9/11: A Boeing 757 Struck the Pentagon

walks like a duck

Jack Elrod in his Mark Trail comic strip (2/27/2000) says "If an aircraft strikes a big bird at a speed of 500 MPH, the impact will be about 25 tons." He is pretty well on target, considering the above model for a headon collision with a medium sized bird.

that's a soft, light, bird, which is not bolted and anchored into the ground. 1 bird = major wing damage 5 aluminum light poles = no wings

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by billybob not only does the lightpole look like it was cut with extreme heat ...

Maybe it was cut by detonating cord? The metal looks discolored near the break.

yes. discoloured. the way metal gets discoloured when exposed to extreme heat. and, no buckling. just a burr on the nearest corner, the only part which looks like it was ACTUALLY torn and not cut.

Okay CatHerder, you are an insperation. (who is paying you??!! - joking! VERY informative, wish i was half as able as you to structure ideas etc) Thing is, all you done is to make my head hurt a wee bit more. I can't accept the drone idea, they can't be as large as even a lear jet (don't know but still) so you debunked that one. The lamp posts still get me thinking, the 757 should of been a tumbling mass of crap well before the impact with the wall, shouldn't it?? A number of beardy muslims 'in a cave' doing this all - not convinced. Seriously thanks for an informitive concise read. p.s. i couldn't get some of the links to work, all real player

There are some stupid people in this world! Here we have a religion that wants to kill everyone that is not their religion! Its like what part on NO do you not understand! Now our government is not perfect, it needs some overhaul, probably need another 1776 and kick all the Gay loving, Christian hating liberals out of here and send them to back to Europe! I have not read all 187 pages but to the best of my military knowledge missiles don't hit objects from the side but from the top!

CatHerder: Thank you for presenting your version of the controversial missile attack of the Pentagon on 9/11. It is good to know who is willing to continue the ‘cover up’ with the disinformation in your Opening Post. The fact is that of the hundreds of cameras poised around this high security area gathering information from every conceivable direction, you cannot provide a single frame of data showing Flight 77 anywhere near the Pentagon. You are willing to include the fact that a 757-200 jetliner has twin (37,000 pound) Rolls-Royce engines mounted just outside the 24 feet dimension in your very first photo. Now you can explain why there are no corresponding impact craters on either side of your tiny 16’ x 20’ hole in the Pentagon wall. Go ahead and make our day . . . The nose of the plane has no density at all, when compared to massive weight of the twin Rolls-Royce engines. Try to calculate the damage from a 37,000 pound lump of metal striking a masonry wall at 500 miles per hour. Where does 255 thousand pounds of jetliner go after the crash? Where were the components reassembled after the crash? How many bodies were evacuated from the site to what location? Who ordered the remodeling of this single area of the Pentagon to withstand this kind of attack? How do you respond to the fact that many of the people ordered out of this area of the Pentagon, for the beefing up of the building, were not even moved back in before the missile attack? That single point makes all of this seem far too convenient for someone of your obvious intelligence to simply dismiss. No sir. Your presentation is far too tedious and orchestrated intentionally to dispel obvious holes in the cover story for anyone to give you an ounce of credibility. The Pentagon missile attack hoax fits perfectly with the WTC 7 pyrotechnic demolition hoax with more holes than Swiss cheese for anyone with an open mind to believe. Think these things through and you just might realize that your case in the Opening Post holds no water at all . . . One of the good guys, Terral

Originally posted by In nothing we trust

Originally posted by billybob not only does the lightpole look like it was cut with extreme heat ...

Maybe it was cut by detonating cord? The metal looks discolored near the break.

[edit on 11-9-2006 by In nothing we trust]

I happend to drive by some of those style lamp pole bases today and I noticed that the metal was discolored at the base of a number of them. Dirt and oxidation I would guess.

Originally posted by Terral You are willing to include the fact that a 757-200 jetliner has twin (37,000 pound) Rolls-Royce engines mounted just outside the 24 feet dimension in your very first photo.

You might want to check your facts again, sport. I think you are confused about the weight of the engine versus the thrust rating which is also given in lbs. If the plane had two 37,000 lbs engines on it, it would never get off the ground. The engines were only around 13,600 lbs apiece.

Originally posted by Terral . Try to calculate the damage from a 37,000 pound lump of metal striking a masonry wall at 500 miles per hour.

I’ve already pointed out your error in the engine weight. As for the “lump of metal” part, do you really think that the engine is just a “lump?” or is it a complicated piece of machinery with many moving parts, and both hollow and solid pieces? Let me ask you this. If an engines is running at maximum RPM, lets say 10,000 rpm, where do the pieces go when the engine hit something and breaks apart?

Originally posted by HowardRoark I happend to drive by some of those style lamp pole bases today...

WOW... neat coincidence, just like you happened to be in Detroit the day after flight 255... MAN everything just happens so perfectly for you howardroark.

Originally posted by Slap Nuts

Originally posted by HowardRoark I happend to drive by some of those style lamp pole bases today...

WOW... neat coincidence, just like you happened to be in Detroit the day after flight 255... MAN everything just happens so perfectly for you howardroark.

Dude, those lamp pole bases are used everywhere.

Hi Howard: Howard >> You might want to check your facts again, sport. I think you are confused about the weight of the engine versus the thrust rating which is also given in lbs. If the plane had two 37,000 lbs engines on it, it would never get off the ground. We agree. The engines should weigh in the neighborhood of 6 tons each. However, the thread starter is using the information from the top of the Opening Post: CatHerder (my*)>> “Engines used on a 757: Two 166.4kN (37,400lb*) Rolls-Royce RB211-535C turbofans, or 178.8kN (40,200lb) RB211-535E4s, or 193.5kN (43,500lb) RB211-535E4-Bs, or 162.8kN (36,600lb) Pratt & Whitney PW2037s, or two 178.4kN (40,100lb) PW2040s, or 189.5kN (42,600lb) PW2043s. (source1) (source2) Auxiliary Power Unit: Honeywell GTCP331-200” Now that we agree that the twin engines weigh 6 tons each, where are the twin holes where they smashed into the side of the Pentagon? Everyone is looking at where a guided missile poked a hole into the side of a building recently beefed up to withstand such an attack. Do you have a single picture of Flight 77 anywhere near the Pentagon? No. You want us to believe that a Jetliner hit each of the Twin Towers to do so much damage as to cause them to suffer catastrophic collapse, but the Pentagon hit the very same way only suffers this tiny 16 x 20 hole? Heh . . . Look at your own picture in the post above showing the light pole and the face of the Pentagon. Where is the jetliner? Where did the wings collide with the building? A guided missile hit the Pentagon and NOTHING similar to a 757-200 jetliner. Howard >> I’ve already pointed out your error in the engine weight. Heh . . . My weight? I did not write the OP, sport. Howard >> As for the “lump of metal” part, do you really think that the engine is just a “lump?” Yes and with about 6 tons of density in a tight little package, when compared to the fuselage of the jetliner. Newton’s laws work the same with all moving objects . . . “a body at rest remains at rest, and one moving in a straight line maintains a constant speed and same direction unless it is deflected by a 'force'.” ( www.star.ucl.ac.uk... ). There was nothing standing between your fictitious 6 ton sledgehammers moving at around 500 miles per hour and the Pentagon walls to create any deflecting force. This video shows the explosion, but no Flight 77. ( www.bedoper.com... ). These authors are working under the premise that a much smaller jet hit the Pentagon, because they have yet to figure out that a guided missile did the damage. Howard >> or is it a complicated piece of machinery with many moving parts, and both hollow and solid pieces? If you are going to try and defend the terrorist propaganda of the Opening Post of this thread (by CatHerder), then stop asking questions and provide one bit of evidence. View the video again and the speed of the sudden impact that must have exceeded 500 miles per hour. Head down to the blueprint (“Overlay of Boeing 757 . . .”) diagram and bring your attention to column 16 in the direct path of the starboard engine. The picture below that one (“right edge of center impact hole”) clearly shows column 16 intact. Six tons of engine would have disintegrated columns 16 and 17 to bits and pieces in the blink of an eye. These pictures reveal the precise pattern of a missile attack centered at the 16’ x 20’ hole at the point of impact. No Flight 77 fuselage is present in ANY Pentagon photos, because no 757-200 jetliner was ever present. Howard >> Let me ask you this. If an engines is running at maximum RPM, lets say 10,000 rpm, where do the pieces go when the engine hit something and breaks apart? According to your theory, an entire 757-200 jetliner simply disappears into thin air. Please stop trying to insult our intelligence . . . GL, Terral

You might want to check YOUR facts. That IS the thrust rating.

Engines are certified to deliver standard thrusts depending upon flight conditions. Thrust is typically measured in kN or lbs. A 'rating' is a predefined power setting that the pilot can select which may be appropriate for particular flight conditions. Rating terminology differs between civil and military aircraft, reflecting the different requirements of these types of aviation.

en.wikibooks.org... The weight of the engine ITSELF is 16,980 kg.

Model: Boeing757-200 Engines: (1)RB211-535C(16,980kg) (2)PW2037（17,343kg） Width: 38.05m Length: 47.32m height: 13.56m Wing Area: 185.25m2 Maximum Take Off Weight: 115,680kg Weight: (1)57,438kg (2)57,411kg Maximum Cruising Speed: Mach 0.80 Maximum Range: 7,222km Required Take Off Distance: (1)2,365m (2)2,310m Required Landing Distance: 1,400m

www.narita-airport.or.jp...

Hi Zaphod: Zap >> The weight of the engine ITSELF is 16,980 kg. That number corresponds with the information in the Opening Post, which means the 500 mile per hour sledgehammer is even heavier than I thought. The fact is that the Flight 77 cover story has a zero probability of being the truth of this matter. Can anyone here figure out the force exerted upon the Pentagon wall from 115,000kg @ 500 miles per hour? That number must be astronomical. None of the photos reveal that much damage, which continues to appear like the detonation of a single missile. Donald Rumsfeld let the cat out of the bag in this interview: www.the7thfire.com... Thank you for Zapping my numbers. : o ) Terral

I have little question that a plane hit the pentagon, but isn't the fuel from a plane stored in the wings? I don't know much about the physics of it all, but I would imagine that there would have been a much wider explosion than there was. Also, I still can't figure out why the tapes haven't been released from those potentially conclusive viewpoints. I also don't believe that the pilot could have flown the plane that well. The coincidences in all of this don't seem right. If a 737 hit the pentagon, fine, but the situation seems too... I don't know, perfect, or something. I don't think that the government has been honest about this. I also think that Bush is totally out of the "conspiracy" loop. If this was a huge hoax, he had no idea. None of that is really based of fact, just curiosity. I'm sorry if this isn't provocative enough for this site...

Yes, but it would depend on how much fuel was in the tanks as to the explosion size. The more fuel the smaller the explosion. They tend to load most of the fuel in the wings on commercial planes for weight and balance issues.

How much fuel do they think the plane still held when it struck? I've seen some say that it was around 5,000 gallons. (half a tank?) If so, maybe there should have been some charring from the wings, or at least a more horizontal explosion. I don't know enough about it to make any real judgement.

5,000 gallons would be somewhere in the 35,000 pound range so you're looking at about 1/4 tank or so if it was a car. There are also fuel tanks in the fuselage.

Unless im totally confused, but looking at the pole on the back of the truck its obvious the TOP PART was sheered off, and the pole bent over. From the cut marks at the SQARE Base, it appears to me like it was cut down. simply because there's no use in repariing the pole, you might as well remove it completely and put a new one there. So the workers probably cut it down AFTER it was sheered.

Originally posted by Terral Hi Howard: Howard >> You might want to check your facts again, sport. I think you are confused about the weight of the engine versus the thrust rating which is also given in lbs. If the plane had two 37,000 lbs engines on it, it would never get off the ground. We agree. The engines should weigh in the neighborhood of 6 tons each. However, the thread starter is using the information from the top of the Opening Post: CatHerder (my*)>> “Engines used on a 757: Two 166.4kN (37,400lb*) Rolls-Royce RB211-535C turbofans, or 178.8kN (40,200lb) RB211-535E4s, or 193.5kN (43,500lb) RB211-535E4-Bs, or 162.8kN (36,600lb) Pratt & Whitney PW2037s, or two 178.4kN (40,100lb) PW2040s, or 189.5kN (42,600lb) PW2043s. (source1) (source2) Auxiliary Power Unit: Honeywell GTCP331-200”

That is the thrust rating. I don't see where he state that was the weight.

According to your theory, an entire 757-200 jetliner simply disappears into thin air. Please stop trying to insult our intelligence . . . GL, Terral

The only ignorant idea here is that anything from the plane would remain intact after the impact.

Although I'm just a bit skeptical about the punch hole, pretty confident that a plane hit the Pentagon after looking at pictures that I didn't even see before, and the fact that it was travelling so fast before impact. What do you expect to be left after going that fast and slamming into that building?