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.

 

Bodies strapped to seats on AA77, Pentagon?

page: 5
7
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 08:19 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


Respectfully, thedman, 2 points....I apologize for the graphic nature of the post, but feel it is important.

1> If the bodies had been belted into seats, the seats would have separated from the seat tracks, they would have either been crushed or impacted the forward part of the remaining aircraft or wreckage. A low forward g impact (like a stall resulting in a low speed, settling impact) might have left a body to incinerate, but high g forces destroy the human body.

2> If the victims had been herded into the back of the aircraft and unbelted or standing, they would have become projectiles upon impact. If this was an aircraft, the radome would have absorbed almost none of the impact, as it is honeycombed fiberglass. The first major energy transfer would have come from the "keel" and main structure. If the structure of the aircraft had absorbed a 300 kt impact, loose bodies would have either been torn apart or destroyed and bodies buckled into seat belts would have most likely separated at the seat belt level....Sorry about being graphic, but I believe that it is relevant..........




posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 08:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Seymour Butz
 


You attempt to draw us into emotional response without discussion of the issues. If you have something useful to contribute which defeats his argument, let's here it -- preferably without snide and unwarranted personal attacks, if you can manage to avoid sinking so low. Your useless rhetoric serves no purpose here if that is all you can manage.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


Its called common sense. 18 inch thick wall versus 40 feet of earth. Its not that hard to understand. An 18 inch wall that will give....40 feet of earth that doesnt give all that much.

We could discuss Flight 93 cramming its 150 plus feet length into that 40 foot chunk of earth or the 150 plus feet length of Flight 77 traveling twice its length into the Pentagon........but then, that wont make a difference either cause you will continue to overthink it.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:12 PM
link   
reply to post by IvanZana
 


Look at the collar of the body you think is in a orange jumpsuit, there is a brass Oak Leaf. Your "orange jump" suit, is the khaki uniform of a Navy Lieutenant Commander. Either Lt. Cmdr. Robert Randolph Elseth, Lt. Cmdr. Patrick Jude Murphy, Lt. Cmdr. Otis Vincent Tolbert, or Lt. Cmdr. Ronald James Vauk.

Feel better now that there is a name associated with the body?



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:16 PM
link   
reply to post by cashlink
 


I didnt say Flight 93 hit the Pentagon nor did I say Flight 77 hit the ground. I said Flight 77 hitting a wall and breaking through it is a much different (and comparatively less violent) collision than Flight 93 hitting solid earth.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Its called common sense.

So you don't have any maths, physics or biology to show me the forces that a body is subjected to, during alleged high speed crashes over 850 km/h?

So you are STILL not able to tell me the names of the alleged corpses that were strapped to the seats, with supporting verification?

Common sense isn't always as common as you think, Swampfox.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


I see photos of what appear to be bodies contained in a military fighter aircraft that unfortunately have been burned in a stationary position, not the evidence of any impact.....



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


You are at it again making up names for a corps!
Do you have DNA results on this corps to give us his real name?
The jump suite is orange not khaki, or are you color blind.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


Agreed, the g force would have been less, but both would have been impacts that would have resulted in body parts everywhere and combustion injuries after the fact....



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:25 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


You want math? Then DO IT. Im sure if you put your brain to it, you will be able to get a reasonably accurate answer of how many G's the passengers of Flight 93 were subjected to as their aircraft when from 450 plus MPH to a dead stop in 40 feet. From that, you might be able to figure out what that force would do to a human body, especially one that isnt in a seat belt.

When you get that one figured out, you should be able to figure out how many G's the passengers of Flight 77 were subjected to as their plane went from its speed to a stop in 300 feet or so. Of course you are also going to have to take into account the energy bled off by the plane coming apart as it progressed through the building.

Like I said, to me its common sense that Flight 77's passengers were subjected to a smaller G load than the passengers of Flight 93. Smaller G load, more intact human remains.



Although, it STILL wont matter to you. Like others on here, the only way you would have been satisfied would have been to either been on one of the jets that day OR been one of the first responders.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 



Ugh, cannot believe I am going to do this.

Okay, try to follow this (if you can) Flight 93 hit the ground, solid ground forty feet of it. Flight 77 hit a brick wall (yeah, yeah a reinforced wall, but just a wall), about 18 inches thick, then it


Did you write this ?


Mod edit: fixed quote

[edit on 10/17/2008 by Hal9000]



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by cashlink
 


No, its khaki that has been exposed to extreme heat/fire. After 15 years in the Navy (prior to starting my time in the Air National Guard), I know the results of a fire...especially when it comes to officers who have died in a fire.

The khaki uniform and the Oak Leaf on the collar signifies a Naval Officer with the rank of Lieutenant Commander, of which there are four of them listed among the dead at the Pentagon that day. Not that difficult to figure out that the picture is one of the four.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Every frontal impact accident I have ever observed (when there are whole bodies left) have resulted in the bodies slumped forward on in a non "sitback position".........Sorry, I see bodies burned in stationary positions....any coroners (MD's) here???



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
You want math? Then DO IT.

You're prepared to make a claim and expect others to supply the proof? Swampfox, please, how can you be taken seriously when you're not prepared to show why some bodies can survive intact at the Pentagon, yet not at Shanksville!

You're waving your hands trying to speculate on 'G forces' without supplying any calculations to try and prove your assertions. Why is that, Swampfox? Is it just easier for you to make claims that you can't prove?

By the way, do you have names for the corpses that were allegedly found strapped to their seats yet? I'm still waiting for them.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by habu71
 


Nobody said the bodies that were found in their seats were complete bodies. Im pretty sure that they would have been missing appendages among other things..



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


You bring up a previously unknown variable. I'm sorry, it's not good enought to reference "unnamed sources". You're not the press. I'd like to see what you're talking about, and then we can debate it intelligently. Otherwise, we're just emitting uric acid in forward flowing wind patterns.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:38 PM
link   


You're prepared to make a claim and expect others to supply the proof? Swampfox, please, how can you be taken seriously when you're not prepared to show why some bodies can survive intact at the Pentagon, yet not at Shanksville!


Who said they were intact bodies from Flight 77? OH, you are going to jump all over the witnesses that said they saw bodies. Gee, I guess we should call the witnesses and ask, "so, were the bodies intact or where they what was left of a human being?"

As for the G forces involved, once again, for me its common sense, after 20 plus years in and around aviation and aviation accidents.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:41 PM
link   
reply to post by tezzajw
 


You made a claim with no evidence. I'm simply asking for the sources of your claim, as per your OP. This isn't a pissing contest, just a simple request. I think you're all getting bogged down in answering unsupported rhetoric.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 

It’s subjective, I see orange you see khaki.



posted on Oct, 16 2008 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by habu71
 


Kudos on you for stating it so delicately. I suspect what you mean is that the burned bodies you've observed have undergone extreme muscular contraction. You have much to contribute to this discussion, if we can just figure out the source of the OP. thank you.




top topics



 
7
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join