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.

 

Russian Pilot photos 9/11 as it happens

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by HLR53K
The white trail just isn't solid enough to be a missile trail. In the picture, it's pretty much "see through" in some places,


Well depending on how long after the missile went by the photo was taken the trail would have dissapated and be see through.

We would have to go back and see if there would be a way to track the trial to the direction and height of the Woolworth building.




posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

I am very surprised an adult doing any research after all these years would not have seen there are no reports matching any of the debris or parts to AA77.


AA77 flew into the Pentagon, not the WTC towers as pictured in this link.

We are discussing the pictures taken above the WTC towers in this thread.

Please stay on topic, Roger.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

I am very surprised an adult doing any research after all these years would not have seen there are no reports matching any of the debris or parts to AA77.

The engine has not been matched to a RB211.

The wheel is a type that is used on other planes beside a 757.



Umm...please check the topic Ultima. It's about the WTC, not the Pentagon.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
We would have to go back and see if there would be a way to track the trial to the direction and height of the Woolworth building.



.... or you could look at the video I linked and see the trail being created by debris after the impact.



in case you missed it, here it is in slow motion:

www.archive.org...

at 36:00....just after impact. Look to the left....watch the trails being formed.

[edit on 1-6-2008 by Disclosed]



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Well depending on how long after the missile went by the photo was taken the trail would have dissapated and be see through.

We would have to go back and see if there would be a way to track the trial to the direction and height of the Woolworth building.


I actually addressed that. To create an explosion that big, you'd need a sizeable missile. That means a sizeable rocket motor to propel it. A sizeable rocket motor means a nice, thick smoke trail behind it.

Lets go with the missile trail for the sake of it. Since the explosion on the tower is in the exact same shot as the white trail, I can safely say that there wasn't much time lapse between a missile traveling and impacting. Thus, I would expect a much thicker smoke trail.

If you're claiming a missile, then what kind was it?



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Disclosed
Please stay on topic, Roger.


Let me just edit the post.

There are no reports matching any of the debris or parts to Flight 77, 11 or 175.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by HLR53K
Lets go with the missile trail for the sake of it. Since the explosion on the tower is in the exact same shot as the white trail, I can safely say that there wasn't much time lapse between a missile traveling and impacting. Thus, I would expect a much thicker smoke trail.?


Well if we look at the major part of the explosion is from the jet fuel not the missile. Then the missile was smaller.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Well if we look at the major part of the explosion is from the jet fuel not the missile. Then the missile was smaller.


You're kind of confusing me here. Just to be sure. You're saying that the white trail is from a missile that caused the explosion seen in the first picture?

But you state jet fuel, so that means an airplane struck it?

As far as I know, the vast majority of missiles are powered by solid fuel motors (easier to manufacture/pack and much safer). So even if it was carrying a payload of jet fuel in addition to the warhead, that would still be one hell of a missile to carry that much jet fuel.

Again, for the missile debate, what kind of missile was said to have been fired?



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by HLR53K
You're kind of confusing me here. Just to be sure. You're saying that the white trail is from a missile that caused the explosion seen in the first picture?


Please do not think i am stating that a plane did not hit the tower, i have never stated that, as with the Pentagon.

The statment i was making was what if the missile hit right about the same time the plane hit. The main explosion is from the jet fuel not the missile.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by rikriley
reply to post by Rhain
 


Is that a UFO to the top left of the left hand tower? I can not see any wings if it is a plane this is an excellent photo and you wonder how many of these type of photos are out there of the twin towers being hit. Rik Riley




Don't forget there were a dozen helicopters circling the towers after the first plane hit.. At that time no-one really knew what was happening yet.

The trails are clearly visible on every other video and picture of the second impact. They are plane parts that completely penetraded the building and exited the other side. Notice how the trails are perfect parabolic arcs, thus indicating they have no power of their own and are simply falling to the ground.

[edit on 1-6-2008 by Tiloke]



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 02:40 AM
link   
Too bad he didnt snap a shot of the 2nd plane..... also interesting he seems to have described it as a 737 (not a 757 or 767) [ www.englishrussia.com... ].

Also interesting: the engine, which is presumable what you see streaking through the air, is prosisbly the same one that landed on the corner of church and murray streets, which is said to look more like a 737 engine than anything else.

And in the fireball picture, you wouldnt see the woolworth missile, because it seems to have been fired about 4-5 seconds after the 2nd "plane" impact.

[edit on 1-6-2008 by The Dispatcherator]



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 03:01 AM
link   
First thing - its a year and a half old, from Dec 2006, so why now and
why wait 5 years after 9/11 to post it. Second keeps referring to
Boeing 737 .

Pictures taken are real - flying south down Hudson from above Ft Lee
to lower Manhattan (I live here so know the locations) .

In picture of plane strike can see debris, which includes one of the
planes engines emerging out the other side of building.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 04:45 AM
link   
I ran into an article today, while doing a google image search. It is discussing this trail that can be seen in this photo.

The photo of the fireball that occurred immediately after the crash of the plane into the South Tower shows two fast moving objects that passed through the tower and are far ahead of the inferno. One appears as a black dot leaving a trail of white smoke; the second appears to be a dark rod burning with a white flame followed by a trail of black smoke.The second object displays the characteristics of a burning DU penetrator. AFP sent enlarged photos of the object to Marion Fulk, a retired chemical physicist from the Lawrence Livermore National Lab, and asked him if this object could be DU.
Yes, it is possible, Fulk said. Asked about the dark smoke trailing behind the nearly pure white flame, Fulk said, It could be uranium oxide.
Let's assume it is uranium, Fulk added. It's burning near the surface and it's pretty hot. It is a small object with great mass and has huge momentum behind it, Fulk said. It's way out ahead of the explosion and nothing stopped it.
If the object is a DU penetrator, that would explain its intense heat, radiation expert Leuren Moret told AFP. The DU would have already been burning before it hit the tower. The burning uranium would have acted to ignite the fuel in the aircraft causing the tremendous explosions seen in both towers. As it passed through the building some of the penetrator's kinetic energy would have been converted to heat energy.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 05:04 AM
link   
One thing about that impact photo is it is one of the best photos showing exactly how far WTC7 is from the tower. How something that is collapsing can reach that building doing enough damage to knock it down does seems very strange looking at it from that angle.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 07:35 AM
link   
Very nice find OP - one of the sharpest pics I've seen

That 'missile' is travelling away from the building. Could it be the turbine that landed in Murray St that was reported to be still smoking after coming to a standstill?
The 'smoke' would be white kerosene vapour running over the hot metal.



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Please do not think i am stating that a plane did not hit the tower, i have never stated that, as with the Pentagon.

The statment i was making was what if the missile hit right about the same time the plane hit. The main explosion is from the jet fuel not the missile.



Ok, just clearing up the waters. I guess it was just the wording of your first posts. It gave the impression that you were saying that only a missile caused the whole explosion.

The DU idea seems slightly odd (first time I've heard of it). If that black dot at the far left of the white trail is the remains of a DU penetrator, then that means it would have had to come from the direction the airplanes hit. But where would they have been launched from?



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 09:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed
I'm suprised in your research over the years, you havent found reports talking about the debris found away from the building? The engine or wheel,


I am very surprised an adult doing any research after all these years would not have seen there are no reports matching any of the debris or parts to AA77.

The engine has not been matched to a RB211.

The wheel is a type that is used on other planes beside a 757.




Ultima1, Both aircraft involved in the WTC attack (the topic of this thread) were 767's. Not 757's. Thought with all your research, you'd know that.

767's are fitted with PW or GE engines.

YOu might find the photos on THIS PAGE interesting in terms of the airplane parts found in the streets of lower Manhattan. I realize they probably won't hold any sway with you since there are NO OFFICIAL REPORTS MATCHING PART NUMBERS TO THE AIRCRAFT, but others who have not seen them might find them interesting. I really don't know why you continue with this "official reports matching part number" mantra anyway. I'm sure if such reports were produced, you would dismiss them as fake. It's so obvious that you have made up your mind regarding what happened on 9/11 and who was behind it. Why do you pretend to be interested in research? Especially when your research so far has not impressed upon you which types of aircraft were associated with each attack location.


[edit on 6/1/2008 by darkbluesky]



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 11:40 AM
link   


One thing about that impact photo is it is one of the best photos showing exactly how far WTC7 is from the tower. How something that is collapsing can reach that building doing enough damage to knock it down does seems very strange looking at it from that angle.


WTC 7 was about 300 ft - lenght of American football field from WTC 1
(North Tower). Distance is distorted by picture



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Anonymous ATS
 


WTC 7 was a little less than 400 feet from WTC 1. WTC 1 was what, 1100 feet tall? And there are stills/video showing core columns in excess of 400 feet tall, so its not a stretch to see those columns reaching far enough to WTC 7. Of course, we could start linking the pic that shows WTC 7 getting hit by chunks of WTC 1.....



posted on Jun, 1 2008 @ 11:52 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 

Yes, it almost looks more like a missile trail.

I would have to check and see if that would be in line with the Woolworth building.


Are you proposing that someone shot a missile from WTC2 at the Woolworth Building?


20 seconds into this video shows the smoke trail in question exiting the building in the same direction as the flight path of 175.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join