Simpler Pentagon Theory

From Eric Bart's site (see post below), I noticed that the plane that hit the Pentagon also damaged a large generator on the way to hitting the wall (there was also a large scrape mark on the generator, but the direction of the scrape was not going in the right line for the plane's path, so it is not clear how this scrape was made). Most people think the plane's engine did this damage to the generator, which basically was part of the top being crushed in. A strong possibility is that when the engine hit the generator, it damaged the engine and released some fuel, since there is a lot of fuel in the engine. It seems likely that some of this fuel caught on fire from a spark before the plane hit the Pentagon wall.

The part of the Pentagon where the plane hit was very strong and reinforced for attack (coincidentally). The fact is that it is very likely the Pentagon wall resisted the entry of the plane much more than the WTC walls.

This new theory goes that when the plane hit the wall, the plane crumpled and broke up to some degree without penetrating the wall very much. The impact and rapid crumpling of the plane released a lot of fuel into the air, and there was already a small fuel fire on the wing. There was thus a massive fuel-driven explosion outside the Pentagon wall which caused the whole plane to completely explode before the plane could penetrate the Pentagon. This would cause the plane to disintegrate and thus only a very small section of plane might enter the side of the wall, leaving the famous abnormally small hole in the wall. The outside explosion theory accounts for parts of the plane that were reported to fly some distance from the site of impact, for instance onto the road next to the Pentagon.

Questions: could airline fuel explode in such a way to destroy the plane almost completely? Do we need to postulate a bomb or additional explosives on the plane?

Conclusion: this theory could explain what happened at the Pentagon fairly well and would tend to support the official 9/11 story. It perhaps also explains the fate of flight 77.

But significant oddities remain:
1) If Flight 77 really exploded outside of the Pentagon, shouldn't there have been passenger bodies and parts of bodies flying out and falling on the ground in front of the Pentagon? But I haven't seen anyone say they saw bodies from the plane, especially outside the Pentagon.
2) In the little surveillance video that was released by the Pentagon showing the explosion, why isn't the plane more visible? Is this video real, or has it been heavily edited?
3) How did the aupposedly amateur pilot of the Pentagon flight make such a close to the ground tight hit on the wall? Basically he had to almost land the plane in front of the Pentagon. From what is known of the supposed terrorist pilot's flying skills, is this possible?
4) what do we make of the phone call from Barbara Olson where she indicates she is sitting next to the pilot? Is it possible the pilot would give up his plane without a struggle and move to the back? Was this even a real call?
5) Was there another military plane flying nearby-- a C-130?
6) Why did the plane just happpen to hit the side of the Pentagon that was recently strengthened and the part where few people were? This could be luck of course, but in this official story Flight 77 makes a large banking turn around the Pentagon to hit that section. If true, this seems less like coincidence. Alternatively, Flight 77 just flew in straight from the northwest, and another plane was on the radar making that tight circle around the Pentagon.

Overall, this theory makes more sense to me than many other theories about this, but still not everything in the official story can be explained.