Crash physics for everyone
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
Why no planes could have struck the towers
There were no crash physics evident at any of the three sites where planes are supposed to have struck AND PENETRATED buildings.
For the plane for instance to have penetrated the tower, you must assume that it remained intact going through the outer wall.
It is obvious to everyone that whatever, the planes did not smash to pieces and fall into the street.
I will deal with this first.
REACTION/deflection
"For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction".
That means that the force received by both objects in a collision will be equal.
Now what determines how much force goes into the objects? Well, if one of the objects penetrates the other, the force needed to break through the
penetrated object will be the amount of force received by EACH object.
If you add up the total sum of the forces required to "punch" through all of the beams we are told that the plane went through, then you would have
to say that the plane sustained that amount of force and did not break up.
I contend that the plane would break up with much less force than what it would take to penetrate all those outer wall beams.
Any remaining kinetic energy would be retained in any parts that had penetrated the wall and parts that had fragmented, the fragments undergoing a
deflective process with their remaining energy.
Some of the energy would convert to sound, heat and light.
The heat would ignite any fuel spilled from the wings, a large amount of which would be vaporised instantly with the impact.
Then there is
TERMINAL BALLISTICS.
If the plane were made of tungsten or something, and it remained intact, then upon the nose penetrating the first beams, whatever force that took
would be transmitted from the beams to the nose of the plane also, causing deceleration and deflection.
The heavier part of the aircraft (the engines) has more momentum though, and due to the deflection of the nose, the plane would tumble, in the same
way a rifle bullet tumbles through Kevlar.
AERODYNAMICS.
The tumble would occur in the direction of lift from the wings and tail plane.
The deceleration of the wing surfaces would not cause an instant loss of lift because the lift is due to low air pressure above the top surface of the
wing, there would be enough lift left during an impact to determine the direction of tumble.
And the 2nd plane was depicted as banking to the left when it hit the tower, so it would have been rising to the left when it struck, giving us
another, separate reason for the plane to tumble.
With the diagonal rise of the nose being suddenly stopped upon penetrating the building, the rear of the plane should have continued diagonally
upwards, causing it to tumble roof-on into the building, probably right-wing first due to the extra lift on that side due to the bank of the aircraft,
the wing on the outside moving faster.
And as the bank of the plane means it should have been moving up and to the left then the fuel should have continued in that direction when the tanks
ruptured, rather than go straight through any hole made by the impact.
