A Curious lack of Interest in the "Live" 2nd Hit Plane
Clearly, if ANY 2nd hit plane image was untampered with, it would be this one, as the footage was shown LIVE.
So what does this plane look like?
Basically, it is not a normal 767-200-- though like most images of "UA175", it is close.
In the diagram below, I took a flight simulator comparison Marcus Icke made between a Boeing 767-200 and the "live" "UA175" image, and I added the colored lines to highlight similarities and differences.
The "UA175" image we were shown on TV has a much stubbier nose than a bona fide 767-200, which makes the starboard engine protrude in a more obviously (compares diagonal purple lines at the front of the plane):
All lines are the same length in each of the two images in order to allow easy comparison. Click to enlarge image.
One possible explanation for the starboard (rear) engine protruding more frontward in the "live UA175" is that the plane is actually pointing at a slightly different angle, more towards the camera, such that we are seeing a slightly more frontal view of the plane. This would bring the starboard engine out more and explain the overall foreshortening of the fuselage. However, this still presents a problem with the "live UA175" since this rotation of the plane more frontwards completely throws the angles of the wings off from what we see in this "live" image.
In other words, in terms of the airframe itself, what we are seeing with the "live UA175" plane is either a Boeing 767-200-like plane that has too short of a fuselage or a Boeing 767-200-like plane with wings at completely abnormal angles.
Although this in fact, is only part of the problem with this "live" plane image.
The larger problem is that the if the plane is anywhere close to the size of a normal 767-200, it is not on the right trajectory to hit the tower. This fact is shown in the following analysis I did using flight simulator:
Here is a top view of the flight simulator plane in the same position as shown above. Simply put, a Boeing 767-200 with the same proportions to the WTC as we were shown on "live" TV is on a trajectory to MISS the south tower!
(Click to enlarge)
This phenomenon arises because the plane is too small in relation to the towers, and thus flight simulator puts the plane further away from the camera when I try to match the "live UA175" image.
Here is what the ratio of the plane to the tower SHOULD look like if it is on line to hit the tower. The difference in ratio is small, but very significant:
Here is the top view showing the plane is on the right trajectory to hit the tower:
I also wrote about this issue before here. Interestingly, one another "live" shot shows too small of a plane for a Beoing 767-200.
So--- where is the interest in this video?
Where is the interest in the 9/11 "truth" community even?
Isn't this video footage one of the most CENTRAL ASPECTS of all of 9/11?
Shouldn't the abnormalities I've described been used in a court of law to charge the film-makers as being part of the 9/11 conspiracy by now?