Amazing, but not impossible. All the evidence (wreckage), people (witnesses on ground and in the air), video (airplane), radar (path tracking) death toll, etc. substantiates the directed crash dive of flight 77. When an airplane is flying at a relative height of less than half a wingspan, it is in "ground effect" where the wing lift coefficient is doubled and the airplane is almost buoyed by the effect. (The first flights of the U-2 were troubled by the inability to land, due to this effect.)
It amazes me that people can express opinions about what is or is not possible when they do not understand flight mechanics or aerodynamics. (Actually, I am no longer amazed. I am just disappointed.)
You make sense in regards to flight characteristics. I just don't see the airplanes huge tail in that video. The Pentagon is only 77' tall so even in the video, the tail would be abundantly visible since the tail itself is about a 25' tall triangluar shape
There is only a frame of the aircraft in approach and the image is so poor that most of the fuselage (unpainted aluminum) and tail (white) fades into the sky background. What can be seen is the horizontal color stripes of the American Airlines livery---which everyone mistakes for being a missile. The tail wasn't to be seen.
Besides which, the wreckage was specific to the Boeing 757.
I guess you think your imaginary world is superior to the real world, because that is where you are. Since it could never have been a Scud (too slow, no dive angle, too large), nor an ALCM (flew too low, too large). And all these silly claims run away from the fact that it was identified by WITNESSES as being an airliner.
Amazing, but not impossible. All the evidence (wreckage), people (witnesses on ground and in the air), video (airplane), radar (path tracking) death toll, etc. substantiates the directed crash dive of flight 77. When an airplane is flying at a relative height of less than half a wingspan, it is in "ground effect" where the wing lift coefficient is doubled and the airplane is almost buoyed by the effect. (The first flights of the U-2 were troubled by the inability to land, due to this effect.)
It amazes me that people can express opinions about what is or is not possible when they do not understand flight mechanics or aerodynamics. (Actually, I am no longer amazed. I am just disappointed.)
You make sense in regards to flight characteristics. I just don't see the airplanes huge tail in that video. The Pentagon is only 77' tall so even in the video, the tail would be abundantly visible since the tail itself is about a 25' tall triangluar shape
There is only a frame of the aircraft in approach and the image is so poor that most of the fuselage (unpainted aluminum) and tail (white) fades into the sky background. What can be seen is the horizontal color stripes of the American Airlines livery---which everyone mistakes for being a missile. The tail wasn't to be seen.
Besides which, the wreckage was specific to the Boeing 757.
I guess you think your imaginary world is superior to the real world, because that is where you are. Since it could never have been a Scud (too slow, no dive angle, too large), nor an ALCM (flew too low, too large). And all these silly claims run away from the fact that it was identified by WITNESSES as being an airliner.