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.

 

Flight 77 Wreckage Pictures Inside Pentagon

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 04:42 AM
link   
The beautfy of this thread is, the same boring old come backs keeep coming out.
Its my opinion, wether you chose to accept it or not, that an entire plane cannot slam into a WALL, without leaving a SCRATCH on the GRASS
An entire plane cannot be CONSUMED COMPLETLY by the biulding.
AN entire plane cannot fly that low, that fast when a NOVICE is at the wheel.
If it was a plane, and the government want to remove the suspicions, why show such a GRAINY, BLURRY video?
Why did it enter the building, remove the structural PILLARS, yet enable the roof to remaine INTACT for some time until it collapsed?

Just because I dont think its a plane, doesnt mean im WRONG simply because I cant tell you what hit it.

And also, you'll notice that the instant the plane hits the pentagon there's a major fireball...
Its my belief that for that scrap metal to be so mangled, so twisted and so FAR From the impact it had to be close enough to have enough force to tear it off and THROW IT.

Thus it would of been in intense heat of the impact.




posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agit8dChop
The beautfy of this thread is, the same boring old come backs keeep coming out.

Agree, the same boring old like...


Its my opinion, wether you chose to accept it or not, that an entire plane cannot slam into a WALL, without leaving a SCRATCH on the GRASS
An entire plane cannot be CONSUMED COMPLETLY by the biulding.

Why not? What is the base or that claim? Just because it SEEMS to be improbable doesn't mean it's impossible.

And btw if you do look at the pics, there is enough debris outside the building. So the plane didn't get consumed completely




AN entire plane cannot fly that low, that fast when a NOVICE is at the wheel.

Then I dare you to look at the flight training of German and Japanese pilots by the later part of the WWII. They received MUCH less flight hours than the 0911 hijackers, were aiming at smaller targets in aircrafts without nav computers and hydraulic assisted steering and all that, sometimes (in cases of jet and rocket fighters or Ohka suicide planes) at speeds close to or exceeeding the 757, often at minimal levels or at moving targets, most of times on targets ablaze with defensive fire.
If the novice pilots were able to do this, why won't a novice pilot with incomparably more flight experience then them be able to fly a plane at full throttle close to ground?



If it was a plane, and the government want to remove the suspicions, why show such a GRAINY, BLURRY video?

If it was a plane what hit the WTC and the government want to remove suspicion why show just one video? Well, you know why? There is just that one.
Any proof there are more Pentagon footages than those two?



Why did it enter the building, remove the structural PILLARS, yet enable the roof to remaine INTACT for some time until it collapsed?

Because if you look at the report showing degree of damage to the pillars you'll see taht completely destroyed was just a little number of them, more were damaged with various degrees of severity - meaning they were still able to support the weight of the above floors for a certain time - say until the bending of the damaged column under pressure became too large.
Plus, the fire inside the building didn't help too much.



Just because I dont think its a plane, doesnt mean im WRONG simply because I cant tell you what hit it.

But you certainly have some opinion on what caused all that damage and what caused the debris look like from AA 757?



And also, you'll notice that the instant the plane hits the pentagon there's a major fireball...
Its my belief that for that scrap metal to be so mangled, so twisted and so FAR From the impact it had to be close enough to have enough force to tear it off and THROW IT.

But the fireball was preceded by a high-speed impact with enough energy to rip the thin metal and throw it in all directions.
If you'll look at the Sandia footage you'll notice debris flying to all directions at rather high velocities even without a fireball.



Thus it would of been in intense heat of the impact.

Not neccessarily. The physical impact preceded the fireball.



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 04:42 PM
link   
That's what would remain fromn a plane hitting a wall in high speed.


You are wrong on so many counts.

1. There were only 1 landing and 1 wheel shown in pics.

2. The video of the F-4 hitting the block wall is completly different then a 757 hitting the reinforced wall at the Penatagon.

First off the F-4 is mostly made of steel and the 757 is mostly made of aluminum. So if a plane made mostly of steel can not penatrate a black wall please explain how a plane made from aluminum is going to make it through a reinforced concrete wall and steel reinforced collums.


Source: Janes

Structure F-4:

The fuselage is an all-metal semi-monocoque structure. Forward fuselage built in port and starboard halves, so that most internal wiring and finishing can be done before assembly. Keel and rear sections make use of steel and titanium. Double-wall construction under fuel tanks and for lower section of rear fuselage, with ram-air cooling. The tail unit is a cantilever all-metal structure, with 23º of anhedral on one-piece all-moving tailplane which has slotted leading-edges. Ribs and stringers of tailplane are of steel, skin titanium and trailing-edge of steel honeycomb.



Structure 757:

Aluminium alloy two-spar fail-safe wing box; centre-section continuous through fuselage; ailerons, flaps and spoilers extensively of honeycomb, graphite composites and laminates; tailplane has full-span light alloy torque boxes; fin has three-spar, dual-cell light alloy torque box; elevators and rudder have graphite/epoxy honeycomb skins supported by honeycomb and laminated spar and rib assemblies; CFRP wing/fuselage and flap track fairings. All landing gear doors of CFRP/Kevlar.






[edit on 10-7-2006 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 10-7-2006 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 10-7-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
I see. So I guess ULTIMA is a NTSB investigator? Special Agent of the FBI? FEMA? Why does anyone have to come to you and show you the serial numbers? Personally, knowing they found the remains of the people who were witnessed to have boarded that plane, in the carnage of the Pentagon, pretty much seals it for me. Well that and the testimony of the hundreds of people who witnessed it first hand.


1. I was a Crew Chief in the Air Force and know what aircraft parts of made of and what should survive a crash.

2. Out of all the witnesses they could not agree on what type of aircraft it was.

3. Can you find any airport security camera footage of people getting on flight 77 ?



posted on Jul, 10 2006 @ 07:15 PM
link   
And yet again, you assume that you have seen all the pics (which you havent). You do not know what parts were found intact or mostly intact (and for that matter, the FBI doesnt have to give you an itemized list)



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Swampfox46 could you provide links to the images of seats, luggage and othere internal structure of the plane that crashed into the pentagon that you say exist so that me and many other people can examine them. I`m not referring to the pictures of the single engine part, the wheel hub, tyer or fragments of aluminum found outside on the lawn or images of burned bodies from that day, my hart, truly, goes out to the families and loved ones of the people that died on 9/11, as these images can be explain by the conspiracy believes as being part of a drone, planted, the really plane, or missile haha.....but you say there are pictures, i`d like to see them ........... I also don`t need a link to the jet fighter that was smashed into a concrete block to simulate an impact into a nuclear station and disintegrated, his may be why there isn't much wreckage and as such may stop you from linking these images to us,. If anyone else could supply links to said images that would be appreciated . By the way i do not like to say this but if pictures of bodys are supplied these could well be the bodies of workers, construction or employees.........just one thought though and understand me when i say i`m undecided on things all I see from the released video of the plane on impact is an single flammable explosion which i might add isn`t on the scale of the trade center strikes, less fuel ? just a small, in comparison to the the trade tower explosion, external flammable explosion and before that a nose cone and maybe a tail fin, a plane i think so, externally controlled maybe, undecided definitely ........




[edit on 4-8-2006 by ISOVOLA]



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 09:09 AM
link   
I just don't understand how the US, with their most sophisticated equipment and air superiority didn't intercept a plane heading towards the Pentagon?

I simply believe they let them hit, to start a new war.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by T_Nexis
I just don't understand how the US, with their most sophisticated equipment and air superiority didn't intercept a plane heading towards the Pentagon?

I simply believe they let them hit, to start a new war.


You are aware, aren't you, that the pentagon is litterally next door to a major airport?



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 09:19 AM
link   
Yes, the US was well aware of the hijackings. And couldn't make a decision in time?



[edit on 6-8-2006 by T_Nexis]



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by T_Nexis


Yes, the US was well aware of the hijackings. And couldn't make a decision in time?



[edit on 6-8-2006 by T_Nexis]



they made there decision on that day, an ireversable decision......................
Afganistan (oil pipe lines)............Iraq, there conversion to the euro(oil),............Lebonan the route to Iran,EURO v DOLLOR and there new oil exchange..... need i say more, all predictions fortold and rife on the net, lets see how this unfolds..........
Just keep checking the news because 9-11 will be suppased ________



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Not a conspiracy.


the fact that there are videos known to exist that show the crash but are missing proves beyond a shadow of a doubt there is a conspiracy. if it was a 757 there is still a conspiracy to cover up information at the very least.

it does look like a 757 wheel. there is nothing to gauge the size of the engine by and it is terribly smashed.

thats what really bugs me about the whole scenario. there is something up but some people refuse to question it. that just creates more schizm than answers.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by T_Nexis
I just don't understand how the US, with their most sophisticated equipment and air superiority didn't intercept a plane heading towards the Pentagon?

I simply believe they let them hit, to start a new war.


In a decade preceding 0911 there was EXACTLY ONE example of an interception above the USA.
Google Payne Stewart interception and you'll see how long it took to successfully intercept a small jet flying straight line with transpoder on.
NORAD was expecting inbound threats which would be identified in the ADIZ zones.
NORAD didn't have radar coverage of USA mainland. To gain it atleast in a limited area, it'd need to scramble an E-3 AWACS first. That was done ASAP.
NORAD was on peacetime standard 15 minute readiness for 21 planes throughout the entire US of A. In fact, as the F-15's in Otis were put into "action stations" readiness at first report of possible problems, they were able to get off at six minutes when the orders came. The pilots also used afterburners (not a SOP) to get to NY faster. Unfortunately, not fast enough.
The fact there was a training going on meant that the NORAD staff rooms were full, contrary to usual status, so the reaction was quicker than it could be expected.
ATC and FAA reaction times were as usual.
There was no "letting in". The system was performing SOP or, in some instances, was even faster. But not fast enough.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 04:57 PM
link   
So the U.S air force were flying drills to counter an internal attack, which i`m sure they`d have completed successfully , if it were not for the unfortunate events of that day , yet when a real life situation occurred they failed on all accounts...If the U.S didn`t have mainland coverage then the U.S citizens need to ask were some of there tax dollars were spent ....... They`d drilled for this and been aware of these threats for sometime yet on the day they fell short of the marker..... This government committed itself to these drills with out any fall back mechanism and were found wanting, was this strategic, were there forces conspiring deep inside the military machine , ummmm, i`ll check back in a few years time .......
maybe not.....................


[edit on 6-8-2006 by ISOVOLA]



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 05:24 PM
link   
There were SOME flying drills that day, and some NON-FLYING drills. NORAD DOES have radar coverage of the US mainland, BUT they do not intercept planes until the FAA notifies them and requests it.



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 02:47 AM
link   
Yup, NORAD drilled for hijackings. But they drilled hijacked airplanes coming from overseas, that would have to pass the ADIZ zones in order to get to the USA. Yes, the very same zones where all but one interceptions in a decade prior to 0911 happened. Not interceptions above USA mainland as it was thought the security on US airfields will be enough to prevent hijackers getting on board.



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I've read all your posts, and you people make excellent points. But the fact of the matter is, all the drills and exercises all the radar and technology...the US...scratch that, no country is prepared for any homeland attack. That was proven on 911 and proven again in London and Spain.



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Non of the parts belong to a 757, this is confirmed by the engineers of the planes.

And please, do you belive that so little is left of the plane?



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Where was that proven? Most of the parts that we've seen DO match up nicely to a 757. Show some links or something to prove that they don't.

And yes, I do believe that. What do YOU think is gonna happen to a plane hitting something like that wall at 500mph.



posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by InSaneTK
Non of the parts belong to a 757, this is confirmed by the engineers of the planes.



What is your source for this ludicrous claim?


If you are referring to the bit in “Loose Change” where this is claimed, then I’d advise you to look again.

The engineer confirmed that the engine part was not from a global hawk!




posted on Aug, 7 2006 @ 11:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by T_Nexis


Yes, the US was well aware of the hijackings. And couldn't make a decision in time?



[edit on 6-8-2006 by T_Nexis]



So, if a plane is heading toward an airport, should they shoot it down?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join