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.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
There were several eyewitnesses that saw him skip the plane across the helipad before it impacted the building. Skipping it would account for the low impact of the building.
Why is is so hard to believe that an engine that is about 6 feet across would hit one or two spools at the most, and NOT hit the rest of them? Is it supposed to hit one, skip off them all, and then go into the building?? I'd say expecting something that small to hit all of them is more of a stretch than saying it hit one or two of them.
While the "cylinder body" that our author keeps referring to is indeed 13ft 6in high, he omits the fact that the engines extend 5 feet below the body and over six feet to either side, meaning that, if the aircraft were actually able to successfully fly at just 1 inch above the ground (highly unlikely), the height of the "cylinder body" above the ground would be at least 18 ft 6 inches! Let us repeat that: if a Boeing 757 were actually able to fly at just 1 inch above the ground, the height of the "13 ft cylinder body" would be at least 18 feet 6 inches! Now, add to that the fact that the plane also includes those two bothersome 6 TON engines, AND a tail fin that protrudes 25 feet above the top of the cylinder body making for a total aircraft height of just less than 40 feet with wheels up. Obviously then, we can reasonably expect that the damage to the facade of the Pentagon would have extended up to this height IF it was a 757 that hit the building.
With titanium fan blades, an intake diameter of over 2 m (6 ft) and weighing 3267 kg (3.2 tons), the RB211-22B allowed the new generation of 'Jumbo Jet' aircraft to take to the air, while bankrupting Rolls-Royce with its massive development costs. The key feature of this engine is the exceptionally large fan which drives a large volume of slow-moving air around the core engine, using fuel efficiently and reducing noise output.
The engines of the Boeing 757 are substantially smaller, however. The 757 can be fitted with either Pratt & Whitney PW2000 series or Rolls Royce RB211 turbofans. The maximum diameter of the RB211 is only 6 ft 2.5 in (1.9 m) while that of the PW2000 series is 7 ft 0.5 in (2.15 m). Meanwhile, the 757 fuselage is 12 ft 6 in (3.75 m) in width. In other words, the engine width is only a little over half that of the fuselage, about 57% as wide to be precise. This comparison can be better observed by studying the above three-view diagram of the 757.
Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
If this was all a government conspiracy, why go to the bother of using a missile or fighter to hit the Pentagon when a 757 would do just fine, make a bigger bang, and there would be no need for a cover-up?
Just one question. Should be easy to answer.
Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
If this was all a government conspiracy, why go to the bother of using a missile or fighter to hit the Pentagon when a 757 would do just fine, make a bigger bang, and there would be no need for a cover-up?
Just one question. Should be easy to answer.
Originally posted by ANOK
Easy answer, a 757 would not have done the job.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
FIrst of all, I just LOVE your repeated claims they were flying 1 inch off the ground.
Originally posted by Grimm
Originally posted by ANOK
Easy answer, a 757 would not have done the job.
Why not?
I would think an expert pilot would have no trouble flying low and on target.
Originally posted by ANOK
Easy answer, a 757 would not have done the job.
They had to make sure it went off without a hitch, or else their little party would have been busted.
Too much risk using a 757 because IMO it would have been too difficult to hit the intended target and would, if they even got close, ended up in pieces over the pentagoon lawn.
You guys ever think these q's through before asking?
Originally posted by ANOK
It's like comparing a bus with a porche.
Originally posted by Outriderdark
These are some of the most uncivilized forums I've ever see,
Originally posted by HowardRoark
On the other hand, this "aint a tea party."
Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
Originally posted by HowardRoark
On the other hand, this "aint a tea party."
Has the 757/Pentagon debate begun to remind you of arguing politics or religion?
Originally posted by ZeddicusZulZorander
So discard the real 757, coach a few hundred+ witnesses, fake the lightpoles, set up the cab, coach all the emergency crews, coordinate with the other attacks and all that was going on...AND do it all on a day when two other planes just happened to get hijacked WITHOUT a single mistake or whistle blower is more plausable?
Originally posted by Zaphod58
You can't even get the information about the engines right, but yet you know everything about what happened that day. If you can't even get THAT right, then what ELSE of your "debunking" is wrong. It took me less than a minute to find that info about the engines. Great job of researching that.