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.

 

What Level Of Skill Was Required To Fly A Plane Into The Pentagon ?

page: 62
40
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

And what do you think a wing impacting the wall and shattering is going to do to the column it hits? Nothing? It won't penetrate the wall but it's still going to damage the column at impact. If only four columns were damaged the wall wouldn't have collapsed the way it did.


Is the photograph a fake? Blame the government for not reviewing every piece of evidence, the photograph does not show 8 columns that are broken.




posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

Engine length is meaningless. It has nothing to do with ground clearance. I can't link a PDF on my phone. The airport planning document shows 8 feet 1 inch.


It do actually when the government says the plane was just 20 feet ground to top of the plane.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

No, it doesn't. Length is the distance from the front of the engine to the back of the engine. What does that have to do with how low they were flying?



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Is anyone going to address why the so called plane has a white color?



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

I feel like I'm talking to that wall, although I suspect I could get my point across better if I was.

The column was damaged behind the facade. The wings hit, and the force of the impact was transferred to the column that was behind the wall. The wing didn't go through the wall, but damage was done anyway. Since the wall was still intact, you can't see the damage on those columns. That doesn't mean that they weren't damaged, only that you can't SEE the damage to them.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jacobu12

I am just pointing out that if the wings and fuselage were structural comprised do to exceeding speed limits, the few the broken columns indicates the more correct you were in flight 77 was braking apart...... or did you not argue flight 77 should have structural failure?


If a plane crashed there 8 columns would have got smashed and thats what they reported. Only 4 or 5 are broken and missing. So something smaller than a 757 hit the wall or a bomb blast blew from inside the Pentagon.


For the bomb....


Then why was everything pushed in? The entrance hole was pushed in. The items in the construction yard were pushed in towards the pentagon? Why was there no interior of the pentagon exploded out. Why were windows in the pentagon not exploded out. Why no crater or pitting in the concrete floors conspiracists say were undamaged. Why were the columns not broken in a patten of a sphere or cone. A blast wave gets wider and less intense with distance. How was a smaller and smaller hole knocked through the sequence of walls. Why was there no indication of an over pressure event caused by a bomb as in no near by car windows blown out or near by vegetation blown over.

Almost all eyewitnesses agree to a large jet impact.....



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux


You cannot prove that certain named passengers and crew (not including the hijackers of course, they didn't name them on the list at first) were found at the pentagon.

Yes, you can incessantly repeat pentagon press releases, but that doesn't make it so. Mary Tillman believed those guys for a few months, but then realized they had lied to her. The Pentagon is really good about lying, and Mary Tillman found out the hard way.

Because there was no airliner at the pentagon, there could not have been passengers or crew or their DNA.


Really then what happened to these people??



I would hope putting faces on the victims would make you guys realize how stupid and frankly evil your being.
edit on 7/17/17 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

No, it doesn't. Length is the distance from the front of the engine to the back of the engine. What does that have to do with how low they were flying?


Plane dropped to just 20 feet- ground to the top of the plane. 20 feet that's it. It's the amount space Hani have to fly the plane.

The top of the plane to the bottom is going to minus 12 feet taken from 20 feet. The engine extend even further down so that eats up the 20 feet of space had to fly very fast..
edit on 17-7-2017 by Jacobu12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jacobu12

I am just pointing out that if the wings and fuselage were structural comprised do to exceeding speed limits, the few the broken columns indicates the more correct you were in flight 77 was braking apart...... or did you not argue flight 77 should have structural failure?


If a plane crashed there 8 columns would have got smashed and thats what they reported. Only 4 or 5 are broken and missing. So something smaller than a 757 hit the wall or a bomb blast blew from inside the Pentagon.


You are still literally losing ground. Now a jet impact is on the table? Something that could make holes for wings at least 70 feet wide, and a tail section at lest 26 feet tall.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

No, it doesn't. Length is the distance from the front of the engine to the back of the engine. What does that have to do with how low they were flying?


Plane dropped to just 20 feet- ground to the top of the plane. 20 feet that's it. It's the amount space Hani have to fly the plane.

The top of the plane to the bottom is going to minus 12 feet taken from 20 feet. The engine extend even further down so that eats up the 20 feet of space had to fly very fast..


What? Funny you never talk about the ground being lower that the base of the pentagon.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jacobu12

I am just pointing out that if the wings and fuselage were structural comprised do to exceeding speed limits, the few the broken columns indicates the more correct you were in flight 77 was braking apart...... or did you not argue flight 77 should have structural failure?


If a plane crashed there 8 columns would have got smashed and thats what they reported. Only 4 or 5 are broken and missing. So something smaller than a 757 hit the wall or a bomb blast blew from inside the Pentagon.


For the bomb....


Then why was everything pushed in? The entrance hole was pushed in. The items in the construction yard were pushed in towards the pentagon? Why was there no interior of the pentagon exploded out. Why were windows in the pentagon not exploded out. Why no crater or pitting in the concrete floors conspiracists say were undamaged. Why were the columns not broken in a patten of a sphere or cone. A blast wave gets wider and less intense with distance. How was a smaller and smaller hole knocked through the sequence of walls. Why was there no indication of an over pressure event caused by a bomb as in no near by car windows blown out or near by vegetation blown over.

Almost all eyewitnesses agree to a large jet impact.....


prnt.sc... the front area was damaged a lot, it's a myth it wasn't.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

Dear God are we back to this again?

Length is the distance from the front of the engine cowling, to the back of the exhaust pipe. It has nothing to do with distance to the ground.

I gave you the numbers but apparently you don't want to do the math. Call it five feet of engine hangs below the wing.

You don't subtract the fuselage diameter from the altitude. Altitude isn't measured at the top of the fuselage, it's the distance from the aircraft to the ground. The pitot tubes that measure airspeed and altitude are on the side of the fuselage. When they said 20 feet, it was 20 feet from the ground to the aircraft.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

No, it doesn't. Length is the distance from the front of the engine to the back of the engine. What does that have to do with how low they were flying?


Plane dropped to just 20 feet- ground to the top of the plane. 20 feet that's it. It's the amount space Hani have to fly the plane.

The top of the plane to the bottom is going to minus 12 feet taken from 20 feet. The engine extend even further down so that eats up the 20 feet of space had to fly very fast..
altitude on aircraft is determined by where the landing gear is. When a pilot sees his altimeter it is telling him when his wheels would hit. You have a weird standard for aircraft height. What good would it do to measure from the top of the fuselage.

This is why you believe stupid things you have no clue how things work. Even people claiming no bodies were found is silly there was 4 people they couldn't identify. Through DNA testing they were able to return remains to there families.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

I feel like I'm talking to that wall, although I suspect I could get my point across better if I was.

The column was damaged behind the facade. The wings hit, and the force of the impact was transferred to the column that was behind the wall. The wing didn't go through the wall, but damage was done anyway. Since the wall was still intact, you can't see the damage on those columns. That doesn't mean that they weren't damaged, only that you can't SEE the damage to them.


You can talk all day and make excuses. You agreed with me only 4 columns only got broken are missing.. Now you are trying to figure out ways to backtrack. The goverrnment said 8 is not your fault, its on them.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

No, it doesn't. Length is the distance from the front of the engine to the back of the engine. What does that have to do with how low they were flying?


Plane dropped to just 20 feet- ground to the top of the plane. 20 feet that's it. It's the amount space Hani have to fly the plane.

The top of the plane to the bottom is going to minus 12 feet taken from 20 feet. The engine extend even further down so that eats up the 20 feet of space had to fly very fast..
altitude on aircraft is determined by where the landing gear is. When a pilot sees his altimeter it is telling him when his wheels would hit. You have a weird standard for aircraft height. What good would it do to measure from the top of the fuselage.

This is why you believe stupid things you have no clue how things work. Even people claiming no bodies were found is silly there was 4 people they couldn't identify. Through DNA testing they were able to return remains to there families.


Do you guys even know why i talk about this, it's the government version of events.

Google it and you know why then why i measuring the top of the Fuselage.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

No I didn't. I never agreed with you, I said that your image agrees with what I quoted that 50 columns were damaged in total. I never said only 4 were damaged. I also said you could only SEE 4,but that didn't mean it was only 4.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

Then you should be able to quote exactly where they said they were at 20 feet, then you subtract the fuselage diameter and add the engine diameter.
edit on 7/17/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

Dear God are we back to this again?

Length is the distance from the front of the engine cowling, to the back of the exhaust pipe. It has nothing to do with distance to the ground.

I gave you the numbers but apparently you don't want to do the math. Call it five feet of engine hangs below the wing.

You don't subtract the fuselage diameter from the altitude. Altitude isn't measured at the top of the fuselage, it's the distance from the aircraft to the ground. The pitot tubes that measure airspeed and altitude are on the side of the fuselage. When they said 20 feet, it was 20 feet from the ground to the aircraft.


You need google as a friend too, Government version ground to top of the plane was 20 feet. Not 20 feet to aircraft, that's false.



posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12
White or silver (reflective)?
Motion/focus blurred RWB stripes look purplish
Looks very close to the ground as well




posted on Jul, 17 2017 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Jacobu12

Jesus. One more time.

When the 757 is on the ground, with the wheels extended, parked at a gate, it is 20 feet 7 inches from the ground to the top of the fuselage. That includes the landing gear height.

This has nothing to do with their altitude at impact with the Pentagon.

An altimeter is used top measure the distance from the ground to the aircraft when it's in flight. You don't subtract anything from the altitude.
edit on 7/17/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
40
<< 59  60  61    63  64  65 >>

log in

join