The Mystery Of Flight 77
Whatever Happened To The Plane That Hit The Pentagon
On September 11, 2001?


A Boeing 757

On September 11, the State Department for Defense confirmed that a Boeing 757 had crashed on the Pentagon. Eyewitnesses indeed talk of a flying craft. But there is no absolute consensus that this craft was an airliner.  There is no doubt which planes hit the World Trade Center Twin Towers, and the wreckage of the fourth plane was found in Pennsylvania - but where was the wreckage/footage/evidence of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon?  Wild theories abound, including the possibility of a missle attack.  But if so, what happened to Flight 77 and the people on it?  Was that plane shot down by US Forces before it reached it's intended destination?  Where was the wreckage, ANY wreckage, any photographs or video or tangible evidence of a commercial airline on the Pentagon grounds?

The Hole

What do we have to go on? One hole, 2 ½ yards in diameter. Whatever hit the Pentagon on September 11, 2001 made a hole several meters wide in the front wall between the first and second floors. It emerged three blocks later, leaving behind a perfectly round hole of about 2 ½ yards in diameter.  The device or craft entered the wall of the Pentagon just behind the heliport. Half an hour after the attack, this front wall collapsed. The photograph above was taken in the minutes following the attack, when help first arrived. The wall at this stage has not yet collapsed. In the accompanying image, the point of impact has been enlarged. It spans from the first floor of the building to the second floor, 7 ½ to 8 ½ yards high. It is as wide as the two windows above (5 ½ to 6 ½ yards). It would appear that the wall between the building's two supporting pillars has been removed.
 

Images Taken Minutes After Impact - No Plane Wreckage Visible ANYWHERE

Eyewitnesses confirm having seen something fly into the Pentagon. However, their accounts differ largely when it comes to describing the nature of the aircraft in more detail.

Several eyewitnesses testify to having seen a large airliner. An anonymous woman interviewed by CNN on September 11 confirms having seen "a commercial plane". Army Captain Lincoln Liebner told the AFP: "I saw this large American Airlines passenger jet coming in fast and low." Since our article: Pentagon: Hunt the Boeing! And test your perceptions! went on-line, many other eyewitnesses have come forward on the internet.

However, other accounts reported in the American press, immediately after the event, speak of a smaller aircraft that, in flight, was very unlike a commercial airliner, and even resembled a winged missile.

The aircraft "appeared to hold about 8 to 12 people" and "sounded like the high-pitched squeal of a fighter", explained Steve Patterson to the Washington Post, on September 11.

Just after the attack, Mike Walter, journalist at USA Today, explained to the Washington Post and CNN that "it was like a cruise missile with wings".

Danielle O'Brien, air controller at Washington's Dulles airport, from where American Airways flight 77 took off, explained that the craft that hit the Pentagon had the speed and maneuverability of a "military plane". Her account was published on the ABCnews site and used on the National Air Traffic Controllers Association site.
 

The official version is complex and contradicts itself, so read on carefully.

To justify the absence of Boeing debris, the authorities explained that the aircraft was pulverized when it impacted with such a highly reinforced building as the Pentagon.

To explain the disappearance of the aircraft's more resistant components, like the engines or brakes, we were told that the aircraft melted (with the exception of one landing light and its black boxes).

To justify the absence of 100 tons of melted metal, experts attempted to show that the fire exceeded 2500 °C, leading to the evaporation of parts of the aircraft (but not of the building itself or, clearly, of the landing light or black boxes).

To justify the presence of the hole, officials now state that it was caused by the nose of the aircraft, which, despite the rigors of the crash, continued careering through the three buildings.

The aircraft thus disintegrated on contact with the Pentagon, melted inside the building, evaporated at 2500° C and still penetrated two other buildings via a hole 2 ½ yards in diameter. Questions need to be asked of Pentagon experts here. The official version has its own holes that need filling.
 

Security Camera Animation Of Impact - No Plane Visible

Let us imagine for a moment that we had not been told that the aircraft had disintegrated, melted and evaporated. The question then is: Is it possible for the nose of an airliner to penetrate three buildings and, as it leaves the third, produce a perfectly circular hole, 2 ½ yards wide ?

The nose of an aircraft, the radome, contains its electronic navigation equipment. To enable the transmission of signals, the nose is not made of metal but carbon. Its shape has been designed to be aerodynamic but is not crash resistant. The inside casing, as well as its contents, are extremely fragile. The nose would crush on impact with an obstacle, not penetrate it.

OThe fragility of aircraft noses can be seen in numerous photographs from much more violent crashes than the Pentagon one. Take for example, the Britannia Airways Boeing 757-204, in September 1999 [more images], the Southwest Airlines Boeing 737-3T5 in March 2000, the Philippine Airlines Airbus A320-211 in March 1998 or the American Airlines McDonnell Douglas MD-82 in June 1999.

It is not actually possible to find the nose of an aircraft after such an impact. So it is not an aircraft nose that could have produced the hole visible in the third ring of the building.

Aerial View Taken On 9-12-01

Fire fighters state they saw what they believed to be the nose of an aircraft. The Boeing did indeed penetrate as far as the C ring, they explain. Captain Defina told the NFPA Journal "The only way you could tell that an aircraft was inside was that we saw pieces of the nose gear." When asked about the aircraft's fuel, Fire Chief Ed Plaugher, replied: "We have what we believe is a puddle right there that the -- what we believe is to be the nose of the aircraft."

Some kind of craft did indeed penetrate the three buildings. The upper floors of the outer ring collapsed over a block of about 20 yards, half an hour after the attack. The two inner rings seemed to have been damaged by the fire which subsequently broke out. They did not cave in. The device, which landed on the Pentagon, did not demolish it but penetrated it.

An aircraft would have demolished the building rather than penetrate the walls. The question is: What type of device would have been capable of producing such damage? One possible answer is a missile. Missiles have heads that are much stronger than aircraft noses. They are made from depleted uranium and are designed for penetration. Depleted uranium is an extremely dense metal that friction heats up, increasing its penetrative capacities. Such missiles are particularly used to enter bunkers. An aircraft crashes and breaks apart whereas a missile of this type will penetrate its target.

Fire fighters attest to having seen part of a plane that they identify, albeit with difficulty, as an aircraft nose. The nose of an aircraft, however, would not survive such an accident. The three buildings could not have been penetrated by the nose of a Boeing. However, a missile head made of depleted uranium could well have been capable of such damage.

Contact/Submit     theNSAisWATCHIN     News Monster     Images Archive       News Monster Archive
The Frances Farmers Revenge Web Portal