Hi Jane

In regards to your post, you have correctly interpreted Zechariah 14:4 and Revelation 19:11-21 as to a picture of the Second Coming events. 

As to the particulars concerning what the Lord does, I'm not a prophet and I wouldn't dare to presume what He does at that precise moment.  Unique to this manifestation is the fact that the Lord touches down on the Mount of Olives.  When the "glory of the Lord", representing God's presence, removed itself from the Holy of holies in the Temple to the mountain east of the Temple (the Mount of Olives), it abandoned Jerusalem to destruction.  We are told this in Ezekiel 10:4 and 11:22-24.  To the restored Temple, the "glory of the Lord" will return -(Ezekiel 43:1-5; 48:35).  It was from the Mount of Olives that Jesus, after His thirty-year pilgrimage, ascended into Heaven with the promise that He would return -(Acts 1:11).

The Mount of Olives is a ridge twenty-one miles long, running from north to south, on the east side of Jerusalem rising to an altitude of 2,710 feet or 330 feet higher than the Temple Mount.  While the major fault in the Jordan Valley runs north and south, there is another hairline fault running east and west through the Mount of Olives.  When the Lord returns, the Mount of Olives will split apart forming a wide valley extending eastward to Azel (place or meaning unknown).  A great plain will be formed form Geba, about six miles northeast of Jerusalem, to Rimmon, about thirty-five miles southwest of Jerusalem.

In this newly formed valley running through the Mount of Olives, the remnant will find refuge.  There the Lord will appear with His holy ones -(Zechariah 14:5).  This text and the subsequent verses hold profound implications of "glory" for which even the New Testament notes in Matthew 24:30 and following, confirmed in 2nd Thessalonians 1:10 and Jude 14.

As to why the Scriptures accounts are different, only God can answer this fully.  We can merely speculate about individual writing style, inspiration; and this is not the only time we find an ambiguous variation or different details.  The Synoptic Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke are examples, where, while there is much in the ways of similar content and coverage, there are also significant differences, but less obvious because of how each is perceived. 

We need to be remember that witnesses at an event or an accident will remember different details, that other witnesses do not notice.  Often the witness testimony does not corroborate the full story, but the investigators are able to assemble a reasonable rendition of what actually occurred or took place.  Unlike in sports where the referees have access to replay cameras recording the game, we only have the written word to base our understanding on.  Writing style, account records, while sometimes different actually speak to the reliability and credibility.  If all the details were carbon copies then we would have to believe someone got together to present a unified image, and diminish the integrity of the text.

In the case of the Gospels, each presents Jesus Christ from a different frame of reference.  This enables us to gather a collage that provides us a larger detailed picture than the individual snapshot accounts, from which we get individual accounts.

Hope I have been helpful,

God bless,

Pastor Bob