In order for events to have occurred the way outlined in the official version, both physics and aviation precedents had to take the day off- not just for one flight, but four.

Summary:
1. Flight Recorders
2. Transporter Hijack Code
3. Flight 77’s Flight Path and Maneuvers
4. Dearth of Wreckage
5. WTC Order of Falls

Flight Recorders

What the Official Report Says 

Per the official report, only one recorder out of the eight that day was recoverable- "In accordance with FAA regulations, United 93's cockpit voice recorder
recorded the last 31 minutes of sounds from the cockpit via microphones
in the pilots' headsets, as well as in the overhead panel of the flight
deck. This is the only recorder from the four hijacked airplanes to
survive the impact and ensuing fire. The CVRs and FDRs from American 11
and United 175 were not found, and the CVR from American Flight 77 was
badly burned and not recoverable. See FBI report, "CVR from UA Flight
#93,"Dec. 4, 2003; see also FAA regulations, 14 C.F.R. §§ 25.1457,
91.609, 91.1045, 121.359; Flight 93 CVR data. A transcript of the CVR
recording was prepared by the NTSB and the FBI."[3]

Recorder Survival 

Most people don’t realize that every flight has two recorders- a Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) and a Flight Data Recorder (FDR). These recorders are specifically designed to survive a crash [1]. For example- Barry M. Sweedler, from the National Transportation Safety Board, cites in a recent speech that for some crashes “the only wreckage recovered were the flight recorders” [2].

In order to find out how often recorders are retrieved from an aircraft crash, I emailed the NTSB (at publicmail@ntsb.gov) on 27 Sep 07 and asked the following questions:

"...First, regarding survivability- historically, how often are flight recorders recovered from airplane crashes? Second, regarding reliability- when they are recovered, how often are they readable?..."

This was the response I received on 1 Oct 07:

"We here at the NTSB receive about 200 flight recorders per year on average. While the vast majority of the recorders that we receive are totally undamaged, we do she some damage ranging from minor to severe in about 15% of the cases. Again most are in the minor category. We experience about 10-15 recorders per year that have sustained severe damage. And historically we only have 1 or 2 per year that the data is irretrievable, mostly due to severe fire damage not impact damage. In the 25 years that I have been here, (several thousand recorders) we have only lost one recorder for impact damage.

The newer solid-state recorders are substantially more robust than the older magnetic tape recorders. As the industry slowly replaces the tape technology with memory chips I expect the survivability numbers to increase.

Jim Cash, Chief
Research and Engineering Division
NTSB"

Unprecedented Anamoly

So, if the official report is right, and that somehow seven of eight flight recorders on the four flights were unrecoverable or essentially unreadable, we have an unprecedented aviation anamoly here. What makes these four flight crashes any different from any other crash? Per the above statistics from the NTSB, the majority of all recorders are retrievable (less than half of 1% aren't) and at most only 15% have severe damage, yet on 9-11 we are supposed to believe that 87% were lost and irretrievable.

Claims that Recorders WERE Found 

Given the above, more credence can be given to claims by a retired NY firefighter, who was active during 9-11, that they had indeed found recorders. Retired firefighter Nicholas DeMasi has stated that he escorted federal agents on an all-terrain vehicle in October 2001 and helped them locate three of the four recorders for those two flights. His story is collaborated by a volunteer and honorary firefighter, Mike Bellone.

They claim they were approached by unknown bureau agents a short time after they found the boxes among the WTC rubble before January 2002. “They confronted me and told me to not to say anything,” recalled Bellone, referring to one of three reddish-orange boxes with two white stripes he saw in the back of DeMasi’s ATV. “I said, ‘Give me a good reason.’ When they couldn’t, I told them I wouldn’t shut up about it."[4]

Transponder Hijack Code

On every civilian aircraft, there is a device called a transponder. It can be tuned to emit a 4-digit frequency called a “squawk”; this allows air traffic control to not only “see” the aircraft, but also lets them identify the altitude, heading, airspeed, etc. There are several emergency codes; one of them is for a hijacking (code 7500)[5]. Federal regulations require emergency codes have to be easy and quick to input; pilots are trained to enter them quickly and accurately. Per Ted Muga (retired aviator), “it takes literally just a split-second for you to put your hand down on the center console and flip it over” , and enter the code.[6] Oddly enough, not one pilot or co-pilot on any of the four planes on 9-11 was able to switch on their transponders. This was so odd that many pilots have remarked on it as being most unusual. Why were these flights different than any other hijacked flight, especially since Capt. Burlingame (pilot of flight 77) was a retired military officer with training in anti-terrorism?

Flight 77’s Flight Path and Maneuvers

Numerous pilots, (including a former naval Top Gun!), state that the flight path and plane maneuvers of Flight 77 are flat impossible due to aeronautical physics and actual experience- at the very least, the plane should have stalled[7]:

• Commander Ralph Kolstad (ret), former Navy Top Gun and Air Combat Instructor: “At the Pentagon, the pilot of the Boeing 757 did quite a feat of flying. I have 6,000 hours of flight time in Boeing 757’s and 767’s and I could not have flown it the way the flight path was described.” Commander Kolstad adds, “I was also a Navy fighter pilot and Air Combat Instructor and have experience flying low altitude, high speed aircraft. I could not have done what these ‘beginners’ did. Something stinks to high heaven!”
• Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, former Air Force combat fighter pilot and Aerospace Engineer: “The things that really got my attention were the amount of descent rate that you had to have at the end of the flight, of Flight 77, that would have made it practically impossible to hit the light poles. Essentially it would have been too high at that point to the point of impact where the main body of the airplane was hitting between the first and second floor of the Pentagon... But, you know, that kind of descent rate it would have been impossible essentially for the results that we see physically from what the flight data recorder was recording.”
• Capt. Russ Wittenberg, former Air Force combat fighter pilot and retired commercial pilot: "I flew the two actual aircraft which were involved in 9/11; the Fight number 175 and Flight 93, the 757 that allegedly went down in Shanksville and Flight 175 is the aircraft that's alleged to have hit the South Tower. I don't believe it's possible for, like I said, for a terrorist, a so-called terrorist to train on a [Cessna] 172, then jump in a cockpit of a 757-767 class cockpit, and vertical navigate the aircraft, lateral navigate the aircraft, and fly the airplane at speeds exceeding it's design limit speed by well over 100 knots, make high-speed high-banked turns, exceeding -- pulling probably 5, 6, 7 G's. And the aircraft would literally fall out of the sky. I couldn't do it and I'm absolutely positive they couldn't do it…there was absolutely no possibility that Flight 77 could have "descended 7,000 feet in two minutes, all the while performing a steep 270 degree banked turn before crashing into the Pentagon's first floor wall without touching the lawn."

So, how could a “beginner” accomplish maneuvers that accomplished pilots could not, and how could the plane perform acts that it shouldn’t be able to? How was it able to crash into the Pentagon right at the wall/ground interface when it would be nearly impossible for even a small slow single engine airplane- and without touching the lawn?

Dearth of Wreckage

It has noted by a range of individuals, from laymen to professional aircraft accident investigators, that there is a dearth of wreckage for ALL four accidents, when compared to accidents of the same class planes. What were the unique circumstances for these particular crashes that metal engines, luggage, the miles of wiring that make up any aircraft, etc all vaporized? The amount of wreckage left simply doesn't correspond to the type of aircraft supposedly crashed:

• One of the first reporters on the scene, CNN correspondent Jamie McIntyre reporting live from the Pentagon: "From my close-up inspection, there's no evidence of a plane having crashed anywhere near the Pentagon. The only site is the actual side of the building that's crashed in. And as I said, the only pieces left that you can see are small enough that you pick up in your hand. There are no large tail sections, wing sections, fuselage, nothing like that anywhere around which would indicate that the entire plane crashed into the side of the Pentagon and then caused the side to collapse..."]”[8].
• Col. George Nelson (ret), former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority: “With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged.”[9]
• Lt. Col. Karen U. Kwiatkowski, former Air Force staff member of the Director of the National Security Agency and eyewitness to Pentagon crash: “There was a dearth of visible debris on the relatively unmarked [Pentagon] lawn, where I stood only minutes after the impact. Beyond this strange absence of airliner debris, there was no sign of the kind of damage to the Pentagon structure one would expect from the impact of a large airliner… I saw nothing of significance at the point of impact - no airplane metal or cargo debris was blowing on the lawn in front of the damaged building as smoke billowed from within the Pentagon. ... all of us staring at the Pentagon that morning were indeed looking for such debris, but what we expected to see was not evident…The same is true with regard to the kind of damage we expected. ... But I did not see this kind of damage. Rather, the facade had a rather small hole, no larger than 20 feet in diameter. Although this facade later collapsed, it remained standing for 30 or 40 minutes, with the roof line remaining relatively straight… The scene, in short, was not what I would have expected from a strike by a large jetliner.”[10]

WTC Order of Fall

The WTC, a steel and concrete building, collapsed after being hit by a Boeing 767 when the engineers designed it to withstand a direct hit from a Boeing 707 (approximately the same size and weight of the 767. Further, the second building collapsed before the first one, which had been burning for 20 minutes longer after a direct hit, when the second one hit was just a glancing blow. This defies common sense- the building that took a direct blow first, obviously should have fallen before the building that just receiving a glancing blow after.

References:
1. http://www.faa.gov/newsroom/factsheets/2005/factsheets_022405.htm
2. http://www.ntsb.gov/speeches/s000314.htm
3. "The 9-11 Commission Report”, page 456 ("Notes to Chapter 1, 1. We Have Some Planes, #76)- available in hard copy or online at: http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report_Notes.htm
4. www.americanfreepress.net/html/black_box.html
5. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transponder_code#Transponder_codes
6. http://patriotsquestion911.com/
7. http://patriotsquestion911.com/
8. CNN Live Broadcast, see at: http://thewebfairy.com/911/pentagon/index.html
9. http://patriotsquestion911.com
10. http://patriotsquestion911.com