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.

 

Pentagon "plane" crash - Where is the plane?

page: 12
15
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by SimontheMagus
especially when the photos before the collapse only show the one main hole that's somewhere between 12 and 15 feet wide.



You could try and be a little more accurate.




How wide do you think the hole is, in the photo above.


I recognize that photo as being someone's composite... I'll have to check my files and see who it was that created it.

You could try being a little more honest.




posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1

Well then why didn't the plane brake up prior to hitting the Pentagon?



Sorry I missed your reply. Did you look at the FDR readout ?



How long was the over speed warning on ?



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by SimontheMagus
 


Please show us other pictures of a plane crash involving head on into concrete and steel. Not a glancing blow like most.
edit on 8-6-2012 by samkent because: (no reason given)


How are plane crashes where hundreds die considered glancing blows?! There have been numerous crashes throughout aviation history where there has been 100 or more passengers, that have died on planes.

For all of those people to die, there would certainly have to be more than a 'glancing blow' otherwise they would still be alive!

Your response is preposterous samkent. You actually have no idea whatsoever about what really went on on 9/11, you have done no proper research into anything, and you seemingly just make stuff up as you go along just so you can be one-up over other forum members. This is considered trolling on internet boards.

Go off and learn about physics, try to steer away from copy & pasting from government created websites that are full of disinformation, and try thinking logically for yourself. You will never gain any headway if you just copy & paste junk theories. You also need to know when you're beaten because trying to rebutt every single comment that anyone makes, just so you can say you are right, really lowers any credibility you are trying to obtain. You and many people that uphold the OS without any critical thinking remind me of Terral Croft, I'm sure he's here somewhere!



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   
reply to post by kidtwist
 





How are plane crashes where hundreds die considered glancing blows?!

Because most are not 90 degrees vertical into the ground.

Most crashes are hundreds of feet long and the plane comes apart in chunks.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by maxella1

Well then why didn't the plane brake up prior to hitting the Pentagon?



Sorry I missed your reply. Did you look at the FDR readout ?



How long was the over speed warning on ?


Not very long apparently. You're a pilot right?

So you tell me how long should it be for the plane to start falling apart? Also would over speed of lets say 20 mph have the same result as couple hundred mph?

How fast was it going during the descent and and the u-turn it had to make?



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by kidtwist
 





How are plane crashes where hundreds die considered glancing blows?!

Because most are not 90 degrees vertical into the ground.

Most crashes are hundreds of feet long and the plane comes apart in chunks.


Many planes have crashed into mountains at 90 degrees and have had bigger chunks of plane left than all the planes on 9/11. Every single one of the planes on 9/11, flight 77 & flight 93 included, all disintergrated. How do you explain that, especially seeing as flight 93 didnt hit any building?



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1


Not very long apparently. You're a pilot right?

So you tell me how long should it be for the plane to start falling apart? Also would over speed of lets say 20 mph have the same result as couple hundred mph?

How fast was it going during the descent and and the u-turn it had to make?


I'm an aerobatic pilot. I fly for thrills, not for transportation.

Planes do not fall apart due to speed, they break up because of G forces. The faster you go the easier it is to pull excessive G's. The highest G's shown in the AA77 FDR read out is 1.75 G's. Thats nothing. UA 93 on the other hand did some amazing stuff and still stayed in one piece.

The over speed warning went off twice on AA77 FDR read out. The true airspeed is much higher for the arrow on the left than one on the right.



The speed during the turn was obviously below the threshold of the over speed warning.

The speed, G's,and altitude are all recorded on the FDR you should look at it.








edit on 8-6-2012 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 03:43 PM
link   
This is the exact plane (Flight 77) that supposedly hit the pentagon.

Boeing B-757-223

Reg number N644AA

It's no small plane, and has distinctive red and blue stripes from nose to tail.




Does anyone see that plane in this gif?




Does anyone see that plane in these videos?

Bearing in mind, if it is supposed to be flight 77, it would have a blue & red stripe on the nose that would be noticeable!







And 'debunkers' still say it hit the pentagon!?!




posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by kidtwist


And 'debunkers' still say it hit the pentagon!?!



Boeing B-757-223, N644AA cn 24602/365 Hit the pentagon.

We can tell by all the Boeing B-757-223, N644AA cn 24602/365 debris photographed at the pentagon.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by kidtwist


And 'debunkers' still say it hit the pentagon!?!



Boeing B-757-223, N644AA cn 24602/365 Hit the pentagon.

We can tell by all the Boeing B-757-223, N644AA cn 24602/365 debris photographed at the pentagon.


Hey, did you know that the Chinese made a clone Apple store, selling perfect replicas of Apple devices, such as the ipod, macbook etc, and they even cloned branded cars.

So if people can fool the public with fakes, then it's pretty easy for a government with unlimited resources to fake a few pieces of plane debris! Think ouside the box once in a while!



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 04:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by maxella1


Not very long apparently. You're a pilot right?

So you tell me how long should it be for the plane to start falling apart? Also would over speed of lets say 20 mph have the same result as couple hundred mph?

How fast was it going during the descent and and the u-turn it had to make?


I'm an aerobatic pilot. I fly for thrills, not for transportation.

Planes do not fall apart due to speed, they break up because of G forces. The faster you go the easier it is to pull excessive G's. The highest G's shown in the AA77 FDR read out is 1.75 G's. Thats nothing. UA 93 on the other hand did some amazing stuff and still stayed in one piece.

The over speed warning went off twice on AA77 FDR read out. The true airspeed is much higher for the arrow on the left than one on the right.



The speed during the turn was obviously below the threshold of the over speed warning.

The speed, G's,and altitude are all recorded on the FDR you should look at it.


edit on 8-6-2012 by waypastvne because: (no reason given)


Planes do fall apart due to going too fast, you should know this even if it's toy planes that you fly!

If maximum airspeed is greatly exceeded the wings and tail will have too much force/stress applied to them, and the wings will break apart. Having no lift or thrust will caused the plane to ultimately fall uncontrollably, and crash.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by kidtwist

Hey, did you know that the Chinese made a clone Apple store, selling perfect replicas of Apple devices, such as the ipod, macbook etc, and they even cloned branded cars.

So if people can fool the public with fakes, then it's pretty easy for a government with unlimited resources to fake a few pieces of plane debris! Think ouside the box once in a while!


The funny thing is: You think it is possible to fake a plane crash.

It is not possible.

If you cut or bend aluminum with a tool the tool will leave a signature mark.

Speed and inertia also have their signature marks,,,,, they are all over the debris at the pentagon.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by kidtwist

If maximum airspeed is greatly exceeded the wings and tail will have too much force/stress applied to them, and the wings will break apart. Having no lift or thrust will caused the plane to ultimately fall uncontrollably, and crash.



This is not true, planes are extremely well braced for longitudinal forces. It's the vertical forces that break them apart.

The highest longitudinal force recorded on the FDR is .28 G's recorded during take off.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 05:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Fichorka
 


Not again. You try running into a steel reinforced concrete building with large "air gaps" between the rings of the Pentagons layers. Going at 200mph your lucky if you leave only a bad memory.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by kidtwist

Hey, did you know that the Chinese made a clone Apple store, selling perfect replicas of Apple devices, such as the ipod, macbook etc, and they even cloned branded cars.

So if people can fool the public with fakes, then it's pretty easy for a government with unlimited resources to fake a few pieces of plane debris! Think ouside the box once in a while!


The funny thing is: You think it is possible to fake a plane crash.

It is not possible.

If you cut or bend aluminum with a tool the tool will leave a signature mark.

Speed and inertia also have their signature marks,,,,, they are all over the debris at the pentagon.



It is possible to fake a plane crash. It was done at the pentagon. Flight 77 - Boeing 757 did not crash into the pentagon. It is possible to crash a plane and make it appear to be another plane or, it's possible to use a missile, and use parts from another plane, disguised as flight 77. C'mon, think outside the box, there are plent of possibilities how they did it. Do you always take everything at face value?



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by kidtwist

If maximum airspeed is greatly exceeded the wings and tail will have too much force/stress applied to them, and the wings will break apart. Having no lift or thrust will caused the plane to ultimately fall uncontrollably, and crash.



This is not true, planes are extremely well braced for longitudinal forces. It's the vertical forces that break them apart.

The highest longitudinal force recorded on the FDR is .28 G's recorded during take off.


This is an interesting read: guardian.150m.com...



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 05:36 PM
link   
reply to post by waypastvne
 





Planes do not fall apart due to speed, they break up because of G forces. The faster you go the easier it is to pull excessive G's. The highest G's shown in the AA77 FDR read out is 1.75 G's. Thats nothing. UA 93 on the other hand did some amazing stuff and still stayed in one piece.


What I was asking is how fast can the plane go at low altitude where the air density is a lot greater than high altitude without falling apart?

I searched the forum that somebody posted a link to earlier, and this is what I found;
www.pprune.org...
Question;

How fast do you think a Boeing 767 could go at sea level? The max operating speed at 1000 feet is 360 knots, but I'm aware if can exceed that speed, just not sure by how much. Is it likely you could make it reach 500 knots? I've done some research on this and I seem to get conflicting answer, some say it would be difficult for the structure of the plane to withstand that speed, others say the engines are incapable of creating enough thrust. I'm in a discussion at the moment about this, I'm not 100% on how far you can exceed the maximum operating speed, your input would be most appreciated. I'm not planning on doing this by the way. I will explain why if you're interested.


First reply;

Depends on what altitude the dive commenced. conspiracy theories ---------------------------->

For some reason this reply left an impression that this question won't be answered honestly, so I found another forum:

www.physicsforums.com...

Is it possible for a commercial liner, Boeing 767 for instance, to descend from high altitude and maintain it's speed? A Boeing 767 has a Vmo maximum of 360 knots and an Mmo of .86 mach. If the Boeing was travelling at 500 mph at 35000 and started descending, what would happen when the air density increases? I'd imagine the cockpit would be going crazy, but is it possible to maintain the speed through the more dense air? Also, if you really pushed a Boeing 767 what kind of speeds do you think you could each at sea level? Do you think it's possible to exceed the maximum operating speed by 100-150 knots? Thanks for your time ---------------------------------------> Peter To address your answer simply, no, it could not. The reason for this is the added drag that is applied based on the increased density of the air. The jet would run into a major problem with having a strong enough structure to withstand the extra force on it. Moreover, the jet may or may not have enough thrust to overcome the added drag. Think of swinging your arm as fast as you can through the air and then through water. Can you move it as fast? This is an exageration, but helps to illustrate the point. And I'm not saying that there isn't a fudge factor, as the plane could probably descend quite a ways before passing the limits, but flying Mach 0.8+ at sea level would probably not be likely in a subsonic transport like the 767.

Another reply seems to be honest;

....and if the pilot doesn't actually care much about whether the wings start to disintegrate, he can exceed design limits by quite a bit. How much does it actually take before the wings actually start to come off? Dunno.


So do you know how much does it actually take before the wings start to come off?



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by maxella1
 


Lets look at this a different way. A 757 going perfectly strait down full thrust.

255 000lbs maximum take off weight.
80 000lbs thrust
335 000lbs of force in the longitudinal axis

335,000 pounds is the total amount of force the plane can put on the air... and.... 335,000 is the total amount of force the air can place on the plane going strait down. For every force there is an equal and opposite force. If you want to say the force can be greater than 335,000 lbs you will have to explain where it comes from.

G forces on the other hand, have no limits, they can go to infinity. G's also work mainly in the vertical axis of aircraft, its hard to get any significant G's in the longitudinal or lateral axis. I know, I've tried.

From what I remember 757 are rated for 2.5 G's with a safety factor of 1.5 For a total of 3.75 G's ( their real world ultimate G factor appears to be around 4.5)

255 000lbs mass
X 3.75 G's
956 250 pounds of force in the vertical axis.

It is the G forces that destroy aircraft. Hani didn't pull any significant G's.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by waypastvne
 



Okay, then this would be a false statement? increased air density is irrelevant?


The reason for this is the added drag that is applied based on the increased density of the air. The jet would run into a major problem with having a strong enough structure to withstand the extra force on it.



posted on Jun, 8 2012 @ 07:28 PM
link   
reply to post by maxella1
 




So do you know how much does it actually take before the wings start to come off?


Faster than the plane that hit the Pentagon.




top topics



 
15
<< 9  10  11    13  14 >>

log in

join