It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
to attack our coast not our homeland
reply to post by dragonridr
Jet fuel in air burns at a lot lower temps in air.
Jet A-1 Jet A
Flash point 38 °C (100 °F)
Autoignition temperature 210 °C (410 °F)
Freezing point −47 °C (−53 °F) −40 °C (−40 °F)
Open air burning temperatures 260–315 °C (500–599 °F)
Density at 15 °C (59 °F) .804 kg/L (6.71 lb/US gal) .820 kg/L (6.84 lb/US gal)
Specific energy 43.15 MJ/kg 43.02 MJ/kg
Energy density 34.7 MJ/L 35.3 MJ/L
Steel still won't bend at those temperatures according to a steel EXPERT...
Well as far as Nano Thermite....you are pretty far off on it not being invented...LOL
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
A Nano-thermite or "super-thermite" is a metastable intermolecular composite (MICs) characterized by a particle size of its main constituents, a metal and a metal oxide, under 100 Nanometers. This allows for high and customizable reaction rates. Nano-thermites contain an oxidizer and a reducing agent, which are intimately mixed on the nanometer scale. MICs, including nano-thermitic materials, are a type of reactive materials investigated for military use, as well as for general applications involving propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics.
What distinguishes MICs from traditional thermites is that the oxidizer and a reducing agent, normally iron oxide and aluminium, are in the form of extremely fine powders (nanoparticles). This dramatically increases the reactivity relative to micrometre-sized powder thermite. As the mass transport mechanisms that slow down the burning rates of traditional thermites are not so important at these scales, the reactions become kinetically controlled and proceed much more quickly.
Even Wiki has it
And here are photos of it from 9/11 building residue...
I'd suggest reading the rest of Phages replies.
While you're at it..why not challenge the numbers the OP has shown and show us where he is wrong about them and why you would claim that?
He did, try reading the rest of phages replies. Just a thought
As a matter of fact he showed how the OP was mistaken by using the OPs own sources and with basic logic. Which tends to be tossed out in favor of speculative theory, conjecture and 'Probabilities"
I mean..personally, i've absolutely no idea of the capabilities of a 767 at any height, so without exhaustive research on airframes, wind tunnel testing and engines etc of said aircraft, i don't actually know if the what the OP is saying is accurate or not and so i for one, would appreciate the correct information being presented by those who do know, instead of snyde oneupmanship retorts.
I'd read the rest of the thread if I were you, The OP posts information and Phage and others have dissected it, showing exactly where the flaws are in this Conspiracy paradigm.
Since you claim you're all about intolerance to ignorance, the implication being you wish nothing more than to correct misinterpretation / inaccuracies and reveal the actual facts, feel free to go ahead and show us why his numbers are an example of ignorance (unless you already have further along the thread, in which case, thanks) Unless short quips targeted at others' interpretations is more your thing, then carry on.
He did, again, using the OPs sources. You wouldn't know this unless you've read the rest of their exchanges. Phage would ask a question the OP would either sidestep with a massive cut and paste campaign or answer a question with a question, or in some cases completely ignore the query.
It's fairly simple..either a 767 could have reasonably performed speeds and course corrections that were stated to have occurred on 9/11, or they couldn't have...it's one or the other.
Exactly, this is why it's absolutely critical for those who are after the truth to search out the unbiased truth and not muddy the water with claims and counter claims based on Conspiracy Blogs and what not.
Phage, I really respect your scientific approach on a lot of topics. You truly are a highly intelligent individual.
Stop brown nosing, it will get you nowhere in life and I doubt it impresses him.
reply to post by NewAgeMan
Vmo/Mmo limits for a standard 767 are 360/0.86M. And this is how it is calculated
Good. Now, what is the Mach number for 510 knots at 700 feet? Is it greater than 0.86?
and as my education is in Psychology
There have been others on this planet that thought they knew what everyone else did not. List?
Here's a little something for you to chew on.
Vne/Mmo - Mach .80 (Never Exceed/Maximum Mach Number)
The yellow arc terminates at the red line—VNE—the velocity that should never be exceeded. VNE is 90 percent or less of the demonstrated dive velocity (VD), a calculated value and/or the speed at which a test pilot flew the plane with no vibration or buffeting severe enough to result in structural damage.
"Don't think there's a 10-percent safety buffer past VNE. A baby's breath will cause the aircraft to exceed its limit load factor, and structural damage will result"
reply to post by jhn7537
I don't find ignorance amusing.
reply to post by NewAgeMan
And yet it was traced on radar from the time it was loaded with passengers and flew into the tower...
"During the descent from 12,000 feet to 6,000 feet, the aircraft groundspeed remained between 500 - 520 knots. As the aircraft made it's descent to 1000 feet, it accelerated (there goes Zaphod58's hypothesis about self propulsion at level flight on final approach) and impacted World Trade Center tower #2 at approximately 510 knots groundspeed.
Flight "UA 175": An Incredible Journey
In August 2006 the NTSB, in response to a NSA FOI request, finally released details of the 9/11 flights.
NTSB Releases 9/11 Flight Information
When going over the report in reference to another thread it suddenly dawned on me how incredible a journey the flight of United Airlines 175 actually was. Report Here
The report includes a flight profile, a ground track, A pressure altitude graph derived from radar mode C returns, and a transcript of radio communications.
The following is a "blow by blow" of the alleged plane's astonishing flight, taken from the report:
United Airlines Flight 175 departed Boston Logan at 8:14AM
It reached 31,000 feet at 8:33AM
The final radio transmission was at 8:42AM
Beacon Codes were changed twice within one minute at 8:47AM (possible point of a "radar swap")
UA 175 started into a climbing turn to the South East at 8:51AM
It reached 33,500 feet at 8:53AM
UA 175 began its descent while continuing its turn
It turned towards North East while its descent continued
The "plane" was now headed towards WTC2 in a direction of North east (45 degrees)
at what is termed point (G)
Its altitude at this point was 25,000 feet at 8:58 AM
It was at 24,000 feet at 8:59AM
18,500 feet at 9:00AM
15,000 feet at 9:01AM
9,000 feet at 9:02AM
The "plane" is presumed to have struck its target at a height under 1000 feet at 9:02 40 AM. Mission Accomplished.
(END FLIGHT SUMMARY)
Now point (G) where UA 175 starts heading straight for WTC2 is just east of Trenton, NJ. The targeted tower is approximately sixty miles away at this point.
This is incredible target acquisitioning, but just as incredible is the fact that according to the NTSB report, which was founded on three sets of radar data ( FAA, JFK Approach and USAF) the alleged plane covered the sixty mile distance in approximately 4 minutes and 40 seconds.
This aircraft was traveling at 10 miles per minute or 600 knots average over 4.5 mins! Holy crap!
Not to mention that the plane was descending 24,000 feet in this last 4.7 minutes-- thus officially going well over the maximum speed in progressively thicker air for a sustained duration.
So officially-- we have a plane descending a mile a minute, significantly over the maximum possible speed for the aircraft-- ALL officially done by a pilot who has never flown this type of aircraft before-- and somehow he manages to steer the plane perfectly to hit precisely a very narrow target (the WTC south tower)?
Then, we have the admission from Boeing that a 767 simply can't go over 500 mph near sea level.
*Somewhat curiously, is that that KNJP, near where UA175 supposedly made its last turn, is the former Naval Air Warfare Center in Warminster, PA. This is another odd link between 9/11 and the Navy.
Mark Loizeaux, Chief of Controlled Demolition, Inc. (in their own words - the greatest contr. demo. company worldwide) said: "Nanothermite does not exist. It's just a technology from 'phantasy land'. If it would exist - i would know it!" fromThe BBC's The Third Tower
A"ccording to Strauss, the Reductio ad Hitlerum is an informal fallacy that consists of trying to refute an opponent's view by comparing it to a view that would be held by Adolf Hitler or the Nazi Party."
pretty low in my opinion
All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.
- Adolf Hitler, On the "Big Lie", Mein Kampf, [p.134]
reply to post by xxdaniel21
What i find funny, is that most people who will tell you to "get a grip" and "stop being silly" actually don't involve themselves in any way with any view of the incident, or familiarise themselves with basic research. People who do their research and align with the official story should theoretically be such a small minority, that they would be the ones worried to voice their opinions - worried about being critisized. However, the general population who accept the official story continue to downplay the biggest attack on the home land of the largest superpower, as if it's not really an issue worth debating, while maintaining the ABSOLUTE view that it was a genuine attack - sort of like nodding your head and signing a contract without reading anything, because all the small writing "must be relevant to my interests...". Moreover, those with informed beliefs usually show a bit of humility and refrain from the immature "you're stupid" posts. Tldr: Sheep
So .... some anonymous person on the Youtubes named "roderm" claims the low-speed pass was at 500 knots and you automatically believe it?
Unless the commentator is lying this old B727 is doing 390knots in this video:
here is another 757 at 450+ knots:
A friend was wondering how fast the RNZAF 757 is going during its high-speed pass at airshows (as per this YouTube video):
He was wondering about 250kts but I thought it was more like 300-350kts. Does anyone here know what speed the guys are doing?
Aside from videos on the 'net, I've seen the display at a few Avalon Airshows and it always looks & sounds fantastic!
A compatriot was the guy that helped develop the display, and I seem to remember him saying they did it at Vmo, which I understand is around 340kts.
"I was the captain of that particular shot, filmed during a Squadron open-day a couple of years ago. It's part of a routine that has been performed over thirty times at various airshows and practices around the world including RIAT Fairford 2003, Kemble 2006, RAF Waddington 2006, Warbirds Over Wanaka 2004, Avalon 2005.
The low pass is flown into wind at 350 knots (indicated) and 100 feet above the runway. It's a 2g pull up to between 45 and 55 degrees nose up pitch (although there has been higher) and the zoom climb ends at an altitude between 8000 and 10000 feet depending on the type of pull up used. The sequence does not end with a loop as some of the readers speculate, but in fact with a 60 degree wingover at around 220 knots. It is easily possible to enhance this maneouver with a steeper climb and bank but there is no need - it is spectacular already, and safe."
This is the official hollywood movie script:
Osama Bin Laden: "I'm gonna hit the US in their most secured buildings, using an incredibly complex and risky plan involving airplanes for which I have no qualified pilots. But what the hell, Allah is on my side so what's to worry, eh?"
(Turns out Allah was indeed on his side, because he managed to bypass US defense and hit 75% of his targets, including one of the most secured buildings in the world. He even got so lucky as to make 3 skyscrapers explode into scrap steel and dust by only hitting 2 of them.)
A Normal Person: "Uuhm, OK, and what is your motive for all this insanity?"
Osama Bin Laden: "Well, I hate that those Americans and the rest of the west are free, and so what choice have I got but to start a war with them? I want to piss them off so bad that they'll come over here, bomb the crap out of my brothers and sisters, and hunt me and my boys down like wild animals, with drones and what not, to finally end up fake-buried in the sea."
soulwaxeredit on 30-12-2013 by soulwaxer because: (no reason given)
reply to post by jhn7537
I don't find ignorance amusing.
Just like EVERY other 9/11 thread, nothing more than a pissing match.
I have no desire to stick around and watch people fling baseless insinuations at one another because everyone thinks everyone else is wrong and thinks *their* opinion is the right one.edit on 30-12-2013 by RomeByFire because: (no reason given)
reply to post by dragonridr
Chemical Engineer here, and jet fuel didn't do nothing except smoke and mirrors. I wish I could find the link to the fact that the EXACT same floors that were hit on both buildings underwent a "special" maintenance program in the months before. Everything from supposed steel reinforcement plates, to "rust" proof painting. If you use a hypothesis as to how the temperatures got to 2000 degrees F, I think the military grade Nano Thermite stories are the most logical.
I agree on the NY Post story.
Did you see this link??
It came from here, Devvy Kidd is brilliant, and her Obama Archives are spot on.
What people fail to see this for what it was.....the ultimate tool for control of the masses with their permission!!!
Scare the # out of them, and then pass laws to spy on them, control them, and say it's all in the name of protecting them.
Thanks for the comments I appreciate a civil debate.
even if he flies a 757, is not exactly an aeronautical engineer.
Capt. Russ Wittenberg, U.S. Air Force – Former Air Force fighter pilot, over 100 combat missions. Commercial pilot for Pan Am and United Airlines for 35 years. Had previously flown the actual two United airplanes that were hijacked on 9/11.
Article: "'The government story they handed us about 9/11 is total B.S." Wittenberg convincingly argued there was absolutely no possibility that Flight 77 could have "descended 7,000 feet in two minutes, all the while performing a steep 270 degree banked turn before crashing into the Pentagon's first floor wall."
"For a guy to just jump into the cockpit and fly like an ace is impossible," said Wittenberg, recalling that when he made the jump from Boeing 727s to the highly sophisticated computerized characteristics of the 737s through 767s, it took him considerable time to feel comfortable flying.
Audio Interview, Capt.Russ Wittenberg, 9/16/04
9/11-The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training
by Nila Sagadevan, Aeronautical Engineer.
As a pilot, I can guarantee you can exceed that number if you are dropping from a higher altitude, you will get wing flutter as the angle of the wings aren't designed for speeds approaching the speed of sound.
These terrorists didn't care about putting too much stress on the wings!
Do you remember the Egypt air crash of a 767? The airframe stayed intact in the dive until after the plane passed mach 1 in the dive.
500+ MPH is easily obtainable in a Boeing 767 at sea level if your intention is to crash it!
reply to post by neformore
Egypt Air 990 (EA990) achieved a maximum speed during an uncontrolled descent, of .99 Mach at about 22,000 feet altitude, and eventually lost it's engine (structural failure) nearer to sea level (as the engine was found about 1200 meters from the main crash area) - at about 425 knots.