9/11 even real pilots couldn't do it

page: 110
141
<< 107  108  109    111  112  113 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



However, before getting too detailed, consider this: A VERY EASY rate of descent, in that airplane (or, any big jet) of 2,500 feet per minute can be achieved, with no outrageous "aerobatics" required. When you fly, and on the descent for landing, it is quite typical. SO...2,500 fpm is equal to ~42 feet lost, every second. At my (roughly) seven seconds, that's around 300 feet, easily. Let's say he was descending at an even faster rate...3,500 is ALSO very easy to accomplish. That gives just over 400 feet lost, in the seven seconds.


All too much guessing I think..
I can't tell by that vid how far the plane decended at all...Nothing to really mark it by...




posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by weedwhacker
 



However, before getting too detailed, consider this: A VERY EASY rate of descent, in that airplane (or, any big jet) of 2,500 feet per minute can be achieved, with no outrageous "aerobatics" required. When you fly, and on the descent for landing, it is quite typical. SO...2,500 fpm is equal to ~42 feet lost, every second. At my (roughly) seven seconds, that's around 300 feet, easily. Let's say he was descending at an even faster rate...3,500 is ALSO very easy to accomplish. That gives just over 400 feet lost, in the seven seconds.


All too much guessing I think..
I can't tell by that vid how far the plane decended at all...Nothing to really mark it by...



you are not going to get a definite answer, you wanted your question answered weed has come back and given you a reasonable answer, i would say looking at the angle the jet has dropped between 250 and 300 feet, without having the exact position of the camera and angle you will not get a complete answer,

Wee Mad



posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by weemadmental
 



you are not going to get a definite answer, you wanted your question answered weed has come back and given you a reasonable answer, i would say looking at the angle the jet has dropped between 250 and 300 feet, without having the exact position of the camera and angle you will not get a complete answer,


True, though I'd say it was a lot more than 300' going by the vid.
I don't know where the film was taken from but it's probably safe to assume it was from a point lower than the towers..
Therefore to me the plane looks a long way above the tower at the start..
Add that to the 200' or so it needs to drop to hit where we know it did and that appears quite a lot more than your 300'..
But that's merely IMO...



posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by weemadmental
 



well its a powered decent, there is no "dive bombing" as you put it


I read that far and stopped..

I'm sick and tired of being told I said something I didn't say..
Try again....


The video you posted to prove your point to Weed - nose dive bombing - that's what i refereed to when i gave my response,

Wee Mad



posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Yes, if I recall correctly I did mention this:


I can't tell by that vid how far the plane decended at all...Nothing to really mark it by...


I do not have the video analyzing software and equipment to do a "proper, exact" study. Just estimates. YOU can estimate as well as any of us, too.

Further, if you scour the Webz, can find some clips showing a wide angled side view...the approximate horizontal distance shown, prior to impact (I called it "horizontal"...it shows a very, very slight descent, maybe 50-100 fpm, about. Again, better analyzing equipment and software.

Oh, and there's this:
www.gwu.edu...

Figure 2 is a graphical altitude/time plot. Keep in mind, the "Mode C" as it is transmitted to the ATC radar has a distinct lag time...depends on lot on your actual rate of climb/descent. Depends a lot on the radar "hits" each time. Maybe there are better descriptions somewhere....I can only tell you from experience, when ATC has queried us, due to some crossing restrictions he may be concerned with (usually, other traffic)....we can be descending, rapidly as possible, and he may ask our altitude, out of concern...as he's watching his 'scope....and we'll say, for example "Leaving 17 thousand." and, he might say, "OK, yeah it showed you still up at nineteen.", or something similar. This is also why they ask, very commonly, to "Report out of" an altitude....again, because of the Mode C lag time. ATC radar, as a rule, is not a precise thing, especially if it's the ARTCC system, as opposed to the TRACON....speed affects its accuracy, too.

But, even allowing for all of that, I look at the graph, and see UAL 175 at roughly 24,000 at time 08:58, and at 1,000 at impact, 09:03. That is just rounding to whole minutes...that works out to an average of 4,600 feet per minute. Again, the above video showed an easy +6,000 fpm in descent....there is also no way to determine at what point he added thrust (on UAL 175) to accelerate to the excess airspeed, so no way to know how long he was AT those speeds...but, going "downhill", it will accelerate very, very rapidly, with thrust applied.

edit on 23 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by weemadmental
 



The video you posted to prove your point to Weed - nose dive bombing - that's what i refereed to when i gave my response,


I wasn't the initial poster and I NEVER mentioned dive bombing..
I was merely talking about height and how far the plane came down...



posted on Jan, 23 2011 @ 11:52 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 24 2011 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Thanks, but yes it's hard to estimate the total descent but I don't think it was a huge pull up anyway...



posted on Apr, 1 2011 @ 09:54 PM
link   
I just watched a 45 minute video on why it was improbable to hit the twin towers with a 767 airliner at 510 kts.
First thought is, why is the author saying 510kts is equal to 1.19 mach? Isn't Mach 1 equal to 650 kts at sea level?
Second, I have been in a level d airline simulator at 500+ kts and actually flew over the numbers on a fly by. Sure the redline on a 767 is 360 or so. So what. In a dive pointed at target thrust up, done. It was wicked clear that day. (unfortunately) Practice MS FS 2000 20 times and some minor other PI work. No problem.



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by sennaha
 



....why is the author saying 510kts is equal to 1.19 mach?


If the video you refer to is the one I think it is.....welcome to the DELUSIONAL world of Rob Balsamo.....the one guy behind the so-called "pilots for truth" website and 'group'.

No.....you are absolutely correct.....Mach number is completely dependent on temperature. (in AIR, and hypothetically in perfectly DRY air, just as a base of standards. Minor density variations, in air, due to moisture content are minimal. Of course, in OTHER media, speed of sound is much different, based on THAT media density and properties...).

AND, that claim is just one of many, many FALSE claims, and outright lies, perpetuated by those so-called "pilots".....a blemish on logic and facts, and an irritant and disgrace to REAL pilots, worldwide.


SO....AT sea level (~700 feet MSL is close enough) and a "Standard Day" (for the temperature....also pretty close, that morning) 510 knots CAS, or IAS (we will presume calibrated and indicated are identical, since the difference of one or two knots won't matter) is a Mach number of only 0.78 NOT beyond the ability of the airplane to handle. M0.78 is a very normal speed. Sure, not done at low altitudes....since it is only achievable in a descent, can't be sustained in level flight at that altitude. AND, is not very efficient, in terms of fuel economy, anyway.....


CAS/Mach/TAS calculator.



edit on 2 April 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Hi Weedy, been gone for a while..
correct you are as usual..

here is another good site for converting air speeds..
pretty easy to read and might come in handy..


www.globalaircraft.org...



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


Wow! 78% of the speed of sound, and there are those few folks out there who still question why the buildings collapsed. Can you imagine? I think a .22 caliber round has a muzzle velocity of about 1200 fps, that plane was going about 700 fps.



posted on Apr, 2 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by weedwhacker
 


No.....you are absolutely correct.....Mach number is completely dependent on temperature. (in AIR, and hypothetically in perfectly DRY air, just as a base of standards. Minor density variations, in air, due to moisture content are minimal. Of course, in OTHER media, speed of sound is much different, based on THAT media density and properties...).

AND, that claim is just one of many, many FALSE claims, and outright lies, perpetuated by those so-called "pilots".....a blemish on logic and facts, and an irritant and disgrace to REAL pilots, worldwide.


Using the calculator you linked it shows 510knts at 1000' =mach 0.78
The same calculator shows the same 510knts at 30,000' =mach 1.26

Seems like quite a difference..
Is that not what P4T were discussing?
Were they really wrong weed?



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
If the video you refer to is the one I think it is.....welcome to the DELUSIONAL world of Rob Balsamo.....the one guy behind the so-called "pilots for truth" website and 'group'.


yeah, we remember... he's the one who schooled you and everyone else in this thread for over 100 pages... I think thats a new record; call Ripley's.

It wasn't until the mods had to bail you out by not only unjustifiable censoring and banning people, but actually erasing messages because the evidence against you became too overwhelming and irrefutable.

Its an even larger travesty upon TRUTH and sad day for those seeking truth by SkepticOverlords decision to actually censor and ban even the mere discussion of no planes and fakery… even worse than that, it was moved to the hoax forum and he closed the thread so no further evidence and discussion could continue… If that isn't PROOF of trying to hide and suppress truth and simple intelligent discourse, i don't know what is. The implications of that action speaks for itself and only scratches the surface as a commentary here and proof how dangerous the evidence is becoming to the government and media.
No other subject on 9/11 has been so viciously attacked and covered up as NRPT and TV FAKERY… the PTB is so scared of the NRPT, that even when it was moved to the HOAX forum, it ended up being
banned there too! LOL. the question is WHY? the most insane and ridiculous theories that don't even have 1% of the evidence of NRPT/tv fakery, are allowed, yet supposedly there's no evidence to support Nrpt etc but any discussion of it is banned for some reason… if there's NO EVIDENCE, there's nothing to FEAR right?? HA HA

Real Truthseekers KNOW that the evidence for no planes and tv fakery are reaching unacceptable levels of exposure and credibility in the eyes of the gatekeepers with the new wave of no planers growing exponentially and the many real pilots coming forth to support it, so of course these outrageous and nonsensical unjustifiable attempts and measures to hide the truth and maintain ignorance, are being taken. In fact, you know if a thread goes so far as being closed and blocked in the Hoax forum, that there's a valid reason and something they' feel a need to hide under the guise of …well, Umm in fact actually, there was no reason making any sense. Its one thing to ban and close discussion in normal forums (which still makes no sense), but quite another to ban it in even an hoax forum. What is S.O. so afraid of? I've seen not one shred of evidence or an argument from him whatsoever to back up and justify the action being taken. Of everyone, you'd think he'd be able to present some
type of intelligent argument to support the position or disprove a position.


Originally posted by weedwhacker
No.....you are absolutely correct.....Mach number is completely dependent on temperature. (in AIR, and hypothetically in perfectly DRY air, just as a base of standards. Minor density variations, in air, due to moisture content are minimal. Of course, in OTHER media, speed of sound is much different, based on THAT media density and properties...)
AND, that claim is just one of many, many FALSE claims, and outright lies, perpetuated by those so-called "pilots".....a blemish on logic and facts, and an irritant and disgrace to REAL pilots, worldwide.


yes, you keep CLAIMING that but can't seem to offer any evidence to support it.
edit on 12-4-2011 by truthseekr1111 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by truthseekr1111
 



yeah, we remember... he's the one who schooled you and everyone else in this thread for over 100 pages... I think thats a new record; call Ripley's.

If by "schooled" you mean repeated the same thing over and over and over again and ignoring all comments and questions - then yeah it was a lot like school - sometimes mundane and non-productive.

It wasn't until the mods had to bail you out by not only unjustifiable censoring and banning people, but actually erasing messages because the evidence against you became too overwhelming and irrefutable.

Yes, it was a bit overwhelming. Sometime repitition and spamming can be like that.

Its an even larger travesty upon TRUTH and sad day for those seeking truth by SkepticOverlords decision to actually censor and ban even the mere discussion of no planes and fakery… even worse than that, it was moved to the hoax forum and he closed the thread so no further evidence and discussion could continue…

Actually, you know its funny - even the former poster never said "no planes". Of course, the poster only said the same thing to every response so I am not suprised, maybe you should take your argument up with him/her.

If that isn't PROOF of trying to hide and suppress truth and simple intelligent discourse, i don't know what is. The implications of that action speaks for itself and only scratches the surface as a commentary here and proof how dangerous the evidence is becoming to the government and media.

There is still almost a hundred pages of the same argument and spam on the site, nothing is hidden, its just seem to be a waste of bandwidth after a while. I, however, do not speak for the moderator/administrator(s), just my opinion.

No other subject on 9/11 has been so viciously attacked and covered up as NRPT and TV FAKERY… the PTB is so scared of the NRPT, that even when it was moved to the HOAX forum, it ended up being
banned there too! LOL.

Actually, I think the garbage about there having been no real victims gets equal bile, at least as far as I'm concerned.

the question is WHY? the most insane and ridiculous theories that don't even have 1% of the evidence of NRPT/tv fakery, are allowed, yet supposedly there's no evidence to support Nrpt etc but any discussion of it is banned for some reason… if there's NO EVIDENCE, there's nothing to FEAR right?? HA HA

I don't change the channel when a stupid commercial comes on because I'm afraid of the product.

Real Truthseekers KNOW that the evidence for no planes and tv fakery are reaching unacceptable levels of exposure and credibility in the eyes of the gatekeepers

I don't think zero is an unacceptable level.

with the new wave of no planers growing exponentially and the many real pilots coming forth to support it, so of course these outrageous and nonsensical unjustifiable attempts and measures to hide the truth and maintain ignorance, are being taken.

What is the expotential product of zero?

In fact, you know if a thread goes so far as being closed and blocked in the Hoax forum, that there's a valid reason and something they' feel a need to hide under the guise of …well, Umm in fact actually, there was no reason making any sense.

Listen if your "theory" gets called a hoax in a conspiracy forum I think you may need to go back to the drawing board.

Its one thing to ban and close discussion in normal forums (which still makes no sense), but quite another to ban it in even an hoax forum.

So your "theory" doesn't even hold enough weight to be considered a good hoax in a forum dedicated to the discussion of conspiracies and you think the problem is with the forum?

What is S.O. so afraid of?

I don't think you touched on the correct emotion there.

I've seen not one shred of evidence or an argument from him whatsoever to back up and justify the action being taken. Of everyone, you'd think he'd be able to present some type of intelligent argument to support the position or disprove a position.

That your "theory" isn't even a good hoax?



posted on Apr, 12 2011 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Darn it! Wish I'd seen this back when you wrote it, it is so easy to explain. YOU, as a pilot, should have had your own answer by now? I mean, you have more knowledge than a non-pilot....even if you have no jet or high-altitude experience.



The same calculator shows the same 510knts at 30,000' =mach 1.26

Seems like quite a difference..



The units used, in this case "knots", would be what is INDICATED airspeed (or, CALIBRATED....YOU know the difference, and it isn't much of a difference, in practical use). You also, I presume, understand what "TRUE airspeed is.

That is your clue to solving this. Simply put, at 30,000 feet, IF you accelerated to an indicated speed of 510Kt...then, yes the mach number would be as calculated. BUT, your TRUE airspeed would also be much MORE than 510Kt. Compared to Sea Level where the Indicated/True are virtually the same.....

Get it?



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by truthseekr1111
 



yeah, we remember... he's the one who schooled you and everyone else in this thread for over 100 pages... I think thats a new record; call Ripley's.

If by "schooled" you mean repeated the same thing over and over and over again and ignoring all comments and questions - then yeah it was a lot like school - sometimes mundane and non-productive.


No, actually thats what you and your pals have been doing in that and this thread; an epic fail for 110 pages. 2 funny


Originally posted by hooper

It wasn't until the mods had to bail you out by not only unjustifiable censoring and banning people, but actually erasing messages because the evidence against you became too overwhelming and irrefutable.

Yes, it was a bit overwhelming. Sometime repitition and spamming can be like that.


If you want to call repeating facts and evidence over and over that answered your repetition of rhetoric and inability to disprove arguments, spamming, okay then.


Originally posted by hooper

Its an even larger travesty upon TRUTH and sad day for those seeking truth by SkepticOverlords decision to actually censor and ban even the mere discussion of no planes and fakery… even worse than that, it was moved to the hoax forum and he closed the thread so no further evidence and discussion could continue…


Actually, you know its funny - even the former poster never said "no planes". Of course, the poster only said the same thing to every response so I am not suprised, maybe you should take your argument up with him/her.


whats funny is your inability to once again disprove what I just explained or even address it. its just more of the same ol rhetoric and dodging from you isn't it.
and I'm talking about 2 threads, not one.


Originally posted by hooper

If that isn't PROOF of trying to hide and suppress truth and simple intelligent discourse, i don't know what is. The implications of that action speaks for itself and only scratches the surface as a commentary here and proof how dangerous the evidence is becoming to the government and media.


There is still almost a hundred pages of the same argument and spam on the site, nothing is hidden, its just seem to be a waste of bandwidth after a while. I, however, do not speak for the moderator/administrator(s), just my opinion.


So If you want to call schooling, facts and evidence the same arguments and spam or waste of bandwidth, okay then... the thread and arguments speak for themselves and anyone with a brain reviewing the threads can see you and the usual suspect detractors got spanked.


Originally posted by hooper

No other subject on 9/11 has been so viciously attacked and covered up as NRPT and TV FAKERY… the PTB is so scared of the NRPT, that even when it was moved to the HOAX forum, it ended up being
banned there too! LOL.

Actually, I think the garbage about there having been no real victims gets equal bile, at least as far as I'm concerned.


no victims wasn't the focus of the thread and the fact you're singling that irrelevant portion out amidst all the other evidence, once again proves my point about how clueless you are and why you and your buddies were spanked so badly.


Originally posted by hooper

the question is WHY? the most insane and ridiculous theories that don't even have 1% of the evidence of NRPT/tv fakery, are allowed, yet supposedly there's no evidence to support Nrpt etc but any discussion of it is banned for some reason… if there's NO EVIDENCE, there's nothing to FEAR right?? HA HA


I don't change the channel when a stupid commercial comes on because I'm afraid of the product.


but the head honcho apparently did... which alone speaks volumes and was my point. The only reason for bannings, moving CONSPIRACY THREADS to a "hoax" forum, and posts are erased on one side only which were responses and contained evidence supporting arguments and answering questions, is when theres something to hide and an agenda. There is no other logical reasoning unless its to cover up and preserve or perpetuate ignorance. deleting multiple posts claiming using the excuse it was spam to do so, is nothing more than a classic disinfo tactic to hide the truth.


Originally posted by hooper

Real Truthseekers KNOW that the evidence for no planes and tv fakery are reaching unacceptable levels of exposure and credibility in the eyes of the gatekeepers

I don't think zero is an unacceptable level.


except the facts and evidence prove otherwise.


Originally posted by hooper

with the new wave of no planers growing exponentially and the many real pilots coming forth to support it, so of course these outrageous and nonsensical unjustifiable attempts and measures to hide the truth and maintain ignorance, are being taken.

What is the expotential product of zero?


right, your side had and has zero product and evidence to support your claims... that was beyond obvious.


Originally posted by hooper

In fact, you know if a thread goes so far as being closed and blocked in the Hoax forum, that there's a valid reason and something they' feel a need to hide under the guise of …well, Umm in fact actually, there was no reason making any sense.

Listen if your "theory" gets called a hoax in a conspiracy forum I think you may need to go back to the drawing board.


If a conspiracy THEORY forum calls a conspiracy THEORY a hoax and there's evidence which proves the THEORY is FACT, then its the conspiracy theory forum that needs to go back to the drawing board. Its akin to the 9/11 perps assigning their own paid off judge to oversee a trial/suit against them. LOL


Originally posted by hooper

Its one thing to ban and close discussion in normal forums (which still makes no sense), but quite another to ban it in even an hoax forum.

So your "theory" doesn't even hold enough weight to be considered a good hoax in a forum dedicated to the discussion of conspiracies and you think the problem is with the forum?


You still don't seem to get the point about why a conspiracy THEORY forum would have to move a conspiracy THEORY into a hoax forum to begin with and then also shutting down discussion of that THEORY in even a HOAX forum.. its a contradiction in terms to shut discussion down in one forum let alone both when one alone is DESIGNED TO DISCUSS A CONSPIRACY THEORY!!! what don't you get? oh thats right, you and those banning the discussion couldn't disprove the evidence and had to take other action to cover up that fact. Its truly comical. Even more hilarious is your circular logic about how a conspiracy THEORY that has more evidence to support it than other even more bizarre conspiracy THEORIES, yet it is moved to a hoax forum and then was closed for NO justifiable reasoning other than a CLAIM there's no evidence to support it even when the evidence presented has never been disproven! ROFL It the action itself is contradictory and only proves my whole point which you couldn't answer. gee what a surprise.


Originally posted by hooper

What is S.O. so afraid of?

I don't think you touched on the correct emotion there.


More incoherent logic as usual... you make no sense whatsoever... the typical commentary on planers... which is another reason why Nrpt/tv fakery continues to grow... those who claim its nonsense, are using nonsense as evidence against it! lol


Originally posted by hooper

I've seen not one shred of evidence or an argument from him whatsoever to back up and justify the action being taken. Of everyone, you'd think he'd be able to present some type of intelligent argument to support the position or disprove a position.

That your "theory" isn't even a good hoax?


No, that you and your pals think it can be debunked by putting in a hoax forum!!
oh the irony of it all! lol sad



posted on Apr, 14 2011 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by backinblack
 

Darn it! Wish I'd seen this back when you wrote it, it is so easy to explain. YOU, as a pilot, should have had your own answer by now? I mean, you have more knowledge than a non-pilot....even if you have no jet or high-altitude experience.

The same calculator shows the same 510knts at 30,000' =mach 1.26
Seems like quite a difference..

The units used, in this case "knots", would be what is INDICATED airspeed (or, CALIBRATED....YOU know the difference, and it isn't much of a difference, in practical use). You also, I presume, understand what "TRUE airspeed is.
That is your clue to solving this. Simply put, at 30,000 feet, IF you accelerated to an indicated speed of 510Kt...then, yes the mach number would be as calculated. BUT, your TRUE airspeed would also be much MORE than 510Kt. Compared to Sea Level where the Indicated/True are virtually the same.....
Get it?


Hey I'm learning all the time..


True or false Weed...
510 knots at sea level produces the same dynamic pressure effects as 1.42 Mach at 30,000 feet.



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 01:09 AM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Apr, 27 2011 @ 03:45 AM
link   
Glad to see your back. We missed you. Only one person comes here posting links to Pilots for 911 Truth.


Altitude above you.

Runway behind you

Doctor in a V tail.

Pilots for 911 Truth.





new topics
top topics
 
141
<< 107  108  109    111  112  113 >>

log in

join