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 )

10 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 6 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Nasa Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The " Elephant In The Room ", PilotsFor911Truth.org

Rating 5 V
 
SanderO
post Jun 27 2010, 10:49 PM
Post #61





Group: Troll
Posts: 1,174
Joined: 23-December 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,814



911 Blogger is controlled by people with an agenda and they silence anyone who they decide is not towing the party line. It appears to be an open resource, but it's not. It's propaganda just the same.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Jun 28 2010, 12:32 AM
Post #62



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,675
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Hi All,

I am glad to see this article is sparking lively discussion, but please, lets try to stick to topic. Bring the WTC collapse discussion to the appropriate forum section.

Thanks.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Jun 28 2010, 07:25 AM
Post #63



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,675
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Continued WTC Collapse discussion split and moved to here...

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=20198

Please stay on topic.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Obwon
post Jun 28 2010, 07:49 AM
Post #64





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 560
Joined: 29-November 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,712



Now, as Rob suggests, back to the topic at hand:

I don't see a mention of a duration for the excessive flight speeds! Does anyone know
when each flight began to exceed it's design limitations?

Also, when a craft exceeds it's design limitations, how long can it be expected to survive?

As a lay person I get the general impression that, even if these unskilled pilots managed to somehow exceed the speed limits, they would not be prepared for what happens next.
Since, unless I miss my guess, the flight characteristics of the aircraft become very different from what is normally expected (not that the skyjackers would even know "normal" from special).

So to my mind, an 'x' or an arrow and/or a number of minutes or seconds, during which the aircraft were flown past their design parameters, would be most helpful.

This post has been edited by Obwon: Jun 28 2010, 07:51 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Jun 28 2010, 09:11 AM
Post #65



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,675
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (Obwon @ Jun 28 2010, 07:49 AM) *
Now, as Rob suggests, back to the topic at hand:


Thank you.


QUOTE
I don't see a mention of a duration for the excessive flight speeds! Does anyone know
when each flight began to exceed it's design limitations?



I am so glad you asked.

Those who make excuse for the govt story love to claim, "The aircraft was only at this speed for a few seconds and then crashed. It can sustain this speed for a few seconds you idiot!"

Of course they offer zero proof for their claim. Not to mention the fact they are wrong.

I cut some scenes from "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" due to the fact it was technical enough. I have calculated the speeds based on radar data for the last minute, a full 60 seconds.

The average speed over this straight line path is 501 knots. The average speed over the last 2 radar sweeps (24 seconds) is 509 knots. Remember, this is groundspeed. True airspeed will be a few knots higher due to a turn into a headwind. This is also straight line distance measurement over time. Actual speed will also be a few knots higher as the path is curved (the aircraft was changing direction), covering more distance (again, I don't want to get too technical when the simple measurements will serve its purpose. K.I.S.S.)

During this time, the aircraft is changing direction and pulling out of a dive, ie. Pulling G loads.

As pointed out in the presentation, please familiarize yourself with a Vg diagram.

Here is a basic Vg diagram.



Now, the above diagram is for a primary aircraft used to instruct student pilots. But it gives you a good idea of what to think about when an aircraft exceeds its design limits.

It is not so much "duration" as it is a hard limit of combined stress on the airframe, speed and maneuvering.

As stated many times, we have been pressuring Boeing to release Wind Tunnel data (which would include the above Vg diagram for a specific aircraft). We hit brick walls.

Now, I just noticed this diagram pop up on the web the other day when I did a search (it wasn't available when I made the film). It is a Vg diagram for the P-51 Mustang.



Notice the structural failure shaded area occurs in the P-51 at roughly 505 mph/438 knots.

Notice the "Limit Dive Speed" in the above diagram. The "Limit Dive Speed" (Vd) for the 767 is 420 knots. 425 KEAS is when Egypt Air 990 broke apart in flight.

The govt expects us to believe a 767 with its bulky airframe can pull G loads and maneuver to stike a target with a 25 foot margin for error each side of wing tip -- almost 80 knots faster than the structural failure limit of a slick P-51 airframe?

I dont think so.

That is why you see so many experts speaking out.

http://pilotsfgor911truth.org/core

The list grows.


QUOTE
Also, when a craft exceeds it's design limitations, how long can it be expected to survive?


Again, it's not so much duration rather that when it hits its "design limits" it breaks. Period. (Edit: This statement needs clarification as duhbunkers are trying to spin it... They love to cherrypick and spin... This does NOT mean that 1 knot over Vd and it breaks, there is a difference, we are speaking in terms of a "design limit" of anything... note the quotation marks. If you bend a pencil, when does it break? At it's "design limit". When anything breaks, it is safe to say it hit it's "design limit". This is why I put "design limit" in quotation marks. This was clarified with my original statement below, but duhbunkers apparently weren't able to comprehend the meaning of the language in context. Hopefully this clear it up for them, but I doubt it. The duhbunker most responsible for this type of cherrypicking is trebor/pinch/sweetpea/streetxcar + 15 other socks. His real name is Bill Paisley. He is a Military flight school washout who couldn't make it to the front seat nor obtain an FAA pilot certificate and now works for the Pentagon as a Blogger cyber-stalking our work and me personally. It wasn't until I threatened to report him for cyber-stalking that he stopped sending harassing emails. Now all he can do is attempt character assassination through his daily obsession. Learn more here on Trebor)

Keeping it simple, how long can you hold a pencil at its breaking point? You cant, because it already broke. Its called a breaking point for a reason.

American 587 lost it's tail during a wake turbulence upset, losing control, killing all on board.



I think it's safe to say it hit it's "design limit"?

This happened well below Vd, at departure speeds.

Edit2: As expected, duhbunkers still don't understand my edit above and are in full spin mode piling in as many clowns as they can. Let me see if I can further clarify.

Note in my original post I stated "Notice the "Limit Dive Speed" in the above diagram. The "Limit Dive Speed" (Vd) for the 767 is 420 knots. 425 KEAS is when Egypt Air 990 broke apart in flight."

Now if I thought an aircraft "breaks apart at 1 knot over Vd", my original statement above based on the analysis found in 9/11 World Trade Center Attack contradicts such a premise as EA990 did not suffer structural failure at 1 knot above Vd. It happened at 5 knots above. This was it's "design limit" in the context of this post. Other aircraft suffered structural failure at 20, 30, 50, 70 knots over their Vd (Dive speed), some well before (as is the case with AA587). This was their "design limit", again, in the context of this post. Not one positively identified aircraft in the history of aviation has EVER exceeded Vd (Dive speed, end of flight envelope and beginning of the structural failure zone on every V-G diagram) by more than 150 knots and maintained control, stability and/or structural integrity. We are still waiting for the duhbunkers to provide one.

It is also interesting to note that duhbunkers like to call me a fraud, yet I can be verified in the FAA database. Meanwhile, every single person they source who claims to be a pilot (maybe three total.. .as not many more will endorse their crap), do not know the difference between Vne and Vmo, cannot determine the difference between an A320 and a 757, and are all anonymous.

Now, since the duhbunkers still won't comprehend what was just written...

If Obwon had asked - "Also, when a craft exceeds Vd, how long can it be expected to survive?"

I would have told him - It depends on conditions and aircraft. But if comparing apples to apples, based on EA990, the aircraft reached 425 knots before suffering structural failure. This is 5 knots into the structural failure zone of a 767 V-G diagram. This is 85 knots less than the speeds reported for the South Tower aircraft. As speed increases, flight conditions become exponentially worse. Also keep in mind that the South Tower aircraft pulled more G's than EA990 as well.

Duhbunkers still won't get it, or will try to spin it, but layman and real pilots will be able to understand.

Bottom line, I never claimed an aircraft "instantly breaks apart at 1 knot over Vd" or "as soon as a plane passed the red zone on [the] diagram then it would instantly break apart". Our own analysis proves we never would make such a statement based on EA990 analysis alone. Duhbunkers have nothing but strawman arguments, character assassination, are obsessed with our work yet will never confront us... and will certainly never debate the facts. As usual.

Again, you don't get flak unless you're over the target.

This post has been edited by rob balsamo: Feb 15 2012, 03:47 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aerohead
post Jun 28 2010, 04:34 PM
Post #66





Group: Core Member
Posts: 327
Joined: 13-July 09
From: State of Heightened Awareness
Member No.: 4,476



There is no doubt in my mind what this was.
Nothwoods reborn, with militarized drones and
mid-air plane swaps. A plan so extravagant that
it has laughable deniability and awesome amounts of
propaganda to cover it up.

The fact that this 767 exceeded flight 990 by 85 knots
should awaken the educated to what this was.
Denial is a powerful mechanism that drives people to
blindness, and to accepting the propaganda of their
brutal masters. Instead of standing up for what they
know is right, and facing their fear, they cave in and crumble
like a weak little slave. A cowards way out.
Im glad our founders werent cowards.


Funny how we didnt see even a shake or flutter of the wings
of those birds going into the towers. Amazing.
Supersonic 767's !! Who would have thought ! haha


Drones are now being actively used in the middle east.
Wonder how long it will be before they patrol all our cities
and enforce the new world order agenda ?

This post has been edited by aerohead: Jun 28 2010, 04:35 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Jun 28 2010, 06:01 PM
Post #67





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



Personally, I do not see any plane “Swaps”. We know the two AA flights never existed!

The twin tower flights appear to be remote controlled from the get go.

The third non- existing flight was intended to hit #7. Oops…something went wrong.

These planes were specially modified and tested by the good old boys. (Perhaps at Edwards AFB?)

I was wondering if it would be necessary to plant a honing device, in the towers to insure a perfect target or does external control work as well?

This post has been edited by elreb: Jun 28 2010, 07:34 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SanderO
post Jun 28 2010, 06:53 PM
Post #68





Group: Troll
Posts: 1,174
Joined: 23-December 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,814



If the planes were not the claimed ones and they were remote piloted drones, they likely had some explosive cargo or delivered some other hi temp incendiary which destroyed enough core columns so that the upper structure collapsed down and upon falling on the lower sections they too collapsed. That is... assuming the drones carried more than fuel.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Jun 28 2010, 07:32 PM
Post #69





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



I want to stay as close on subject as possible and not be deposed to never-land by Rob but these planes seem to have been provided only as distractions, rather that objects of destruction.

The “Real” question is could a specifically modified 757/767 under computer control travel up to 501 knots then put the hammer down to 509 knots?

The original claimed planes with seasoned pilots admit, they could not pull it off.

As drones, I would have kept them under fueled to gain speed.

This post has been edited by elreb: Jun 28 2010, 08:08 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Jun 28 2010, 09:54 PM
Post #70



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,675
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (elreb @ Jun 28 2010, 06:01 PM) *
I was wondering if it would be necessary to plant a honing device, in the towers to insure a perfect target or does external control work as well?



Check this out...

Less than 1 Meter accuracy.

See attached.
Attached File(s)
Attached File  FS_OPATS.pdf ( 124.67K ) Number of downloads: 305
 
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Jun 28 2010, 10:35 PM
Post #71





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



Rob, things just happen…

Anne Tatlock found out about the collision of a plane with the North Tower while en route to the U.S. Strategic Command headquarters at Offutt AFB in Omaha. The 62-year-old chief executive of Fiduciary Trust Co. International was one of a small group of business leaders at a charity event hosted by Warren Buffett.

Military officers boarded the bus she was on, and escorted her to an officer's lounge and a television, just in time to see the second plane hit the South Tower between the 87th and 93rd floors--right where 650 of her employees worked.

Offutt AFB is, coincidentally, where President George W. Bush flew to on Air Force One later in the day for "safety."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dennis Cimino
post Jun 29 2010, 02:36 AM
Post #72





Group: Guest
Posts: 31
Joined: 19-November 07
Member No.: 2,496



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Jun 29 2010, 02:54 AM) *
Check this out...

Less than 1 Meter accuracy.

See attached.



No homing device needed. laser illumination of the target if the drones used IR homing, as I felt they did for the 'terminal phase' could have been done from a number of locations around the city, from any number of heights. It'd be interesting to see if anyone had any 'valid' IR photo's of the area, say, an hour or two before this happened? Not likely but worth a thought.

One thing I wanted to point out is that the GPS systems out there with WAAS augmentation would have made target illumination wholly not necessary, it
would be nice as a terminal phase augmenter to the GPS stuff out there, for a false flag op of this type, you'd want to make sure you had a plan 'B' just in case of the freak accident that day that GPS was locally 'jammed' somehow, which requires very low power to effectively and locally 'jam' the system (who would jam is also a good question, but you wouldn't want to take the chance that it wasn't possible, is what I am getting at).

but the final ballistics trajectory final course changes would be far better handled by a high speed processor doing the job of keeping the plane on the
mark than a human brain. We're good, but not nearly as good as a computer that's got good solid accelerometer data being fed to it, to compensate for side slipping and low level wind shear.

but back to the speed thing, the ONLY constructive reason you'd want to go 'faster' into the buildings with these drones, is to minimize the amount of time that a camera could get good clean shots of the airplanes before impact. As it is, we don't have good clear pics which show that there is NOBODY IN THESE MACHINES on the other side of the oval cabin windows.

one last note I have spoken extensively about, is that the FMS systems on the stock airplane would have to be 'locked out' to prevent the airplane from trying to protect itself from structural overload from overspeeds and high roll rates in the final phases of the flights. if that wasn't done, it's unlikely that a human pilot could command the kind of speeds and roll rates demonstrated by at least one of the '2' airplanes just prior to impact with the WTC towers, and the FMS system not override that. What I am stating is that these airplanes have flight limits built into the flight managment systems that are there as SAFETY FACTORS, and they trump pilot imputs in circumstances where a command by the pilot actually threatens the structural integrity of the machine. Without this being locked out, extreme agility, way out of tolerance airspeeds, are not too very real. The plane's FMS computers won't allow
the planes to go intentionally to these realms of overspeed and roll / pitch which would result in structural failure of not just control surfaces, but the
wings and engine pylons which hold the 7 ton powerplants on the wings. Once an airplane begins to structurally fail, the failures aren't necessarily going to happen in a predictable, redundant system keeps you flying fashion. Boeing would have programmed the FMS systems to 'self preserve' the airframe and powerplants but not taken all the control away, just limited 'actual' control surface movement versus 'commanded' control surface movements at high speeds. Remember, load factor goes up very fast as a function of speed, and even a momentary 'stop to stop' rudder or elevator command at 510 knots would have consequences such as horizontal stabilizer deformation and possible separation, as well as vertical stabilizer failures like the Airbus off of New York suffered while well below Va (maneuvering speed) when the pilots tried to compensate for wake turbulence from a heavy jet they had just flown thru before the vertical stabilizer (rudder) came off the machine.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
aerohead
post Jun 29 2010, 03:04 AM
Post #73





Group: Core Member
Posts: 327
Joined: 13-July 09
From: State of Heightened Awareness
Member No.: 4,476



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Jun 28 2010, 09:54 PM) *
Check this out...

Less than 1 Meter accuracy.

See attached.


Yep.

I turned down the opportunity to go work on the UAV program in 96
when my squadron closed because i thought it would be boring to
work on pilotless, model scale aircraft with small recip engines.
Im glad i didnt, i thought they were going to be recon only, not
offensive video games for kids to kill the enemy from a safe room
thousands of miles away from the battlefield.
Didnt know they had been experimenting with them since the early 80's.


Homing device ? Absolutely and no doubt coupled with a manual back up
to hand fly it. Redundancy is an absolute. 3 separate systems would be
my guess.


And how bout a little laser guidance.......................since atleast 1991.
If they can build a Bunker buster that can hit the hole in your chimney,
they can certainly build a "tower buster" that could fly at 510 Knots and
detonate at a predetermined time after slicing the outer columns of the
Twins. Then the countdown to the fireworks.




Commons sense seems to be in short supply these days,
but I have plenty if any skeptics would like to borrow some.

This post has been edited by aerohead: Jun 29 2010, 03:04 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dennis Cimino
post Jun 29 2010, 03:33 AM
Post #74





Group: Guest
Posts: 31
Joined: 19-November 07
Member No.: 2,496



QUOTE (Obwon @ Jun 26 2010, 05:08 PM) *
Thanks a bunch! This is exactly the dissertation I was looking for. I'm also quite sure that this is a "quick and dirty" representation of the problems, a skyjacking pilot would face.

Some time ago on usenet, someone posted an analysis of the time, the skyjacker pilots, would have had to line up their planes for their finals. I believe he mentioned it would be like trying to hit a pencil from some 3 to 4 miles out (the distance from where the tower view became large enough to take a general aim), then to the 1 to 2 mile distance, where a precise aim would HAVE to be taken with no margin for error. Turns out that closing that last distance yields approx. 20 seconds. A magical feat, to take aim, if the plane is operating within it's design parameters, an impossible feat if it's outside it's design parameters -- AND IN THE HANDS OF AN INEXPERIENCED PILOT! Because even an experienced pilot would be overwhelmed by the complexities of the variables that must be kept under fine control. If you can imagine the relatively short period of time these alleged hijackers had to get 'comfy' in these planes, exceptional control would 'not' be one of the apparent traits they'd exhibit on the final phase of the flight into the WTC towers. If you can imagine the cacophony of the overspeed audio and the sounds of the stick shakers kicked in, plus the unusually high sound of noise as the planes now are at 510 knots, making the sound level in the cockpits unusually high due to slipstream over the nose, it'd almost be borderline 'horrifying' to be piloting these machines thru all of this. Add to this the fact that even if you're prepared psychologically to 'die' that day, you sure would have a lot of misgivings about it as you see the buildings rushing up at you like that, particularly at 510 knots! So much so, you might 'freeze' and be unable to put in any further control inputs at all. The whole thing is preposterous on it's face anyway, but this 'incredible' flight skill level shown by not just 'incompetent' but lower tier aviators is such that it flies in the face of what we saw that day, which was exceptional precision and unusual airmanship to control these planes with such precision at such extreme and difficult to maintain control, speeds.

----------

Thus this reduces the need for skyjacker pilots to mere ideological fare, they could not have supplied anymore than a "target for blame". That being their only utility in these events, it's hard to believe they would even be trusted to be aboard such aircraft, if they existed at all and were to be used for this purpose. A remote or computer driven control scheme yields substantial more utility, but that can't happen either, remote controls cannot be utilized on this mission, because they'd be detectable and no such chance could be taken. That's right, and furthermore, to remotely control these aircraft using datalink control, most likely at around 440 mhz or thereabouts as the military is so in love with, someone with a receiver would have seen the unusual telemetry link and thought; "hmm????" for sure. Secondarily, for these things to have been flown with optical camera links, the liklihood of the video even if encrypted, being intercepted, would be fairly high, as there has to be any number of geeks with fairly nice scanners out there in NYC even in the year 2001, looking at the radio spectrum and wondering what's 'new' that they hadn't seen before. The one drawback of a video link, is that it has no peripheral or pan vision for the reason stated you want to stay boresighted on the longitudinal axis of the drone plane so you can always see the intended target area. Your field of vision is moderately restricted to an arc of not much more than 120 degrees or so, max. At 510 knots, you know you don't get a 'do over' if per chance, you 'miss' on the first pass...because by now, every camera in NYC is focused on your fuselage, no matter how fast you are booking around in a circle to re-attack a second time. So, the drone would likely be 'self controlled' and totally without need of any human intervention due to the lack of ballistics precision that the 510 knot final flight phase requires.

That would leave on board programing, but there's not sufficient time and/or information available to any would be programmers/operators to accomplish such a task. So the only pratical solution is not to employ any planes at all, or; limit their use to merely supplying visuals. NO, NO, remember now, these planes were configured to be flown as drones, no 'sufficient time' argument here at all. In all liklihood they were not airliners, but military planes with drone control equipment retrofitted well in advance.

The "planners" would realize that they cannot get the planes to the buildings, so they have to devise elaborate plans to "get the buildings to the planes". Thus the explosions must come from inside the buildings and that fact covered up and papered over with noise. Navigation into the airspace wouldn't be too very hard for a 'competent' and 'well trained' hijacker to do. It's just problematic for a 'bozo' or a 'neophyte' not even a good 'wannabe' pilot getting there and then flying with such precision to the targeted buildings in such a way as we saw was done that day.

Oh, and btw, of the 19 skyjackers, one died a year before the attacks and another 9 were found alive in the aftermath of the attacks. Leaving only 9 to be distributed among 4 planes. The 'alleged' hijackers were never valid passengers on these 'alleged' flights any more than were Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. The F.B.I. knows this. They have never ever charged a single person allegedly who was on these planes, even post mortem, with any crimes, and they have produced ZERO samples of any hijacker DNA to analyze. Why do you think that may be?? Oh, I forgot, Saudi Arabian nationals don't have DNA, and they also have fireproof passports that flutter down to the street afterwards in PRISTINE CONDITION. :)
Sweeney has 5 or six aboard her plane, leaving only 3 or four to be distributed among the other three planes. I sincerely doubt that one single skyjacker on board a plane is going to easily overcome the flight crew. Which means, of course, that whatever anyone wants to think about the 9-11 attacks, at least one plane has to be completely eliminated, unless they want to explain why the flight crew decided to carry out the attack on their own.

So, if one plane can be eliminated, because it could not be manned, why not eliminate all four? After all, they couldn't be flown. Though we cannot prove that all '4' planes were never ever who the U.S. govt says they were (which is the occams razor solution) it's kind of unusual that though we have people that were on the ground at the complexes that were eye witnesses to the recovery of the FDR's of both of these planes, for the F.B.I. to out and out LIE TO US and say the data was not useable at all, and that the boxes were too badly destroyed, and then later to assert as they have that the FDR's and CVR's were NEVER RECOVERED at all. How do you erase the memories of the eyewitnesses without killing them??? They saw what they saw. Firemen saw the FDR's and CVR's recovered. I have a very hard time buying that the CPM modules were obliterated by the post crash fire, that's not too very possible nor is it likely. One of two would, by odds, survived and been unencoded. More out and out LYING by the F.B.I., clearly, in an incredibly obtuse and unbelievable effort to cover-up the acts of a government and the Israeli Mossad who did this, by virtue of the 'moving company' of Dominic Suter being on the other side of the river, high five-ing each other and jubilantly cheering the events that day. One has to wonder why these same 'let go by the F.B.I. mossad agents would be so emboldened to declare on Israeli Television that they were sent 'in advance' to document the event.

Dominic Suter, by the way, got nearly half a million dollars from the U.S. Treasury (thanks, Aidan Monaghan!!) and is currently back in New Jersey.

Obwon
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dennis Cimino
post Jun 29 2010, 05:38 AM
Post #75





Group: Guest
Posts: 31
Joined: 19-November 07
Member No.: 2,496



Re 'the flight crew deciding to carry out the attacks themselves' idea :)

if you remember in 'Catch-22' how Milo Minderbinder got the contract from the German's to bomb and strafe the airfield for them, so, in right wing apologist land, this is possible!!! I can hear it now; "listen, here is da deal, if you carry out these suicide attacks..I mean....high speed runs for us...ahem...we'll give you a piece of the ackshun...say, a million bucks, paid out after you flutter down in near pristine fashion to the ground.."

we're digressing way off the path here, and I apologize to the forum for it, but shit, guys....if we listed every one of the not only nonsensical things about the official story and then add the 'absolutely impossible' things to that list, then clearly by the time you get the whole thing compiled, it starts to look like a bunch of amateurs did this, certainly not top echelon mossad zionists who with assurances from our F.B.I. and our DoD, that nobody would ever in a million years ever be allowed to ever see the recovered parts for examination for SERIAL NUMBERS that would be TRACEABLE TO the N-Numbers of the planes that are alleged to have been destroyed that day.

The 'impossible speeds' thing is one more thing to toss on the pile of; "sorry, we can't buy this" list of things they have thrown at us.

It's almost so amateurish and so blatantly bogus, it's like; "catch us, catch us if you can!!" taunting us, and taunting the dead from that day, making a mockery of the very tenets of what this nation says it was founded upon.

We're now almost a decade later and with all the evidence that supports the MOSSAD involvement, and NORAD complicity, and F.B.I. assistance in COVER UP, with Congressional NON OVERSIGHT and PURPOSEFUL OBFUSCATION OF FACT by Philip Zelikow, you'd think that by now, we'd have gallows built to hang the perpetrators from, and grand juries convened to indict them. Not so.

If a dead American Airlines crew can get indicted by the N.T.S.B. for 'rudderdance' as I call it, in an airplane several knots below the designed maneuvering speed of that Airbus they died in that day, then they cannot have it both ways. They cannot assert here that speed doesn't create issues down low, with structural integrity and over-stressing of airframes, unless they're going to exonerate that AA crew from the 'oops, you danced on the rudders too hard' schlock job the N.T.S.B. handed down in their ruling on that fandango.

Why bother having a 'Va' speed for any airplane if you can drive them as fast as you want to, with no consequences??

clearly there are indeed consequences, not because Airbus builds cheap crap that should never get certificated to fly in U.S. airspace, with no structural spar from the vertical stabilizer into the empennage as Boeing always has had (until maybe recently), and then that airplane falls apart when the pilots use moderate force on rudders to correct for yaw encountered in a wake turbulence episode, you have to ask yourself; "gentlemen, what made you think you could float the 510 and 440 knot HELL BENT FOR LEATHER final approaches to the WTC buildings as 'not a problem' then??

They can't. because that assertion is crap. Just like their bogus recreations they cranked for FLT-77 into the Pentagon that day, is CRAP!

and it's also TREASON. HIGH TREASON. Capital T, capital R, capital E, capital A, capital S, capital O, capital N..that kind of TREASON.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Obwon
post Jun 29 2010, 07:29 AM
Post #76





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 560
Joined: 29-November 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,712



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Jun 28 2010, 09:11 AM) *
Thank you.

I am so glad you asked.

Those who make excuse for the govt story love to claim, "The aircraft was only at this speed for a few seconds and then crashed. It can sustain this speed for a few seconds you idiot!"

Of course they offer zero proof for their claim. Not to mention the fact they are wrong.

I cut some scenes from "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" due to the fact it was technical enough. I have calculated the speeds based on radar data for the last minute, a full 60 seconds.

[sniped]


Ah, live and learn! So "design limits" are breaking points, not merely "red zones", because the "red zones" are the yellow caution zones, where within which the aircraft is stressed, but does not immediately break (unless it's already weaker than expected, by say age or previous usage)

So, then, how well these craft are likely to hold up in the caution zone, is credibly impacted negatively by their age? I must guess that as aircraft age, they become less tolerant of stress.

My best guess is that such a plane could never last long enough to hit the tower, even with a robot, remote controller or anything else "at the wheel".

I also took another, cursory, look at the skyjacker distribution claimed. So, with 9 of them found alive, one dead a year prior, that left 5 or 6 on flight 11 with Madeline Sweeney, and 3 or 4 on the flight with Bremmer, total 9 or 10 and we have only to account for 9.

So two of the planes in the 9-11 attacks had no skyjackers on board, and yet all the evidences of them being skyjacked, flown to targets and crashed, exists! Oh my! I say "oh my" because what this means is that all of the evidence from all four flights, it is now demonstrated, can be faked. Because two of these flights had to be faked, and it was done just as well for them all.

If the official story were true, then there would be aircraft parts littering lower Manhattan and the towers would still be standing. Or destroyed like WTC 7, without explanation there for.

But like I said, they knew that the risks of trying to fly planes into the towers was way too high a failure prone operation. They could not risk failure, they would not get another chance, and they could not keep the prepped buildings both secret and ready for long. They had to have the towers struck by planes, because that's the only way they could blame the affair on Islamic extremists and initiate their intended wars. So, the only way to ensure the greatest measure of success, is to dispense with reality and focus on creating the illusions needed.

Same old stuff, different century! tsk tsk tsk.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
elreb
post Jun 29 2010, 03:28 PM
Post #77





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 2,589
Joined: 31-December 07
From: Maui
Member No.: 2,617



One minor fact that I found interesting is that the WTC 1 plane and WCT 2 plane were flying towards one another but with a comfortable 8 floors of separation and a 15 minute delay between them.

How convenient!

It’s almost like WTC 7 was a command center with a “Birds eye” view of everything.




Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dennis Cimino
post Jun 30 2010, 04:27 AM
Post #78





Group: Guest
Posts: 31
Joined: 19-November 07
Member No.: 2,496



You guys really astound me with your stuff, and it's been a good experience for me in the forum recently because so many of you are not moron's, idiots, govt. shills, or COINTELPRO fuck sticks (pardon the japanese there).

If an Airbus can have structural failure at significantly lower speeds than 440 or 510 knots IAS, at nearly ground level, break up in flight, and end up with it's vertical stabilizer being fished out of sheepshead bay for a little bit of rudder compensation at a speed well below MANEUVERING SPEED for that machine, then just imagine what kind of issues a B-767 might have, boogeying along at 510 knots IAS, and then the plane suddenly banks sharply, and then there's some yaw going on in the recovery, so the rudder is jumped on a bit to correct, and 'voila' instant aluminum confetti land on the streets of NYC, and a building doesn't get hit, (like WTC-7 wasn't hit) and then half an hour after the failed attempt, the building implodes in on itself and falls into it's own footprint at freefall speeds. I can just hear the whining from the Right Wing SHILL echo chamber now;"oh, you don't understand, mind waves from Osama were being projected at the buildings, and as everyone knows MUSLIMZ all are super human beings with looks that can inflict pain and suffering and bring down tall buildings..you have to believe my story..

Well, I think that WTC-7 was an intended target of a plane that didn't make it into NYC airspace, is what I think. They had it rigged in advance, it was supposed to be OBVIOUSLY HIT BY A PLANE that NEVER SHOWS UP, but it then implodes on itself several hours later and nobody sees the obvious
'screw up' in that all these years later. Obwon has a good thought process going on about the; "what if none of the planes made it, and then the buildings fell in on themselves???"

We know that we weren't that far off on a scenario like that when WTC-7 was not struck by airplane wreckage, and yet it still imploded into itself at freefall speeds.

One more broken airplane that didn't quite cut the mustard, and either WTC-1 or WTC-2 'not hit' by anything, and still collapses, and THEN WHAT??

well, if ONE of the three targeted buildings they needed to destroy is NOT HIT and still implodes and NOBODY CARES, then I will go so far as to say that then, you and I know they would have concocted a story about Osama's super invisible guys sneaking into the buildings and whilst invisible for a long long long time, managed to put the charges in the buildings and detonate them with MIND CONTROL afterwards.

You know where I am going with this. One building was clearly 'not hit at all' but was intended to be, and that plane never made it into NYC airspace for whatever reason. Because it was a 'no show' for the pyrotechnics gig, the building still came down, much later in the game, because someone screwed up on the timer sequencing of the buildings. They almost could have gotten away with WTC-7 going down with the other '2' buildings, had that happened, but that's not what took place. WTC-7 imploded and came down at 5:20 p.m. in the afternoon. Nothing hit it. Nothing.

anyway, what I am getting to here is with '2' planes who didn't have hijackers on board, that means you had to count them out altogether, because without a hijacker in the cockpit, it's another Milo Minderbinder dream, isn't it?

I would have loved to have seen the looks on faces in Tel Aviv at Mossad HQ, had no planes shown up in NYC, and the three buildings then came down without being hit.

MIND CONTROL waves from Afghanistan's caves at Tora Bora?? American's are so gullible and essentially ignorant of concepts of reality and what makes sense and what does not, I'm not so sure that this crap would have been sold by MSM as the proof that Osama had planted explosives in the buildings in advance of the day and then detonated them somehow...all with Marvin Bush's SECURACOM boys in there during the rigging.

All evidence is that the F.B.I. never expected guys like Gerard Holmgren to research the 'victims' on the planes and find that a lot of them were 'fictional' and 'identity rip offs' of people dead long before the dirty day came around on the calendar. And, the F.B.I. never ever dreamt in a million years that people would find out that cellular phone conversations of the duration and efficacy could NEVER TAKE PLACE from the altitudes these planes were at just before they moseyed on down at impossible speeds and hit the buildings. They also never counted on someone actually digitally comparing the one phone call from the 'victim' to a later call to his 'mommy' and in that, the timing is so identical that it couldn't have come from a human being.

There are so very many critical, nasty, gaping wounds in the Government's story about that day, that truly, only a complete, utter MORON could buy their fiction, lock, stock, and box cutter superhuman airman b.s.

In reality, like Obwon said, the NYC streets would have had all sorts of structural failure pieces scattered on them, and the buildings more than likely would still have been standing UNTIL the demolition charges began to take them down, as we know is what really took them down (looking at all the nice ANGULAR CUTS in the support columns, evident in lots and lots of photos of the building wreckage).

and then, there's the Pentagon. The case of airplane vaporizes, virtually no meaningful wreckage in front of the building, and no engine entry points in the building facade, and clearly a case of a missile strike and possible Global Hawk impact. Take a good hard look at Peggy Elgas' 'wreckage found' picture, and tell me that came off a B-757 then!!!! You know that's a Global Hawk vertical stabilizer part, and so do I know it. There is no corresponding fiberglass piece on a B-757!!!

Barbara Honegger says the clock's stopped at 9:32 a.m. and seismic data shows that charges started to go off there, as well, six full minutes before any alleged FLT-77 arrival and impact occurred, too! So do people in the building. Ahem!!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Obwon
post Jun 30 2010, 07:51 AM
Post #79





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 560
Joined: 29-November 09
From: NYC
Member No.: 4,712



QUOTE (Dennis Cimino @ Jun 30 2010, 04:27 AM) *
You guys really astound me with your stuff, and it's been a good experience for me in the forum
<snips>



Found this: http://www.911closeup.com/

It sums up some of my thinking on the matter of real planes vs no planes quite well, even though it misses a few of my points which tends to illuminate matters just a wee bit more.

Oh yes, and about the floors that were "struck", they were precisely the floors that were leased by banks, that had new construction work done on them in the year prior to 9-11. In the south tower the bank installed a data back up center. The entire floor was filled with server cabinets, which were kept locked. Techies who know say that managing the keys would be a logistical nightmare, considering how they have to work on projects in such areas. Which makes that entire cover story strange at the least. While in the north tower, where the plane "struck" that floor was raised three feet and covered entirely with batteries, to be a back up power supply.
These batteries were never tested, never switched on.

Funny how Jets, which could not be relied on to precisely hit the towers, could be relied on to precisely strike the floors where preparations had been made, large scale enough to have concealed explosives, eh?

In any event, there's the cost of actually using real aircraft or even missiles. Even with missiles there are risks, associated with launch sites, obtaining the missiles etc., But hey! If you're going to lie about their even being planes in the first place, why bother with missiles? Your media effort is going to be able to "paper over" any real eye witnesses, so you don't really need any planes or missiles, just put the explosives on the floors of the buildings, configured to create the proper illusions [after all the damage is going to be persistently visible by all, both on the ground and via video], that's going to hold public attention and cause any pesky eye witnesses to stifle themselves. After all, these eyewitnesses aren't going to be a cohesive group.
They are going to be scattered here and there and virtually alone in a sea of millions of teevee believers, much like they were themselves. So as not to appear to be raving lunatics, insisting the media is telling one big gigantic lie, to people who will refuse to listen, best they stifle themselves which ever way they can.

In any event, the "costs" matter, as well as other artifacts, reveal that the perps do not have either unlimited funds or unlimited power at there disposal. But they do have pervasive media control and they are very near the peak of the American power structure, even if they can't pull the levers with impunity. The power to punish detractors appears to have been enough.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dennis Cimino
post Jun 30 2010, 01:25 PM
Post #80





Group: Guest
Posts: 31
Joined: 19-November 07
Member No.: 2,496



Actually, Obwon, you do hit some things on the head, and bring to light stuff most of us in here hadn't really focused a lot of energy on yet.

First, in the "Pandora's Black Box: FLT-77" video, it begins with exposing the 2.3 trillion bucks that Dov Zackheim (a target on wiretaps the JUST US dept. had in place looking at Israeli Spies in the U.S., by the way!) and Donald Rumsfeld had 'spirited' out of the United States, and during the presentation, it points out that the precise point of impact on the Pentagon was 'investigation related' to the missing 2.3 Trillion that Cynthia McKinney was grilling Donald Rumsfeld over on Sept. 10th., 2001. Which truly brings to mind that 9/11 had a 'dual purpose' role for Israel, not just to expand wars in the Middle East and keep the lid on for zionism, but to hastily and in an EMERGENCY FASHION destroy evidence contained in WTC-7, and in the Pentagon.

So the precision targeting, as perhaps almost 'irrelevant' as it was to the final result of CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS which utterly pulverized the buildings, seems kind of moot, nothing is, in fact, a 'moot' point here. For people to not understand the reasons why WTC-7 may have been the 'primary' target on Sept. 11th., 2001., is to also not understand why 'The Catcher's Mit' portion of the Pentagon had to be obliterated by a missle and embedded demolitions charges put into the building during the 'reinforcing' work, which was so very nicely called out in Barbara Honegger's white paper on the 6 minute discrepancy between the internal explosions in the Pentagon, and the missile strike.

So, yes, Obiwon, you aren't barking up any wrong tree here. These precision targetings that didn't work out to be precision at all for the plane that didn't make it into New York airspace that day and strike WTC-7 as was intended, for whatever the reason, were in fact the 'raison d'etre' of the whole thing in the first place. The Israeli intelligence service HAD TO DESTROY the WTC-7 totally, and they tossed in an added 'bonus' or 'bone us' to Silverstein in the taking out of the WTC-1 and WTC-2 towers, which were essentially 40 percent vacant due to ASBESTOS, and hence, a huge demolition job that would have to be done in the future at tremendous cost, anyway!

In any case, this is why I theorize that had not a single plane made it into the New York airspace for whatever reason, those '3' buildings would have imploded on themselves, and then; "Lucy, you got a lot of splainin to do" would have ensued. I can just see Wolf Blitzer (mossad) over at C.N.N. talkng about how Blind Mellon Muslim somewhere in Paramus, New Jersey, was the Imam in charge of Al Qaeda's 'precision demolition team that is so small and tiny they work in the buildings with nobody seeing them.." (in real life, the Israeli Moving company that did this under Dominic Suter's supervision, was very very visible in the buildings, living in pitched tents on one floor we know of, busily rigging the buildings for demolition.

This is way off the discussion for the 'speed' thing we're supposed to be talking about, but I think it's a relevant 'side trip' into the Twilight Zone of 9/11, because David Ray Griffin has done so much work, as well as Professor Steven Jones, and Richard Gage, on the evidence that supports that the demolitions people not only were 'known' to be in the building and seen by many, but that they left a paper trail all the way back to the U.S. Treasury, who paid them for their murderous job they did, to the tune of nearly a half a million bucks. Hell, I'd have thought to bring down those buildings, our friends in Langley could have passed the hat and upped the ante, to say, what...a nice even number, like One Million Shekels, I mean, dollars...

So I wonder who in U.S. Dept. of State authorized Domiic Suter to get his visa renewed to come back here?? Did they think the heat was so 'off' on the heinous crimes he aided and abetted on 9/11, to think nobody would know he'd come back here??

You know, someday, Obiwon, we're going to find out that the F.B.I. has 'destroyed' all of the evidence and files for this 'mass murder' and some piece of crap like Eric Holder will stand at a podium and prounounce; "We did it for the good of the Nation.."

uh huh. Just like Arlen Specter helped Gerald Ford change the Warren Commission report so their magic bullet could zig and zag and make more holes in two people than a spaghetti collander has, all fired by one lone assassin and CIA stooge, known as Lee Harvey Oswald, who probably didn't even touch that rifle in his life, let alone fire it in Dealey Plaza that day. With that kind of 'good for the Nation' going on, and intentionally sealing the files for so many years, as they'll do with this mass murder by Israel and the U.S. on U.S. soil, they hope that someday, way off in the future, someone might say; "Sept 11th?? what are you talking about, what was that???"

We're already getting close to that now. Though people instinctively know the government is LYING about it, blatantly, bold faced and with a great deal of chutzpah, in ten years if there is a United States, which I sincerely doubt at this point, anyone left here will blink at each other and not know what the hell you're talking about when you reference that date in conversation.

And that, unfortunately, is the sad part of all this mass murdering done by Israel and the U.S. on U.S. soil. That in time, just like the U.S.S. Liberty murdering done by Israel, so will be Sept. 11th., 2001. After all, it's much more important that we know who is up for an Oscar, or who's doing well in American Idol, for sure!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

10 Pages V  « < 2 3 4 5 6 > » 
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: 20th August 2014 - 06:42 AM