Originally posted by turbofan
No, you are misunderstanding. The first witnesses to the crash site
were there within 10 minutes of the impact. Their statements and
photos support that a commerical airliner/757 did not crash there.
Let's talk about those that were there shall we? Now, what we don't know is (and this is also a response to the quote from you below) what we are
supposed to see in a high speed, nose down impact. First responders and witnesses on the scene did state that it did not look like a plane crashed.
(the ones that watched it going down knew it was)
So, what we do now is attempt to compare this crash to something similar. This is a very difficult crash as most planes that crash have an
experienced pilot doing all he can to save the craft and passengers.
This is why in response to your OP I posted the video of flight 1771. No, it is not "identical." yet quite similar in that it was a high speed, nose
down craft.
We read the witness statements, the first responder statements, the FDFR, the CVR, etc. We look at the photographic evidence.
Flight 1771 first responders did not think a plane crashed. It was not until it was reported that a plane was missing that they determined this was a
commercial airliner.
The debris fields were pretty close. No large recognizable parts. Flight 1771 responder stated "nothing bigger than a suitcase."
We don't see any photo evidence showing enough debris to support
a 757 crash.
Do you know of any NTSB agents, or first responders that don't believe a plane crashed there? Or are they all in on it too?
If you claim the wind carried a majority of it away, I ask how far
do you believe the plane parts moved within 10 minutes?
I'm not saying the majority was carried away. I was responding to your post regarding the 8 mile debris field. This debris field was in fact in the
direction of the winds that day. As posted previously, only very light debris was recovered in Baltimore. (paper, small pieces of vinyl)
I ask you to show me what was found through out the 8 mile debris filed, that you feel is not consistent with a high speed nose down crash.
Flight 1771 shows an example of debris concentrated near the crash
site. THis is nothing alike UA93 when viewing the photo and video
evidence.
That is one photo that shows the scattering of debris. It was from a screen shot from the video I posted. Please read a little more into the debris
field regarding this crash. (1771) Did you notice the crater? Did you see any distinguishable plane parts?
By stating that it is "nothing like" Flight 93, Tino, you are being disingenuous. I know your not that ignorant.
Where are the rims, wheels, landing gear, seats, tail section, etc. that
should have appeared in the crater long before an engine rotor was
recovered?
We have seen several parts. (not all) What I ask of you is to once again look at flight 1771 and show me the photographs of the tail section there.
The Engine rotor... etc. Again..high speed... nose down... Compare the two. "Nothing that resembled an aircraft."
Why do you continue to quote wind speed at 1000 foot altitude, when
the crash happend at ground level according to the official story?
The debris is at ground level. The wind speed as you suggest was 11 MPH.
What's the point of discussing wind speed at 1000 feet? Please enlighten me.
The crash was at ground level. Flight 93 weighed about 77000 kg and struck the ground at 504 knots. Hopefully you're better at math than Balsamo.
Please calculate the kinetic energy that was produced when flight 93 impacted the ground.
What do you think was in that massive flume that was photographed. (you can find the answers pretty easily)
[edit on 16-5-2009 by CameronFox]
