Question about Shanksville crash

[420ish]

Terral, how did this engine get planted in the ground?

 

[Terral]

Hi 420:

Terral, how did this engine get planted in the ground?

First of all, the empty hole has grass growing on all the inclines (pic) and you are mistaking that rusty 'planted' evidence for a 6-ton Rolls-Royce Engine (like this):

Then you are missing more than 200 seats ..

... 60 Tons of Titanium Frame, two (2) massive wing sections, indestructible landing gear ...

... and a tail section ...

... that stands more than 40 feet above the tarmac. The question for the Loyal Bushie/Obama DUPE cuckoo is:

How did your planted evidence get under the green grass? :0)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu3qDCv-jb4]Debunk This!!![/ame]

420 Is Another Loyal Bushie/Obama DUPE. Good Grief ...

GL,

Terral

 

[Fizz]

Hi 420:

Terral, how did this engine get planted in the ground?

First of all, the empty hole has grass growing on all the inclines (pic) and you are mistaking that rusty 'planted' evidence for a 6-ton Rolls-Royce Engine (like this):

Then you are missing more than 200 seats ..

... 60 Tons of Titanium Frame, two (2) massive wing sections, indestructible landing gear ...

... and a tail section ...

... that stands more than 40 feet above the tarmac. The question for the Loyal Bushie/Obama DUPE cuckoo is:

How did your planted evidence get under the green grass? :0)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vu3qDCv-jb4]Debunk This!!![/ame]

420 Is Another Loyal Bushie/Obama DUPE. Good Grief ...

GL,

Terral

not missing anything terral. where is your proof? 95% of the plane was revovered in your "empty hole" (which you have been proven to be lying about) and the surrounding area. other than showing us a picture of a hole with airplane parts in it and claiming its empty what proof do you have?

where is your proof the engine is RUSTY? you just pulled that one out of your ass, didnt you....

 

[DiveCon]

420 Is Another Loyal Bushie/Obama DUPE. Good Grief ...

GL,

Terral

terral is another fucking stupid moronic troofer that makes stupid claims he cant back up

 

[420ish]

Terral, how did this engine get planted in the ground?

How did your planted evidence get under the green grass?

That's what I'm asking you. How did that engine get under the ground?

... and a tail section ...

Both the tail and wings left a marks in the ground. Do you think they are still going to be intact after crashing at nearly 600 mph?

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtao0f8C4MU&feature=related]YouTube - 'Horrible' scene at Iran crash site - 15 Jul 09[/ame]

 

[DiveCon]

YouTube - 'Horrible' scene at Iran crash site - 15 Jul 09

thats consistent with the wreckage of flight 93, dipshit

 

[Fizz]

YouTube - 'Horrible' scene at Iran crash site - 15 Jul 09

thats consistent with the wreckage of flight 93, dipshit

and once again it needs to be pointed out the the pilots in iran were not intentionally trying to smash the plane into the ground as is the case with flight 93.

 

[DiveCon]

YouTube - 'Horrible' scene at Iran crash site - 15 Jul 09

thats consistent with the wreckage of flight 93, dipshit

and once again it needs to be pointed out the the pilots in iran were not intentionally trying to smash the plane into the ground as is the case with flight 93.

true, but it still nose dived into the ground and there was very little OBVIOUS plane parts laying around
about the same as was recovered from flight 93

 

[420ish]

and once again it needs to be pointed out the the pilots in iran were not intentionally trying to smash the plane into the ground as is the case with flight 93.

That actually wouldn't matter as long as the speeds of impact were similar.

I think the confusion with a lot of truthers is they expect larger debris and for most of the debris to be littered on the field. In the case of Flight 93, it appears most of the debris embedded into the ground because the ground happened to be a reclaimed strip mine.

 

[candycorn]

and once again it needs to be pointed out the the pilots in iran were not intentionally trying to smash the plane into the ground as is the case with flight 93.

That actually wouldn't matter as long as the speeds of impact were similar.

I think the confusion with a lot of truthers is they expect larger debris and for most of the debris to be littered on the field. In the case of Flight 93, it appears most of the debris embedded into the ground because the ground happened to be a reclaimed strip mine.

Angle of impact has a direct relation to debris field.

Think of it like this; if you were tp our a cup of water on the ground, it would land in a puddle.
If you were to take the same cup of water and move the cup as you pour it, you'd end up with a trail of water. Same content, same volume, different distribution pattern.

A nose-dive will give you a different debris field than a leveled off aircraft doing the same velocity.

 

[420ish]

A nose-dive will give you a different debris field than a leveled off aircraft doing the same velocity.

I was just mentioning there's no difference if a plane nose dives and crashes nearly 600 mph into the ground on purpose, or accident.

Flight 93 crashed at around a 45 degree angle if I recall correctly.

 

[420ish]

Does anyone know any reports that state most of the plane debris went into the ground? I'd like to use it in future debates with truthers when they ask what happened to the plane.

 

[DiveCon]

Does anyone know any reports that state most of the plane debris went into the ground? I'd like to use it in future debates with truthers when they ask what happened to the plane.

i dont recall if anyone ever said what percentage was embedded and what they found around the site
it doesnt matter that much to me
as they found 95% of the plane at the site
most of it within a small radius

 

[eots]

If you call 6 miles a small radius

 

[DiveCon]

If you call 6 miles a small radius

it wasnt 6 miles, moron
that was the DRIVING distance

 

[420ish]

i dont recall if anyone ever said what percentage was embedded and what they found around the site
it doesnt matter that much to me
as they found 95% of the plane at the site
most of it within a small radius

I don't need what percentage was embedded if there was no mention of that, just a general official explanation that most of the plane was embedded.

I like to be able to back up my facts when debating truthers just as I ask them to back up their claims.

I had been confused about the debris when first starting to debate these truthers I know. They complained there wasn't enough debris in the field to come from a Boeing 757. I said most had disintegrated from the force of the high-speed impact. I found a few article that stated that. But they countered with the claim that most of the plane was recovered. I hadn't heard that and agreed that would be a contradiction if true, that most of the plane was recovered, but little was present at the scene after the crash.

I started this thread to confirm most of the plane had been recovered, which it turned out to be true; 95%. I was initially stunned when Fizz posted the news article that confirmed most of the plane was indeed recovered, but then Trojan explained that most of the wreckage was located in the hole, which all makes sense as to how most of the plane could have been recovered when so little was visible strewn across the ground. It's because most of the wreckage was actually beneath the surface and that's why they had dug some 45 feet down in the ground.

 

[eots]

Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former combat fighter pilot. Aerospace engineer. Currently Captain at a major airline. Combat experience includes Desert Storm and four tours of duty in Northern and Southern Watch. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle and General Dynamics F-111 Aardvark fighter/bomber. Former President, U.S. Air Force Accident Investigation Board. Also served as Pentagon Weapons Requirement Officer and as a member of the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review. Awarded Distinguish Flying Cross for Heroism, four Air Medals, four Meritorious Service Medals, and nine Aerial Achievement Medals. 20-year Air Force career.


Audio interview with Rob Balsamo 6/25/07: Regarding the 9/11 Commission's account of the impact of Flight 77 at the Pentagon and discrepancies with the actual Flight Data Recorder information:

"After I did my own analysis of it, it's obvious that there's discrepancies between the two stories; between the 9/11 Commission and the flight data recorder information. And I think that's where we really need to focus a lot of our attention to get the help that we need in order to put pressure on government agencies to actually do a real investigation of 9/11. And not just from a security standpoint, but from even an aviation standpoint, like any accident investigation would actually help the aviators out by finding reasons for things happening. ...

The things that really got my attention were the amount of descent rate that you had to have at the end of the flight, of Flight 77, that would have made it practically impossible to hit the light poles. [Editor's note: Destruction of the light poles near the Pentagon by Flight 77 was stated in the 9/11 Commission Report.] Essentially it would have been too high at that point to the point of impact where the main body of the airplane was hitting between the first and second floor of the Pentagon. ...

You know, I'd ride my bike to the Pentagon. So, you know I'm a little bit familiar with that area. [Editor's note: Lt. Col. Latas served as a Weapons Requirement Officer at the Pentagon.] But, you know, that kind of descent rate it would have been impossible essentially for the results that we see physically from what the flight data recorder was recording. Like I say, that's an area that I think deserves explanation. ...

The ground track [the path of the airplane] is off from the 9/11 Commission. There are several things that can be brought up but it's been a while since I've seen the film and looked at the flight data recorder. And I can't think of all the discrepancies I saw, but there are several there. [The film he refers to is the video documentary, Pandora's Black Box, Chapter 2, Flight of American 77.] ...

And I think that we Americans need to demand further investigation just to clarify the discrepancies that you've [Pilots for 9/11 Truth] found. And I think that we need to be getting on the phone with our Congressmen and women and letting them know that we don't accept the excuses that we're hearing now, that we want true investigators to do a true investigation." Google Videos




Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – FAA certified commercial pilot. Former U.S. Air Force aircraft accident investigator and airplane parts authority. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career. FAA certified Airframe and Powerplant Mechanic.


Essay: "In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft -- and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. ...

The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. …
With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged. …

As painful and heartbreaking as was the loss of innocent lives and the lingering health problems of thousands more, a most troublesome and nightmarish probability remains that so many Americans appear to be involved in the most heinous conspiracy in our country's history." Physics911, by Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-Eleven, 9/11/2001




Lt. Col. David Gapp, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Retired Pilot and Qualified Aircraft Accident Investigator. Served as President, Aircraft Accident Board. Military aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Cessna T-37 Dragonfly "Tweet", Northrup T-38 Talon. 3,000+ total hours flown. 31 years of U.S. Air Force service. One year as commercial pilot for Continental Airlines. Commercial aircraft flown: ATR-42.
Member: Pilots for 9/11 Truth Association Statement: "Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe that have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day since the United States Government doesn't seem to be very forthcoming with answers."





Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Former U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. Former Head of the Department of Aeronautical Engineering and Assistant Dean at the U.S. Air Force Institute of Technology. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech). Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter. 22-year Air Force career. Also taught Mathematics and English at the University of Southern California, the University of Maryland, and Phillips University.
Member: Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth Association Statement:

"Scholars and professionals with various kinds of expertise---including architects, engineers, firefighters, intelligence officers, lawyers, medical professionals, military officers, philosophers, religious leaders, physical scientists, and pilots---have spoken out about radical discrepancies between the official account of the 9/11 attacks and what they, as independent researchers, have learned.

They have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that, therefore, the official “investigations” have really been cover-up operations.



Lt. Cdr. Bernard J. Smith, U.S. Nay (ret) – Retired carrier Naval Aviator and former aircraft accident investigator.
Statement in support of Architects and Engineers petition:

"From my several years experience as an aircraft accident investigator for the U.S.Navy, I am appalled at the basic principles of investigation being ignored; ie, premature destruction of evidence, reliable eye witness accounts ignored, etc. To allow the official version to be the final word in this planned event, as is evident from the AE9/11 investigation, would be a major disservice to the victims and the nation." AE911Truth



Patriots Question 9/11 - Responsible Criticism of the 9/11 Commission Report

 

[Tom Clancy]

Still no Proof, just more Questions and This guy wants an Investigation, blah blah.. In all the time you folks post and find this shit you could've been using that time for "Investigation".

 

[eots]

Still no Proof, just more Questions and This guy wants an Investigation, blah blah.. In all the time you folks post and find this shit you could've been using that time for "Investigation".

Top military crash investigators put their reputations on the line to say there is something wrong here and this is the shit ass response you give..pure avoidence..pure denial