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.

 

Reno Air Show Crash Proves Shanksville and Pentagon

page: 2
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:41 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


seriously..

what a lousy attempt at debunking


stereotyping every truther


but that seem the modus operandi nowadays anyway.




posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:44 AM
link   
reply to post by phishyblankwaters
 


and of course we still have this



but hey..

us truthers are bat[SNIP] crazy



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:45 AM
link   
Also the majority of plane crashes happen on take off and landing at lower speeds than what happened in PA.......so less speed, bigger chunks of debris, more speed, smaller chunks of debris.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by tpg65
I pray for the souls of you misguided , flag waving morons .


You should pray for all of the "OSer's," too.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:50 AM
link   
If you were going to do a scaled down simulation of either of these crashes a P-51 would be a good choice. I wouldn't use it, because it would be a waste of one of my favorite aircraft. The airframe is of the same basic type of construction, riveted aluminum on formed aluminum stingers and longerons. Stressed skin construction and the long narrow V-12 engine would give a good approximation of a jet engine's shape and weight.

As far as the issue of soft aluminum impacting steel is concerned, think about this. Copper is softer than steel, but a self-forging projectile anti-armour weapon uses copper as it's penetrator and it will penetrate an Abrams tank.

Anybody ever think that the debris found away from the Shanksville crash site was a result of an overstressed airframe starting to come apart just before impact, just like the Reno P-51?

I have worked on both types of aircraft mentioned here, including helping with the complete restoration of a P-51.
edit on 23-9-2011 by JIMC5499 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
Post after post on here comment on the lack of air craft debris at both Shanksville and the Pentagon.

But when you look at the photos of the aftermath in Reno you see the same pattern of obliteration of the airplane. One might even make the claim that the remains would fit the back of an oversized pickup truck.

Funny, I see more scattered debris from that small plane crash than the two alleged large plane crashes at the Pent and Shanks!



Truthers make the claim that the tail always survive a crash.

Link?


This shows that when an airplane hits a hard object at high speed the plane shreds into very small pieces.

It's not that we have a problem that a high-speed plane crash just leaves very small pieces, it's the claim that there were a LOT of very small pieces found that almost adds up to the entire large plane when photographic evidence suggests otherwise. Big difference you skeptics don't seem to comprehend.

As usually, this skeptic thread is uber lame.
edit on 23-9-2011 by ATH911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


i think he was reffering to the 'OS' believers.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Plus the video of the crash must have been CGI.
How else would they get a frame clearly showing a missing trim tab on the elevator?
How convenient?

I suggest it was the same team of experts as pulled off 911.
They flew a missile into the crowd and manufactured wonderful video to feed to the media.

Have you noticed how few pictures we have of this crash? The crowd was there for a show. They must have had at least one camera for every two people. But all we have are just a few stills and a few frames of video. Just like the Pentagon. This has Rupert Murdock finger prints all over it. He’s clearly in on it with TPTB. They are setting us up for something.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by JIMC5499
 


You wont see that many ribets in modern airliners. Same construction? Lol...
A piston engine, and you still compare materials there? Really?

AT warheads work by creating a high pressure stream of molten copper, note the "molten" part?

To sum it all up, you high?



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by kn0wh0w
 


and of course we still have this


The order to shoot down flight 93 was already documented in the 9/11 Commission report ten years ago, dude.

If you really are simply concerned about finding the facts of 9/11 then it becomes YOUR responsibility to be informed about such things before you start complainign about them. I shouldn't have to tell you that.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
Plus the video of the crash must have been CGI.
How else would they get a frame clearly showing a missing trim tab on the elevator?
How convenient?

I suggest it was the same team of experts as pulled off 911.
They flew a missile into the crowd and manufactured wonderful video to feed to the media.

Have you noticed how few pictures we have of this crash? The crowd was there for a show. They must have had at least one camera for every two people. But all we have are just a few stills and a few frames of video. Just like the Pentagon. This has Rupert Murdock finger prints all over it. He’s clearly in on it with TPTB. They are setting us up for something.


I am almost ready to say - forget it. I figure about ten more posts before some truth seeker points out that Shanksville is in Pennsylvania and Reno is in Nevada so you can't compare the two - completely different states.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Saltarello
To sum it all up, you high?


No. Are you?

Where do you get "molten" from "self-forging". You are thinking of a shaped charge that converts copper to a plasma jet like an RPG. Reactive armour was created to counter that. In a self-forging projectile projectile is formed by an explosion and accelerated toward it's target. Molten copper would just splash off of the armour.

A 757 uses plenty of rivets and aluminum stringers. You are thinking of the 777 that uses composites and structural adhesives to reduce the number of fasteners.

The Merlin engine of the P-51 was one of the first cast aluminum block, steel sleeved engines. With it being liquid cooled, it would make a good APPROXIMATION of the jet engine on the 757.
edit on 23-9-2011 by JIMC5499 because: typo



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by JIMC5499
 


Cast aluminium block with sleeves, and you really want to compare that with a modern turbine engine.
Nevermind, its not really worth it.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:18 AM
link   
reply to post by HawkeyeNation
 


I saw the same thing in a LEAR 35 A - which hit ground at 350 mph

Walking the crash scene marking body parts for recovery largest piece visible was a 2 x 3 ft section of tail
fin

Rest was shredded into "metallic confetti"



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Saltarello
 


Missed the point

Poater was atemmpting a analogy between the robustness of the old Packard engine and jet engine (at least the
core) being able to survive a crash scene reasonably intact and recognizable



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 


I worked the crash of the US Air 737 near Pittsburgh. It was going slower than 350, and hit softer, but, the airframe was still shredded.



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by HawkeyeNation
 


Rest was shredded into "metallic confetti"

So where was all that "metallic confetti" at Shanksville that was said to have equaled 95% of the 757?



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by Saltarello
 


Missed the point

Poater was atemmpting a analogy between the robustness of the old Packard engine and jet engine (at least the
core) being able to survive a crash scene reasonably intact and recognizable


So, where are the engines in shanks? Or in the pentacon? Ah I see, nothing to see here as usual huh?



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by JIMC5499
reply to post by thedman
 


I worked the crash of the US Air 737 near Pittsburgh. It was going slower than 350, and hit softer, but, the airframe was still shredded.


I think you are lying



posted on Sep, 23 2011 @ 10:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Saltarello

Originally posted by psikeyhackr
So how could a plane do much damage to the core after hitting the STEEL of the exterior of the towers?

One step forward two steps back.


psik


It must have been the molten aluminium reacting with the water in the steel of the towers.


Oh yeah, melt tons of aluminum in one hour with kerosene.

Believe the idiotic and rationalize backwards from there.

psik



new topics

top topics



 
14
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join