Nasa Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The " Elephant In The Room ", PilotsFor911Truth.org Rating Options

[rob balsamo]

NASA Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The "Elephant In The Room"


06/22/2010 - (PilotsFor911Truth.org) Recently Pilots For 9/11 Truth have analyzed the speeds reported for the aircraft utilized on 9/11. Numerous aviation experts have voiced their concerns regarding the extremely excessive speeds reported above Maximum Operating for the 757 and 767, particularly, United and American Airlines 757/767 Captains who have actual flight time in all 4 aircraft reportedly used on 9/11. These experts state the speeds are impossible to achieve near sea level in thick air if the aircraft were a standard 757/767 as reported. Combined with the fact the airplane which was reported to strike the south tower of the World Trade Center was also producing high G Loading while turning and pulling out from a dive, the whole issue becomes incomprehensible to fathom a standard 767 can perform such maneuvers at such intense speeds exceeding Maximum Operating limits of the aircraft. Especially for those who research the topic thoroughly and have expertise in aviation.

Co-Founder of Pilots For 9/11 Truth Rob Balsamo recently interviewed a former NASA Flight Director in charge of flight control systems at the NASA Dryden Flight Research facility who is also speaking out after viewing the latest presentation by Pilots For 9/11 Truth - "9/11: World Trade Center Attack".

Retired NASA Senior Executive Dwain Deets published his concerns on the matter at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) as follows:

A Responsibility to Explain an Aeronautical Improbability
Dwain Deets
NASA Dryden Flight Research Center (Senior Executive Service - retired)
AIAA Associate Fellow

The airplane was UA175, a Boeing 767-200, shortly before crashing into World Trade Center Tower 2. Based on analysis of radar data, the National Transportation and Safety Board reported the groundspeed just before impact as 510 knots. This is well beyond the maximum operating velocity of 360 knots, and maximum dive velocity of 410 knots. The possibilities as I see them are: (1) this wasn’t a standard 767-200; (2) the radar data was compromised in some manner; (3) the NTSB analysis was erroneous; or (4) the 767 flew well beyond its flight envelope, was controllable, and managed to hit a relatively small target. Which organization has the greater responsibility for acknowledging the elephant in the room? The NTSB, NASA, Boeing, or the AIAA? Have engineers authored papers, but the AIAA or NASA won’t publish them? Or, does the ethical responsibility lie not with organizations, but with individual aeronautical engineers? Have engineers just looked the other way?

The above entry remained at the moderated AIAA Aerospace America Forum for approximately two weeks before being removed without explanation. Click "Who is Ethically Responsible" submitted by Dwain Deets at the Pilots For 9/11 Truth Forum for discussion on this entry at AIAA.

Dwain Deets credentials and experience are as follows:

Dwain Deets
MS Physics, MS Eng
Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center
Served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden
Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award
Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988)
Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics
Associate Fellow - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)
Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000
Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems
- Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers
Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology
37 year NASA career

It is established based on corroborated expert statements, raw data, and precedent, that the extremely excessive speed reported for the 9/11 aircraft is truly the "Elephant In The Room" and needs to be thoroughly investigated.

For summary of speed analysis, please see article 9/11: Speeds Reported For World Trade Center Attack Aircraft Analyzed.

To view the scene from "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" analyzing the reported speeds in more detail, please click here.

For full detailed analysis covering the events which took place in New York City on September 11, 2001, interviews with experts, including analysis of "Hijacker" pilot skill, Black Box recovery and more... please view the latest presentation from Pilots For 9/11 Truth, "9/11: World Trade Center Attack".

Founded in August 2006, Pilots For 9/11 Truth is a growing organization of aviation professionals from around the globe. The organization has also analyzed Flight Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for the Pentagon Attack and the events in Shanksville, PA. The data does not support the government story. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, there is a growing mountain of conflicting information and data in which government agencies and officials refuse to acknowledge. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Core member list continues to grow.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/core.html for full member list.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/join to join.

###

[panthercat]

Alas, I wasn't the one who got to break our flying machines, just fix them. The airframe is primarily aluminum and having seen blobs of molten aluminum after a fire, if large twin engine transports did in fact crash into those buildings, where was all of that aluminum debris? Aluminum can't be picked up with an electromagnet, so where did it go? They hauled off the steel, and after digging through the concrete debris, there should have been a lot of aluminum blobs laying around. There was no mention of it and since it melts and does not disintegrate like we were told, around 140,000 pounds should have been strewn about WTC1&2. Fire is capable of a lot of things, but it doesn’t do what we were told it did that day.

As for the videos, something like that could have been manufactured in a studio. A good video editor can make anything appear real. The initial emotional impact clouded a lot of minds.

[Obwon]

Alas, I wasn't the one who got to break our flying machines, just fix them. The airframe is primarily aluminum and having seen blobs of molten aluminum after a fire, if large twin engine transports did in fact crash into those buildings, where was all of that aluminum debris? Aluminum can't be picked up with an electromagnet, so where did it go? They hauled off the steel, and after digging through the concrete debris, there should have been a lot of aluminum blobs laying around. There was no mention of it and since it melts and does not disintegrate like we were told, around 140,000 pounds should have been strewn about WTC1&2. Fire is capable of a lot of things, but it doesn’t do what we were told it did that day.

As for the videos, something like that could have been manufactured in a studio. A good video editor can make anything appear real. The initial emotional impact clouded a lot of minds.

Now that I think about it, it doesn't seem that the final flight paths are achievable so quickly, requiring a change of direction of the huge aircraft in so little time, to actually be lined up to penetrate the towers completely. If the paths were the least bit off perpendicular, when the planes hit, the crafts should have begun to rotate. That's got to yield a vastly different debris configuration than that shown. No?... Then what say ye all?

But that aside! Most people today, unlike people of yesteryear when movies were new, we've learned to watch movies and videos and almost automatically suspend disbelief to allow ourselves to be entertained by them. In the long lost time, people had no such reflexive reactions, thus did they give producers and directors the nightmarish tasks of trying to closely parallel reality as close as they could. Resulting in much expensive film hitting the cutting room floor, I'm sure.

Then too there's the matter of a general level of trust, that people tend to give to their news agencies. They don't expect to see blatant lies put on screen by the news people. But they do forgive "dramatizational" fare. I remember seeing something almost impossible on a tv news program long ago, I reflexively put it down as a dramatization, until the nooze people said it was an actual video. It was flt 800 climbing 8,000 feet, after the nose of the craft had come off! Even with my small store of lay persons knowledge, I knew that was impossible, since the center of gravity was no longer over the center of lift -- and that has to yield rotation instead. But some people brought it, even a person, or two, on usenet who claimed to hold several degrees. Of course, in the end the NTSB claimed they didn't produce the video, and the CIA announced it wasn't their doing, so the FBI stepped forward to take the blame for it, saying they were only trying to help with a dramatization. Ha!

But, with 9-11 things were kept moving at a very fast pace, new things were being claimed as being discovered almost daily, so there wasn't much focus on what had actually happened, and the President and his merry men were out their whipping up a formidable patriotic fervor, easy for things to get "lost in the sauce" as it were. The few of us who were asking questions, found ourselves marginalized by suffocating ignorance and the deafening media trumpet blare. If a chorus arose around any question, the media quickly stepped in, restated the question in a non-critical way, so that it could be answered with easily made-up nonsense, then quickly moved on. Making the questioners look silly, in the eyes of the many who thought the question was either silly and/or that it had been answered adroitly.

Well, way back then, I was the only one I knew who was asking "but... where is the debris?"
I watched the fireball emerge from the south tower on teevee, I waited breathlessly for the much heavier than air and burning fuel, pieces of plane, to exhibit the wake vortexes of solid aircraft debris to come trailing flames down through the fireball. It never happened. And that was funny because... Neither were pieces of furniture, chairs, desks, tables, computers etc., that should have been on that floor, coming through the fireball either. So the fuel that was being ejected from the tower, had to leave after the outer wall had been breeched otherwise it's pieces would have made wake vortexes, which they didn't. Nothing solid came through that fireball and I thought that was extremely odd. Oh yes, if you look you can see trails of burning liquid coming down, but no wake vortexes for anything solid. Go figure!