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.

 

How Does Aluminum Cut Steel?

page: 33
13
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
This means you believe there was wrong doing on the part of the government. .


No, stop being immature and twisting what i post.

I am saying that we do not have all the facts and evidence of what happened that day. The FBI has not released it.

Maybe if you did any research you would know this.
[edit on 11-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]


I am not twisting anything. Those were your words. Either you believe "the official story" or you don't. If you don't, you are saying the government is not telling the truth. It's VERY simple really. Do you or don't you support the governments "official story" ???? YES or NO?




posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123 If you don't, you are saying the government is not telling the truth.


No, thats your words not mine.

I have stated and will state again. The evidence has not been released.

Can you understand the that the evidence has not been released. YES or NO ?



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123 If you don't, you are saying the government is not telling the truth.


No, thats your words not mine.
I have stated and will state again. The evidence has not been released.
Can you understand the that the evidence has not been released. YES or NO ?


Here are your exact words:
"I am stating that people that still believe the official story have not done the research to find the truth of what happened."

So obviously what you are saying is that anyone who has done the research, such as yourself, does not believe the official story. So you disagree with the official story. So you disagree with what the government says is the official story. So you are stating the government is not correct about the real story. So the government is either massively incompetent or lying. Which is it? Incompetent or lying?



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I am saying that we do not have all the facts and evidence of what happened that day. The FBI has not released it.

Maybe if you did any research you would know this.


So let me make sure I understand you, ULTIMA1.

Are you saying the FBI has all the evidence needed to show what happened on 9/11 then? No evidence from the NIST or FEMA is viable?



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
Are you saying the FBI has all the evidence needed to show what happened on 9/11 then?


As i have stated before many times. The FBI and the NTSB are the main investigators for 9/11 by law.

The FBI has the following evidence that would show what happened that day.

1. Crime scene reports.

2. Videos from the Pentagon and near by buildings.

3. Photos of the crime scenes.

4. Black boxes from the Flight 77 and Flight 93. (no word about black boxes from the WTC)



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


So then they must have evidence showing whether or not aluminum could cut thru steel, correct?



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
So then they must have evidence showing whether or not aluminum could cut thru steel, correct?


No, not like your theory of the Zero cutting into the ships hull when it was the engine that penatrated and not the aluminum airframe and wings.



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 09:10 PM
link   




Well, the recordings have been released from 93 and 77, the ones that survived. Photos are available for 77 for sure, I've seen them, and 1 was torn up so bad that nothing was left inside of it. That would be the voice recorder, since we have varying analysis of the flight data. And the voice recorder was released from 93. But judging from what I saw of 77's box, I personally wouldn't find it unusual that 11 and 175's boxes were scrap metal.

Q-would the FBI release evidence/findings of a crime scene before a trial? Would it be reasonable to assume that they'll never release this until some time later - whatever "later" means?



posted on Dec, 12 2007 @ 09:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
No, not like your theory of the Zero cutting into the ships hull when it was the engine that penatrated and not the aluminum airframe and wings.


I would agree with you on the Zero which was pretty light weight construction and used a an alluminum alloy that was brittle but lighter than regular alluminum. Clearly you do not want something brittle in that scenario


BUT

Please consider the MXY7 Ohka which was a purpose built rocket powered kamakazi. It could reach speed of just over 600 mph in a dive and weighted 4500+ pounds
en.wikipedia.org...




1945 — Six Bettys attack the US Fleet off Okinawa. At least one makes a successful attack, with its Ohka hitting one of the 16" (406 mm) turrets on the West Virginia, causing moderate damage. en.wikipedia.org...


Now the West Viginia was a North carolina class battleship The turrets had 16" or armor on the face
, almost 10" on the sides, nearly 12" on the back and 7" on the top of high strength steel. To even manage to "moderate" damage, this plane had to pack a punch.



American fighters and kamikazes swirled above Stanly in a grand melee. Suddenly, out of the maelstrom of planes, a Yokosuka MXY-7 Ohka plunged toward her at a speed in excess of 500 knots (900 km/h). Her assailant's great speed made countermeasures impossible; and so, Stanly absorbed the baka's impact on the starboard side of her bow, five feet above the waterline. Fortunately, the warhead continued through Stanly, passed out her port side, and exploded in the water close aboard. Within minutes of the first attack, another Ohka whisked over the ship and snatched her ensign from its gaff in passing. It skipped across the water like a flat stone, then disintegrated.
en.wikipedia.org...


Bows and the area around them are pretty thick and this craft / warhead travaling at over 500 knots had no problem going through and exploding ON the other side fo the ship.

[edit on 12/12/07 by FredT]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Bows and the area around them are pretty thick and this craft / warhead travaling at over 500 knots had no problem going through and exploding ON the other side fo the ship.


Yes the warhead might penatrate (what was warhead made of ?) but not the body of the craft.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Yes the warhead might penatrate (what was warhead made of ?) but not the body of the craft.


I think you'll find that the warhead was made of exactly the same thing as the rest of the craft, barring the explosives. It was a suicide weapon, used at a time of desperation when raw materials were in short supply.

[edit on 13/1207/07 by neformore]

update

Actually, scratch that above. The wings were made from wood, and the nose section was a 2626lb bomb.

Ohka

Still, it was a 2626lb object smashing straight through the armour plated hull, and out the other side again.

[edit on 13/1207/07 by neformore]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Just curious how you would go about explaining these things?


Here are a few more physics defying examples:
1. A flying piece of paper killed someone
Blank cartridges for guns, do not contain bullets, but they do contain a paper plug that seals the powder in the case, called a wad. This wad can cause bruising at medium ranges and severe penetrating wounds at close range. Actor John Erik Hexum died when the wad from the blank fractured a piece of his skull.
2. How can my hand be crushed by a cement block but my hand can also crush that same cement block.
If I drop a cement block on my hand from a distance of 4 feet it will crush it but I can put my hand through that same brick from that same distance and break it.


There are analogies to help you understand how aluminum can cut steel. In other words, how a weaker item, can damage a stronger item.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Actually, scratch that above. The wings were made from wood, and the nose section was a 2626lb bomb.

Still, it was a 2626lb object smashing straight through the armour plated hull, and out the other side again.


Well its nice that you corrected yourself. The bomb was iron, BUT as stated the body, wood or aluminum would not penatrate. As Disclosed photos showed of the zero hititng the ship, only the engine penatrated the hull.

[edit on 13-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to [There are analogies to help you understand how aluminum can cut steel. In other words, how a weaker item, can damage a stronger item.


The problem will all your analogies is,

1. It is not actual prove or evidence.

2. The video of the F-4 being destroyed hitting the concrete wall completly destroys all your analogies. Since the F-4 is made up a several steel parts.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Im not the end all be all expert on the craft mind you But I do beleive that the warhead was simply an explosive device not an armour piercing bomb. The plane did not carry external stores and the device was carried in the fuselage up front. The front of the craft was the bomb. If you had a typical armour piercing bomb up front, the craft would be way too front heavy and given the small controll surfces Im skeptical that you could trim it out.

But I will do some digging.

[edit on 12/13/07 by FredT]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 



Hmmm, I think it does however.

One such example is seen quite often.

Tractor Trailers travaling at freeway speeds hitting concrete or steel overpasses can and have caused damage. most trailers are made of alluminum and the bridges made of reinforced concrete and/or steel.

Its all about mass and velocity as evidenced by the Columbia tragedy. We are talking about what a 2 pound piece of foam? Hit a piece of reinforced carbon carbon and cracked it....

A mythbusters episode showed the ability of straw to penatrade objects far more dence that itself.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Im not the end all be all expert on the craft mind you But I do beleive that the warhead was simply an explosive device not an armour piercing bomb.

But I will do some digging.


Please see photo.

i114.photobucket.com...

[edit on 13-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
reply to [There are analogies to help you understand how aluminum can cut steel. In other words, how a weaker item, can damage a stronger item.


The problem will all your analogies is,

1. It is not actual prove or evidence.

2. The video of the F-4 being destroyed hitting the concrete wall completly destroys all your analogies. Since the F-4 is made up a several steel parts.


So are you saying my analogies are incorrect or untrue? YES or NO.



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
So are you saying my analogies are incorrect or untrue? YES or NO.


Yes, they are incorrect as far as evidence.


[edit on 13-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Dec, 13 2007 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


OK let's go through this step by step and tell me where I am wrong.



1. A flying piece of paper killed someone
Blank cartridges for guns, do not contain bullets, but they do contain a paper plug that seals the powder in the case, called a wad. This wad can cause bruising at medium ranges and severe penetrating wounds at close range. Actor John Erik Hexum died when the wad from the blank fractured a piece of his skull.

A piece of paper is not stronger then a human skull.
A piece of paper damaged a human skull.

Replace the piece of paper with the aluminum plane.
Replace the cranium with the steel columns.
How are these not similar as an analogy?


2. How can my hand be crushed by a cement block but my hand can also crush that same cement block.
If I drop a cement block on my hand from a distance of 4 feet it will crush it but I can put my hand through that same brick from that same distance and break it.

My hand is softer then a cement block.
My hand can go through a cement block.

Replace my hand with an aluminum plane.
Replace the cement block with steel columns.
How are these not similar as an analogy?

Please explain in detail how these are not good analogies with regard to what happened with the planes and WTC. Thanks.




top topics



 
13
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join