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.

 

Flight 175; The Impossible Speed

page: 3
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 09:27 AM
link   
reply to post by RockHound757
 



What type engines can you see there? Are they Derated? Are they modified? Any extra vortex gens to prevent boundry layer seperation at high speed? What is CG, What is Weight? What is Mcrit? How many secondary flight control surfaces operating? How many IAC's on board compensating for speed excessive of Vmo? What is exact true airspeed? Can you see that in those photos?
Feel free to compile a list of all the modifications required for a 757/767 to bust through this magical Vne/Mmo barrier and I will do my best to find the companies or agencies that have the capability to make such modifications.


Boone, you are another who is lost.
Says the no-planer/wrong-planer!!!




posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
reply to post by RockHound757
 



What type engines can you see there? Are they Derated? Are they modified? Any extra vortex gens to prevent boundry layer seperation at high speed? What is CG, What is Weight? What is Mcrit? How many secondary flight control surfaces operating? How many IAC's on board compensating for speed excessive of Vmo? What is exact true airspeed? Can you see that in those photos?



Feel free to compile a list of all the modifications required for a 757/767 to bust through this magical Vne/Mmo barrier and I will do my best to find the companies or agencies that have the capability to make such modifications.


Wooooooooo! The ever widening conspiracy..........

Now, we have all of the United Airlines maintenance personnel, refuelers, the pilot(s) who preflighted it as well as those involved on it's previous flights. Wait a minute..... I'm sure the idiot who speculates about these mods has confirmed that the aircraft was taken out of service for some period to allow these extensive modifications. Sure, he has. After all he does not speculate and he always sources his claims....



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Reheat
 

Wooooooooo! The ever widening conspiracy..........


Don't forget to add American Airlines to the list. All four aircraft exceeded their published Max operating speed on 9/11.

Note to the New World Order Department of False Flag Operations: the next time you guys stage a massive psychological attack on your own country, don't waste time and resources modifying commercial aircraft to exceed their published speed limits. Professional Internet pilots will discover the impossibility of the maneuvers and bring your whole scheme crashing to the ground.



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Boone 870
Professional Internet pilots will discover the impossibility of the maneuvers and bring your whole scheme crashing to the ground.



It doesn't get much more truthful than this. You'd think certain people who are trained and qualified pilots would know better. Maybe there's an agenda somewhere?



posted on Mar, 29 2009 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Hi reheat, bo(o)ne's,

dear delusional Jref devotees, and staunch defenders of ridiculous phantom speeds.

You guys, who once were considered just 'a pain in the proverbial', but are now
merely viewed upon as objects of amusement.
(How it ever came to this, only the gods knows)!

Why don't you listen?

No Boeing 767 hit any of the World towers.

Stop wasting more posts, and our time, with your embarrassing drivel, please!



posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 07:22 AM
link   
reply to post by djeminy
 


Certainly not one single serial number from any one of the four aircraft, used by the 9-11 perps for their Inside Job Attack on America, to give any indication what aircraft they were. How convenient; and the chant of the government loyalists goes on and on.

"We don't need any serial numbers because our faith in our government is strong."




posted on Mar, 30 2009 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by djeminy
No Boeing 767 hit any of the World towers.

He says without any shred of evidence.


Keep trying.



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 03:25 AM
link   
I happen to think that working on this problem; the speed of flight 175, is a reasonable pursuit. I would like to share some bit of information, just in case I am not the only person who is pursing this. 9-11 Conspiracy Truth is a site I am looking at and seems to be a decent resource. It has link to Mega Uploads where you can download the "Smokefloat" video.(see still below) I have a rather large collection of photos (about 3,000) I have found on the internet, that I use to reference 911 videos. Looking through it, I found one that anyone examining this particular video will want.


follow this link to get the wider version which does not fit into the forum page.
files.abovetopsecret.com...
If you look at the lower right of the video still, there are these points that are superimposed over some of the Manhattan buildings. Looking at the above photo, you can see what it is, the remains of the steeple tower of the Westminster Church at Clinton st. and 1st Pl.
Below is a crop from a frame 2 seconds later, that gives a better look at the points.

Just in case someone does not see how this post is on topic, in order to determine the speed from a video, you have to have some geographical constants, including where the camera was located. It may seem simple but if you can not go there in person, it requires photographic evidence, which is not exactly easy to search out. (especially pre-911 ones)


[edit on 5-5-2009 by jmdewey60]



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 11:53 PM
link   
To the original poster and anyone who believes in the lies and manipulations of the NPT.

If there was no plane that hit the WTC, then all the videos had to be faked, all the pictures had to be faked, and all the witnesses had to be faked.

If even ONE shred of evidence PROVING that ONE of the videos is real, ONE of the pictures is fake, or ONE witness is genuine then the NPT falls apart.

Therefore, YOU all HAVE to discredit ALL videos, prove that ALL photos are faked, and prove that ALL witnesses were faked. A daunting task since the burden of proof is upon you.

But let me save you some time with one video that CANNOT be fake.

www.youtube.com...

Watch from about 7:30.

As the maker of that video says, it is IMPOSSIBLE for a graphics artist to paste in a plane when the camera is zooming in.

Real video, real plane.

You have either been duped into promoting a bull# theory or you are knowingly spreading around bull# and we all know it.

DEAL WITH IT!



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by MrRandomGuy
 


As the maker of that video says, it is IMPOSSIBLE for a graphics artist to paste in a plane when the camera is zooming in.

I guess this video that you linked to is an attempt to debunk a standard no-planer video. There is a problem with this argument. I have the dvd version of that video of the High 5 Live and have split it into individual frames to get a better look at things. I took a look at them to see if that is right. The zoom stops one frame before the plane appears.
You may have misunderstood that the narrator is saying. What he is saying is that during the zoom, way before the plane hit, there was a point where the plane could have been detected, but it would have been too hard to calculate out, while it was happening, to have put it in. My problem with this statement is that it could have been added later. It did not show up in the originally broadcast version. Later on, a "high resolution" version was released that had it in the wide zoom.
I find this video to be equally non-credible as the September Clues video. It shows a very superficial amount of research, to me. In the currently active no-planes debunking thread, www.abovetopsecret.com... I examine this same question, and come up with a conclusion that does not jive with this one. The maker seems to have a limited knowledge of the "Jersey Shore" video, which I examine in my "Liberty Island Plane" video on ats video & media. The attempt in this video of matching up the High 5 Live and the Jersey Shore planes is laughable.


[edit on 6-5-2009 by jmdewey60]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


You've put some thought into it i see. I agree that it is possible that they added in the plane later, but that goes back to my original point. You have to show that the original shot did not have a plane.

And even then, it still wouldn't be proof of anything. You would have to discredit all of the videos, all of the pictures, and all of the witnesses. If even just one witness comes forward to say "I saw a plane." then the theory is blown to pieces.

Luckily for us, the burden of proof is upon the No Planers. So until they can do all of the above and not some of the above will I or someone with a brain take this bullsnot seriously.



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
reply to post by MrRandomGuy
 

I guess my point is that if you think the no-planers are dis-info propagators, you have to realize that anyone who comes along to discredit them are not by default correct.
I have to admire some of the no-planers for their dedication. I emphasize "some". There are people do do good research on both sides and a lot of what is out there would not be known, if not for the no-planers pointing out discrepancies.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 08:28 PM
link   
OK, two and a half days later, here is what I came up with.
This is the frame where the nose of the plane just barely comes into view (the left edge), so this is the one that needs to have its dimensions determined in the real world.

My philosophy on this problem has to be adapted to the fact that only half of the frame has reliable landmarks. If you can calculate how much space half of the frame covers, you can assume the other half is the same.
What I did was identify the camera position to within four or five feet and then identify and determine the distances that the buildings in the mid-ground take up.

Really, the goal is to end up with the correct angle, so the measurement is just a tool to that end. Each measurement has to be made while taking into consideration the angle of view for that section. (the distance in feet is just a perpendicular measurement, where the center crosses South Street.)
Without going into all the details, the answer is 522 mph.
I was a little surprised because I thought it would end up being a lot slower.
Keep in mind that this was released by the F.B.I. after a F.O.I.A. request freed it up. They had taken it from whatever format it was in and put it on a DVD. It ended up being 10 frames per second, so that gives a lot of room for manipulation if it originally had a higher frame rate. They could have removed a lot of frames to make it seem to be going faster than it really was.
More details: OK, i guess I need to throw in a little more info. Take a look at the Google Earth capture above. Part of the "G" of a round, blue google symbol for a point of interest, can be seen at the very top. It points at pretty much where the plane was, in my dissected frame. All that measurement was just to determine the outer boundaries of the field of view. The left edge of it crosses the flight path at that point. (what I had earlier determined from other videos.)
From there you only have to measure the distance to the impact point, and then use the elapsed time to get the speed ratio.


[edit on 8-5-2009 by jmdewey60]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join