*[Due to lazy research, where I mistakenly used an average 757/767 plane length of 178 ft. to make my original plane speed calculations, as pointed out by "CriticalMass" at Cluesforum , {thankyou,thankyou CM}, ***this post has been re-edited and updated on 10/28/15,** with "new and improved" plane speed calculations ]

**Another "Plane" Fact : Contradictory Video Plane Speeds:**
The pre- strike plane speed for Fl. 175 that I previously calculated via the Fox 5 footage as being 540+ mph , is directly contradicted by the Evan Fairbanks "amateur"footage - which shows a speed of either 148 mph, 296 mph., or 591 mph. depending on the claimed frame speed of the camera purportedly used :-) .

That previous post established the fact that at a video speed of 30 frames per second, the Fox 5 network footage showing Fl.175's alleged flight and collision with WTC2 reveals an [altogether physically impossible for plane] air speed of 540 +mph. as calculated frame to frame.

[

**N.B**. "official " plane speed was/is 520 knots, or 598 mph :-) ].

**A 9/11 Video "Evidence" Fact: For Plane Speed Calculations, Only Two Useful Video Sequences**
There are only two Fl.175 flight/impact videos that I am aware of with sufficient camera/ viewer perspective of close to 90 degree [i.e. close to 90 degrees perpendicular to the planes path] that allow for a reasonably accurate calculation of frame to frame plane speed .

These two sequences are:

1]:

The Fox 5 national TV network broadcast sequence, as examined in my previous post :

and ....

2]

The er, "amateur"sequence [ i.e never part of a "live" "as it happened", 9/11 US network broadcast ] purportedly captured by pro videographer "Evan Fairbanks", which was subsequently shown on a major US network later the same day, for the first time:
**Speed Check**
So, in order to double check on the plane speed I have calculated as being 540+mph in the Fox 5 sequence by measuring distance travelled per frame, at an assumed 30 frames per sec. camera speed, I then used the wonderful

Killtown "Air Vs. Skyscraper" analysis of the Fairbanks sequence, which handily slows the sequence down to reveal individual frames of that sequence:

**Plane Speed is Only 296 mph in Fairbanks Sequence?**
If we ignore the main purpose of the Killtown analysis , and

instead just concentrate on the number of frames the plane image takes to travel its own length, it will be seen that Killtown's frame by frame analysis of the Fairbanks sequence reveals

the plane taking 11 frames to travel its own length:

**Plane Length= 159 ft. **
According to Wikipedia, Flight 175 was a Boeing 767-200, 159 ft. long
**Fairbanks Camera's Frame to Frame Speed ? **
The frame to frame speed of the camera used for the Fox5 sequence was apparently 30 frames per second.

I did a superficial search for technical details of the Fairbanks sequence, but drew a blank for frame to frame speed, so I've done my plane speed calculations using three different, most common speeds.

From what I understand, these most common frame to frame speeds are:

1] 15 frames per second

2] 30 frames per second

3] 60 frames per second

*[n.b. I'm not sure if this camera speed was even available in 2001, but included it anyway].*
**Plane Speed =14.45 Ft. Per Frame**
If the plane takes 11 frames to travel 159 ft, it travels 14.45 ft per frame.

Therefor:

**1] **at

15 frames per sec.: 14.45 ft per frame =216 ft per sec= 13,009 ft. per minute=780,545 ft. per hour:

= **148 mph**

**2]** at

30 frames per sec. , 14.45 ft per frame = 434 ft per sec= 26,010 ft. per minute, = 1,560,600 ft. per hour:

= **296 mph****.**

**3]** at

60 frames per sec., 14.45 ft per frame = 867 ft per sec= 52,020 ft. per minute = 3,121,200 ft. per hour :

= **591 mph.**** **

**Impossibly Slow, Or Impossibly Fast- Or, Both Fake? **
So there you have it , dear reader, according to the Evan Fairbanks video sequence Fl.175 was either traveling at an impossibly slow [to do what it next supposedly did] 148 mph, [at 15 frames per sec.]contradicting the Fox 5 plane speed of 540+ mph, and the official speed of 598 mph.

Or, an impossibly slow [to do what it next supposedly did] 296 mph,[ at 30 frames per sec.] once more contradicting the Fox5 plane speed of 540+ mph., and the official speed of 598 mph.

or.....

An impossibly fast 591 mph,[ at 60 frames per second, if that camera speed was available in 2001], which was/is just as impossibly fast as the Fox5 plane speed of "only" 540+ mph [and just as impossible as the official speed of 598 mph.]

**Assume 30 Frames Per Second for Fairbanks Video?**
If I assume that the Fairbanks video was shot at the same camera speed as the Fox5 sequence,[ a not unreasonable assumption, I believe], then the Fairbanks video, with its airspeed of

**296 mph.**, directly contradicts the Fox5 sequence, which shows an airspeed of

**540+ mph.**

**Question:**

**So Who do You Believe: 11 Frames Or, 6 Frames For Plane To Travel It's Own Length ? **

If we assume a camera speed of 30 frames per sec. for , the Fairbanks video shows Fl.175 traveling its own length in almost twice the number of frames as it takes in the Fox 5 sequence. :-) .

And, don't fergit, as the Pilots For 9/11 Truth video clearly demonstrates:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs5RQ_5nu4k
**... that at anywhere near the official collision speed of 598 mph., [ or even at Fox 5's revealed speed of 540 mph], or even at "only" 500 mph........**

** at that altitude [1000 ft. and below], the plane would have simply broken apart pre-strike due to the forces exerted on it by the 4x denser [than at 35,000 ft.], air mass.**

**And, from what I understand [as a non-expert in these matters] - even at 296 mph [ i.e the recorded speed of the E. Fairbanks video, assuming 30 frames per sec.], the plane would** still** not have been able to endure the massive forces acting on it via 4x air density, descent, and turning maneuvers , and would have therefor broken up, long before any attempted building strike.**
**Conclusions? **
So, based only on the plane speed issue [i.e. excluding any/all other technical and physical impossibilities shown in either video] :

1]: either the Fox5 sequence is genuine, and the Fairbanks sequence is a fake.

Or,

[2]: the Fairbanks sequence is genuine, and the Fox sequence is a fake.

Or,

[3]: [ horror of horrors], they are both [bad] fakes.

Or,

4] They are both genuine, because you are out of your tiny mind :-) [

get help]

**False In One False in All- An Idea For You to Consider ?: **
To close, a legal principle for you to perhaps consider, dear reader:

"False in one , false in all"
Regards, onebornfree