Plane wreckage left over after F-18 crashes into building. (compare to 9/11)

reply to post by Human_Alien


I was talking about the F-18 plane crash and eyewitness accounts of explosions in the apartment complex after the crash and fire. So am I to assume explosives were the cause of these explosions? Were they planted in the apartment complex?

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

I was talking about the F-18 plane crash and eyewitness accounts of explosions in the apartment complex after the crash and fire. So am I to assume explosives were the cause of these explosions? Were they planted in the apartment complex?

Oh.
Sorry.
Didn't realize that.

As you have already surmised, I have no idea.

reply to post by Human_Alien


Wow! I don't see retractions like yours around here much.
I'm gonna give you a star just for being courageous.

Just pointing this out: As far as I know, no plane has ever vaporized or completely disintegrated after crashing...into anything. So technically speaking, the type/kind of plane(s) really make absolutely no difference. Even TWA flight 800, which literally exploded in a ball of fire over the Atlantic Ocean was still mostly recovered.

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

I was talking about the F-18 plane crash and eyewitness accounts of explosions in the apartment complex after the crash and fire. So am I to assume explosives were the cause of these explosions? Were they planted in the apartment complex?

Gas explodes. Fuel. Other types of chemicals and matter which catch fire and quickly burn, sometimes in bright flames, which could be mistaken for an explosion. Who knows who had what in these apartments. For all we know a meth lab was in the complex. But assuming the "explosions" and "fire" were the cause of explosives intentionally planted in the building(s) is just ridiculous. Especially since there is absolutely no evidence of any of those things.

Originally posted by Nite_wing
reply to post by Human_Alien

 

Wow! I don't see retractions like yours around here much.
I'm gonna give you a star just for being courageous.

Thanks
But when you're wrong or ill-informed like I was....there's no point bickering. That's just the kinda Alien I am

Goose....is dead...

Wow. Had to have seriously lost control to crash like that.

reply to post by DragonFire1024


If you'd notice, I was being sarcastic as acting like the truthers that bring forward video and accounts of people that heard explosions when the WTCs were hit by the plane and burning, as proof of explosives used. Just hoped someone noticed.

reply to post by randomtangentsrme


Nailed it exactly. The planes that hit the trade center were full of JP8 as where the military pilot knew the fuel would be bad so he dumped it before the crash.

Originally posted by GuidedKill
reply to post by randomtangentsrme

 

Nailed it exactly. The planes that hit the trade center were full of JP8 as where the military pilot knew the fuel would be bad so he dumped it before the crash.

Those stupid, dimwitted idiots who designed the World Trade Centers with planes crashing into them FORGOT to include the fuel.
Man. Good help is so hard to find!

I know it's been posted, but speed and mass are some of the biggest factors here in the amount of energy translated back into the plane during the crash. Energy goes up exponentially as speed increases, and on 9/11, the plane at the Pentagon was going upwards of 400mp/h. Maybe I'm missing something, but I highly doubt that the pilots of the F-18 were going full-throttle, and I'm reading from some of the responses here that they dumped a lot of the fuel before ejecting and letting the plane crash.

There really is no comparison. Besides, there was a lot of debris found at the Pentagon, regardless of the people who think it was all planted.

Originally posted by GenRadek


Also, to whomever said that on 9/11 a 747 crashed, please, go back and do some actual research so you do not look ignorant and foolish as most Truthers do.

talking to me?

I just typed whatever popped into my head, since I don't believe it was any plane 737 747 757 or whatever...

So yea, guess I picked the wrong one. Sorry. But you didn't correct it either...

Originally posted by MilzGatez
reply to post by MattNC

 

And I work for NASA..... anyone could say they work or know something on here ....

but a crush is a crush no matter what... It still went crushing down very hard no matter which angel it comes from...

I MEANT CRASH
TYPO :-)

edit on 6-4-2012 by MilzGatez because: TYPO :-)

You could work for NASA, but even NASA needs janitors

I say this having worked for NASA at the Holloman Air Force Base in NM as a systems administrator. My Job was no different there than at G.E. Just because you work for an organization, government agency, or even a fortune 500 company doesn't mean the actual work you're doing pertains to their field of industry, research, engineering, etc. Every work place needs a janitor, almost every business nowadays needs I.T., H.R., accounting, etc.

....and another thing, just because someone has 'insert this level of security clearance' doesn't mean they're some super high ranking officer in some secret compartment of the government... even those who work at the Census Bureau need security clearance, and we all know how pointless that work is, right?

Just my two cents.

Originally posted by Varemia


There really is no comparison. Besides, there was a lot of debris found at the Pentagon, regardless of the people who think it was all planted.

I actually know a guy who was an MP. I was also in the Army. He was charged with guarding the plane parts from the pentagon. He wasn't convinced about the plane actually crashing there.. He said the parts just looked like they were taken from an old crash.

He could have been very wrong of course..

reply to post by Varemia


looks like it may have stalled and come down almost vertically, seen a Mig like this once, looked almost intact where it came down, had stalled and come straight down, fins engines and wings were still in the original configurations, looked like the plane had lost its wheels on landing, was the weirdest thing.

People always forget that the rear section of aircraft, especially military jets are real strong, you cant really compare a tin can 767 to a F18-D crash, 767's have large spacial areas that crumple on impact (ie. the cabin & luggage storage / Cargo spaces) and carry tonnes of jet a which wouldnt be dumped over land unless it was a dire emergency.

Has the Navy picked up the FT fuel type yet?, this may have been a factor if it had, dont think its as flammable as Jp5

Wee Mad

Originally posted by Human_Alien

Originally posted by GuidedKill
reply to post by randomtangentsrme

 

Nailed it exactly. The planes that hit the trade center were full of JP8 as where the military pilot knew the fuel would be bad so he dumped it before the crash.

Those stupid, dimwitted idiots who designed the World Trade Centers with planes crashing into them FORGOT to include the fuel.
Man. Good help is so hard to find!

A B-52 bomber crashed into the Empire State Building in NYC in 1945. Fuel or no fuel, still didn't bring that building down. I am just saying is all.

Originally posted by GenRadek
reply to post by DragonFire1024

 

If you'd notice, I was being sarcastic as acting like the truthers that bring forward video and accounts of people that heard explosions when the WTCs were hit by the plane and burning, as proof of explosives used. Just hoped someone noticed.

You can put forth any story on either side and no one is ever going to be truly satisfied with any answer. All "truthers" or "conspiracy theorists" and evidence aside, it would take a full on revolution and the topple of the US government, as we know it today, before we ever really know the real answers of what happened that day. In either case, I take what the government says these days with little more than a grain of salt. Today's events just fuel the fire...on both sides. (no pun intended)

Originally posted by TheBloodRed
The comparison would be difficult to make because of the difference in the type of aircraft involved.

However, notes of the "debris field" etc could maintain credence if explained properly.

the comparison is difficult? Are you serious?

a single, small plane crashes in an apartment complex and leaves massive amount of debris VS a large plane crashes in a heavily guarded, monitored, phalanx protected, AA protected reinforced building and leaves a small hole in the side and clean

reply to post by DragonFire1024


No it was a B 25 bomber converted to personnel transport which hit Empire State Building

As an aside the oldest B 52 in service just passed 50 years.......

Wow... Apples and Oranges anyone? How about Apples and Watermelons?

If the OP can show me a photo of Jet Fighter wreckage after a hard nose impact of 600pmh or higher, straight in to the impact itself....then I am ALL ears and would be fascinated to see the comparison in a direct wreckage to wreckage look at what ANY Jet Fighter looks like vs. a Commercial Airliner.


However...on this same line of thinking.... We know Jet Blu (Value Jet.. wasn't it then?) happened for the tragic nose dart one did into the Everglades years back. Remember all the debate about Oxygen bottles and generators on Aircraft? Yup... That crash. There was water there...but not that deep. It's a swamp, not an ocean. Yet....little remained in anything even remotely recognizable as either formerly human OR formerly a part of an aircraft.

Aluminum planes do horrible...nightmarish things when they strike solid objects in excess of several hundred miles an hour. Human bodies just cease to exist in a physical form at all. I'm taking a wild guess than an F-18 coming down after an eject is either at or below terminal velocity....and that is WORLDS from the 'under power' speeds the 9/11 planes were flown at right to impact.