Can this be the engine from United 175? Options

[Poacher]

I was browsing the 911blogger earlier today and saw a blog about the engine from the second plane that hit the towers.

www.911blogger.com/node/3935

It led me to a story on Rense here

www.rense.com/1.imagesG/streetE.jpg

There is a pic four down that clearly shows an engine. I am presuming this was what seemed to fly out of the other side of the WTC on impact and land in the streets.

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/streetE.jpg

Along with other photos, is it possible for an engineer to clarify the exact engine type and if it matches United 175 from these photos? I thought this forum might be the best place to get an answer or maybe help with a possible lead.



This post has been edited by Poacher: Oct 21 2006, 07:52 PM

[rob balsamo]

From what i understand.. none of the parts from any of the aircraft were matched via serial numbers, tail numbers and maintenance logs...




I have been in contact with Col. George Nelson at Scholars and we are trying to coordinate efforts.

[Poacher]

Well, to be realistic 'they' are not about to release any evidence that would show non matching parts and will stonewall anyone asking for it.

But if this engine can be proved to be a certain type - and then proved not to match flight 175 then it is another smoking gun.

The photo seems quite detailed and it would take an expert to know, without any doubt, just what it is.

Anyone here know some engineers?



This post has been edited by Poacher: Oct 21 2006, 08:10 PM

[Poacher]

I found another high res pic of an engine that may help idendification.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...p?showtopic=498 &st=0

Its a big file and I am not sure it is the same engine but certainly it is an engine from the crash at the WTC.

[bill]

http://home.att.net/~south.tower/STengine1.htm

this link seems relevent

this engine seems way to small for a 767

[v2rot8]

It looks like the inner most core of an engine, sans blades and outer cowl/casing. That part of the engine would have the most integrity, and therefore, could stay intact, only to be hurdled out of the building.

[JackD]

Big Junk: evidence planted?

The picture is taken sometime between 903am and 959am on 9/11.

http://www.rense.com/1.imagesG/streetE.jpg

That is because you do not see the dust from WTC2 collapse yet.

It may just be me, but does the engine look to have a wee bit of rust or ferroxidation taking place, not just heat/fire/impact damage? as if it had in fact been damaged a while back, not minutes ago?

Then again, what does a freshly -crashed RB211 look like?

This post has been edited by JackD: Dec 12 2006, 09:21 PM

[liberty-911]

I work in a engine shop, I have the photo and will show my co-workers. The engines used on this type of aircraft are called high-bypass engines. Some of my co-workers have overhauled all types of high-bypass engines Pratt, G.E. and Rolls. Each engine is unique but they all have a few things in common. Like a LPC (Low Pressure Compressor) and a LPT (Low Pressure Turbine). The part I don't understand is what happened to the LPC? The shaft at the top of the engine in this photo is where a long steel shaft goes through, and it connects the low compressor to the low turbine. This shaft is about 700-900 pounds, 12-15 feet long, and between 1&1/2 to 2 inch wall thickness (all of these shafts are hollow) depending on the engine type. The question is how the middle part of the engine make it to the ground but the front part and the midshaft of the engine didn't? Now that I think about it the cooling ducts that you see in the photo (the things that look like air nozzles going around in a circle) are similar to a JT-8, but I'am not sure if a JT-9 has the same set up. For your information JT-8's are not high-bypass engines and are not on large aircraft like a B-757. Check back here tomorrow for the correct answer.

This post has been edited by liberty-911: Feb 25 2007, 06:29 PM

[liberty-911]

It seems that most agree that this is not a RB-211 nor CF-6 which leaves JT-9. The person that has the most experience on this engine is on vacation until next week. So I must wait until then to get expert advice. However, their are a few strange appearences, is a hammer handle sitting on top of the engine next to the wood used to sepparting two parts? It seems that it land perfectly verticle and it so happens that not one blade can be seen on the high pressure compressor which has close to 1,000 blades. Also, its diffult to make out if the bearing race is on or off of that shaft. Funny how things happen.

[p.w.rapp]

Any news on that?
*curious*
Zap

[liberty-911]

Not yet, I got real busy, so I' ll try to reach him now.

[waterdancer]

So far these are the highest res. shots of that engine which I've run across:

[liberty-911]

I emailed the above photos to my buddy. I let you know when I hear something.

[JackD]

engine mechanics -- what is likelihood engine crashes from 78th floor, bounces off street, and lands on its end like that? or is that the heavy part, like the old Weebles?

curious -- seems odd that engine is STANDING UP.

if you research that corner of lower NY on 9/11 -- you;'ll find why they call it "spooks corner"

JackD

[amazed!]

Yeah, it sure seems pretty small to me.

[waterdancer]

I recently read somewhere that it initially landed on a car, not the pavement. Sorry I don't have a link on that.

[truthseeker]

I emailed the above photos to my buddy. I let you know when I hear something.

Just wondering, it's been almost 5 months since you posted this, and still nothing from your friend?

Thanks

[SlackerSlayer]

I emailed the above photos to my buddy. I let you know when I hear something.

Wasn't this engine part determined long ago to be from a CFM56 that pushes 737's?

The people that are defending the official hoax have been saying it was junk dropped off a flatbed truck that morning, but that would bring up why they didn't use the same engine as those claimed to have flown into the towers.

In my own way, I've been trying to compare a 737-400 with what is seen on the videos flying into the tower. Any pilots have a look at this yet?

From what I've found on the net, a 737-400 is only decernable from a 767 in three locations, the nose, the end of the fuselage and the meeting point of the fuselage and rudder. The engines have a slightly different size ratio, but I can't tell in the pictures I've seen.

I came in here to post a topic on this so I'll leave any more to that.

This post has been edited by SlackerSlayer: Jan 4 2008, 04:09 PM

[amazed!]

Well the dimensions of the 737 and 767 are quite different, I would expect, not having flown one. Are you saying they have the same engines?

[dMz]

Here's a photo of the business end of a [UNDAMAGED] CFM56 series without nacelle fairing:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:CFM56_dsc04643.jpg


A few other views are available at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Cfm56-3-turbofan.jpeg

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/CFM56

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CFM56

For the CFM56-2 series, the immediately above states:
"The 68.3in diameter fan has an airflow of 788lb/s."

As I recall, the B757/B767 engines have a 90+ inch FAN intake diameter. How this translates exactly to the (aft-end? jet) debris in the photo- I don't know. If any relevant Boeing or CFM/GE/PW/RR engine guys are lurking out there, please belly up to the bar.

Boeing's website was kind enough to provide me with some "coarse" airplane exterior CAD drawings that I am able to work with- thank you very much! I can try to put a B737/B757/B767 comparison drawing on my growing list of projects if necessary...

EDIT: I'd like to amend the OP "engine" terminology- the photos appear to be of the aft "high pressure" PORTION of a jet engine of some flavor. The "engine" proper would include much more machinery than the NYC curbside photos show.

EDIT2: I'm assuming that the green "MURR..." sign is about 4 inches "high." Can anyone from NYC confirm this, or possibly the dimensions of the hexagonal pole or square (4"?) bus station poles in the other photos? Crude size estimates could be scaled approximately if we knew the size of some other objects in the "engine" photos.

EDIT3: See also:
http://img54.echo.cx/img54/8073/streetengine1cutp9xi.jpg


http://www.rense.com/general63/wtcc.htm

This post has been edited by dMole: May 22 2009, 03:19 PM