The radio transmissions have been cut short, with conversations with other some other aircrafts left out. The original didnt have the mayday call in it so I put it in where it should have been. I did most the words myself as some online transcripts seemed incorrect and didnt make a lot of sence. To help you understand the transmissions: When they say Three Five Zero ( which they say a lot, as well as Three Seven Zero ) they mean the Flight Level that the aircraft is on ( ie FL350 is 35000ft etc ) When they turn one eight zero, thats a compass bearing ( South ) A transponder is a peice of equipment that sends out information to Air Traffic Controllers about Identity, direction, and altitude of the aircraft to Secondary Surveillance Radar ( SSR ). When the transponder is turned off, it mean they no longer appear on SSR, However they can still be seen on PSR ( Primary Surveillance Radar ) just without the information attached. The Sencond is an acurate computer simulation of Flight 77 as it hits the Pentagon, with photographic evidence. Please watch the entire thing before you leave comments.
Featured Content
Discover the Amazing Natural Wonder of Galapagos Islands with Galapagos Cruises
As we know the weekend season will be arrive soon. Yes, the New Year... read more
Refreshing Holiday Vacation at Hilton Head South Carolina
In this busy work time like today, most people usually have spend most of their... read more
Thank you for that! But there are still people out there who would call your video “FAKE” and willing to say the wreckage was placed at the scene and photographed…….and blah blah blah…. GET A LIFE PPL!!
September 11th. 2001 has Mossad wrtten all over it……..
Great vid. Answered every one of my questions about the pentagon attack. Every conspiracy theorist needs to watch this one as well as read the popular mechanics article debunking 9/11 myths.
And props to cjnewson88 for using equally powerful music to further enforce the point, its nice to see it used when actually talking about the truth.
@ChancesTaken1
HOW DO YOU know its a BMW engine?
@cjnewson88
the wing was already on fire when it hit the pentagon.
Im no structural engineer, nor do I know the exact reinforcing complexities of the pentagon, I can only guess
you pose a good query though, let me know of you stumble across an explanation
911was a lie…and remember the Oil spill will kill millions….And your Government is letting that happen?And we think 3000 they killed then ,that they gave a shit?Wake the fuck up and do research on whats going on in the mother fucken Gulf and whats going on with Russia and Jap Warships fully Loaded ported in Our Docks…Are President bows to the Saudi King…Are you all that Dam BLIND…The Constitutions is being taken from all Americans and were ok with it..Time to fight on OUR SOIL.TO ARMS
Some fake ass shit here lol….United 93 wasn’t in the air that day ….Do your research dumb ass…Look at lamp pot 2 IS the lamp bigger then the Tree it sits next to,Why the only engine they find there was a BMW engine?now do your research on BMW Engines made for planes again duh.there Made for 1 jet only and thats a F16 Jet…then do your research on 747 and a 757 plane .And now as for your ground Structure search and find the video taken of the pent. 3 days before hand shows the grass hmmm
@xqzme78228 I’m no expert, so I can only go by what little knowledge I have. If I’m not mistaken, the Twin Towers were built to sustain an aircraft collision. The structural support was in the center of the buildings. Before they were built tall buildings were constructed with the steel frame on the outside of the building and throughout the interior. The Towers were not built this way, therefore the interior structure did the damage that caused the planes to explode. But I’m not an expert.
@cjjnewson88 ahh good theory. One possible flaw that immediately comes to mind is perhaps an assumption of the pentagon being heavily reinforced; it’s simply a concrete structure. I would submit a steel & glass structure presents significantly more resistance. I’m not a conspiracy theorist; however, this is just one of several interesting puzzles that cause me to pause.
interesting, I never really compared the two in such a way. If i was to take a stab in the dark at an explanation, I would look at the construction of the pentagon verses the twin towers, where as the twin towers is effectively an empty shell, the pentagon is a heavily reinforced military structure. I would imagine the break up and explosion of an aircraft would happen more rapidly when colliding with a building like the pentagon.
very good simulation and footage from the surveillance camera. The video brings up another very interesting point. Given that the publisher of the video believes it was a plane, it’s curious that the characteristic explosion properly occurred immediately after impact, and at the point of impact. When the 2nd aircraft crashed into tower 2, conversely, the explosion began from the opposite end of impact and well after impact.
Interesting indeed.
Good video. You present one side of the case very well. Something certainly seems to have hit that building. A lot people don’t believe it was an areoplane. As for the evidence well, if I wanted to make it appear it was a plane obviously I would have to lay down a few fallen poles along the suppose flight path, plus scatter aeroplane debris around etc. Why the charade though? Some people say the supposed hijacker would not have been able to execute the flight maneuvers necessary.
@shootgroundhog it doesnt take alot of time to research various place crashes in recent history. and im not a theorist, i just happen to have an open mind a logical brain enough to know what a false flag operation looks like. if you honestly believe thats a real plane crash then you indeed an ignorant mislead sheep of the US govt. i suppose you also falsely believe the Gulf of Tonkin attack was real as well. poor stupid fool. do wake up, for your own good.
@martinhaith1337 Sounds like you have seen wreckage from a lot of jet airliners crashing into buildings. Do you really even know what you are talking about? Or are you just another conspiracy theorist?
the fact that you chose metallica for background music makes me believe you are full of shit and have no idea what the fuck you are talking about.
i didnt see any plane sorry it wasnt there to see it i even looked at the blurry images of building in the back ground then look at the shadows on the ground by them they tell a story the sun in opposite direction however the area is fully lit when the plane hit all these poles one would think things would be thrown forward they are not the area remains lit nothing passed the buildings 638 on tape all clearat 640 boom fire smoke flies from building from wrong direction they said
Type out illuminati backwards on any search engine. The NSA site pops up along with other sites with itanimulli search results. Sure you can redirect a site to another, but if you did, Google’s or AOL’s search engine would only list NSA sites. itanimulli wouldn’t pop up at all unless the NSA site itself had the itanimulli keyword listed on the NSA site. Do you want to know more about the Illuminati?
Read “Proofs of a Conspiracy by John Robison A.M. 1798″ Rewritten by the Americanist classics in 1967. It talks about the Freemasons, illuminati, a One World Government. It also states in the pretext that their sub-objective is to take control of mainstream media after establishing lodges in the United States. This is the book our government doesn’t want you to read.
Watch “Population Reduction” by Dr. Rima. Cross reference Keith Olbermann and Habeas Corpus and watch your Bill of Rights thrown out the window. Look into the U.S. Spy Bill -HR6304. Watch HBO’s Hacking Democracy and look into the continuous vote fraud through Black Box Voting dot org Watch “National Security Alert” Watch “911 Press for Truth” by the 911 family members. Watch “Fall of the Republic” Watch Hyperinflation videos by inflation.us. I’ll be at “The Tea Party Truther” Facebook
Still does not explain why debri’s was spread over 5 miles. News reporters were there within minutes on the ground and in helicopters and have on film debri’s on roof tops of houses, tree’s…miles away. Explain that? Clearly shot down! as Rumsfeld and Bush said on TV.
The censorship of 9/11 is not working. The world is demanding a real and independent investigation. Rumsfeld said 93 was shot down. Bush said they used explosives in the buildings. Silverstein refers to 7 as having been “pulled.” Who am I to argue with these people? Read the NIST report and the commission report, but unless you are an expert of some kind, don’t expect to figure anything out. Common sense helps. So does logic and reasoning.
this smart, but nonsense as well. there were no remains of a jet airliner of any kind found at the bomb site. and it is physically impossible for a jet airliner to totally vaporize but hitting a building, impossible. if a jet airliner actually did hit, you would see many large pieces of the fuselage. nice try with this vid though.
Ok yes, you are not the first to point out.. there are a few spelling mistakes which i apologise for… I made the video in a hurry.. Turns out there were a few typos, but you get the general gist of the vid
Where did you learn to spell
TWISE?
As in ” I hade to repeat English TWISE”