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 Orion7911
huh????
SPEED MEANS LITTLE?
let me get this straight,,, your argument hinges on dismissing the speed for 175 as irrelevant but could have hit the wtc, because 11 was slower and thus proves it did ? mmmmmmmmmkay
edit on 11-11-2010 by sanctum because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Unlike you, I can source my claims.
Originally posted by Xtrozero
....a condition known as “Mach Tuck”...... this condition is related to T tails only.
Let us know when you can source yours trebor, your credibility diminishes by the day, as if you had any left.
(Interviewer asks -) "So there's no way the aircraft could be going 500 mph at [700 ft] altitude then?"
Boeing Spokesperson Leslie Hazzard - (Laughs) "Not a chance..."
Now actually read the NTSB document.
Source - Click
Originally posted by Orion7911
Lol ... I love responses like that because it only validates the absurd lengths duhbunkers will go to deny a true story.
Originally posted by Xtrozero
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Unlike you, I can source my claims.
Originally posted by Xtrozero
....a condition known as “Mach Tuck”...... this condition is related to T tails only.
Let us know when you can source yours trebor, your credibility diminishes by the day, as if you had any left.
Well maybe,Tiff, you should quote all the posts on this if you are trying to make a point...oh and just what point is that?
In the end Boeing aircraft cruise extremely fast...
(Interviewer asks -) "So there's no way the aircraft could be going 500 mph at [700 ft] altitude then?"
Boeing Spokesperson Leslie Hazzard - (Laughs) "Not a chance..."
Very blindsided questioning...but once again you need to continue to build conspiracy on top of conspiracy on top of conspiracy, and so on...
Now actually read the NTSB document.
Source - Click
Actually a good descent would help them accelerate rather quickly to the end result of hitting the towers.
Tiff are you suggesting that they over stressed the airplane due to a descent into the towers?
Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
You haven't presented evidence that it was " impossible " for a standard 767 to behave as UA 175 did. Best you can claim is that it may have entailed risk..
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Some cruise faster than others. But none of them cruise at 1,000 feet above sea level. You know why that is Xtrozero? Clearly not.
(Interviewer asks -) "So there's no way the aircraft could be going 500 mph at [700 ft] altitude then?"
Boeing Spokesperson Leslie Hazzard - (Laughs) "Not a chance..."
It wasn't "blindsided", it was a straight forward question within a conversation while Leslie was looking up data in a manual. Really, go listen.
Originally posted by Xtrozero
Yes we all understand this but you fail to see the point that if you firewall the engines in a good descent with the purpose to hit an extremely large building then the norm doesn't play much into it either.
... maybe I am not being clear enough for some to understand.
An airplane-any airplane-is a balance of forces. Lift Drag thrust and gravity. The controlability of the airplane is designed within a certain speed range and weight range.
If you exceed airspeed-and at low altitude this is the major limitation on the airframe, you run out of pitch authority to keep the nose down.
The horizontal stabilizer of an airplane-the tail mounted wings- have up and down limits. these limits are mechanical stops.
As you increase speed beyond the design limits you need more nose down. At a certain speed you will run out of nose down authority.And the Aircraft will climb regardless of your nose down force on the yoke-simply because the aircraft is not built to exceed or fly... outside of its flight envelope.
Thats just a cost for no gain.
[snip]
An airplane is a beautifully balanced piece of equipment,within its design parameters. At the claimed speed what will the roll rate be?Don't know.I don't even know if the spoilers could stay attached at that speed.But a little if any deflection can have huge control issues.
[snip]
And again-I tried this in a 737-400 simulator. I ran out of nose down pitch authority and the airplane started to climb even with my full nose down command on the yoke.
Originally posted by sputniksteve
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
You want evidence that this is possible? Here you go Tiffany www.youtube.com...
Obviously that will not be good enough for you but you asked for evidence so I will supply it =)
Originally posted by sputniksteve
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
Well actually if you go back you will see I posted in this thread within the first few of its 83 pages Tiffany. If you go back and find that comment you will see what my point was, and see it is very relevant to your comments. You are ok with the theory that planes hit the building, ok good. We have that established, could you be so kind as to tell me then how those planes were flown into the buildings then?
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Originally posted by JetStream
And again-I tried this in a 737-400 simulator. I ran out of nose down pitch authority and the airplane started to climb even with my full nose down command on the yoke
Pilots can rent time in the simulators. If you’re pilot qualified to train in a large jet simulator, here’s the contact info:
Email: [email protected]
Originally posted by sputniksteve
reply to post by TiffanyInLA
Hmm, im sorry but again I don't have any theories to back up or to prove. I am sorry I made some edits to my post after you read it. I am just curious on how you think these planes were flown into the buildings if not done by the "hijackers"?
I am not making any arguments for or against the original story, I am just trying to clear something up for my own benefit. If you want I can restate my question in case you missed my edit.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Odd that you wish to hang your "confidence" on THAT particular anonymous ATS member....merely because he/she seems to agree with "P4T".
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
I am not here to offer theory, nor does my opinion mean much.
I prefer to follow the evidence.
There is a growing mountain of evidence which conflicts with the OS.
They are losing of course.