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.
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
What experience does Dwain Deets have of flying aircraft over your "red line"?
None, obviously, because according to you he would immediately die as soon as he hit 420 knots. But the question stands.
Originally posted by Kaynos
If i was to hijack a plane to ran it into these towers it would probably be easy and yes it doesnt matter wether or not my ground speed exceed the limit of the aircraft, it's not like the wings are gonna rip apart from the plane because i exceed the speed limit.
Originally posted by hooper
Wow, all these technical experts at your disposal and still not an iota of proof that anything you are saying is true. Again, please post the failure analysis calculations that show the Boeing 767-222 immeadiatley breaking into pieces when it travels into your alleged red zone.
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Hooper, no one claimed it "immediately" breaks apart once entering the "Red Zone".
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by ipsedixit
It took a lot longer to happen to EA990 than "Tiffany" would have you believe though. Have a look at the wikipedia page - particularly the graph showing the descent - and ask yourself if, using the OP's criteria, it shouldn't have failed earlier.
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
I also wanted to highlight the fact that "Tiffany" continually avoids answering my question about the point at which a plane actually fails.
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Hooper, no one claimed it "immediately" breaks apart once entering the "Red Zone".
Oh okay. So when do they break apart?
Originally posted by __rich__
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
I also wanted to highlight the fact that "Tiffany" continually avoids answering my question about the point at which a plane actually fails.
Wouldn't that be entirely dependent on the individual plane, itself?
Structural stress due to hours of wear and tear, last maintenance performed, etc?
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
reply to post by ipsedixit
It took a lot longer to happen to EA990 than "Tiffany" would have you believe though. Have a look at the wikipedia page - particularly the graph showing the descent - and ask yourself if, using the OP's criteria, it shouldn't have failed earlier.
According to radar data, UA175 was traveling more than 90 over the speed which failed EA990, for more than 2 mins that of EA990.
This was all covered on past pages.
[edit on 13-7-2010 by TiffanyInLA]
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Hooper, no one claimed it "immediately" breaks apart once entering the "Red Zone".
Oh okay. So when do they break apart?
According to EA990, at 425 KEAS.
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
You know - earlier. When you were pretending that planes automatically break up as soon as they hit 420 knots. It's only recently that you've quietly climbed down from this absurd position.
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Originally posted by __rich__
Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
I also wanted to highlight the fact that "Tiffany" continually avoids answering my question about the point at which a plane actually fails.
Wouldn't that be entirely dependent on the individual plane, itself?
Structural stress due to hours of wear and tear, last maintenance performed, etc?
Exactly, Capt Aimer goes over this in the presentation. He feels it should have broke up before EA990 as N612UA (UA175) was a much older airplane with many more cycles on it. He has flown that exact aircraft.
Originally posted by __rich__
I think maneuvers are more important than speed , it itself. Sure, the wings of a 757 going nose-down will eventually rip off at a certain speed, but they will definitely rip off at a much lower speed with enough G forces from a crazy yaw, pitch, or roll.
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Originally posted by pteridine
Bottom line: Dwain is guessing and there is no real basis for his estimate. This means that 3% could just as easily be 83%. Dead elephant.
Opinions based on experience are used all the time in industry.
For example, who would know better about the skills of a flight student who was described as "trouble understanding what the instruments were there to do", and "had skills so bad she couldn't believe he had a commercial certificate of any kind" -
....You or multiple Flight Instructors who have taught enormous amounts of primary and advanced students?
Yes, "PFFT", know a lot more of what they are talking about than you.
That is why you see the lists grow with their peers and why you see Pilots chiming in here agreeing with the OP (Jetsream et al), who have no connection to P4T whatsoever, and while you remain.. .well... in denial.