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.

 

Forward this photo to any 911 Truth debunkers.

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


As I have said more than once the kinetic energy of the impact covers that. remember 4MegaJoules at 500MPH

A missile is not meant for penetration it goes in and detonates most only penetrate a few inches past their length (based on timers and electronics) then explode.
Period.




posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Achorwrath
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


As I have said more than once the kinetic energy of the impact covers that. remember 4MegaJoules at 500MPH

A missile is not meant for penetration it goes in and detonates most only penetrate a few inches past their length (based on timers and electronics) then explode.
Period.



Well that would be cool if you were an expert but your not!
We will talk again when you have a PHD on relevant subject matter. In the meantime I'll listen to structural engineers and architects period!



Oh yeah and welcome to ATS by the way I hope you enjoy your stay and find it as fascinating as I do.

PEACE
SLAY

[edit on 24-3-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by Achorwrath
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


As I have said more than once the kinetic energy of the impact covers that. remember 4MegaJoules at 500MPH

A missile is not meant for penetration it goes in and detonates most only penetrate a few inches past their length (based on timers and electronics) then explode.
Period.



Well that would be cool if you were an expert but your not!
We will talk again when you have a PHD on relevant subject matter. In the meantime I'll listen to structural engineers and architects period!



Oh yeah and welcome to ATS by the way I hope you enjoy your stay and find it as fascinating as I do.

PEACE
SLAY

[edit on 24-3-2009 by SLAYER69]


I guess it is bad for you that I am a former combat engineer with extensive experience in demolitions then huh?

But then again I suppose those engineers and achitects took into account rusted internal support in the concrete and pillars huh?

I think not or they would not be making the comments they are.

As for missle weapons having been in the millitary for years I have used many of them and have information and live enxperience with what they do.



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Achorwrath


I guess it is bad for you that I am a former combat engineer with extensive experience in demolitions then huh?




Yeah Really?

Would you be so kind as to provide us some certificates?
ATS as you may know already is always looking for some Subject matter experts. It would go a long way to convince people that your not just another newcomer making claims that they are experts in this or that field.



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Well, I hope the pissing contest ends soon. It was going great. I wish we could get back to the point.

PS- Kiwi- Great zinger on the "unobtainium". Made me laugh.

Carry on.
Ga head.

Cuhail



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


And to whom should I offer this to?
You?

I have proivded the formula for the impact physics. and shown the actual math based on the planes wieght and speed. Link

I have used your own document to show where the exterior walls were no longer structrually as sound as at the time of contrsuction (rusted stiffeners, cracks, spreading, water seepage).

And also shown that the videos being shown do not cover the actual force of imact as they are with smaller palnes and differently constructed walls (mostly newer construction than the 60 year old Pentagon).

I have nothing to prove to you,



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Achorwrath
 


So you admit it's a theory
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you can convert freely between the two for purposes of mreasurement they can be used to illustrate the same theory.

English / Metric Units of Measurement and Conversion Factors


Also he had a good reply

Originally posted by Griff
reply to post by Achorwrath
 


I was only pointing out that your units were for force when you were calculating energy. Yes, you can convert between the two, but you actually have to do the conversion.

As far as a composite deck. I'm not going to argue. I know for a fact that the word "composite" means it acts together.


"Composite construction usually refers to a construction method in which a cast-in-place concrete slab is bonded to steel beams, girders, or decking below, such that the two materials act as a single unit"


Civil Engineering Reference Manual 10th edition First sentence in composite structures section.







[edit on 24-3-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by screwedagain
 


Like how many plane crashes you been to? Guess dont see too many from mommy's basement?

Seen one up close and personal after a Lear 35 ploughed into ground just down street - as member of FD walked the crash scene marking body
parts for the coroner to recover.

I didn't see anything that looked like an airplane - only parts recognizable
was 2 x 3 ft section of tail fin and a landing gear light which struck
parked car down the street



At the site, at Rifle Camp Road and Washington Drive near the Great Notch Reservoir, Federal, police and fire investigators sifted through the remains. The parts of the plane were scattered beneath trees, shrubs and rocks, and the smell of jet fuel permeated the air. The residents of nearby homes and the condomnium complex said the explosion rattled their homes and the flames lighted the early morning sky.


Rest was metallic confetti - bits and pieces scattered around. This is what happens in high speed plane crash - ours hot nose down at about
350 mph. One hitting Penatgon was going about 500mph



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Foot Pounds and Joules are convertable back and forth one is force the other is energy.


1 joule of energy = 0.7376 ft.lb
1 foot pound = effort to lift a pound a foot = 1.3557 J


Source

To your other comment; rusted steel inside the weakened concrete.

315,000 pounds at 500MPH.

like I said between 2-4 Million Joules of kinetic energy. Realistically more than that. Probably around 5-6 Million.

Factor that in.





[edit on 24-3-2009 by Achorwrath]



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by screwedagain
 


Like how many plane crashes you been to? Guess dont see too many from mommy's basement?




Oh how very mature of you.


Post your opinion not your attitude.



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   
I can't believe America hasn't risen against the real terrorists yet. They send young adults in dusty countries of the Middle-East propagandizing about how cool it is to fight for freedom, while they're silently taking every one of your liberties away, passing repressive after repressive law.
During this time, sons and daughters of America are being killed.

i can't believe the MSM coulmd have sold you americans the whole story without any spontaneous protest . I mean :
_2 towers collapsing due to intense fire? ( controlled demo)
_Another one collapsing on its own ? (controlled demo+logistics disappearance of the authors)
_A jet crashing into the Pentagon without even smashing the windows a couple of floors higher ? ( a couple of laser guided bombs )
_A bunch of heroes making a plane collapse in the countryside? ( simply shot down by scrambled jets)
COME ON AMERICA. The rest of the civilized world thinks you are a bunch of God-loving retards hungry for burgers and football games and gallons for your 2-liters-a-mile SUVs and not caring about the rest .
PROVE US WRONG.

A very little proportion of you is trying to denounce the horrific manipulation you're all victims of ( nd the world ) . Do we have to wait the regular 50 years before reading declassified censored reports?
You deserve better than that. The land of the free of George washington and Jefferson and all the other heroes of the XVIIIth century is slipping into totalitarism. And you ... don't... move !
One day, when we'll line up for food in the streets, watched by Orwellian nightmarish cops, we'll think about it and wonder why we always had better to do.
One last thing, excuse my english, i'm french and tired


[edit on 24-3-2009 by MattMulder]



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


One of the many cameras around the outside perimeter of the Pentagon:




WOW! Just to think that the amount of fuel onboard didn't really explode as much as I thought.. with ONLY 1 Engine putting out .. hmmmm.....a fire ?

Looking at the explosion today of the FEDEX jet.. all i can think of is.. the Penta-lawn !!!



[edit on 24-3-2009 by Komodo]

[edit on 24-3-2009 by Komodo]



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 11:21 PM
link   
The question is pretty simple.

How large is that Fire Engine? I'd say it is probably a little shorter than a school bus, but that would be a fair comparison. 30'
Scale it yourself. The fire engine fits in between the undamaged area in the fence and the untouched outbuilding roughly 3 times. 90'... For argument's sake, I'll grant an extra 10 feet to make it an even 100' span of an area that the plane possibly could have hit and then dissentigrated into (coincidentally without doing any damage expected to the left of the hole in the building).

How wide was the jet? It was like 135' in width, if I remember correctly.

And all of that is aside from the fact that we don't see any damage to the lawn or a single trace of what would be expected to be seen at a plane crash. Something like this... news.bbc.co.uk...

So yeah, the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missle. Like this. www.serendipity.li...



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Achorwrath
 


Cruise missile with a bunker buster warhead... Like this...

"NUCLEAR W-80 NUCLEAR WARHEAD 250 KILOTON YIELD
CONVENTIONAL 1,000+ LB. FRAGMENTARY OR BUNKER
BUSTER WARHEAD WITH ROCKET ASSIST PENETRATION"

www.softwar.net...



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Achorwrath


To your other comment; rusted steel inside the weakened concrete.


Do we have any source pictures of all these rusted reinforcements inside the concrete


Those pictures I have not seen. That would really help with your theory
thanks in advance


[edit on 24-3-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Komodo
 


What do you mean?
you have one jet that plows into a building and is completely crushed and in tombed inside a reinforced concrete structure and the other right out in the open



posted on Mar, 24 2009 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Mechanical failure of reinforced concrete due to oxidization of the steel used to reinforce it should be evident by significant cracking of the concrete.

We would have expected these types of evident failures to have been met by the Government. Especially in such a critical building as the Pentagon.

(What in the world am I even arguing this for? The case is open and shut)

Inside Job.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Jay-in-AR
 


Nuclear???
Are you joking?

Plus read the penetration factor on that, it is designed to penetrate only a few feet.

It is were one of those the whole structure yould have gone up in the area of impact.

Link 1

2 engines are present - look at the pcitures

Link 2

Fire - again just look at the pictures

Link 3

Again 2 engines

Link 4

More of the fire

Link 5

Fire again

I have chosen these just for images of damage, not the ones that people like to show off hours after the crash. Many of these are during the initial response and show multiple foam engines and multiple regular trucks. Remember regular water is not used on fuel or oil fires, the water flash boils, the steam then carries more fuel into the air which ignites in a fireball.



posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 03:40 PM
link   



WOW! Just to think that the amount of fuel onboard didn't really explode as much as I thought.. with ONLY 1 Engine putting out .. hmmmm.....a fire ?

Looking at the explosion today of the FEDEX jet.. all i can think of is.. the Penta-lawn !!!



Not exactly the same scenario but I agree...there is such a difference in the explosions and fires as a result of the crash!




posted on Mar, 25 2009 @ 03:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jay-in-AR
The question is pretty simple.

How large is that Fire Engine? I'd say it is probably a little shorter than a school bus, but that would be a fair comparison. 30'
Scale it yourself. The fire engine fits in between the undamaged area in the fence and the untouched outbuilding roughly 3 times. 90'... For argument's sake, I'll grant an extra 10 feet to make it an even 100' span of an area that the plane possibly could have hit and then dissentigrated into (coincidentally without doing any damage expected to the left of the hole in the building).

How wide was the jet? It was like 135' in width, if I remember correctly.

And all of that is aside from the fact that we don't see any damage to the lawn or a single trace of what would be expected to be seen at a plane crash. Something like this... news.bbc.co.uk...

So yeah, the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missle. Like this. www.serendipity.li...


Thankyou..you've basically said what I wanted to say but more concisely, it was 1am on a school (work) night !

Cheers!



[edit on 25-3-2009 by kiwifoot]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join