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.

 

Where was all that 95% of UA93 wreckage?

page: 24
9
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shadow Herder



The image is too large Smarty. Ats cuts it off automatically.

Would you like the full version?



Thats pretty funny - first you tell me that Above Top Secret cuts it off automatically then you ask if I want to see the full version I should go to - Above Top Secret!!!




posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   
More of the OS lies disputed.

Wife of Captain Dahl Flt 93 that crashed or was shot down Shanksville, PA


Sandy Dahl: I'm disappointed at the FBI report, because I heard something other than what they reported. And I don't understand how they came up with it. For instance, they talk about passengers indicated that the pilots were dead and laying in the first-class section. I heard evidence to the contrary on this tape. And I don't understand why they would report that.


Wife of 1st Officer Flt 93...


"Melody Homer is another young widow of a 9/11 pilot. Her husband, LeRoy Homer, a muscular former Air Force pilot, was the first officer of United's Flight 93. The story put out by United-of heroic passengers invading the cockpit and struggling with the terrorists-is not believable to Melody Homer or to Sandy Dahl, widow of the plane's captain, Jason Dahl. Mrs. Dahl was a working flight attendant with United and knew the configuration of that 757 like the back of her hand. "We can't imagine that passengers were able to get a cart out of its locked berth and push it down the single aisle and jam it into the cockpit with four strong, violent men behind the door," said Ms. Homer. She believes that the victims' family members who broke a confidentiality agreement and gave their interpretation of sounds they'd heard on the cockpit tape misinterpreted the shattering of china. "When a plane goes erratic, china falls."



41 U.S. Counter-Terrorism and Intelligence Agency Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11 – Official Account of 9/11: "Terribly Flawed," "Laced with Contradictions," "a Joke," "a Cover-up"



29 Structural & Civil Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Explosive Demolition in Collapses of All 3 WTC High-Rises on 9/11 – More than 950 Architects and Engineers have joined call for new investigation, faulting official collapse reports



Twenty-five U.S. Military Officers Challenge Official Account of 9/11 – Official Account of 9/11 “Impossible”, “A Bunch of Hogwash”, “Total B.S.”, “Ludicrous”, “A Well-Organized Cover-up”, “A White-Washed Farce”



Eight U.S. State Department Veterans Challenge the Official Account of 9/11 – Official Account of 9/11 "Flawed", "Absurd", "Totally Inadequate", "a Cover-up"



Seven Senior Federal Engineers and Scientists Call for New 9/11 Investigation – Official Account of 9/11 "Impossible", "Hogwash", "Fatally Flawed"



Eight Senior Republican Administration Appointees Challenge Official Account of 9/11 – "Not Possible", "a Whitewash", "False" oped



Can you smell it now?
OS = Operational Suitability



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


mike, what I think is happening there is a simple misunderstanding.

Initial reports (since known to be incorrect) may have implied that the passengers managed to breach the door, and enter the cockpit. We know that is not the case, because of the CVR recording.

Each individual who is commenting on that story, is doing so under false assumptions.

Now, about the beverage cart comment, by the Captain's UA flight attendant wife:



"We can't imagine that passengers were able to get a cart out of its locked berth and push it down the single aisle and jam it into the cockpit with four strong, violent men behind the door,"


There is ANOTHER flase assumption, when she said "four strong, violent men behind the door."

Can you see whay that is a false assumption, and distorts the truth? Unintentionally, probably, unless it's being used disingenuously by people with another agenda.

OK, answer is: All four of the terrorists were NOT in the cockpit. OTHER passenger reports (via Airphone calls) relate that at least two were in the cabin, watching the passengers.

We have two voices from the CVR, recorded inside on the flight deck. They discuss some aspects of the autopilot operation (in Arabic) and later, when the commotion at the door is heard, one is standing at the peephole viewer (exactly like one you have on your front door, or on a hotel room door) and, comically, thinks that brandishing the crash axe (which is normally kept in a mounting bracket on the right side of the cockpit, near the First Officer's seat) would somehow intimidate those on the other side, as he apparently was too stupid** to realize that THEY could not see in!!!


**Or panicked, under the stress.

Now, the beverage cart:

Very easy to remove from its location in a galley. Heck, it may have already been out in the aisle. There were other F/As who could show anyone how the wheel locks work...there's a red pedal, and a green pedal. Red locks the wheels, it's operated with your toes. Not difficult at all. IF stowed in the galley, there is simply a metal bar that swings on a pivot, you spinit up and out of the way to pull out the cart.

Those bev carts are pretty heavy, too...several hundred pounds (many cases of severe, unexpected clear air turbulence encounters are documented, with severe injuries inflicted by those carts).

The Flight Deck doors, in 2001 and prior, were very light weight, not sturdy at all. In fact, they were nearly identical to the doors you still see today on lavatories.

The major difficulty on the B-757, compared to the B-767, is that the 757 Flight Deck door opens aft, into the cabin, and it's a fairly narrow space, with the forward lavatory on ship left, and a galley bulkhead on the right.

(Here's something I've wondered, though --- don't know the United Airlines policy, but my airline had at one time [late 80s] a cockpit door key location, mounted in the cabin, and known to all F/As. Later, [starting in early 90s] policy changed, that was removed, and all F/As were required to carry a key on their person --- considered mandatory part of the "uniform" --- just as we were. Of course now, no keys at all, and much more sturdy and secure door design, and I won't describe that...)


BTW, funny term she used --- "locked berth". But, different airline, different terms sometimes...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

here's a photo showing the carts, this is in the AFT galley of a typical B-757 (this case, a Delta airplane):



You can see (picture worth a thousand words) the metal levers that pivot down, on the top...(most show unlocked, if you'll notice).

That pic didn't have the pedals at the bottom, though.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Found one:



Also, in case memory is short from not having been on a flight recently, gives good sense of size scale.





[edit on 14 January 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


According to Mrs. Dahl what they heard on the recoding isn't what the OS states, so that pulls the transcripts into question. Without the recording the transcripts are just what the FBI / OS wants to be published. Whatever she heard on that recording apparently isn't the whole story.

As far as the bev cart goes perhaps whatever they heard on that recording proves that 4 hijackers were in the cockpit and once again, the transcript from the recording isn't complete.

Nonetheless, your thoughtful post with the fantastic photos are appreciated. And yes, I can see your point as well.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by mikelee
 


mike, looks like you may have been had


I say this, because your answer intrigued me, so I googled Mrs. Dahl

From "Infowars", but mostly verbatim from a Denver Post article (Infowars is not usually the place I would turn to, but oh well, since they repeated the Post article it gives a more thorough account, and doesn't spin it the way what you read did):



...Despite the detail of the voice recording and because the cockpit ceiling microphone can pick up sounds from the passenger cabin, particularly if the cockpit door is open, there are multiple interpretations of the final seconds of the flight.

But Sandy Dahl, who says her experience as an attendant has helped her understand a lot of the background sounds, is sure she heard her husband's moaning in the cockpit throughout much of the ordeal. She points to evidence that shows her husband's DNA and teeth were found in the area of the nose of the plane.

"It's been widely speculated that Jason died in the first-class cabin and so did (co-pilot) Leroy (Homer), and neither of them did," she said. "I listened to that tape from a flight attendant's perspective, and I was able to recognize the horns that go off in the cockpit, the alarms. I know what it sounds like to sit inside the cockpit and hear noises coming from other side of the cockpit door."

The first voice heard on the recording is a hijacker making an announcement, apparently believing he was speaking over the plane's public-address system, but instead it went out to tower operators in Cleveland.

"Ladies and gentlemen: Here the captain, please sit down, keep remaining seating. We have a bomb on board. So sit."

Moments later, a hijacker is heard saying in English: "Don't move. Shut up. ... Sit, sit, sit down."

It's at this moment that Sandy Dahl believes the hijackers are speaking to Jason Dahl...

www.infowars.com...

Please, I suggest you read that entire article.

You see, the source you used seemed to confuse the issue, and what Mrs. Dahl actually said (if I was reading it correctly).

It looks like she was talking about "passengers" lying dead on the floor in the forward galley, but she says what she was told by FBI was that the pilots (and here husband) were the ones lying dead, on the floor in the forward galley. I see that as either a miscommunication by someone in the FBI (because, unlike her, and me, they wouldn't be as tuned in to the sounds) or just a general misunderstanding under the stress of events.

Anyway, she reminds me of something else I was going to add, about the "sound of wind noise" that I think you've brought up before.

I was trying to find a .wav file, no luck yet...but as soon as the airplane exceeded a certain airspeed, known as "VMO", a very loud alarm goes off, sounds like a high/low electronic siren. I'll see if I can look some more for it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
cannot find the B-757/767 "Master Warning" sound (common for the overspeed, and fire warnings, among others) but found another noise that would have activated, it's the GPWS (Ground Proximity Warning System):

www.entertonement.com...

This may have gone on for a brief time, until impact, but only IF the Radar Altitude read the height above ground, with the gear and flaps up, which is what it's designed to do (among other things).

This is the "Master Caution" from the B-757/767 (amber lights):

www.entertonement.com...

This is from earlier Boeings, for overspeed:
(We call it the 'clacker':

www.entertonement.com...'-Random-





[edit on 14 January 2010 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Thats pretty funny - first you tell me that Above Top Secret cuts it off automatically then you ask if I want to see the full version I should go to - Above Top Secret!!!


You have been here that long and you do not know that you can host pictures on ATS that may be too large to display fully withing the threads? Are you trying to discuss the topic or attack other posters? You are doing poorly at either so please educate yourself about posting pics on ATS and stop mucking up the thread with this kind of ignorant nonsense. It just makes you look desperate and foolish.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale
Can you provide a list of names of the people that were there to witness flight 93 crash into the ground? Thanks.

Speaking of people that were there...what did the coroner say again? Can you remind me?


I just love it when people leave themselves wide open to having their own words bite them on the rear:

911review.org...



Hundreds of searchers who climbed the hemlocks and combed the woods for weeks
were able to find about 1,500 mostly scorched samples of human tissue totaling less than 600 pounds, or about 8 percent of the total.
-------------------------------------------
Miller was among the very first to arrive after 10:06 on the magnificently sunny morning of September 11.
He was stunned at how small the smoking crater looked, he says,
"like someone took a scrap truck, dug a 10-foot ditch and dumped all this trash into it." Once he was able to absorb the scene, Miller says,
"I stopped being coroner after about 20 minutes, because there were no bodies there
--------------------------------------------
Immediately after the crash, the seeming absence of human remains led the mind of coroner Wally Miller to a surreal fantasy:
that Flight 93 had somehow stopped in mid-flight and discharged all of its passengers before crashing.
"There was just nothing visible," he says. "It was the strangest feeling."It would be nearly an hour before Miller came upon his first trace of a body part.
(bold and italics by me)
---------------------------------------
Miller said the lab is continuing to test DNA material to verify the deaths of the last six crash victims.
He said DNA tests won't be able to identify the four hijackers on board.
"To make a DNA identification we need something from the victims or their family members
-- personal effects, or blood samples -- to match," Miller said. "We don't have that kind of information about the terrorists."
Identification of the victims through DNA testing allows the coroner to issue death certificates
and return the fragmented remains to the families.
Miller said he will identify as many of the remains as he can.
Remains that can't be identified will be interred at a grave in Somerset County.
"We already have issued presumptive death certificates so families could begin to take care
of the affairs of those persons we haven't identified," Miller said.
"Now we can say for sure on 34 of the victims
and that gives the families, some of whom have held memorial services, more of a sense of closure."
911research.wtc7.net/cache/planes/evidence/postgazette1027_flight93.html


Hmm.... No human bodies? Really? What did they find instead? Shredded remains. Shredded human remains in a violent crash site? NO!!! Couldnt happen!
But enough to ID at least 34 victims. And what else did they find? Aircraft debris. Shreds no bigger than a telephone book. Ah so shreds of aircraft and humans found! So, there really was a plane crash there! Well, glad that mystery is all cleared!

Oh would you also like some names and eyewitnesses to the crash?

Tom Fritz, Rick King, Knoll and Nevin Lambert, Karl Landis, Anna McBride, Eric Peterson, Lee Purbaugh, John Walsh.

And this was just typing in "flight 93 eyewitnesses". Not too hard.

[edit on 1/15/2010 by GenRadek]



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 07:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
Hmm.... No human bodies? Really? What did they find instead? Shredded remains. Shredded human remains in a violent crash site? NO!!! Couldnt happen!
But enough to ID at least 34 victims. And what else did they find? Aircraft debris. Shreds no bigger than a telephone book. Ah so shreds of aircraft and humans found! So, there really was a plane crash there! Well, glad that mystery is all cleared!


Good research! Star for your post.

We aren't used to seeing shredded human remains and aircraft at a crash site because often there is some semblance of control when a crash landing occurs, which is why sometimes there are even some survivors to the crash.

I probably would be more astonished by how completely shredded everything was in the flight 93 crash, except I got my wake-up call 7 years and 3 days earlier on Sept 8, 1994, also in a crash in PA, of US Air flight 427. There is some information about that crash at this link: killtown.911review.org... The plane dove almost straight into the ground from about 3600 feet due to a loss of rudder control. I remember seeing it on the news at the time it happened and it seems similar to the flight 93 wreckage in that the annihilation was so extensive. Completely destructive crashes like that fortunately are a rarity, but they have happened prior to flight 93 so it wasn't the first time.

Also just to throw a little science into the mix of high speed crashes, for some reason, the energy of a plane impacting at 500mph is not just twice as great as a plane impacting at 250 mph, it's 4 times as great (per the 1/2 mv^2 kinetic energy equation), but it's still shocking to see how fragile the planes and our bodies really are, or, how enormous the forces involved in such a high speed crash are. And whether the plane has a glancing blow with the ground while traveling essentially parallel to it versus diving nearly straight into the ground as flight 427 did (80 degree nose down impact at 261 knots) makes a big difference. I guess the angle of impact for flight 93 was somewhere between those 2 extremes, but the speed was much higher than the flight 427 speed. The hardness of the ground the plane impacts can make a difference in the way the plane breaks up too.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 07:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Amazing how these planes that disinegrate to SHREDS hitting the
ground.

Can do so MUCH damage to a Steel building , that it collapses.

Wonderful day 911

The day Science played Hookey.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lillydale

Originally posted by hooper
Thats pretty funny - first you tell me that Above Top Secret cuts it off automatically then you ask if I want to see the full version I should go to - Above Top Secret!!!


You have been here that long and you do not know that you can host pictures on ATS that may be too large to display fully withing the threads?


I starred your post, and actually wrote a thread about that here: www.abovetopsecret.com... but never got any official reply from anyone at ATS. It still seems odd to me that the atsimg tags don't work as well as the regular img tags, you'd think they would make them work at least as well if not better. But you're right, the atsimg tags cut off the image at 600 pixels, and the regular img tags don't but give you a scroll bar instead so you can see the entire image using the scroll bar.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Amazing how these planes that disinegrate to SHREDS hitting the
ground.

Can do so MUCH damage to a Steel building , that it collapses.

Wonderful day 911

The day Science played Hookey.


Actually science didn't play hookey on the steel building collapse. If the impacts had occurred with nearly empty fuel tanks, I suspect the buildings would still be standing. It was actually the fire fueled by the nearly full fuel tanks that caused the collapse of the buildings, more than the impact of the planes themselves. I believe I read the WTC was designed to withstand the impact from a large aircraft and as we all saw on TV, they both did withstand the initial impact.

Or to put it another way, if it were the impact that brought down the buildings as you suggest, they would have come down right away, and that didn't happen. So it wasn't the impact that did the biggest damage to the structure, it was the fire. I have an interesting side story to that, a friend of mine was in an architect's office when they saw 911 on TV, and the architect told my friend he estimated those buildings would come down after about 30 minutes due to the fire. So knowledgeable people like that architect were not surprised.



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 08:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arbitrageur. So it wasn't the impact that did the biggest damage to the structure, it was the fire. I have an interesting side story to that, a friend of mine was in an architect's office when they saw 911 on TV, and the architect told my friend he estimated those buildings would come down after about 30 minutes due to the fire. So knowledgeable people like that architect were not surprised.


Actually they were designed to take Multiple plane hits.

Jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to weaken steel either.

Your friend was basing this collapse on...what precedent ?



posted on Jan, 15 2010 @ 08:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Sean48
 


Well I guess the weakness of planes and their ability to disintegrate is very much on topic in talking about the flight 93 crash, so it's not too far off topic to say the planes disintegrated when they hit the WTC towers too. But since the thread is about the flight 93 crash I don't want to get too far off topic on the WTC. I suggest you reread my post, my friend is not an architect and has no prior experience. It was the architect he was visiting who has some knowledge of how fires can damage and weaken steel structures. But I don't know the architect myself or any other details of the story like precedents if any. I pretty much told you the whole story of my friend's visit with the architect as he related it to me.

What I've often wondered was, why didn't the fire department know what that architect knew, that the buildings' collapse was imminent, they could have saved some lives with that knowledge.

Anyway, back to the flight 93 crash, yes, the planes can disintegrate on impact, as all four of them did that day.



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 02:32 AM
link   
So funy how Payne Stewarts small Learjet crashed into the ground at high speed and left recognizable parts and debris.

Yet the much larger 757 left almost nothing.



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 


No not really. First, you base your comparative premise on the incorrect assumption that there were no recognizable parts in Shanksville - there were. They are mentioned in interviews with numerous first responders and are included in the photographic evidence presented in the Mossaui trial. Second, there was no explosion of the Stewart craft. It ultimately crashed because it ran out of fuel.

Comparing apples and monkey wrenches and not even doing a good job at that.



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 07:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
They are mentioned in interviews with numerous first responders and are included in the photographic evidence presented in the Mossaui trial.


Sorry no proper source for the photos, thats why the evidence was not good enough to charge OBL. That evidnece would not hold up in another REAL trial.


Second, there was no explosion of the Stewart craft. It ultimately crashed because it ran out of fuel.


So tell your expertise and proof of type and size of explosion at Shankesville.

Still waiting for the proper proof of parts and debris at Shankesville.

[edit on 16-1-2010 by REMISNE]



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sean48
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Amazing how these planes that disinegrate to SHREDS hitting the
ground.

Can do so MUCH damage to a Steel building , that it collapses.

Wonderful day 911

The day Science played Hookey.


:headslap:

You are comparing a crash of an aircraft that hit the SOLID ground to a plane that slammed into a 100+ story building which only had to slam through a web of exterior columns that were bolted together and had virtully nothing behind the exterior columns until the core. Boy oh boy, just how many times have we been over the WTC designs? Also, the ground at Shanksville acted like a giant sandtrap. It almost fully absorbed the impact and blast into the ground, which also helped bury the parts and debris as well. At the WTC, there was nothing to fully absorb the impact or blast or impact. The plane just entered the building and blew up inside, with the force at impact carrying it through the building. It acted like a "hollow point" bullet.


Actually they were designed to take Multiple plane hits.

Jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to weaken steel either.

Your friend was basing this collapse on...what precedent ?


Jet fuel may not be hot hot enough for long to soften up the steel, but it sure does make for a nice starter fluid for everything else inside the WTC to catch fire and burn. And in a regular office fire the temps do get hot enough to weaken and soften steel to the point of failure. Are you having selective amnesia? Or selectively ignoring facts?

[edit on 1/16/2010 by GenRadek]



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 09:40 AM
link   
reply to post by Arbitrageur
 


Thanks for the reply.


Thankfully I have never been or seen a plane crash in person. But I do know enough to understand that when a plane impacts the ground at a very high speed, the plane and nearly all of its contents are turned into confetti. I see it as a lack of critical thinking when some people are expecting to see large recognizable pieces of the airplane in a crash as violent as this. Had eyewitnesses claimed instead the plane coming in straight and level as for a landing and then crashing, at a slower speed, then I believe we would have the more "familiar" crash site with recognizable pieces intact like the cabin, wings, tail, etc. But a nosedive over 450+mph? I'm not expecting any survivors or anything familiar.

The ground practically acted like a sandtrap on impact absorbing much of the impact and smashing to bits the aircraft. I dont feel like re-posting that famous video of the F-4 Phantom into the special wall, but pretty much we see the plane getting shredded much the same way.



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 



Sorry no proper source for the photos, thats why the evidence was not good enough to charge OBL. That evidnece would not hold up in another REAL trial.


Sorry, it already did stand up in a real trial. Its done. The photos were submitted as evidence in a court of law and accepted.

Ah, I am not aware of any arraignment procedures involving OBL wherein no charges were founded. When did that happen?



posted on Jan, 16 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by REMISNE
 





So funy how Payne Stewarts small Learjet crashed into the ground at high speed and left recognizable parts and debris.

Yet the much larger 757 left almost nothing.


Had a Lear 35A crash in my neighborhood number years back - only recognizable parts left was 2 x 3 ft section of tail fin and landing gear light

Report from NY Times



''We're dealing with body parts, not bodies,'' Chief Joseph Ranney said. ''Identification will be very difficult.'' Airplane parts were scattered in small pieces throughout the site on Garrett Mountain. Flames Higher Than Treetops




The parts of the plane were scattered beneath trees, shrubs and rocks, and the smell of jet fuel permeated the air.


Sound familiar ?

So plane crash will yield recognizable debris, even if most of aircraft
reduced to small fragments

WTC - aircraft parts

Jet Engine



Aircraft wheel



Aircraft part in car



Bin to collect aircraft parts



Recovered aircraft parts






Your claim that there were no recognizable parts from the 767 is false...



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join