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.
The Pilots club, once again, doesn't seem to have its collective stories together.
Originally posted by Reign02
I saw the 2nd plane impact, It was definatley a plane I'll tell you that! No missile, or UAV or anything else. It was a plane. Now was it one of the specific flights ? Who knows? Could it have been remote controlled? I think it's a possibility from what I'm seeing on this thread.
Some great info inside this one!!!!
Originally posted by weedwhacker
Joking, right???
Trying to equate a video of a guy doing a COIN trick? To an AIRPLANE that hit the PENTAGON???
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Evidence for my argument -
Data - NTSB, Boeing, Limits set by the manufacturer based on flight/wind tunnel testing
Precedent - EA990, China Airlines 747SP, TWA 727, 737, Modified DC-8, all suffered in flight structural failure, crash and/or lost control and needed 10's of thousand of feet to recover, or was modified to exceed it's manufacturer's set limits.
Numerous verified experts
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Especially if you feel there can be a 250 knot discrepancy.
[edit on 31-8-2010 by TiffanyInLA]
You come to web discussion boards like ATS or Loose Change or JREF or create your own because no competent authority will take you seriously because...well...your claims are made up of "cynical delusion and fantasy".
You spend your time here because it is useless to spend it anywhere else.
Originally posted by Xtrozero
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Especially if you feel there can be a 250 knot discrepancy.
[edit on 31-8-2010 by TiffanyInLA]
I didn't say I "feel" anything, I'm asking what does the speed prove either way. I'm not suggesting any speed, but I did say that a flight profile could be done at slower speeds and still hit the towers on the run in at 500 plus in a Kamikaze type scenario.
Originally posted by Xtrozero
If you suggest they were in some kind of tight turn to hit the towers at 500 plus knots then now we are talking structure integrity of the wings plus Gs forces and finally just aircraft/pilot capabilities. This would quickly go from not too difficult to impossible to accomplish.
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
@trebor -
Your "verified expert" level remains at 0 because of the fact people like William "Pinch" Paisley cannot even obtain an FAA pilot certificate.
Your precedent level also remains at 0, because every single piece of evidence you have tried to present as precedent prove an aircraft cannot exceed it's Vmo by 150 knots without losing control, shedding parts, needing 30,000+ feet to recover, or crashed, well below Vmo+150. The one aircraft that did exceed it's Mmo by a wide margin was admittedly modified.
Again, the only thing you have REMOTELY close to a "verified expert" is perhaps William "Pinch" Paisley - a rabid Bush supporter who couldn't even make it to the front seat, let alone Top Gun, nor obtain an FAA Airman certificate. This is why your "Verified Expert" column remains at zero.
And yet you call these people "barnstormers who couldn't hit a barn".
Let us know when you get some evidence for your argument.
Originally posted by earthdude
How much velocity past VMO, that has been documented by an unmodified and similar airplane will poo-poo the pilots for truth's claims?
Again, its not so much duration rather than when it hits its "design limits" it breaks. Period.
Originally posted by trebor451
And yet you call these people "barnstormers who couldn't hit a barn".
*I* don't say that! THEY do! THEY are the ones who say they could not hit a 1,300 foot tall by 208 foot wide building with a 767! Don't grump at ME...grump at THEM! A standard runway is only 150 - 200 feet wide - if your experts can't hit a target as big as the WTC, don't blame me. I'm just the messenger!
Originally posted by trebor451
Originally posted by earthdude
How much velocity past VMO, that has been documented by an unmodified and similar airplane will poo-poo the pilots for truth's claims?
If "aptain Bob Balsamo" of the Pilot's club could state, without a doubt, when an aircraft would break, we could answer that question.
Originally posted by impressme
Perhaps, it is the many OS believers that are "cynical delusion and living in a fantasy,”
because they can not handle the truth.
Originally posted by earthdude
How much velocity past VMO, that has been documented by an unmodified and similar airplane will poo-poo the pilots for truth's claims?
Ok I'll go with 350 knots then. Still researching.
[edit on 2-9-2010 by earthdude]
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Originally posted by earthdude
How much velocity past VMO, that has been documented by an unmodified and similar airplane will poo-poo the pilots for truth's claims?
Ok I'll go with 350 knots then. Still researching.
[edit on 2-9-2010 by earthdude]
You need to find an aircraft which exceeded it's Vmo by 150 knots, pulled G's, remained stable/controllable, and survived.
/pg22#pid9479102