It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Some are still trying to push fake planes due to POOR understanding & observational skills.

page: 7
7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 07:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Show me a spec sheet for an air plane fitted with "fan engines"?

Funny, I hear air planes at the airport. The kid rushes out of the house to look at jets flying into the local air port?




posted on Feb, 11 2017 @ 08:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Fan



www.dictionary.com...

any device for producing a current of air by the movement of a broad surface or a number of such surfaces.



turbofan


www.dictionary.com...
a jet engine having a large impeller that takes in air, part of which is used in combustion of fuel, the remainder being mixed with the products of combustion to form a low-velocity exhaust jet.




posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 03:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

So we do agree on the numbers and they confirm that the planes were flying at subsonic speeds for the low altitude. That also means the roar of the engines at max throttle preceded the planes IE you'd hear them before they arrived with a very distinct doppler effect that was recorded in all those 911 videos with audio content.

By 'fan engines' I'd guess you mean jets? The planes in question had 'high bypass' jet engines not that that has any real bearing on this discussion as they all produce extreme sound levels at full throttle



posted on Feb, 12 2017 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

If you do not know the differences between a straight turbojet engine and a turbofan engine, I have no desire to educate you. Noise footprint is one of the significant differences.

That's for you too Pilgrum.
edit on 12-2-2017 by Salander because: Include Pilgrum



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Again, simple request. Please reference an air craft spec sheet with a "fan engine"?



posted on Feb, 15 2017 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Pilgrum

Considering the work of Dennis Cimino, a man who worked in avionics his whole life, including in the Navy. He knows electronics, it's his livelihood .

He and others made the FOIA request, and 5 years later they received the computer stuff to analyze on their own. Stutt & Legge analyzed the data too, but their expertise was not the same as Cimino's.

His analysis showed that the FDR data he received did not include assignment to a particular aircraft, serial numbers etc. The entire thing from start to finish had huge irregularities compared to what one would see in a normal airliner.

Flight 77 was revealed to be highly suspicious from the start, as other government info showed the airplane was where it could not possibly be.

The only airplane that flew low level over the pentagon was done for effect and seen by citizens on the ground, as was the intention. Low level fly by, but on the wrong damn course to agree with what became the official story.



posted on Feb, 15 2017 @ 07:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheFridaySpecial

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: TheFridaySpecial


Does this help



or how about this




Yes, so for comparison,




Do we see how it is impossible for the wing to be behind the building while the plane appears to be lower than the Twin Towers in the frame?

100% proof of fake here.

Thanks WMD_2008, couldn't have done it without you!


Absolute non-sense. All it shows is you can't get your head around perspective/field of view.

Have a look at the following thread. If you think that you have proven that it is fake then why not post over there? Quite clear that you don't understand perspective and field of view.

Metabunk Link



posted on Feb, 16 2017 @ 04:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Sounds like you've put a little too much faith into the ramblings of P4T and CIT etc which has been addressed at length right here in the past and found to be lacking in substance.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 07:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Pilgrum

Rational analysis by experts in the field are not ramblings. Their findings might have been "addressed" here, but they have not been proved wrong. Two different things.

CIT went out there and interviewed people who actually saw the airplane. 2 of them were cops.

The 911 Commission DID NOT interview those people. The government DID NOT investigate their testimony, because it never took their testimony.

The government had a story to tell, and it was not interested in the truth. That's why the official story is bankrupt for years.



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 08:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Probably because they found the jet wreckage with the correct parts with the correct serial numbers.

Did you know that even the individual blades of the turbofans have serial numbers.

The serial numbers off the jet wreckage matched the maintenance records for the crashed jet.



edit on 17-2-2017 by neutronflux because: Erased are



posted on Feb, 17 2017 @ 09:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Dennis Cimino? Is that the same guy that claims a manned space flight couldn't find, navigate, and land on the moon?



posted on Feb, 18 2017 @ 07:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

Probably because they found the jet wreckage with the correct parts with the correct serial numbers.

Did you know that even the individual blades of the turbofans have serial numbers.

The serial numbers off the jet wreckage matched the maintenance records for the crashed jet.




That sir, is a false statement.



posted on Feb, 18 2017 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux



Probably because they found the jet wreckage with the correct parts with the correct serial numbers.

Did you know that even the individual blades of the turbofans have serial numbers.

The serial numbers off the jet wreckage matched the maintenance records for the crashed jet.


Prove it?



posted on Feb, 18 2017 @ 06:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

One: you are the one making allegations of a 9/11 murderous government, the burden of proof is on you.

Two: so tired the truth movement tries to create the false narrative the 9/11 investigation didn't look for evidence because the investigation didn't sensationalize ever standard procedure that didn't conclude anything abnormal! Oh my gosh! News alert, all readable serial numbers from the wreckage revealed the jet was maintained with proper parts!

Prove they didn't do a standard parts check from the wreckage, they didn't do a standard use of the maintenance records for a mechanical historical of the jet, and there where abnormalities on the serial numbers on the recovered parts.



posted on Feb, 18 2017 @ 06:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Salander

Care to answer?

Dennis Cimino? Is that the same guy that claims a manned space flight couldn't find, navigate, and land on the moon?



posted on Feb, 18 2017 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


Probably because they found the jet wreckage with the correct parts with the correct serial numbers.

Did you know that even the individual blades of the turbofans have serial numbers.

The serial numbers off the jet wreckage matched the maintenance records for the crashed jet.


Prove it?

I rest my case.



Two: so tired the truth movement tries to create the false narrative the 9/11 investigation didn't look for evidence because the investigation didn't sensationalize ever standard procedure that didn't conclude anything abnormal! Oh my gosh! News alert, all readable serial numbers from the wreckage revealed the jet was maintained with proper parts!


That is your answer?

So you're "opinions" are facts and everyone else opinions are wrong?

Is this the new standard of debating on ATS now?



posted on Feb, 18 2017 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: neutronflux


Probably because they found the jet wreckage with the correct parts with the correct serial numbers.

Did you know that even the individual blades of the turbofans have serial numbers.

The serial numbers off the jet wreckage matched the maintenance records for the crashed jet.


Prove it?

I rest my case.



Two: so tired the truth movement tries to create the false narrative the 9/11 investigation didn't look for evidence because the investigation didn't sensationalize ever standard procedure that didn't conclude anything abnormal! Oh my gosh! News alert, all readable serial numbers from the wreckage revealed the jet was maintained with proper parts!


That is your answer?

So you're "opinions" are facts and everyone else opinions are wrong?

Is this the new standard of debating on ATS now?


Sorry, you are the one making unfounded allegations of guilt and murder.

Far as I know, the investigation verified wreckage and maintenance records.

You are the one bringing charges of conspiracy, murder, improper investigation, and improper failure analysis. The burden of proof is up to you to prove what the standard investigation procedure was, and if it was not followed.
edit on 18-2-2017 by neutronflux because: Fix this and that



posted on Feb, 18 2017 @ 08:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

This is a chance for you to show unbiased research and conclusion.

Its was sad how you chose to be biased and ignorant on the hand searching of WTC debris for human remains, personal effects, and evidence.

Care to state once again how those cops who recover 19,000 body parts willful concealed evidence and fabricated recovering human remains?

Sad you cannot acknowledge the human toll on the law enforcement, investigators, engineers, and clean up crews who did honest work. You cannot even fathom people who lost loved ones at the WTC stepped up to be part of the investigation and cleanup. I guess just victims of your agenda.



posted on Feb, 18 2017 @ 08:09 PM
link   
The commercial plane's claimed to have hit the towers could not have made the maneuvers withough structural failure long before reaching them...



posted on Feb, 18 2017 @ 08:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
The commercial plane's claimed to have hit the towers could not have made the maneuvers withough structural failure long before reaching them...


By who? About five people in truth movement trying to use the truth movement for fame and notoriety.

While a overwhelming majority of scientists, aviation engineers, pilots, and researchers proved the allegations of the truth movement wrong with nothing to gain, no banking / backing from a website, other than stamping out truth movement ignorance?



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join