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 Pilgrum
Nice simulator applet but what are we proving with it ?
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by Pilgrum
Nice simulator applet but what are we proving with it ?
Well a few things.
1. The altitude and speed the pilots were flying at would have probably destroyed the engines in a short time.
2. The jet blast from the plane at the Pentagon would have blasted people and cars.
[edit on 5-4-2008 by ULTIMA1]
Originally posted by weemadmental
1. a short time is all they needed, plus aircraft engines are very stable, fighter jets during the gulf wars flew at this height on a regular basis to avoid SAM's / AA fire.
2. the period of time the jet was overhead would have been very short, know from experince that a tornado fighter jet at afterburner at 40-45ft ( at end end of runway road runs past it) will rock a panel side van but not blow it over, and these engines produce more thrust than the boeing ever would.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by weemadmental
1. a short time is all they needed, plus aircraft engines are very stable, fighter jets during the gulf wars flew at this height on a regular basis to avoid SAM's / AA fire.
2. the period of time the jet was overhead would have been very short, know from experince that a tornado fighter jet at afterburner at 40-45ft ( at end end of runway road runs past it) will rock a panel side van but not blow it over, and these engines produce more thrust than the boeing ever would.
1. Airliners use turbofans, military fighters use turbojets. Fighters fly high to aviod SAMs and AA, not ground level like the plane at the Pentagon.
2. I guess you have not seen all the videos of airliners blowing cars and people around?
[edit on 5-4-2008 by ULTIMA1]
Originally posted by Disclosed
Why didnt that high speed pass flip those small prop planes then? Or toss the people standing next to them?
Originally posted by defcon5
Here are some more for you:
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
1. The pilot was a very expreienced pilot with thousands of hours of flight time, not 100 hours like some of the hijackers.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
2. The plane is not traveling the speed of the plane that was supposed to hit the Pentagon.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
3. Check out 15 seconds in to the video and you will see and hear the tiubulence coming off the plane.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
If you are going to show videos please limit them to the type of planes that were supposed to have been used on 9/11.
What happens if the plane is moving at high speed? At sea level, and 400 mph airspeed -- the exhaust velocity declines only by the tiniest smidgen, to 2242 feet per second. That's relative to the velocity of the plane, so the ground speed of the exhaust would be reduced to about 1100 mph -- which is still plenty fast enough to send Probst spinning like a pinball. Not to mention the issue of wake turbulence and ground effect, as the weight of an 80-ton jetliner must be supported by exerting downward pressure on the air squeezed between its wings and the ground.
Some witnesses who were inside cars on rd 27 said that their car was rocked and pushed sidely on the road. This limited effect is coherent with the overfly of a Boeing 757 plane flying at approximately 350 mph with engines at full throttle. The case presented in the video quoted above is completely different. This "no cars were pushed over the safety barrier of rd 27" statement is by no way an argument to say that the Pentagon was not hit by a B 757.
Originally posted by defcon5
Again jet blast is jet blast.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
www.earth-citizens.net...
Originally posted by defcon5
I have walked on foot behind aircraft running taxi throttle while marshalling them.