown a very small training aircraft.
The final part of the run would have encountered terrible in ground effect turbulence making such a flight almost impossible. It is clear that a 757 did not hit the Pentagon so what was it? A military aircraft or a missile? There was CCTV footage at other locations but none were made available.
Peter Eyre - Middle East Consultant 11/9/09
Quote this article on your siteTo create link towards this article on your website,
copy and paste the text below in your page.Preview :
