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.

 

What happens when a 500 mph plane hits solid? Slow-mo video

page: 3
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 14 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   
[edit] Explosively formed penetrators

Improvised explosive device in Iraq. The concave copper shape on top is an explosively formed penetrator.IEDs have been deployed in the form of explosively formed penetrators, a special type of shaped charge that is effective at long standoffs from the target (50 meters or more). These are especially problematic to counter because they can be placed so far from their intended targets.[29] An EFP is essentially a cylindrical shaped charge with a concave metal disc (often copper) in front, pointed inwards. THE FORCE OF THE SHAPED CHARGE TURNS THE DISC INTO A BOLT OF MOLTEN METAL (also see plasma), CAPABLE OF PENETRATING THE ARMOR OF MOST VEHICLES IN IRAQ.

en.wikipedia.org...

ak 47 bullet striking steel - www.youtube.com...

22 hitting steel - accurateshooter.net...

Effects of bullets on 1/2 inch steel plate - www.youtube.com...

www.spaceref.com...

Accelerated to 13 km/sec, the plates are neither distorted, melted, nor vaporized, as they would be if shot from a gun. When the plate is accelerated to a speed about 20 times faster than a bullet, or 20 km/sec, the more forceful acceleration needed to reach higher velocity causes temperatures of 2,500 K to occur in the flyer plate; this liquefies aluminum flyer plates.

Better understanding of launch configurations is expected to eliminate this problem, though liquidation still is superior to the worst alternative of vaporization -- the result if conventional acceleration could be used to reach these speeds. (No power can be delivered from a vaporized pellet.) Characteristics of copper and titanium plates are also being investigated.


It's the fastest gun in the world," says Sandia physicist Marcus Knudson, lead scientist on the project. The propulsion speed of 20 km/sec -- almost three times that necessary to escape the gravitational pull of the Earth (about 7 km/sec) -- would send material from New York to Boston in half a minute, and from Albuquerque to Santa Fe in a few seconds. A rifle bullet is typically propelled at 1 km/sec.
The machine, Sandia's Z accelerator, currently propels dime-sized pellets called flyer plates only a few hundred millimeters to gain information on the effect of high-velocity impacts. The data gained can be used to simulate the effect of flying space junk impacting the metal skin of an orbiting observatory traveling in the opposite direction. The data is expected to aid materials scientists trying to balance lightness against strength for satellite and observatory shells.
The technique also has potential as a hypervelocity "kinetic kill" weapon that, emanating from a lighter, more mobile source than the huge Z machine, still could strike disabling blows through an adversary's heavy armor. These more mobile sources are already in development. Perhaps most importantly, though least dramatically, the technique is the fastest, most accurate, and cheapest method to determine how materials will react under high pressures and temperatures. These characteristics can then be expressed in formulas called "equations of state" -- equations that tell researchers precisely how materials will react if basic conditions like pressure and temperature are changed by specific amounts.


Fact vs BS.

DrEd

Still have massive craters, 5 acres of earth at 1500 degrees, 2 billion pounds of building turned into instant dust, billions of tritium units, hiroshima cancer effects, wilting spires, impossible anaerobic, chlorine fueled fires, and many more 'anomalies' that are classic textbook examples of a nuclear reaction AND CAN NOT BE EXPLAINED ANY OTHER WAY.


[edit on 14-2-2009 by EdWardMD]




posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 07:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Insolubrious
you can see the wings have sliced right through the steel

From the picture you posted, the last 8 columns of where the wing hit are all still intact. Only the aluminum siding is damaged. So, nice false info there, especially when the picture you posted says the total opposite of what you type.


Originally posted by Insolubrious
The plane should of crashed and exploded up against the side of the tower, not punch right through, exploding out the other side.

Yet more false info. You will not find a single high-rise building anywhere on this earth that will make a large jetliner bounce off. Jetliners are not light. They weigh between 200,000-400,000 pounds or more.

I already posted pictures in the tv-fakery thread that shows no exit holes on the other side of the tower, and I also posted pictures that prove that it was not a nose-cone that came out of the other side that still has no exit hole.

Please get researched before posting all of this false info, thanks.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 04:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by Insolubrious
you can see the wings have sliced right through the steel

From the picture you posted, the last 8 columns of where the wing hit are all still intact. Only the aluminum siding is damaged. So, nice false info there, especially when the picture you posted says the total opposite of what you type.


Originally posted by Insolubrious
The plane should of crashed and exploded up against the side of the tower, not punch right through, exploding out the other side.

Yet more false info. You will not find a single high-rise building anywhere on this earth that will make a large jetliner bounce off. Jetliners are not light. They weigh between 200,000-400,000 pounds or more.

I already posted pictures in the tv-fakery thread that shows no exit holes on the other side of the tower, and I also posted pictures that prove that it was not a nose-cone that came out of the other side that still has no exit hole.

Please get researched before posting all of this false info, thanks.


So what those last few columns are intact. That's just a strawman arguement, look at the right wing. The whole picture was in question but it got cropped on the forum.

Click this link and take a better look then say that again about the right wing.

www.cs.purdue.edu...

The wings should not of sliced through the steel, yet we have plane shaped holes (including a distinctive wing shape) in the steel. MEEP MEEP (Road runner physics). It's a joke, I mean like did ACME make the plane or did ACME run your school of physics?


It should of exploded up against the side of the tower, sure some debris would of made it into the building, the windows would of been broken but not the STEEL! The majority of the plane should of crumpled/exploded/fall down and maybe even dented the steel, i never said it would 'bounce'. The plane didn't explode until it was INSIDE the building. That's the kind of effect the military invests billions of dollars of research into. Yet a plane that is not designed to be an armour penetrating weapon manages to do the same job required of a military grade bunker buster. Yeah right!!

So tell me, why doesn't the military design it's missiles more like boeings? If this is what happens when a flimsy plane hits a building, then the US military are wasting millions on all this bunker busting nonsense! They should start firing coke cans at the enemy instead.


Talking of weight, the plane maybe 80 tons but the twin towers were more than 100,000 tons each, that's almost 1,000 tons PER FLOOR.

Wake up dummy. Obviously no normal boeing nose cone could punch through the tower, but a armour penetrating warhead could.




[edit on 16-2-2009 by Insolubrious]



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 05:50 AM
link   
um yeah.. that's super concrete it's not used in ahem.. common buildings.. it's super concrete only used for ultra-elite bunkers so.. you know.. just go away with your "theories" and your "ideas" that natural "physics" work in "our" world.. ok?

k thnx.. we don't need your input anymore thanxxx

-



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Insolubrious

The wings should not of sliced through the steel, yet we have plane shaped holes (including a distinctive wing shape) in the steel. MEEP MEEP (Road runner physics). It's a joke, I mean like did ACME make the plane or did ACME run your school of physics?


So what you're saying is that since the plane was built less sturdy then the building, it shouldn't have penetrated the building.

How would you explain this video then?
The hand is the plane and the bricks are the building.



Now if the hand were stationary, and the bricks traveled at the hand, what would happen?



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by Insolubrious

The wings should not of sliced through the steel, yet we have plane shaped holes (including a distinctive wing shape) in the steel. MEEP MEEP (Road runner physics). It's a joke, I mean like did ACME make the plane or did ACME run your school of physics?


So what you're saying is that since the plane was built less sturdy then the building, it shouldn't have penetrated the building.

How would you explain this video then?
The hand is the plane and the bricks are the building.



Now if the hand were stationary, and the bricks traveled at the hand, what would happen?



If you stop/click stop/click the video, you'll see a black thin crack running down the
middle of all the light-weight bricks simultaneously with the top brick being hit, and
of course before the fist is followed through.

Elementary, really!



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by djeminy

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by Insolubrious

The wings should not of sliced through the steel, yet we have plane shaped holes (including a distinctive wing shape) in the steel. MEEP MEEP (Road runner physics). It's a joke, I mean like did ACME make the plane or did ACME run your school of physics?


So what you're saying is that since the plane was built less sturdy then the building, it shouldn't have penetrated the building.

How would you explain this video then?
The hand is the plane and the bricks are the building.



Now if the hand were stationary, and the bricks traveled at the hand, what would happen?



If you stop/click stop/click the video, you'll see a black thin crack running down the
middle of all the light-weight bricks simultaneously with the top brick being hit, and
of course before the fist is followed through.

Elementary, really!



Apples and oranges.

They write 'No step' on the wings of a plane for a reason you know, can you guess why that is?

What if the man had hit the concrete using a hollow aluminium tube only a few millimeters thick instead of his hand?


You guys are seriously underestimating the strength of steel..


Airplanes over design factor is approx. 1:1. Should we only fly steel planes? Airliners are designed to be light. Airliners worry about how much your luggage weighs, I wonder why that is? Do you think they worry about how much your luggage weighs on a single floor of the towers?




[edit on 16-2-2009 by Insolubrious]



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 08:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Insolubrious
 



"You guys are seriously underestimating the strength of steel.."


Hey, hold on! Leave me out of it, please.

I don't underestimate the strength of steel!!






posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:50 AM
link   
I really don't care what you official story believers think, your full of BS, and a total waste of energy. Explaining a little simple physics to you is much like expecting a child to give up their security blanket. Just keep avoiding my questions, you clearly cannot answer them. I laugh in your face.





[edit on 16-2-2009 by Insolubrious]



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
wtc7lies.googlepages.com...reply to post by _BoneZ_
 





That's not a considerable amount. The pictures he showed were a fraction of a plane. Same at the Pentagon. Some pictures showing a few pieces of debris, but no where near enough to account for the whole plane. Just because there's a few aircraft parts, doesn't necessarily mean there's a plane.


Thats because I only posted a few of the pictures of the scene!

Search crews at Flight 93 spent weeks going over the scene to recover
all the aircraft debris on the site. Most of the aircraft was smashed into
fragments often smaller than your hand - crews literally crawled on
hands and knees to recover debris.





Here is extensive listing of articles, interviews and pictures of Flight 93

I advise you to look it over (though rather doubt it)

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...

wtc7lies.googlepages.com...


What utter BS, I was at Lockerbie the same evening the aircraft was lost. I was based at RAF Spadeadam in the Keilder Forest between Carlise and Newcastle in the North of England. We were literally going out the gate and on leave for Xmas when we were told an aircraft had gone down just over the border in Scotland. In the early morning light next day there were massive sections of aircraft all over the place, miles apart, remember the pics flashed around the world of the cockpit/nose section and this aircraft had a bomb on board and was at 31,000ft when it exploded and fell to Earth and you seriously expect us to believe that an aircraft that was supposedly flying at a few thousand feet, (in fact one supposed eye witness said it was only 40 or 50ft off the ground when it flew over his head) crashed and left debris no bigger than your hand


We also found people still strapped in their chairs, in fact one group we found still strapped in had hit the ground ploughed thru a dry stone dyke (wall) and came to rest in the middle of a field, there was bits of bodies hanging from trees like lumps of meat. I even heard that a few survivors had been found but by the time medical attention had gotten too them it was too late, how true that is I don't know.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 04:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by djeminy

If you stop/click stop/click the video, you'll see a black thin crack running down the
middle of all the light-weight bricks simultaneously with the top brick being hit, and
of course before the fist is followed through.

Elementary, really!



Not elementary. It's evident you have no idea what you're talking about. There were no precuts in the bricks. This was a monitored world record attempt and precutting would have disqualified the attempt.
Have you ever broken a brick with your hand? I can tell you these are real house bricks that are not weakened in any way and people have broken their hands trying to break them.
If you don't believe me, TRY IT YOURSELF. Even with a precut and tell me how bad you injured yourself.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Insolubrious

They write 'No step' on the wings of a plane for a reason you know, can you guess why that is?

They also write NO STEP on the top of ladders. How many people use them as steps anyway???


What if the man had hit the concrete using a hollow aluminium tube only a few millimeters thick instead of his hand?

Depends on velocity and surface area
Look it up



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Insolubrious
So what those last few columns are intact. That's just a strawman arguement, look at the right wing.

What do you mean "so what"? You made the inaccurate claim the the wings sliced through the steel columns which is totally false. Only the strongest part of the wings near each engine and the engine itself all broke through the steel. The last several steel columns on both the right wing and the left wing are all intact as the outer part of the wings are too weak to break the steel connectors.


Originally posted by Insolubrious
The wings should not of sliced through the steel

The wings didn't slice through the steel. The connectors that connected the columns are the only things that failed and broke. The steel wasn't sliced through and didn't fail. The perimeter columns were connected together in sets of 3 like this:



Take a look at your picture and you'll see all the columns are broke in sets of 3 which tells you that the wings and the plane broke the connectors, not sliced through the steel.



Originally posted by Insolubrious
yet we have plane shaped holes (including a distinctive wing shape)

Yet we have a plane-shaped hole at the Empire State building in 1945 from a B-25 bomber. It also has a distinct wing shape. So what's your point?

Empire State building impact hole:




Originally posted by Insolubrious
It should of exploded up against the side of the tower, sure some debris would of made it into the building, the windows would of been broken but not the STEEL!

The steel didn't fail, the connectors did!


Originally posted by Insolubrious
Yet a plane that is not designed to be an armour penetrating weapon manages to do the same job required of a military grade bunker buster.

Yet a drinking straw isn't designed to go through trees, but with enough velocity from a tornado, it will do just that. A 2x4 piece of wood isn't designed to go through the steel doors on your car, but with enough velocity from a tornado, it will go right through with ease.


Originally posted by Insolubrious
Wake up dummy.


Originally posted by Insolubrious
I really don't care what you think, your full of BS, and a total waste of energy.

Your attacks quoted above not only are against forum rules, but show your level of maturity. If you can't have a civil discussion without calling people names or attacking them, then you have no business in the discussion at all. I haven't seen anyone call you names yet.


Originally posted by Insolubrious
Just keep avoiding my questions, you clearly cannot answer them.

You've been debunked.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 04:58 PM
link   
You've debunked squat.


Clearly you've just ignored 90% of my post and attempted a strawman argument, the wings sliced through the steel and the photo evidence supports it which I have presented twice already. Simple as that. All your doing is clinging to your acme security blanket. Well go cry to your mommy! I am well aware of how the sections of the outer walls were constructed and connected. Please try reading the posts again, thanks - you fail.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Insolubrious
I am well aware of how the sections of the outer walls were constructed and connected.

Obviously you don't know how the outer columns were constructed and connected if you can't look at your own picture and notice that all of the columns are broke in sections of 3's and that not one single column is sliced through, therefore debunking anything you say.


Originally posted by Insolubrious
Well go cry to your mommy!

I have no idea why you post things like this, but it shows your immaturity and insecurity. You should really go talk to a doctor as you appear to have issues.

[edit on 16-2-2009 by _BoneZ_]



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 06:25 PM
link   


Perhaps you should visit the doctor and get your eyes tested. Look at the damn diagram the wings sliced through the steel, not the connections, any fool can see this.

www.cs.purdue.edu...

Do i need to put big labels on it too? It would be pretty much impossible for the plane to hit just the connections!

As far as the ESB goes, I am not impressed. The ESB outer wall is completely different. Again, apples and oranges, you fail hard..





[edit on 16-2-2009 by Insolubrious]



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Chuffer
 


Pan Am 103 (Lockerbie) came apart at 30,000 ft from a bomb which
accounts for the large sections of aircraft scattered around. Flight 93
hit the ground nose down at 580 mph - the impact forces smashed it into
fragments .

I have been to a high speed impact (Lear 35) which hit the ground down the street from me. As member of FD walked the crash scene to mark
body parts for coroner to recover. This plane hit nose down at about
350 mph - plane was smashed into small pieces similar to what was seen
at Shanksville. Largest piece was 2 x 3 ft section of tail fin.

Your are comparing aplles to oranges - try doing some research



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123

Originally posted by djeminy

If you stop/click stop/click the video, you'll see a black thin crack running down the
middle of all the light-weight bricks simultaneously with the top brick being hit, and
of course before the fist is followed through.

Elementary, really!



Not elementary. It's evident you have no idea what you're talking about. There were no precuts in the bricks. This was a monitored world record attempt and precutting would have disqualified the attempt.
Have you ever broken a brick with your hand? I can tell you these are real house bricks that are not weakened in any way and people have broken their hands trying to break them.
If you don't believe me, TRY IT YOURSELF. Even with a precut and tell me how bad you injured yourself.



Who on earth is talking about precuts in the brick!!

Can't you bl**dy well read what is written for once in your life!!!

It's the impact on the first brick unto the next that subsequently cause that crack to run down the middle of the stack of the other bricks. This happens before the fist follows
through.

You would have seen this had you done what I suggested, but of course, as long as
you take delight in playing your silly immature Horatio Nelson games, there will never
be any change of that, will there!!



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 05:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by djeminy

If you stop/click stop/click the video, you'll see a black thin crack running down the
middle of all the light-weight bricks simultaneously with the top brick being hit, and
of course before the fist is followed through.

Elementary, really!




Not elementary. It's evident you have no idea what you're talking about. There were no precuts in the bricks. This was a monitored world record attempt and precutting would have disqualified the attempt.
Have you ever broken a brick with your hand? I can tell you these are real house bricks that are not weakened in any way and people have broken their hands trying to break them.
If you don't believe me, TRY IT YOURSELF. Even with a precut and tell me how bad you injured yourself.




Who on earth is talking about precuts in the brick!!

Can't you bl**dy well read what is written for once in your life!!!

It's the impact on the first brick unto the next that subsequently cause that crack to run down the middle of the stack of the other bricks. This happens before the fist follows
through.

You would have seen this had you done what I suggested, but of course, as long as
you take delight in playing your silly immature Horatio Nelson games, there will never
be any change of that, will there!!


So now you're saying that if you can break the first brick, you can break an infinite number of bricks because the bricks break themselves?

What you're not understanding about this is that if you do not apply sufficient force, the force will not be transferred through the bricks so they all won't break.

Ok let's take multiple bricks out of the equation so just maybe you can understand this a little better.
Let's take the brick breaking example using only 1 single brick. The house brick is harder then the human hand yet the human hand can still break the single brick. How is that possible? I can show you example after example. I've done it myself so I know it can be done. To prove the brick is harder then the human hand, you can try breaking one yourself
Hint: You'll get injured if you do it.

what about the people who can break giant blocks of ice with either the hands or heads? Just a single giant ice block? You have a moving hand that can break a substantially harder, larger object that is stationary. If you changed the position and have the block of ice at a stationary hand, the hand will be crushed. Explain why this happens.

and if this
community.guinnessworldrecords.com...
is so easy to do, why aren't these records broken every day?

[edit on 17-2-2009 by jfj123]

[edit on 17-2-2009 by jfj123]



posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123


So now you're saying that if you can break the first brick, you can break an infinite number of bricks because the bricks break themselves?



Here we go again...... does it never end!

No, I'm not saying anything of the sort anywhere.

I'm just telling you what's happening in the video clip.




top topics



 
1
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join