NASA Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The "Elephant In The Room"

page: 2
127
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:31 AM
link   
Very true but i think this is a miss interpretation as usual people will only hear what they want to.

A plane like the one in question would not achieve these speeds flying in a straight line at around sea level BUT the plane was in a dive and throttle obviously at max so its definitely feasible .




posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by tommyb0y
Very true but i think this is a miss interpretation as usual people will only hear what they want to.

A plane like the one in question would not achieve these speeds flying in a straight line at around sea level BUT the plane was in a dive and throttle obviously at max so its definitely feasible .



Being in a dive at such excessive speeds makes it worse as the aircraft will have to pull G's to pull out of the dive. Read this post again and learn the fundamentals of a V-G diagram. Hooper and his Tricky friend seem to think the red shaded areas in the below diagrams are "safe" and "not excessive".


Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Check this out here.


Those who make excuse for the govt story love to claim, "The aircraft was only at this speed for a few seconds and then crashed. It can sustain this speed for a few seconds you idiot!"

Of course they offer zero proof for their claim. Not to mention the fact they are wrong.

I cut some scenes from "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" due to the fact it was technical enough. I have calculated the speeds based on radar data for the last minute, a full 60 seconds.

The average speed over this straight line path is 501 knots. The average speed over the last 2 radar sweeps (24 seconds) is 509 knots. Remember, this is groundspeed. True airspeed will be a few knots higher due to a turn into a headwind. This is also straight line distance measurement over time. Actual speed will also be a few knots higher as the path is curved (the aircraft was changing direction), covering more distance (again, I don't want to get too technical when the simple measurements will serve its purpose. K.I.S.S.)

During this time, the aircraft is changing direction and pulling out of a dive, ie. Pulling G loads.

As pointed out in the presentation, please familiarize yourself with a Vg diagram.

Here is a basic Vg diagram.



Now, the above diagram is for a primary aircraft used to instruct student pilots. But it gives you a good idea of what to think about when an aircraft exceeds its design limits.

It is not so much "duration" as it is a hard limit of combined stress on the airframe, speed and maneuvering.

As stated many times, we have been pressuring Boeing to release Wind Tunnel data (which would include the above Vg diagram for a specific aircraft). We hit brick walls.

Now, I just noticed this diagram pop up on the web the other day when I did a search (it wasn't available when I made the film). It is a Vg diagram for the P-51 Mustang.



Notice the structural failure shaded area occurs in the P-51 at roughly 505 mph/438 knots.

Notice the "Limit Dive Speed" in the above diagram. The "Limit Dive Speed" (Vd) for the 767 is 420 knots. 425 KEAS is when Egypt Air 990 broke apart in flight.

The govt expects us to believe a 767 with its bulky airframe can pull G loads and maneuver to stike a target with a 25 foot margin for error each side of wing tip -- almost 80 knots faster than the structural failure limit of a slick P-51 airframe?

I dont think so.

That is why you see so many experts speaking out.

pilotsfgor911truth.org...

The list grows.


Source
pilotsfor911truth.org...



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:37 AM
link   
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 



Pilots For 9/11 Truth have calculated....


Sorry, without numbers that's just another way of saying "my opinion is".


It is impossible for the alleged United 175 to achieve the speeds reported by the NTSB using EA990 as a benchmark.


Again, opinion based on opnion.


Pilots For 9/11 Truth have further studied.....


So?


Math doesn't lie.


Figures don't lie but.....



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
It's interesting how pliable the speeds of these planes are. When Truthers need them not to have damaged the buildings unduly then they're floating in at 300mph. But somehow they can also move suspiciously fast as well.


i don't think many say the planes hit the towers at a mere 300 mph but you know how dis information works on the internet.

Would you help us out and point us towards any main stream 9/11 articles that quote 300mph or are they only on the non planner sites, please.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:40 AM
link   
Safe? Can you actually pick up irony?

Just to spell it out to you, I think the speeds these aircraft were traveling were probably unsafe. You have proved this. Well done.

I mean, it's almost as though they didn't care about hurting people!



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by TiffanyInLA


Being in a dive at such excessive speeds makes it worse as the aircraft will have to pull G's to pull out of the dive. Read this post again and learn the fundamentals of a V-G diagram.


Oh dear. Look at your own data again and you might see why this is wrong.

Next.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:44 AM
link   
reply to post by LieBuster
 


If you look through threads on this forum about structural damage, you'll notice a general tendency to minimise the speeds of the planes, for obvious reasons. Often this takes the form of disagreeing with the NTSB data that "Tiffany" uses as the basis for her contention.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:44 AM
link   
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 



The long awaited release from Pilots For 9/11 Truth analyzing the events which took place in New York City on the morning of the 11th of September 2001. Analysis includes Black Box Recovery, Radar and Speed data analysis, Aircraft Control, and "Hijacker" Pilot Skill. Interviews with 757/767 Captains from United and American Airlines. DIRECTOR'S CUT INCLUDES THE FULL INTERVIEWS WITH 757/767 CAPTAIN'S FROM AMERICAN AND UNITED AIRLINES. Was 19.95, now 15.95 Special! Includes free shipping to USA and Canada. All other International orders, please use button below.


So, the evidence that the United States government conspired to kill 3000 of its own citizens is now on sale! That's really precious. Thank you for your patriotism.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 06:50 AM
link   
It appears some need a picture drawn out for them.

I quickly put this together with the speeds as set by the Manufacturer, corresponding to a typical V-G diagram/definitions.



Hooper and his Tricky friend feel 510 knots as reported by the NTSB is not excessive. Hooper and Tricky need to inform Boeing to change their airpseed limitations and widen the V-G envelope of the 767-200.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 



The long awaited release from Pilots For 9/11 Truth analyzing the events which took place in New York City on the morning of the 11th of September 2001. Analysis includes Black Box Recovery, Radar and Speed data analysis, Aircraft Control, and "Hijacker" Pilot Skill. Interviews with 757/767 Captains from United and American Airlines. DIRECTOR'S CUT INCLUDES THE FULL INTERVIEWS WITH 757/767 CAPTAIN'S FROM AMERICAN AND UNITED AIRLINES. Was 19.95, now 15.95 Special! Includes free shipping to USA and Canada. All other International orders, please use button below.


So, the evidence that the United States government conspired to kill 3000 of its own citizens is now on sale! That's really precious. Thank you for your patriotism.


You forgot to post a source link.

Link Removed By Admin

But, if people wish to view the detailed analysis and math for free, they can click the full article. You should watch it. Many others are. As has been pointed out, I guess that is why this list grows?

pilotsfor911truth.org...

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Crakeur]



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:04 AM
link   
Good work Tiffany. S&F.

I would add that the Pentagon impact is even more ridiculous to comprehend, not only do we have speeds exceeding structural limitations but also the added dimension of ground effect which would make it absolutely impossible for a large aircraft to achieve 50ft altitude nevermind the 10ft or so the PTB would have us all believe.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:05 AM
link   
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 


Well, of course I can not speak for my "Tricky" friend but I can say, again, thanks for your opinion!

By the way, if I tell them I know you can I get a little discount on the evidence that the United States government conspired to commit 3000 acts of first degree murder of its own citizens? $15.95 is a little steep for a DVD!



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:07 AM
link   
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 


You're claiming that structural failure definitely occurs at 426 knots? Where are you getting your data from?



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint
I am a truther myself and don't believe the OS.
However, this report has a fundamental flaw.
That flaw being that it is assumed by the writer
that these aircraft cannot exceed certain limitations
in design when in actuality all kinds of vehicles
including submarines have safe operating limits.
But when under stress can exceed those numbers.
And if they can exceed those numbers then for proper
testing would require a test flight to fly said model
as fast as it could go until it actually broke up and
splintered in mid-air. To my knowledge, these tests
have never been done. So to prove this report to
have merit he would have to prove at what speed
these models actually broke apart.


An aircraft of the same type certificate, flying as Egypt Air Flight 990 did exceed its operating limits in flight, and guess what, it suffered an inflight breakup. Boeing has set the airspeed limits for the 757/767 at a MMo (maximum mach operating speed) of .86 Mach at mach levels and a Vne (never exceed) of 360 knots at lower altitudes. EA990 hit .99 mach at 22,000 feet. That is a dynamically equivelent airspeed of 425 knots at sea level where the air is much denser.
Look at [1] www.luizmonteiro.com..., www.csgnetwork.com... (Equivalent Airspeed and Mach One Calculator to convert Mach into True Airspeed based on altitude/temp and then into Equivalent Airspeed). EA990 broke up at a speed 85 knots LESS than United 175 and 5 knots LESS than Flight 11.
So the experiment was done in October 1990. The Boeing broke up, killing 217 people.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Cosmic4life
 


Large aircraft can't be 10ft off the ground? Are you sure?



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 


Precise rate of growth please. How often are the listees requalified? That is to say, how often are persons allowed to remove their name from the lists.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
You're claiming that structural failure definitely occurs at 426 knots? Where are you getting your data from?


"Definitely"?

No.

However, airspeed limitations are set by the manufacturer for a reason. See above V-G diagram.

EA990 broke apart in flight at just above its Vd limits which is 420 knots. The P-51 V-G diagram shows structural failure at 438 knots.

Dwain Deets considers the speeds "An Aeronautical Improbability".

Capt Rusty Aimer considers the speeds "Impossible".

Capt Ralph Kolstad considers the speeds "Impossible".

This is based on the limits set by the manufacturer, the actual definitions of those airspeed limitations (see V-G Diagram above), data provided by the NTSB and extensive knowledge and experience in aerospace, including actual flight time n the aircraft reportedly used on 9/11.

You feel the speeds are not excessive. You are wrong.

You should listen to the interviews and view the analysis as it's clear you haven't.

[edit on 12-7-2010 by TiffanyInLA]



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


Positive.

The lift/ground effect at high speed for a civilian airliner would make it impossible to get that low.

Only military aircraft with thin wings can fly that low that fast.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 



You should listen to the interviews and view the analysis as it's clear you haven't.


If you can afford it.



posted on Jul, 12 2010 @ 07:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
 


Precise rate of growth please. How often are the listees requalified? That is to say, how often are persons allowed to remove their name from the lists.


No idea, have you emailed Pilots For Truth to find out? What I do know is the growth rate is more than that of ALPA, the largest pilot union in the world.





 
127
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join