Engine Experts?, hi res. FEMA photos Options

[skywatcher]

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/sad.gif) I cannot reconcile Waterdancer's info from NTSB with Killtown's info from FAA. Here is a summary of the tail Nos, engines, SNs, dates of delivery & deregistration on Killtown:

UA175 N612UA PW JT9D-7R4D 21873 1983 9/28/05
AA11 N334AA GE CF6-80A2 22332 1987 1/14/02
UA93 N591UA PW PW2037 28142 1996 9/28/05
AA77 N644AA RR RB211-535E4B 24602 1991 1/14/02

Can anybody verify this information?

[tocarm]

Dear Rob,

Regarding your concern that the engine wreckage in that/those photos is a CFM-56 variety...

CFM-56s went on Boeing 737s -300/500 (Classics) and -700/800/900 (New Generations).

Rather than pour over engine wreckage photos that dont' exhibit the fuel nozzle porting and bolting patterns, look REAL CAREFULLY at all the many GOOD PHOTOS of those B-types used against WTC Towers 1 or 2.

CFM-56s are on Boeing 737s.

Boeing 737s (post -200 model) have a very distinguishing airframe characteristic vis-a-vis a Boeing 757 or Boeing 767.

Boeing 737s (post -200) have a DORSEL FIN running from the leading edge of the vertical stabilizer downward at an angle into the top of the fuselage.

This photo clearly shows what I mean - 'The Dorsel Fin':
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0984320/L/

You will note in the following photos of a Boeing 757 and Boeing 767 that they DO NOT have a 'Dorsel Fin':

Boeing 757:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0874333/L/

Boeing 767:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0984488/L/

If you can't find a 'Dorsel Fin' in the photos of the Boeing types employed against WTC Tower 1 or 2 - then forget even considering those wrecked engines as CFM-56 types.

Respectfully yours,
- tocarm
(former GE Aircraft Engines tech rep)

[waterdancer]

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/sad.gif) I cannot reconcile Waterdancer's info from NTSB with Killtown's info from FAA.  Here is a summary of the tail Nos, engines, SNs, dates of delivery & deregistration on Killtown:

UA175 N612UA PW  JT9D-7R4D 21873 1983        9/28/05
AA11 N334AA GE  CF6-80A2  22332 1987 1/14/02
UA93 N591UA PW  PW2037 28142 1996 9/28/05
AA77 N644AA RR  RB211-535E4B 24602 1991 1/14/02

Can anybody verify this information?

Seems like there might indeed be a difference of opinion between the NTSB and the FAA registries (without knowing my airline engines, I couldn't say for sure)

FAA- N612UA (UA 175) http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NN...Numbertxt=612UA archive P&W JT9D SERIES ... NTSB says PW4062

FAA- N334AA (AA 11) http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NN...Numbertxt=334AA archive GE CF6-80 ... NTSB says PW4062

Can't these official govt. agencies even come to agreement with each other? I've read that the FAA relies on the airlines to report the info to them, but still...

For completeness, here are the other two planes FAA records:
http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NN...Numbertxt=591UA archive
http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NN...Numbertxt=644AA archive

This post has been edited by waterdancer: Dec 30 2006, 11:51 AM

[rob balsamo]

Dear Rob,

Regarding your concern that the engine wreckage in that/those photos is a CFM-56 variety...

Im not saying it is of CFM-56 variety... you did... You're the GE engine expert.. not me.. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

remember your quote from above..

Dear Rob,

Looks 'GE' to me -- the center fan air duct, the inner & outer balance piston seals, the inner/outer shell design & patterns in the annunular combustion liner - all typical GEAE design......

But this is most definitely a GE variety.

Now, if that engine found on the sidewalk of Murray St, looks more like a GE engine vs. a Pratt (which was reportedly the engine on UA175)... to a GE engine expert... then there is a problem.


So which is it... does the engine found on Murray St look more like a GE engine??? Or a Pratt...?

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/cheers.gif) (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/salute.gif)

[tocarm]

Dear Rob,

Gotta clean up a little confusion here.

The FEMA photos of that wrecked engine at the Fresh Kills landfill are most assuredly CF6. I can't tell for 100% certainty the Murray St. engine is CF6 without seeing the combustion chamber fuel nozzle ports.

CFM56s are on Boeing 737s. No Boeing 737 was employed vs. the WTC Twin Towers.

Does that clear everything up?

- tocarm

[muhammadcolumbo]

tocarm,

I am looking to identify the combustion chamber of the engine found at the pentagon. Did you made anything about that?

[tocarm]

The photos of engine wreckage allegedly found at the Pentagon cite show the combustion chamber casing of a RB211.

RB211s are used on Boeing 757s however, since no B757 hit the Pentagon, you'd be wise to look into other aerospace applications utilizing the RB211 turbofan - again, this is IF those photos were, in fact, from the Pentagon.

- tocarm

[rob balsamo]

Dear Rob,

Gotta clean up a little confusion here.

Joe,

I posted this...

(IMG:http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f178/myphotos1960/wtcengine.jpg)

Then you posted this...(please note you are talking about the engine found on Murray St as you reference the carpenters square..)

Looks 'GE' to me -- the center fan air duct, the inner & outer balance piston seals, the inner/outer shell design & patterns in the annunular combustion liner - all typical GEAE design.

I see there is a carpenter's square inserted in to the top of wrecked hulk of the top photo. Can't tell if it's a 2', 3' for 4' variety.

I can't/don't see the tell-tale ports for fuel nozzles - that's the 'Dead Give Away' as to what type of model of a mess we are looking at.

But this is most definitely a GE variety.

Based on your above posts which refer to the engine found on Murray St as 'most definitely a GE variety' and the fact that the NTSB reports the engine as a Pratt, wouldnt you say there is a problem? Or.. are you changing your mind now that the engine on Murray St could be a Pratt.....

Please call me when you get a chance Joe, so we can clear this up... Thanks bud...

Also, i received your other package today.. havent had a chance to look through it yet...

Rob

[waterdancer]

A somewhat bigger version of that same image is included below; thought it might be helpful... also, more pics of that engine and other parts can be found here, though the resolution isn't that great. Presumably, this engine would, according to the official story at least, have come from Flight 175 in order to be located at Murray St. Both NSTB and FAA documents indicate it should be a PW, though I'm not sure if they agree on the model or not... according to the 911review site, airdisaster.com gave them an engine model of JT9D-7R4D (a high res. picture of one of these engines is viewable here archive)
(IMG:http://i104.photobucket.com/albums/m177/wassertanzen13/streetengine1.jpg)

This post has been edited by waterdancer: Dec 31 2006, 03:01 AM

[skywatcher]

I don't want to confuse matters, but I want to reconcile Waterdancer's NTSB info on the engines with FAA's, even if the info is not relevant to WTC etc....
Can anybody check the FAA deregistration info from its source? Because what I have does not seem to agree with NTSB for flight 11. That is to say NTSB PW, FAA GE....

Happy New Year everybody (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[waterdancer]

Skywatcher, it's not official, but I did find confirmation of your data here and here for all four flights and also here. The NTSB info seems to be a minority opinion.

This post has been edited by waterdancer: Dec 31 2006, 04:21 AM

[tocarm]

Now I want for all of you to EXCUSE ME for posting what is to follow and grant me your individual and collective FORGIVENESS for what I'm about to post, but..

>>I HAD A BAD DAY WORKING ON AIRPLANES LAST NIGHT AT THE AIRPORT!<<

I'm tired. I'm grumpy. And I am 'impatient' as hell with the whole world right at this moment.

Stupid engineers can't design aircraft equipment, making it readily accessible to repair and/or maintain. They design CRAP. And then one has to put up with the various sorts of vandalism half-drunk passangers cause to the interiors - and you gotta fix that stuff too.

And everyone in the USA is so concerned with getting to their destinations in order to make the 'Big Buck Business Deals' or aching to go to Disneyland vacations, beach resorts and 'exotic' foreign hot spots. Everyone living in and chasing after their own particular version of their desired 'La-La Land'!

And while all of this FRIVOLOUS & innane activity on the parts of so many 'fellow US citizens' just goes on and on and one, they couldn't give two shitz about the mass murder crime of the century - 9-11-2001 - nor about their 'fellow US citizens' in the US Armed Forces thrown into a perpetual pit of hell that is WAR. Just so as long as they have their alcoholic drinks, are fed on time, get to listen to next-to-useless music artists and watch the most ignoramous sorts of entertainment on their t.v. monitors - they are content as a heroine addict who has just shot up!

So...regarding this engine business stuff...

There are thousands of TECH/FIELD REPS from Pratt & Whitney, General Electric, Rolls-Royce, Boeing all over the USA as well as the world. Would SOMEBODY make the effort to CALL UP somebody...anybody...at PWA, GEAE, RR, Boeing and ASK THEM for a 'training manual' on their particular product line of JET ENGINE or AIRCRAFT you are all interested in???

There are thouands of FAA ATC Traffic Controllers within and throughout the USA. Why, there are at least TWO at your local municipal, town or city AIRPORTS. Give them a call - ASK THEM why the FAA/DOD protocols weren't put into effect back on 9-11-2001.

There are around 435 Members of US Congress. There are 100 US Senators. There are 50 US State Governors. If PWA, GEAE, RR, BOEING won't supply you with the information you want regarding ENGINE types and AIRCRAFT types, and if the thousands upon thousands of FAA ATC Air Traffic Controller's won't supply you with the information you want as well - well GET YOUR CONGRESSMAN OR SENATOR to have his/her staff/interns to get you the information you want regarding the physical FACTS concerning 9-11-2001.

Thank you in advance for attempting to do "something substantial".

- tocarm

[muhammadcolumbo]

The photos of engine wreckage allegedly found at the Pentagon cite show the combustion chamber casing of a RB211.

This is the image I spoke about is this one:

(IMG:http://home.planet.nl/~reijd050/JoeR/Pentapix/debris2_engine.jpg)

But here the debris is not the same combustion chamber as the drawing. The distance between the series of holes is not constant in the debris. But it is in the drawing. Also the ratio between the size of the holes and the distance to the cylinder end are different.

May be you can give us a photo of RB211 instead of a drawing?

[tocarm]

Dear Muhammadcolumbo,

I must confess that I'm pretty much "burned out" with this 9-11 stuff. If all of my own personal 9-11 Truth involvement has taught me anything - it is this. The United States of America, its Government officials, its Corporate/Business leaders along with vast segments of the general US populace have "lost their souls" - or perhaps better yet, have "sold their souls" (and are 'living happily ever after in this lifetime of theirs on the dividends of that sale).

The many religious prophecies I know of all indicate this USA nation is coming under God's Divine Justice (or 'wrath' if you prefer - as in 'chastisement').

But since you ask about RB211's photos vs. parts catalog illustrations, I want for you to look to the IPC illustration to the right and note numbered items 40 & 42.
Please not that port corresponds to the port shown in the photo to the left in the lower left hand quadrant of the photo.

Now I must bring something to your attention. Please note that the bolting flange at that same port exhibits a fracture crack running circumfrentially around the combustion case paralleling the case's bolting flange. In other words, the casing is "broken", that there is casing material 'separated' as well as 'missing' for 360 degrees of case circumfrence.

You are NOT looking at a 'factory perfect' combustion casing. Rather, you are looking at casing which has experience and endured sudden and violent "compression forces" as that engine went from 500 mph to zero is about 1/10th of a second.

THAT generates enormous amounts of force upon every last structure and force bearing feature of ANY jet engine undergoing such as radical change in velocity and vector.

Get yourself an empty beer can - stand it up on its end...and then give a quick, short, violent "STOMP" with the bottom of your shoe..

The compression forces you exert on the cylindrical structure of that beer case kinda/sorta illustrates what can and does with "casings" of jet engines in aircraft crashes. They can deform. They can 'compress'. They can break. They can fracture.

Seldom do you see a jet engine involved in a sudden 'crash' in which the turbine section/hot section of the engine is still attached to the entire engine. And the reason for that is that the kinetic energy with resides within the turbine rotor(s) literally rips away the turbine/hot section AWAY FROM the combustion case section.
Likewise with the fan rotor/blades. The inertia, the kinetic energy of that rotating assembly often "rips away" going off in whatever direction that makes it happy.

Regarding photos of RB211s...shoot...just do a Google image search. Tons of photos of all sorts of engines available.

- tocarm

[muhammadcolumbo]

Dear Muhammadcolumbo,

I must confess that I'm pretty much "burned out" with this 9-11 stuff. If all of my own personal 9-11 Truth involvement has taught me anything - it is this. The United States of America, its Government officials, its Corporate/Business leaders along with vast segments of the general US populace have "lost their souls" - or perhaps better yet, have "sold their souls" (and are 'living happily ever after in this lifetime of theirs on the dividends of that sale).

Hello Tocarm,

I understand your point, things are very bad, many lies, worst propheties, ... Ok for all of that. But if I, or any of us here, begin to focus on this kind of ideas, anybody he can be, he is lost, he is ill, and he is dying. That's not a solution.

I made my own way:
- I'll do my best, but not more than can I do.
- I'll be patient, but I'll not stop working.
- I'll focus on facts, on studying each subject up to the last detail.
- I'll remain sincere in what I do.
- I'll not think negative.
- I'll not expect to have things perfect.

Doing that, I can continue the work.

The many religious prophecies I know of all indicate this USA nation is coming under God's Divine Justice (or 'wrath' if you prefer - as in 'chastisement').

Excuse me, but this is a little bit negative thinking. Let's leave it aside for other. Fur us, lut's focus on facts.

Now, for the RB211. I looked for photos. But got only outside pictures, some know maintenance manual drawings, ... Finally nothing new.

All arguments trying to justify the presence of a 757 focus on the type of holes, the number of holes, broken smashed debris, ... But many engines may have this kind of fuel nozzle entry holes, if the debris is smashed it's not more reliable, ...

Sure, a final decision can be done by serial numbers analyse. But this has not been done. Officials wanted to hide these information. So we need an other solution!

Most of the time it's possible to identify objects by measuring the ratios of the same dimensions on similar images. So I did that for the RB211. Here are the drawings. Measurements are made by autocad, so they are precise. For better precision download the images and chek them yourself.

(IMG:http://users.swing.be/muhammadcolumbo/RB211_Measurements-Debris.jpg)
Here the averages ratios are as follow:
Angular distances: ((3.69+3.34+3.24+2.94)/4)/((0.89+0.93+1.13+1.02)/4)=3.327
Linear distances: 18.05/2.26=7.986

(IMG:http://users.swing.be/muhammadcolumbo/RB211_Measurements-Dwg1.jpg)
Angular distances: ((7.33+7.53+6.93)/3)/((4.52+5.04)/2)=1.519
Linear distances: 9.56/1.78=5.371

(IMG:http://users.swing.be/muhammadcolumbo/RB211_Measurements-Dwg2.jpg)
Angular distances: ((8.22+8.47+8.56+7.37)/4)/((3.7+3.66+3.8)/3)=2.192
Linear distances: 12,28/4,59=2.675

There is a big difference in linear distances. From 7.986 to 5.371 or 2.675. As we have only one reference, let's say it's not enough precise.

But for angular measurements we have several dimensions and averaging must give some better precision. But we still have big differences: From 3.327 to 1.519 or 2.192

So we can state that the debris is not the same part as in the maintenance manuals. May be some images are not enough precise. Yes it's possible. That's why I asked to have more picture, more precision on that part.

We must check that dimensions ratio to be sure that the debris is of an RB211 or not. The government refuses to do it, we will do it! Quitely but surely!

That's the same work for the landing arm debris which is not from a 757:
(IMG:http://users.swing.be/muhammadcolumbo/Trains.jpg)

Here the ratios are :
For B757: 2.94/1.2=2.45
For the debris: 2.51/1.3=1.93

Conclusion: The debris is not from a 757.

I think the debris are from a 737-400! But that must be checked. So I need more pictures of the same parts of a 737-400.

This post has been edited by muhammadcolumbo: Jan 2 2007, 06:40 PM

[rob balsamo]

(IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/worthy.gif)

[tocarm]

Dear MuhammedColumbo,

Alright...alright...let us continue on with the idea that the photos of the combustion chamber case in the wreckage at the Pentagon was of a P&W JT8D type.

Let me see if this is going to work - posting the following link from eBay in which the seller is selling a fuel nozzle from a JT8D engine:

http://cgi.ebay.co/ebaymotors/Aircraft-Boe...bayphotohosting

(further commentary to follow IF this link with its photo works.....)

SONOFAGUN! IT WORKED!

As it is said "A Picture is work a thousand words".

Comparing THAT photo of a JT8D fuel nozzle to the Pentagon combustion case photos speaks for itself.

Sorry.


- tocarm

This post has been edited by tocarm: Jan 2 2007, 07:45 PM

[UnderTow]

I am in idiot at the moment becuase I don't get it

a Boeing 727 / 737 Turbine Engine Fuel Nozzle. It is a Pratt & Whitney JT8D engine fuel nozzle. It would make an excellent conversation and show and tell piece. The JT8D was installed on most Boeing 727s, Boeing 737s and DC9s

/shrug (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/dunno.gif)

[tocarm]

Dear Undertow;

MuhammedColumbo is working on his thesis that it was a Boeing 737-400 that was used against the Pentagon.

He is using this geometric photo analysis to dispel the idea that the Pentagon photos show what is very likely the crash wreckage of an RB211 turbofan engine. And 'Why?' he is pursuing that course of action?

Because RB211 turbofan engines are used on Boeing 757s and NOT on Boeing 737s.

The Pentagon crash photos of that particular turbofan engine's combustion chamber case exhibit ROUND fuel nozzle mounting ports with a distinct 6 BOLT CIRCULAR mounting pattern.

Pratt & Whitney JT8D engines were, in fact, used to power both Boeing 727 as well as the earlier 'classic' Boeing 737s.

The ebay photo of a JT8D fuel nozzle is RECTANGULAR in shape with a 4 BOLT RECTANGULAR mounting pattern.

The visual/physical conclusion that one MUST reach is this:

One cannot mount a 4 bolt rectangular FUEL NOZZLE into a 6 bolt CIRCULAR combustion chamber case port.

Or...in order to make it as simple and 'non-technical' as I possibly can for everyone who hasn't, doesn't or wisely chooses NOT TO maintain and repair either airframes or jet engines...

"One cannot put a SQUARE PEG into a ROUND HOLE."

- tocarm

[UnderTow]

No need to type beyond the obvious, I just wasn't sure which part was the peg, and what hole it was supposed to go in.