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

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

As for your claims of the turbine wheel being from a cruise missile, you couldn't be more wrong.

This is the turbine wheel, next to a person for perspective.

You can clearly see that it comes up to about his knee.

This is a Slam missile(the one on the bottom).

It's clearly far smaller than the turbine found at the Pentagon. Cruise missiles are designed to be small, and carried either by aircraft or ships. That turbine wheel is far too small to have come from any missile.

As for the Global Hawk claim, again, the engine is too small.

The entire engine might come up to someone's knee. You have to account for blade length, so the turbine wheel in that engine is going to be far too small. The turbine wheel at the Pentagon was either a low or high pressure turbine from inside the engine, with the blades snapped off.

Somebody getting schooled

Compressor disk, it not evidence of the engine type haha. Did anyone measure the disk to find out? It just means the object had a turbofan jet engine most likely..

You were trying to prove it was from a missile. Post after post. Is that false.

Missile was my friends story, try again. I open to be wrong on everything i said i not a die hard truther, i just want to see what the facts are!

You have no credibility because you have no coherent message and you contradict yourself.

Would you like to play the fool? Or state a theory to supersede large jet impact and create a credible argument. Or just be the stereotypical irrational conspiracist that cried wolf one to many times.

I don't know know what crashed at the Pentagon for real, if i did would be discussing this now? Why you so against debate or discussing the subject. Show me were i am wrong instead of preaching? I provided you with photographs hours ago and i still waiting on your evidence i was wrong there?

So when you said it had to be a missile based on the turbine wheel, that was somebody else?

Sorry, you are the conspiracists that cried wolf one to many times.

Mr the 9/11 missile jet should have crashed on walls dropped clock funny looking footage from a fish eyed lenses the stripe is wrong but the blue tint jet hit ground 8 feet hang under fuselage person

I said it could be a part from the Turbo jet engine, did i not? You tried to tell me it was a rotor hub or something i can't remember why you thought that who knows?

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

As for your claims of the turbine wheel being from a cruise missile, you couldn't be more wrong.

This is the turbine wheel, next to a person for perspective.

You can clearly see that it comes up to about his knee.

This is a Slam missile(the one on the bottom).

It's clearly far smaller than the turbine found at the Pentagon. Cruise missiles are designed to be small, and carried either by aircraft or ships. That turbine wheel is far too small to have come from any missile.

As for the Global Hawk claim, again, the engine is too small.

The entire engine might come up to someone's knee. You have to account for blade length, so the turbine wheel in that engine is going to be far too small. The turbine wheel at the Pentagon was either a low or high pressure turbine from inside the engine, with the blades snapped off.

Somebody getting schooled

Compressor disk, it not evidence of the engine type haha. Did anyone measure the disk to find out? It just means the object had a turbofan jet engine most likely..

You were trying to prove it was from a missile. Post after post. Is that false.

Missile was my friends story, try again. I open to be wrong on everything i said i not a die hard truther, i just want to see what the facts are!

You have no credibility because you have no coherent message and you contradict yourself.

Would you like to play the fool? Or state a theory to supersede large jet impact and create a credible argument. Or just be the stereotypical irrational conspiracist that cried wolf one to many times.

I don't know know what crashed at the Pentagon for real, if i did would be discussing this now? Why you so against debate or discussing the subject. Show me were i am wrong instead of preaching? I provided you with photographs hours ago and i still waiting on your evidence i was wrong there?

So when you said it had to be a missile based on the turbine wheel, that was somebody else?

Sorry, you are the conspiracists that cried wolf one to many times.

Mr the 9/11 missile jet should have crashed on walls dropped clock funny looking footage from a fish eyed lenses the stripe is wrong but the blue tint jet hit ground 8 feet hang under fuselage person

I said it could be a part from the Turbo jet engine, did i not? You tried to tell me it was a rotor hub or something i can't remember why you thought that who knows?

As in trying to describe what is left after all the blades are knocked down and broken on a turbine wheel...... the blades connect to something? The middle of the wheel connects to the shaft somehow....

Specification AE 3007H AE 3007A1E AE 3007A1P AE 3007A1 AE 3007A1/3
Length in (m) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92)
Diameter in (m) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98)

Applications

Northrop Grumman RQ-4A/B Global Hawk UAS, Northrop Grumman Euro Hawk, Northrop Grumman RQ-4N BAMS (Broad Area Maritime Surveillance), Trident, Embraer EMB 145 AEW&C, RS/AGS, MP/ASW, Legacy & P99, Embraer ERJ 135, 140 and 145, Cessna Citation X

www.rolls-royce.com...-specifications

Nothing in the size of a 757 is listed

originally posted by: roadgravel

Specification AE 3007H AE 3007A1E AE 3007A1P AE 3007A1 AE 3007A1/3
Length in (m) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92)
Diameter in (m) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98)

Applications

Northrop Grumman RQ-4A/B Global Hawk UAS, Northrop Grumman Euro Hawk, Northrop Grumman RQ-4N BAMS (Broad Area Maritime Surveillance), Trident, Embraer EMB 145 AEW&C, RS/AGS, MP/ASW, Legacy & P99, Embraer ERJ 135, 140 and 145, Cessna Citation X

www.rolls-royce.com...-specifications

Nothing in the size of a 757 is listed

We looking to match the compressor inner disk. Can a compressor disk fit in globalhawk engine comfortably? Can it fit in a missile. We know roughly the size to work this out between 26 and 42 inches max!

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: roadgravel

Specification AE 3007H AE 3007A1E AE 3007A1P AE 3007A1 AE 3007A1/3
Length in (m) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92)
Diameter in (m) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98)

Applications

Northrop Grumman RQ-4A/B Global Hawk UAS, Northrop Grumman Euro Hawk, Northrop Grumman RQ-4N BAMS (Broad Area Maritime Surveillance), Trident, Embraer EMB 145 AEW&C, RS/AGS, MP/ASW, Legacy & P99, Embraer ERJ 135, 140 and 145, Cessna Citation X

www.rolls-royce.com...-specifications

Nothing in the size of a 757 is listed

We looking to match the compressor inner disk. Can a compressor disk fit in globalhawk engine comfortably? Can it fit in a missile. We know roughly the size to work this out between 26 and 42 inches max!

So it no longer about the 757 engines, it's back to a missile. I thought the idea it was too large was in play.

Guess you;ll have to find out the size for a cruise missile or such.

originally posted by: roadgravel

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: roadgravel

Specification AE 3007H AE 3007A1E AE 3007A1P AE 3007A1 AE 3007A1/3
Length in (m) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92) 115.08 (2.92)
Diameter in (m) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98) 38.5 (0.98)

Applications

Northrop Grumman RQ-4A/B Global Hawk UAS, Northrop Grumman Euro Hawk, Northrop Grumman RQ-4N BAMS (Broad Area Maritime Surveillance), Trident, Embraer EMB 145 AEW&C, RS/AGS, MP/ASW, Legacy & P99, Embraer ERJ 135, 140 and 145, Cessna Citation X

www.rolls-royce.com...-specifications

Nothing in the size of a 757 is listed

We looking to match the compressor inner disk. Can a compressor disk fit in globalhawk engine comfortably? Can it fit in a missile. We know roughly the size to work this out between 26 and 42 inches max!

So it no longer about the 757 engines, it's back to a missile. I thought the idea it was too large was in play.

Guess you;ll have to find out the size for a cruise missile or such.

It still in play, but we have to rule out other options,. If we can figure out if the compression disk came out of another engine or not, it go along way to figuring out if plane crashed at the Pentagon. We have only few options as to what is it . Anyway calling it a night.

originally posted by: Jacobu12

. Anyway calling it a night.

If you are in Europe you should be calling it a morning.

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: Jacobu12

You are told, with no way to confirm this. Why would they just stop watching this side of the building?

There's an official statement from the firm that was installing the security system as part of the renovations much earlier in this thread (I think). It explains what was and wasn't operational on the day as the system was still being commissioned at that time - the 2 gate cameras were operating and recording 1 frame/sec as part of the testing but little, if anything, else.

Can i see that official statement?

Found it here
(Everything you need to know about the Pentagon cameras on 9/11)

originally posted by: Jacobu12



That entire space where you marked red should be clear and open and nothing there, and you are gone too far to the right. Why do you think they are fallen floor slabs, did you read this somewhere?

I call them floor slabs because I can see they are floor slabs. What do you think they are?


Let me explain it to you as simply as i can:


Column hold up lintel beam.

Lintel beam hold up floor.

Plane come knock out columns, break lintel beam.

Lintel beam fall.

Floor fall.

Part of floor not fall because steel rebar inside concrete.

Red arrow right... floor slab.

Understand?

a reply to: Jacobu12

If the entire engine is 38 inches, the turbine wheel is going to be somewhere around half that. It's far too small for that wheel.

originally posted by: Jacobu12

It still in play,

A set of RB211 disk for you to compare with the RB211 disk found at the pentagon.

originally posted by: Pilgrum
a reply to: Jacobu12

People tend to obsess over the strength of the plane's nose, forgetting that there was an entire plane behind it. That is over 100000kg of mass moving at over 200m/sec which amounts to something like 2.5 gigajoules of kinetic energy needing to be absorbed by the stationary building in order to arrest all of that mass and it didn't go down peacefully.
Only one wall of the building had been reinforced, the outer wall and it obviously wasn't up to this huge challenge. The inside walls were nowhere near as tough.

The mass behind it isn't a big deal. No matter how much mass there is behind the nose, if it gives way, it gives way. (Like the "crinkle zone" in an automobile, the nose breaking up would have padded the overall crash if it had happened at lower speeds.)

The issue is that, at those speeds, the nose has enough kinetic energy all on its own that you could interpret it as being very nearly a "bullet". 500 mph is still slower than the 800 mph of a typical bullet, but still pretty fast.

Imagine shooting the wall with a giant medieval musket using a bullet made of soft lead.

And then, of course, if the bullet isn't enough to quite break through, there is still the plane behind it also.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Have you ever flown in a plane in business class?? Use of cell phones happens all the time partly because they don't want to pay the minute charges on calls. A tower will have a range of about 22 miles the only bad thing of these calls is they can drop but it doesn't happen that often.

That is certainly true today.

The issue is whether that was true in 2001. It's hard for a lot of us to even remember that far back.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

It was Gopher 06, and it wasn't a fighter, it was a C-130H that belonged to the Minnesota Air National Guard out of Andrews. He was close to the Pentagon and was asked to ID the unknown.

Sorry. I was listening to the audio in that clip and the traffic controller kept calling it gopher86. And gopher06 kept correcting him.

But it stuck in my head.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Jacobu12

. Anyway calling it a night.

If you are in Europe you should be calling it a morning.

True, but for you fine folks is still nighttime!

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

The nose may have crumpled, but the landing gear and mounting were probably very solid pieces of metal. They broke free from their momentum, and became separate projectiles.

The hard thing for me to wrap my head around is not WHETHER Hani could execute a 500 mph gradual dive into the Pentagon. But rather.......... why would he?

If I were doing a suicide attack, that I only get one chance at. Where I know I will probably be nervous (since it is the last few seconds before I die.) ....

I would choose the simplest maneuver I could. The goal would be a fail safe, guaranteed hit. That way you're not taking a chance you might kill yourself for nothing.


On the other hand, if I were a conspirator, programming a computer to hit the Pentagon, why not maximize speed? I know the computer won't get nervous.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Jacobu12



That entire space where you marked red should be clear and open and nothing there, and you are gone too far to the right. Why do you think they are fallen floor slabs, did you read this somewhere?

I call them floor slabs because I can see they are floor slabs. What do you think they are?


Let me explain it to you as simply as i can:


Column hold up lintel beam.

Lintel beam hold up floor.

Plane come knock out columns, break lintel beam.

Lintel beam fall.

Floor fall.

Part of floor not fall because steel rebar inside concrete.

Red arrow right... floor slab.

Understand?

I highlighted the areas that are columns in red, i highlighted in green, the area that could be what you said. To the right those are columns one is is untouched and another looks bit twisted. If a 126 feet plane smashed through there why are those columns still standing?

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: Jacobu12

You are told, with no way to confirm this. Why would they just stop watching this side of the building?

There's an official statement from the firm that was installing the security system as part of the renovations much earlier in this thread (I think). It explains what was and wasn't operational on the day as the system was still being commissioned at that time - the 2 gate cameras were operating and recording 1 frame/sec as part of the testing but little, if anything, else.

Can i see that official statement?

Found it here
(Everything you need to know about the Pentagon cameras on 9/11)

9/11 conspiracy is true, this interview 4 years after the attack, is just another cover up? Notice where the interview took place (Rumsfield office) These are the same men, who faked intelligence, for wars in the Middle East.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Jacobu12

If the entire engine is 38 inches, the turbine wheel is going to be somewhere around half that. It's far too small for that wheel.

This event is 2001, not 2017. I read online the engine was 41 inches, around that time. You have a point size probably does rule out the globalhawk.. Then again was the globalhawk modified (outside and inside) to resemble a 757? This is just wild speculation of course, but who knows.

originally posted by: Jacobu12

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Jacobu12



That entire space where you marked red should be clear and open and nothing there, and you are gone too far to the right. Why do you think they are fallen floor slabs, did you read this somewhere?

I call them floor slabs because I can see they are floor slabs. What do you think they are?


Let me explain it to you as simply as i can:


Column hold up lintel beam.

Lintel beam hold up floor.

Plane come knock out columns, break lintel beam.

Lintel beam fall.

Floor fall.

Part of floor not fall because steel rebar inside concrete.

Red arrow right... floor slab.

Understand?

I highlighted the areas that are columns in red, i highlighted in green, the area that could be what you said. To the right those are columns one is is untouched and another looks bit twisted. If a 126 feet plane smashed through there why are those columns still standing?

Do a little research, they maybe hanging. The bases of the columns maybe broken. The pentagon collapsed for a reason.

a reply to: Jacobu12

You need to come up with a single theory so you will stop contradicting yourself. A missile used as a kinetic weapon, vs a exploding missile, vs a bomb, vs a large jet impact are very distinct events that create distinct physical effects. Again, you are just playing the fool. The conspiracist that cried wolf too many times.