reply to post by FDNY343
I appreciate what you guys are trying to say. I try to write with the layman in mind, so let’s try to keep it simple so readers don’t get
confused and discouraged with the thread. In my short time here I’ve run into FDNY343 on other threads. On one he argued the viability of
Aluminum Bullets and Aluminum Sledge Hammers, exposing his ignorance about material densities but when confronted he just disappears and goes to
This is important information. Hundreds of thousands of people are dead now, and more are joining that grim roster by the hour. To defend the OS
means defending their wars. With that in mind, accurate information is essential, and you guys are being disingenuous to say the least.
You are saying that regardless of mass and density of material, if you apply enough Kinetic Energy (KE) to an object…IE, make it go fast enough, it
will cut through anything. In this example, you are arguing that a wingtip made of a lightweight and relatively soft metal like aluminum, when
traveling at a certain velocity, will slice through very dense and massive structural steel, causing the plane-like cutout hole as depicted on TV.
This is only possible in Hollywood, not in the real world.
Let’s use a real world example most of our readers would understand, then we can delve into your calculations comparing density of materials as well
the KE , M and V of horizontally-supported 14”structural steel columns, and lightweight aluminum wings.
For our example, how many of us as kids have ever hit a telephone pole with a baseball bat? Hit it hard enough and you will injure your wrists. The
velocity of the bat and the Kinetic Energy (KE) applied by your swinging motion, changes the INSTANT the bat comes in contact with the telephone pole.
At this point the KE is still there, but the velocity of the bat has been stopped by the pole, so the KE will travel down the path of the least
This is where the density of the materials and mass should be considered. The reason you hurt yourself when you hit the pole with the bat is because
even though the density of materials are comparable, the mass of the bat is FAR less than that of the telephone pole, making the BAT and eventually
your wrists the path of least resistance.
Increasing the velocity of the bat only ensures the bat and the pole will need to absorb more Kinetic Energy at the moment of impact.
Folks also like to talk about the straw and the oak tree myth, and it is just that. In high winds trees would blow partially over opening cracks in
their trunks, and flying straw would get caught in the cracks when the trees would straighten up, causing people to believe the wind had blown the
straw through the trunks. Mass and density of material rule this equation and even those frauds at the Discovery channel had to admit it, whatever
However in this case the straw is the wing and the tree is the tower but in your argument you're saying the straw hit the tree sideways with such
velocity that it severed the tree trunk.
For those who would like more detailed information, make sure you consider the Kinetic Energy, mass, velocity AND density of material when considering
this question. Here’s a link to Wikipedia which has a handy chart for comparing Ultimate tensile strength of materials. Note the densities listed.
Also keep in mind that a jet wing doesn’t contain the same amount of material as the steel column would, and we’re talking about many steel
columns supported by spandrel plates backed by the steel and concrete floors, in turn supported by central columns and more exterior columns, and only
The mass of a jet is not what we're talking about here...the jet's combined mass is only derived by the sum of it's individual parts. This means
the wing from the engine to the tip, is far less massive than other parts of the jet. Filling it with fuel does not increase the density of the
aluminum wing, it adds weight, and mass to the wing, but only as long as the wing can maintain it's integrity, so like a big water balloon, it would
burst on impact.
Here is the description of damage to a 767 wing caused by a single bird. You'd have to agree, a bird is a wee bit less massive than laterally
supported steel columns:
Posted Tue May 16 2006 20:03:44 your local time (4 years 9 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 12392 times: Quote: Hokkaido International
Airlines, the Sapporo-based carrier known as Air Do, said Tuesday that birds hit one of its Boeing 767 aircraft in midair Monday night, leaving a hole
in one of the plane's main wings. According to the airline, the two-engine jet, which had left Tokyo's Haneda airport, was about to land at
Sapporo's New Chitose Airport around 8:45 p.m. when birds collided with its right wing, creating a hole about 30 centimeters wide. No one was
injured in the incident, but it caused Air Do to cancel a total of 15 flights between the two cities, the carrier said.
Here is a video which shows what happens to a real wing when it bumps a telephone pole. Although the plane is going much slower than the TV cartoon
we were shown on 911, bear in mind that increasing velocity simply means more Kinetic Energy needs to be absorbed by both materials on impact.
Here is a link with several of the impossible scenarios.
The wings of a Boeing 767 are swept back approximately 35 degrees. This means wings do not strike the steel wall “flush” during the
milliseconds of the crash process. Engines and wing roots impact first, almost simultaneously, and the wing tips, which are 40 feet back, hit a
fraction of a second later. The official theory must be that wing roots and engines break through columns and spandrel plates following penetration of
the “powerful” nose and fuselage, while wings stay intact to burst subsequent columns, floors and spandrel plates further away from the fuselage.
The only way for tips to reach into the building and enter the “Hoffman shredding stage” is for the wings to remain intact and plow or “saw”
through the steel columns and floors like an angled carpenters cut in the progressive fragmentation process (thanks to Gerard Holmgren for this
The official story claims a wing sliced through steel creating the damage shown in the photo below.
However the Naudet video clearly shows the slice marks were not there after the jet allegedly entered the tower. Once again, I'll give the link
which shows still shots from the movie which show charges cutting the exterior columns AFTER the alleged impact.
The cartoon cutout of a plane is only possible with explosives.
Since this thread is all about what the Popular Mechanics hit piece missed, and to keep you guys busy, you can pick up where they left off by using
your calculations to show how aluminum can cut steel when applying the proper amount of KE. The government claims it is so. Ignoring the images of
the explosives cutting the plane outline of course, I'm looking for proof
Here is a link that describes the structure of a wing and even provides the fracture toughness of the alloy which can be used as a starting point in
I can see you already have all the NIST documentation, so you should be able to drum up the figures for the tower steel.
KDNY343 is looking for investors in a start up company which makes aluminum bullets and sledge hammers. You guys should pool your money.