WTC1 Witness Reports


Reproduction And Analysis Of Claimed “Flight 11” Witness Reports And Recordings






In this article we will reproduce and analyse reports from witnesses who claim to have seen an aircraft striking Tower 1 of the former World Trade Centre Complex on the morning of September 11th at approximately 8:46am.





Part 1 – Witness Reports On 911


Libby Clark


"...I believe it was a passenger plane, it was relatively large, I mean it wasn't the size of a jet, was not a small, small plane. Like a [unrecognisable].”


From a live ABC / 7 news report at Tuesday 11 September 2001 recorded prior to 9:03 am.




Karim Arraki


“I saw it come up from the left, and I saw the plane coming through to the building, go inside, a small plane….no, no, it was plane, you know, like they teach the people to pilot plane, small plane, you know, it was that kind of plane….yes, going into the building, and I never saw that plane before. It's like something, I don't know, it's like they work with the motors, I never saw a plane like that before!”


From an ABC News Special Report at 9:08 am on Tuesday 11 September 2001.






“I was waiting a table and I literally saw a, it seemed to be a small plane. I just heard a couple of noises, it looked like it like ‘bounced’ of the building and then I heard a, I just saw a huge like ball of fire on top and then the smoke seemed to simmer down….it just seemed like a smaller plane, I don’t think it was anything commercial…”


From a Bryant Gumble CBS News Special Report at 8:52 am on Tuesday 11th September 2001.




“Dog Walking Woman”


“We’re walking the dogs and we saw a plane flying really low, a jet, a small jet, and it flew directly into the World Trade Centre. And then all the pieces fell to the bottom…in seconds.”



From Fox News.




Narrator On The Mi Kyung Heller Video


"Hey Grandpa, I'll tell you what woke me up. They bombed the World Trade Centre. I'm looking at it and Mi-Kyung's video taping it. Terrible. I heard, Grandpa, I saw it. It could have been a plane, but I think it was a bomb...a could be world war three."



From “In Memoriam: New York City 9/11/01”. Produced by Brad Gray and HBO for Brad Gray Pictures. 2002 Home Box Office. Video image above implies recording was made between the times of 8:46am and 9:03am on Tuesday 11th September 2001




Jane Derenowski




“Jane you said you saw the first plane, did you get a, a, glimpse of what kind of plane that was? We were told it was a small commuter plane.”




“Well, it, it looked, it wasn’t a Cessna or anything like that. It was a [unrecognisable] plane, a midsize plane and we could hear it very low…then it veered drastically on its side thought the building and then went into the upper floors.”


Recorded live from NBC Television on Tuesday 11th September 2001 prior to the collapse of WTC2 at approximately 9:59am.




Sean Murtagh


“I just witnessed a plane that appeared to be cruising at slightly lower-than-normal altitude over New York City, and it appears to have crashed into -- I don't know which tower it is -- but it hit directly in the middle of one of the World Trade Centre towers….it was a jet. It looked like a two-engine jet, maybe a 737….a large passenger commercial jet….it was teetering back and forth, wingtip to wingtip, and it looks like it crashed into, probably, 20 stories from the top of the World Trade Centre, maybe the 80th to 85th floor….the plane just was coming in low, and the wingtips tilted back and forth…”



From CNN Live. Murtaghs statement appears to have been recorded between the times of 8:46am and 9:03am on Tuesday 11th September 2001. Image taken from "CNN Tribute - America Remembers" - Produced by Ken Shiffman and Brian Rokus. 2002 Cable News Network. Sean Murtagh was the Vice President of Finance and Administration at CNN during 9/11.




“Spear” Witness


“…it came in…like a…like a…(unrecognisable)…like a…like a…like a spear. It just speared through the building.”



From "CNN Tribute - America Remembers" - Produced by Ken Shiffman and Brian Rokus. 2002 Cable News Network. Recording appears to have been made between the times of 8:46am and 9:03am on Tuesday 11th September 2001.




“In Distress” Witness


The plane was slightly on its side and that's why, maybe think, maybe it, it was in distress..."



From "CNN Tribute - America Remembers" - Produced by Ken Shiffman and Brian Rokus. 2002 Cable News Network. Recording appears to have been made between the times of 8:46am and 9:03am on Tuesday 11th September 2001.




Chief Joseph Pfeifer


“…we have a number of floors on fire, it looked like the plane was aiming towards the building, transmit a third alarm…”



From "9/11 - The Filmmakers Commemorative DVD Edition" - 2002 Goldfish Pictures Inc. Produced / Edited by Richard Barber, Mike Maloy, Bruce Spiegel and Mead Stone. Executive Producers Jules Naudet, Gedeon Naudet and James Hanlon. Directed by Jules Naudet, Gedeon Naudet and James Hanlon. Pfeifers’ statement appears to have been recorded between the times of 8:46am and 9:03am on Tuesday 11th September 2001.




Mr. Obenhaus


“I was at the corner of Franklin and West Broadway, and as I was approaching the subway, a tremendous roar went over my head and--and I looked up immediately, and it was a plane much lower than I've ever seen a plane in lower Manhattan, and it was a large plane. I couldn't identify it as anything specific except that it was a commercial jet certainly. And it--it--my eyes followed it because this is approximately 15 blocks from the World Trade Centre, and it--it just slammed right into it and was completely engulfed by the--by the building.


It was extraordinary. No--no wings flew off, nothing like that. It just went directly in, creating this sort of cavern-like hole….the profile--the body of the plane was of such scale that I immediately identified it as a commercial jet.. I didn't--I couldn't--it happened so quickly I couldn't tell whether it had windows on the side or what, but it could very well have been some sort of a--a transport plane. But it was a large, large plane, as opposed to, occasionally down here you do see smaller, prop planes or smaller aviation stuff that flies around here sometimes, doing movies and things like that.


But in all my years down here, and I've lived down here for about 20 years within walking distance easily of the building, I've never heard anything like this, and that's what--that's why I--I just immediately glanced up, and I just followed the track of this sound and this huge plane that was swooping over my head….my impression was--was that it had a tan coloration to it. However, the sun, it was very low in the horizon, and I think kind of orange, and it may have been simply the colour of the sun reflecting off a silver exterior…”


From an ABC News Special Report on Tuesday 11 September 2001.




Todd Harris


“Yes, I had a perfect view, and the plane was coming in. I noticed it a second before it hit the building. It looked like it was moving slowly, and it lined itself up to hit the building directly.”


From CNN Live on Tuesday 11 September 2001.




Mary Cozza


“…we saw a plane flying low overhead which caught all of our attention. We looked up. It was making a b-line for the World Trade Centre. It was very low, extremely low, not a big plane like an airliner …uh… but not a tiny propeller plane, a small, small jet plane.”


From NBC Television live on Tuesday 11 September 2001. Recording appears to have been made between the times of 8:46am and 9:03am.





Part 2 – Aural Accounts


Don Dahler


“…I can only describe as, it sounded like a missile, not an airplane….it was definitely not the sound of a prop plane or anything like that….I grew up on military bases and I know the sound of jets and I’ve been in war zones and heard those kinds of different sounds….the sound itself was not of a prop plane , it was perhaps a jet, but it could have been a missile as well….it was high pitched, but it had a…er…a…whooshing sound, not, not like a prop plane…”



From an ABC News Report at 8:54 am on Tuesday 11 September 2001.





Part 3 – Retrospective Accounts and Second Hand Accounts


George Sleigh


"I was on the phone; I heard a roar, looked out the window and passenger jet coming toward the building. It was only 2 or 3 plane lengths away from me at that point and I didn't really have time to react. I just saw it then it was into the building."



From "How The Twin Towers Collapsed". A Darlow Smithson Production in association with Channel 4 Television, Channel 4 International and the Learning Channel. Channel 4 Television Corporation 2001. First transmitted in the U.K in December 2001.


The story behind Sleighs report is a long one.  It started with an alleged report from him posted at CNN’s web site on the 14th September 2001


Survivor saw inside hijacked jet - September 14, 2001 Posted: 10:18 AM EDT (1418 GMT)


George Sleigh escaped from the north tower of the World Trade Centre before it collapsed LONDON, England -- A British-born architect who survived Tuesday's attack on the World Trade Centre watched in horror from his 91st-floor office as a hijacked jet smashed into the building. George Sleigh, 63, originally of Gateshead, England, told the Newcastle Evening Chronicle he was close enough to the point of the initial impact to see people in the cockpit of the hijacked American Airlines Boeing 767.


"When I close my eyes and picture that airliner coming towards me and the people in the cockpit it is like a dream," Sleigh said. After hearing the whining engine of the jet, "I looked up out of the window and just a few feet away from the building was this huge jet plane," he said. "The wheels were down and I could see the people in the cockpit. I thought to myself, 'Man this guy is low in the air,' but I still thought it would clear us. But then it smashed into the tower a few floors above me. "I couldn't believe it, even now it seems insane that anyone would do that, even a crazed terrorist."


I reproduced this statement in my own article "Was Flight 11 A 767?" that was published in April 2004. In the paper I questioned the likelihood of the statement being genuine and in September 2004 Sleigh contacted me to set the record straight.


"At no time have I ever indicated to anyone that I saw people in the cockpit. Some of the British tabloids attributed that quote to me and subsequently I refused to grant interviews with those tabloids. As is pointed out in the article, if I had seen people in the cockpit I would not be around to discuss it."


"Every time I have discussed my account I have made it quite clear that what I witnessed was a large passenger jet (model or airline unknown) flying above my location with the wheels up, I particularly commented on the smooth underbelly of the plane. I have never indicated to anyone that the undercarriage was down!"




"I was in my office on the north side of the 91st floor. I was alerted by a loud roar to look out of my window and saw the plane approaching about 3 or 4 plane lengths away. I can remember it as clearly as if it were yesterday. I recognised it only as a large passenger jet, with a light coloured, and smooth under-body. I had no time to react as the plane almost instantaneously hit the building above my location. We exited from our floor as quickly as possible taking the only stairway that remained accessible to us - the other two stairwells were blocked. We were to find out later that no one above our floor escaped. I continue to praise God for sparing my life that day."


And later,


"The plane definitely had engines on its wings."


"I only recall that the undercarriage was light - I have been quoted as saying it was white, but I only saw the plane for a few seconds before it hit the building."


"USA TODAY December 19, 2001 in an article by Dennis Cauchon in which I said regarding the plane that 'The wheels are up, the underbelly is white, and 'man, that guy is low' ' ".


"Dean E. Murphy, a reporter from the NY Times "SEPTEMBER 11: AN ORAL HISTORY", page 41 "I saw the nose of the plane and then the smooth underbelly and one of the wings. It was just above me, a little to the right, and slightly bent so that the wing over me was higher than the other wing. I couldn't see any windows or recognize any markings but I noticed the landing gear was up."


David M. Bresnahan "TERROR IN AMERICA", page 27 "It was above us and to my right, so I saw the underbelly of the plane. I noticed that the wheels were up. That kind of registered with me".


What this demonstrates is that CNN had either deliberately or accidentally modified George Sleighs original report to add details that were not originally there, and that Sleighs recollection of the incident changes slightly each time he asked to recall it.




NBC News Reporters




“Now according to the pilot that we had on a few minutes ago he said that appeared to be a smaller jet, business type of jet.








“Um, so perhaps it was some sort of a commuting airline or something like that.”


From a live NBC News report on Tuesday 11 September 2001 at some time after the Pentagon strike.




Sid Bedingfield


"I thought it could have been an accident...I thought the plane was much smaller...our shot was from a good distance of. It was when we confirmed that it was in fact a 767 that I realised what we were in for..."



From "CNN Tribute - America Remembers" - Produced by Ken Shiffman and Brian Rokus. 2002 Cable News Network. Sid Bedingfield was the Executive Editor for the CNN News Group during 9/11.




Captain Dennis Tardio


“I looked up and I said to myself. Where’s he going? Nobody flies this low over if there was a bulls-eye on it, and he hit it.”



From "9/11 - The Filmmakers Commemorative DVD Edition" - 2002 Goldfish Pictures Inc. Produced / Edited by Richard Barber, Mike Maloy, Bruce Spiegel and Mead Stone. Executive Producers Jules Naudet, Gedeon Naudet and James Hanlon. Directed by Jules Naudet, Gedeon Naudet and James Hanlon.




Damien Van Cleaf


“…and it felt like a dream as I seen the plane crumble into the building, just disintegrate…”



From "9/11 - The Filmmakers Commemorative DVD Edition" - 2002 Goldfish Pictures Inc. Produced / Edited by Richard Barber, Mike Maloy, Bruce Spiegel and Mead Stone. Executive Producers Jules Naudet, Gedeon Naudet and James Hanlon. Directed by Jules Naudet, Gedeon Naudet and James Hanlon.




Charles Waters


“I worked on the 54th Floor World Trade Centre 2. On Tuesday 9/11, I was on the plaza of the World Trade Centre when I saw the first plane hit WTC1. It was 8:43am….I arrived in Lower Manhattan at about 8:38. Walking up Dey Street I decided to stop for coffee and waked across Church Street onto the Plaza of the World Trade Centre. I called my father on my cell phone and we were talking which kept me from entering the building. I was on a bench right in front of the WTC1 and turned slowly for no real reason and saw the entire plane hit the tower. I saw the wing extend from the building on the south side and a large explosion. Then smoke. Then everything was frozen, very still, with a perfect New York blue sky framing the backdrop of explosions.”


From “The View From The WTC PLAZA”.




Mariah Ehlert


“I was looking out the window talking to my co-worker, David, when I saw a plane, which was flying too close. I was going to tell David to look so he could see it when it came out from behind the WTC: but it didn’t, it crashed. I screamed something. I tried to call Mom, then sent her an e-mail to get offline and left her a voice message. We were trying to find something in the news for more information, but it was too early. It was very creepy being witness to this before it even hit the news.”


From Isanti County News on 9th October 2001.




Karin Batten


“Once I found out what happened, I knew I had to go get my son. Luckily, I found him, and all the kids told me they saw the plane coming by their classroom and hitting the tower and they saw people jumping from the building. Then we all turned around and Tower One – where all my work, my supplies, everything, was – was coming down. Several children whose parents worked at the World Trade Centre just screamed.”


From the “New York Metro: WTC Testimonials 6 Months Later”




Eberhart Testimony


“And at that time, we issued a scramble order for the two F-15s out of Otis Air Force Base. We continued to send those airplanes toward New York City because initially, as we worked with the FAA, we weren't sure if that was the hijacked airplane. I mean, I hate to admit this, but I'm sitting there hoping that someone has made a mistake; there has been an accident; that this isn't the hijacked airplane, because there is confusion. We were told it was a light commuter airplane. It didn't look like that was caused by a light commuter airplane”.


From the FDCH transcripts from Congressional Hearings on 25th October 2001.




Unknown Clergyman


“…one of our Friars was walking down 6th Avenue and actually saw the airplane go overhead at a low altitude…”



From “Victim 0001”. Transmitted in the U.K. on 11th September 2004.




Female Voice From Bob and Bri Video


“Bob said he heard it sounded like a rocket…”


From “September 11, 2001 – What We Saw” by “Bob and Bri”.

Released through on September 11th 2006. is run by Edelman Public Relations.




Phone Witness


"It looked like a normal plane going over the city, and then, all of a sudden, a turn to the left, and it slammed right into the WTC."


From “Three Hours that Shook America: A Chronology of Chaos” by Mark K. Miller, Broadcasting and Cable August 26, 2002. Quoted time for witness report was 9:01am on 11th September 2001.




Fire Marshal Steven Mosiello


“I was told by somebody that we had an eyewitness who happened to be an off-duty firefighter who told me that he saw the first building get hit and it was hit by a prop jet, which I think turned out to be the wrong information, but everybody sees things differently. But he said he was an eyewitness. I gave him to a fire marshal. I never got his name personally.”




Firefighter Roy Chelsen


“We proceeded in Tower 1. I think the revolving doors were kind of busted up, so I think we went through a window.  At that point we were still not sure that it was a plane that had hit the tower. There was some talk from the civilians coming down that a plane hit. The consensus was that it was a small plane. “




Anthony Bartolomey


Numerous civilians were telling me that a plane had hit the building. There were discrepancies as to the type of plane. Some were saying it was a Cessna or Leer jet type, a small jet plane. Some said it was a large passenger plane. One person actually said that it was like a military style plane that actually shot missiles into the building.”




Firefighter Richard Carletti


“I was coming up Allen, which turns into First. When I was crossing Delancey Street, I saw a jet in front of me, which was the first jet. He was pretty low. He was probably about 30 stories. Now I'm heading north and crossing Delancey Street on Allen and I see the jet make a move toward  the Trade Center. It made a south-westerly turn from that point.. I proceeded up First Avenue, left on 14th, parked in front of the firehouse. Fireman Lynn was there. He said they were out on a box, they wouldn't let him on because they thought they had a good job, and right then he told me a plane just crashed into the Trade Center. It was the same exact plane I just saw.”





Part 4 – Videographic Recordings


Jules Naudet


The aircraft in the video is too small to be a Boeing 767-200 but is similar in size to a Boeing 737-NG. The audio recording is consistent with the noise produced by the bypass engines of a commercial passenger jet at a low throttle setting. Just prior to impact the jet engine noise fades out to a quiet whining noise. The Jules Naudet first hit sound track can be downloaded here



From "9/11 - The Filmmakers Commemorative DVD Edition" - 2002 Goldfish Pictures Inc. Produced / Edited by Richard Barber, Mike Maloy, Bruce Spiegel and Mead Stone. Executive Producers Jules Naudet, Gedeon Naudet and James Hanlon. Directed by Jules Naudet, Gedeon Naudet and James Hanlon. The video of the WTC1 strike was allegedly recorded serendipitously by Jules Naudet at 8:46am on Tuesday 11 September 2001 from Canal Street.




Pavel Hlava


The resolution of the Pavel Hlava video is so low it is impossible to determine how large the flying object is or what the flying object is.



The video was allegedly recorded serendipitously by Pavel Hlava from the back of an SUV on the approach to the Brooklyn Battery Tunnel at 8:46am on Tuesday 11 September 2001.





Part 5 – Audio Recordings


Ginny Carr


Ginny Carr was at a business meeting in One Liberty Plaza and was recording the proceedings with a voice dictation machine. She accidentally captured the WTC1 impact noise and the WTC2 impact noise.


The WTC1 impact recording consists of a quiet whistling noise followed by two loud bangs nine seconds apart (the second one being a quick double bang in itself). It bears no resemblance to the roaring sound that should have been produced by the 2 bypass engines used on a Boeing 767-200.


To hear Ginny Carr’s recording in full go to, enter the archive and search for “Ginny Carr” or alternatively download the WTC1 impact recording only here.



Sound track allegedly recorded serendipitously by Ginny Carr from One Liberty Plaza at 8:46am on Tuesday 11 September 2001.





Analysis Of Witness Reports


In order to draw a conclusion from the witness reports we will only consider reports made on the day of 911 itself. The reason for this is to eliminate reports that might have been contaminated by the publicly announced official version of events, shortcomings of the witnesses memory or any witnesses who simply “change their mind” for whatever reason.


Therefore we will be examining the following reports because all of them were taken on the morning of Tuesday 11th September 2001.


“Libby Clark“

Karim Arraki

Todd Harris


“Dog Walking Woman”

Narrator On Mi Kyung Heller Video

Sean Murtagh

“Spear” Witness

Mary Cozza

Mr Obenhaus

“In Distress” Witness

Don Dahler

Jane Derenowski


Chief Joseph Pfeifer


The reports from “Spear” Witness, “In Distress” Witness, Todd Harris and Chief Joseph Pfeifer do nothing more than tell us that some sort of aeroplane flew into WTC1.


Mr. Obenhaus claims to have positively identified the aircraft as a large commercial jet. But when pressured by the news reporter he can’t recall how many engines it had, even though he could make out airframe colouration and distinguish it from “prop planes or smaller aviation stuff that flies around here sometimes…”. Towards the end of the statement he hints at the possibility of it being a transport plane because “…it happened so quickly I couldn't tell whether it had windows on the side or what…, thereby contradicting his earlier claim of it being a commercial jet.


The Obenhaus transcript suggests that Obenhaus is unsure of what he actually saw. It seems hard to believe that this man could have seen an aircraft with basic detail like colour and size yet at the same time fail to notice how many engines it had. The Obenhaus statement appears to have been made towards the end of the CNN new special on 911 at a time when the reports of hijacked commercial planes were widespread. It’s difficult to know if Obenhaus is reproducing the official line or his own version of what he saw under the influence of the official reports of hijacked passenger jets. For these reasons I have chosen to largely ignore the Obenhaus report.


I find it hard to believe that Murtaghs report is genuine and / or accurate. We should consider the way CNN added fictitious detail to George Sleighs original statement and the comment from Murtaghs colleague, Sid Bedingfield, who states “I thought the plane was much smaller”. Presumably Bedingfield is making a comparative statement about the aircraft he saw in relation to the type of aircraft Flight 11 was supposed to have been in the official version of events, namely an American Airlines Boeing 767-200.  Consequently I’ve chosen to ignore the Murtagh report as there is evidence to suggest that he is not telling the truth and / or he might have had an ulterior motive for claiming to have seen a large passenger jet in his position as the Vice President of CNN.


Although there are 2 (somewhat suspicious) witness reports of a large commercial aircraft colliding with WTC1 the bulk of witness reports suggest something significantly smaller than a large commercial aircraft. Karim Arraki, “Stuart”, “Dog Walking Woman”, Don Dahler and the narrator on the Mi Kyung Heller video provide more or less consistent details at roughly the same points in time very close to the WTC1 attack at 8:46am. Their collective observations are summarised below in 5 points:


1 – “Small plane”

2 – “Non-commercial”

3 – “Flight training aircraft”

4 – “Missile”

5 – “Small jet”


To some extent these 5 points are subjective and unspecific. From the perspective of a glider pilot a Learjet could be described as a large aeroplane but a 747 pilot could just as easily describe a Learjet as a small plane. The term “non-commercial” is meaningless as flight training in a 2 seater aircraft is classed as “commercial” because a flying instructor will receive payment from a student pilot to receive that training. So the terms “non-commercial” and “commercial” don’t always provide us with information about the size of the aircraft. Any aircraft can be used for training regardless of its size. For example a Boeing 737-400 trainee pilot will complete most of his / her type rating course in a simulator followed by Base Training on an empty Boeing 737-400. So the idea that because a plane is used for flight training it must therefore be small is untrue. A missile can be described as an object or weapon for throwing at a target or for discharge from a machine or a weapon directed by remote control or automatically. In other words a missile could be something launched from the wing of an F-16 during aerial combat or an Airbus A380 flying on autopilot. Consequently the term “missile” is meaningless with regard to its size and functionality.


So what is do the witnesses mean when they talk of a “missile” or a “small” aircraft or a “non-commercial” aircraft or an aircraft that would be used for flight training?


I suspect that the term “non-commercial” refers to an aircraft that would not be typically used for transporting people or cargo. In other words an aircraft that would be used by flying schools to teach student pilots basic piloting skills. But exactly how small is “small”? Most people are familiar with “heavy” aircraft seen at airports like Boeing and Airbus models and I suspect the term “small” is relative to the perception of the size of these types of aircraft.


If you see an aircraft at an airport that functions as a carrier of people or cargo then I doubt if the witnesses would perceive this type of aircraft as “small”. On the other hand if you went to an airfield that mainly accommodated aircraft used for training student pilots then these types of aircraft would presumably be perceived as “small” by the witnesses.


My interpretation of these 5 reports collectively is that the aircraft in question appeared to the witnesses as something that would not have been used for carrying large amounts of people (no greater than 15) and would be predominant at airfields that support light aircraft operations and / or recreational aviation.


As for the term “missile”, it probably means something the size of a Tomahawk / CALCM missile or anything that the layman might associate with a missile from films or popular media. This term “missile” is the odd one out as it implies small or absent wings. The other witnesses make a specific reference to an ”aircraft” or a “plane” which suggests prominent wings.


The Derenowski reports suggests the aircraft was larger than a “Cessna” which seems to refer to the popular 4-seater Cessna 172 light aircraft and / or any other similar type of aircraft (Cessna 182, Piper Warrior, etc.) used primarily for recreational and training purposes. The term “mid-sized” plane is open to interpretation, but would presumably eliminate the “large jet” or “large plane” option. So this report is a little vague only telling us that the size of the plane was somewhere between that of a typical light aircraft and a typical passenger jet (like an Airbus A320 or a Boeing 737 for example). The “Libby Clark” statement is like an imprecise version of Derenowskis’ and can only be used to eliminate the “large plane” option and “light aircraft” option with words like “I mean it wasn't the size of a jet” (presumably within the context of the statement she is referring to a typical large passenger jet) and “it was not a small, small plane…”.


Similarly the Cozza report eliminates the “light aircraft” option and the “large passenger jet” option. Both the Derenowski and Cozza reports are specific and spoken with a degree of confidence unlike the Arraki report that is somewhat rushed and vague.





Estimation Of Aircraft Size Deduced From Analysis of Witness Reports


By analysing the witness reports previously mentioned it would appear that the size of aircraft (but not type of aircraft) that hit Tower 1 of the former World Trade Centre complex on the morning of 911 could have been as small as a Beechcraft Baron (approximately 10 meters in length) to an aircraft the size of a Bombardier Learjet (with variants up to 18 meters in length):



Collectively the reports seem to swing in favour the larger option, say in the 15 meter to 20 meter range with two witnesses stating succinctly that, “…it wasn’t a Cessna or anything like that and “…but not a tiny propeller plane.


The aircraft in question may not have been a conventional aircraft, it might just as easily have been a Tomahawk / CALCM missile or a custom built missile specifically for the WTC1 attack, but this option does not have overall support from the witness statements.



I suspect that if the aircraft was any longer than 20 meters the witnesses would not have perceived it as being a “small” aircraft or a “missile” and they would have recognised it as something “commercial”, not “non-commercial”. The Boeing 737-200 is approximately 30 meters in length and would be operated from larger airfields for the purpose of carrying passengers. I doubt if anyone would consider this type of aircraft to be “small” or confuse it with a missile.





Computer Simulated Visualisation Of The “Flight 11” Aircraft


Below we have a Beechcraft Baron and a Bombardier Learjet next to an American Airlines Boeing 767-200 for comparative reference.








There isn’t any evidence to support the official version of events which tells us a large Boeing 767-200 passenger jet hit WTC1 on the morning of 911. The witness reports indicate that whatever hit WTC1 was probably similar in size to an aircraft like the Bombardier Learjet with a conventional airframe (i.e. a single fuselage with two wings).





Implications Of The WTC1 Witness Reports Analysis


The conclusion raises serious doubt over the statements from Sean Murtagh, George Sleigh, and Mr. Obenhaus. Why do their reports conflict so heavily with the majority of “small jet” reports? Obenhaus comes across as being an outright liar with his longwinded, embellished and contradictory banter and what looks like a weak attempt to spin a yarn about a transport plane because he couldn't tell whether it had windows on the side or what.  The Murtagh and Sleigh recollections are more convincing. The only problem with Sleighs story is that it’s too implausible and changes each time he gives a report to the media. He is also employed by a branch of the U.S. Government and that might reduce his credibility in some peoples eyes. That leaves pensive Sean Murtagh the then Vice President of CNN, CNN being a popular outlet for government propaganda.  Murtaghs statement is precise and clear but it does seem like a “stroke-of-luck” that the Vice President of CNN was able to catch a first glimpse of the attack. What a shame that his report contradicted the bulk of reports taken around the same time and the official “767” version as well. One way or the other it’s the “large passenger jet” reports that are the most suspicious, not only because they are in a minority, but also by their very dubious nature.  Memories may fade or be influenced but it’s hard to imagine how a “small jet” can change to a “large passenger jet “ in a few hours or even a few minutes. We should consider the possibility that some of the “large passenger jet” witnesses are deliberately lying. If this is the case then the “large passenger jet” witnesses for the WTC2 event should be taken with a pinch of salt, to say the least.


We can conclude with a high degree of certainty that the object that struck WTC1 was definitely not a large commercial passenger jet. Furthermore the analysis indicates that the object in question was a conventional aircraft similar in size to a business class jet, like a Learjet for example. There is no evidence of an unconventional aircraft or exotic weaponry.


While compiling the article I noticed certain reports that indirectly revealed properties of the “Flight 11” aircraft.  Consider the following:


“Yes, I had a perfect view, and the plane was coming in. I noticed it a second before it hit the building. It looked like it was moving slowly and it lined itself up to hit the building directly.”




"It looked like a normal plane going over the city, and then, all of a sudden, a turn to the left, and it slammed right into the WTC."


How is a Boeing 767-200 travelling at a claimed 400mph – 500mph supposed to suddenly position itself for a pinpoint strike on a relatively small target in Lower Manhattan and have numerous people on the ground witness the event? The only realistic answer is that the aircraft in question was smaller, lighter and flying much slower than the official version of events tells us. This lower speed would be advantageous in terms of ease of aircraft handling and navigation.


This “low speed / small plane” issue raises doubt over the authenticity of the Jules Naudet “Fireman’s Video” which is shows the WTC1 impact. A quick look at the video shows an aircraft similar in size to a Boeing 737 / Airbus passenger jet colliding with WTC1 at a speed in the region of 450 mph – 500 mph. The fact that the majority of witnesses talk of a “small jet” apparently flying slower than it was supposed to be the contradiction between this video and the witness reports couldn’t be more obvious.


One could argue that the “Fireman’s Video” is fake and indeed that is the authors conclusion. This should come as no surprise to the reader when a significant proportion of the WTC2 strike videos have already been exposed as fakes, so why should the “Fireman’s Video” be any different?


October 2006 - Version 3.0