IPB




POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
When Aircraft Hit Movable Objects

dMz
post Jun 13 2008, 07:11 PM
Post #1



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Here is a resource on aircraft bird strikes:

http://www.birdstrike.org/events/signif.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRQvTDj3374...feature=related

Video of bird strike to starboard ® 757 engine in UK
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uYNpB-8_BSo

F16 Bird strike & Eject
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zN_Zl64OQEw...feature=related

Similar to above, with flameout
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gc-XiO4ojzk...feature=related

Gibraltar takeoff and emergency landing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35FVYzf0uiY...feature=related

Windshield FEA animation
http://www.drd.com/searchable/Consulting/Consult_Index.html
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Jun 14 2008, 01:03 AM
Post #2



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Here are more resources:

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.sear...;disp_order=asc

http://wildlife.pr.erau.edu/Pictures.htm

http://wildlife.pr.erau.edu/FAADatabase.htm

EDIT: These are some pretty gory photos of a Bald Eagle that struck a C-130 apparently tail-first- you've been warned...

http://www.rapp.org/archives/2005/08/c130_bird_strike/

Mirrored at:
http://www.rapp.org/archives/2005/08/c130_bird_strike/

And at:
http://media.militaryphotos.net/photos/shrek
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ricochet
post Jun 14 2008, 03:25 PM
Post #3





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 746
Joined: 25-April 08
From: Canada
Member No.: 3,225



If AA77's right engine struck the generator trailer in the manner described, then the engine should have been sheared off. I refer you to the El Al 1862 that crashed into the apartment complex in Amsterdam.
QUOTE
1.On October 4, 1992, El Al Flight 1862, a 747-200 cargo aircraft, took off from Schiphol Airport nearAmsterdam. Some seven minutes later the #3 engine and pylon separated from the right wing in anoutboard and rearward direction. The #3 engine hit the #4 engine, causing this engine and its pylonalso to separate from the wing. Both engines and pylons fell into a lake about 25 km east ofSchiphol.During engine separation the right wing leading edge was extensively damaged. This damage,together with loss of the engines, made control of the aircraft extremely difficult (NetherlandsAviation Safety Board 1994). An attempt was made to return to Schiphol by flying several right-hand descending turns. During these turns the aircraft flew north over Amsterdam, then east, southand finally westwards to try and line up with an east-west runway. However, the aircraft becameuncontrollable and crashed into an apartment block in a suburb 13 km east of Schiphol.Subsequent investigation of the accident involved many organisations, including Boeing, Prattand Whitney, El Al, airworthiness authorities from Israel, the Netherlands and USA, accidentinvestigation boards from the UK and USA, the Technion Israel Institute of Technology and theNLR. Within the NLR several divisions and departments within divisions assisted in theinvestigation. The NLR Structures and Materials division was given the task of fractographic andmetallurgical investigation of components connecting the #3 engine pylon to the right wing. Thesecomponents were also investigated by Boeing, and Technion was also involved.This paper presents the NLR’s investigation of the #3 engine pylon components, done undercontract to the Netherlands Department of Civil Aviation (RLD). The paper also takes into accountthe contribution from other investigators in order to describe the most probable cause and sequenceof damage leading to separation of the #3 engine and pylon from the right wing of the aircraft.Finally, a short description is given of the measures instituted by Boeing to improve the safety ofpylon-to-wing connections.

2.THE #3 ENGINE PYLON-TO-WING CONNECTIONSFigure 1 is a schematic of the engine pylon-to-wing connections. These connections are at the aftend of the upper link, the aft end of the diagonal brace, and at the two mid-spar fittings. The design incorporates six "fuse pins" which are less strong than other parts of the connections. If extremeloads occur on an engine and pylon, for example during extreme turbulence or an emergencylanding, the fuse pins are supposed to shear off and allow a clean separation from the wing, therebyprecluding damage to the wing and possible rupture of the wing fuel tank. However, as found in thepresent case, and at least one other, engine and pylon separation was accompanied by severe damageto the wing leading edge.Many of the components of the #3 engine pylon-to-wing connections of El Al Flight 1862 wererecovered. These were (1) the forward part of the upper link, containing an intact fuse pin, (2) thediagonal brace with the forward fuse pin intact but the aft fuse pin missing, (3) the inboard mid-sparpylon and wing fittings with the fuse pin missing, (4) the outboard mid-spar pylon fitting, and (5)part of the outboard mid-spar wing fitting containing a sheared-off fuse pin.Macroscopic inspection of the components indicated that the upper link and diagonal brace hadbroken away owing to overload as the # 3 engine and pylon separated in an outboard direction.


Full report here. http://www.nlr.nl/id~4823/lang~en.pdf

The trailer box is constucted of heavy corrugated steel, the photos show extensive damage to the top of the container. The fuse pins on the engine mounts would have done their job and sheared off dropping the engine. Also note the top of the trailer would have been 13 feet high, add the height of the engine mounted underneath the aircraft and that would put the belly of AA77 at some 22 feet high.

This post has been edited by Ricochet: Jun 14 2008, 03:27 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Aug 18 2008, 02:04 AM
Post #4



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



This is more accurately when movable objects or other aircraft hit aircraft (from Hurricane Wilma):

Airbus A300-A300B2K-3C N101GA with hole torn in fuselage

http://www.pbase.com/airlinerphotos/image/52257564

Douglas DC3-S1C3G N123DZ with broken wing

http://www.pbase.com/airlinerphotos/image/52164920

Wilma gallery
http://www.pbase.com/airlinerphotos/opf_wilmadamage
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Oct 7 2008, 03:50 PM
Post #5



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Here's a mid-air collision between two F/A-18 aircraft (and both pilots were fine). Both aircraft were scrapped.

http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Stor...r/story0011.htm
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Omega892R09
post Oct 8 2008, 02:50 PM
Post #6





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 2,194
Joined: 29-September 07
From: Hampshire, UK.
Member No.: 2,274



Thanks for those links dMole.

Nearby I found this one which demonstrates the trouble even supersonic military jets can get in when they go outside the flight envelope in the transonic region, never mind a Flight 77:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qMtnFtB38I...feature=related

I may have posted this up here before but it is worth repeating IMHO.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Oct 8 2008, 03:06 PM
Post #7



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



Now that you mention it O892, I suppose that air molecules would certainly qualify as "movable objects," of course times Avogadro's Number [a few dozen or hundred times, for say something with an F-14 Tomcat's area and drag coefficient(s) ]. wink.gif

EDIT: "Officially" the F-14 looks to be designed/rated for M1.88:

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/f-14.htm
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ULTIMA1
post Oct 13 2008, 05:39 AM
Post #8





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 52
Joined: 17-January 07
From: PA
Member No.: 464



QUOTE (dMole @ Jun 11 2008, 10:11 PM) *
Here is a resource on aircraft bird strikes:


Some photos of bird strikes on a 767 at takeoff (slow speed) Showing how fragile the wing and nose of the plane are.

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/ph...pg?t=1223890617

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/ph...pg?t=1223890587

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/ph...pg?t=1223890670

http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n268/ph...pg?t=1223890645

This post has been edited by ULTIMA1: Oct 13 2008, 05:39 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dMz
post Jan 29 2009, 07:09 AM
Post #9



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 5,019
Joined: 2-October 07
From: USA, a Federal corporation
Member No.: 2,294



C-130 and Hawk in nosecone

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:C-130_an...one_outside.jpg



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bird_strike
--------------------------
Inside view

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:C-130_an...de_nosecone.jpg

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd August 2014 - 05:49 AM