Boeing 767 Low-altitude Top Speed Options

[Guest_Ningen_*]

Does anyone know how fast a Boeing 767 can fly at low altitude? The top speed at cruising altitude is over 500 mph, but I've heard the following about flight at 700 feet altitude:

The power plant will max out at 330 mph.

The plane will begin to shake itself apart at over 220 mph.

At 700 feet altitude, the air is so thick that if you go too fast you max the rotation of the turbines, the engines can't suck in air, and the engine starts acting as a brake.

Does this make sense?

Where could I get more detailed information about flight limitations (or whatever you call it) of the Boeing 767?

Thank you.

This post has been edited by Ningen: Sep 2 2007, 04:19 AM

[dMz]

Thanks S9B- sourced aerodynamics information is always welcome to me- several of those books are out of print and/or quite expensive and difficult to find. V_ne is more for smaller aircraft, with V_mo/M_mo being more applicable to the "Big Boeings." That diagram of V > V_ne [or V_mo] effects is still very relevant here, too.

Instead of speculating about what the speed "could" be, let's talk about what the data suggests it "WAS," in absence of SSFDR and CVR's. This is from something I posted earlier on a ["limited" by necessity] thread here:

"1. My preliminary analysis of USAF 84 RADES data shows UA175 pitching down from 8-15 degrees during the last minute of flight (based upon arc tan(ModeC "v_y" /GS "v_x" ) spherical Law of Cosines approximation- see UA175 section...)

2. My RADES analysis shows UA175 approximate GS of 471.344 knots at 2200 feet aMSL ModeC at 13:02:23.660 Zulu time (GMT) or 9:02:24 EDT (the final radar return). [FEMA and FAA put it about 512 kts, NIST at 475 kts, and I'm not sure whether they meant TAS, IAS, CAS, or GS here]

3. My RADES analysis shows approx. AA11 GS of 421.81 knots at 2000 feet aMSL "height" at 12:45:48.445 Zulu or 8:45:48 EDT (final RADES return, no transponder or secondary radar info).

I have used approximation techniques to derive GS velocity from the RADES lat/lon data (more info in AA11 and UA175 Aircraft sections if needed here).

Unfortunately, I reached a standstill without verifiable, documented structural B767-200 data/specifications or better WTC mass distribution numbers. I also have yet to see any FAA radar data 6 years later, or WTC2 South blueprints for that matter. There has been considerable speculation and ambiguity about the WTC 1,2, and 7 construction particulars as well. Apparently ASCE, FEMA, NIST, and FBI/NTSB were able to draw their conclusions without any of this information that I still seek...

For AA11, my research says:
B767-223ER #N334AA B# 22332, GE CF6-80A2, Mode 3A 1443 off 08:20:38 EDT

For UA175:
B767-222 #N612UA B# 21873, PW JT9D-7R4D, Mode 3A 1470 > 3020 > 3321 "

[Seatnineb]

Thanks S9B- sourced aerodynamics information is always welcome to me- several of those books are out of print and/or quite expensive and difficult to find. V_ne is more for smaller aircraft, with V_mo/M_mo being more applicable to the "Big Boeings." That diagram of V > V_ne [or V_mo] effects is still very relevant here, too.

Instead of speculating about what the speed "could" be, let's talk about what the data suggests it "WAS," in absence of SSFDR and CVR's. This is from something I posted earlier on a ["limited" by necessity] thread here:

"1. My preliminary analysis of USAF 84 RADES data shows UA175 pitching down from 8-15 degrees during the last minute of flight (based upon arc tan(ModeC "v_y" /GS "v_x" ) spherical Law of Cosines approximation- see UA175 section...)

2. My RADES analysis shows UA175 approximate GS of 471.344 knots at 2200 feet aMSL ModeC at 13:02:23.660 Zulu time (GMT) or 9:02:24 EDT (the final radar return). [FEMA and FAA put it about 512 kts, NIST at 475 kts, and I'm not sure whether they meant TAS, IAS, CAS, or GS here]

3. My RADES analysis shows approx. AA11 GS of 421.81 knots at 2000 feet aMSL "height" at 12:45:48.445 Zulu or 8:45:48 EDT (final RADES return, no transponder or secondary radar info).

I have used approximation techniques to derive GS velocity from the RADES lat/lon data (more info in AA11 and UA175 Aircraft sections if needed here).

Unfortunately, I reached a standstill without verifiable, documented structural B767-200 data/specifications or better WTC mass distribution numbers. I also have yet to see any FAA radar data 6 years later, or WTC2 South blueprints for that matter. There has been considerable speculation and ambiguity about the WTC 1,2, and 7 construction particulars as well. Apparently ASCE, FEMA, NIST, and FBI/NTSB were able to draw their conclusions without any of this information that I still seek...

For AA11, my research says:
B767-223ER #N334AA B# 22332, GE CF6-80A2, Mode 3A 1443 off 08:20:38 EDT

For UA175:
B767-222 #N612UA B# 21873, PW JT9D-7R4D, Mode 3A 1470 > 3020 > 3321 "

It was not just that fl175 flew at 500+mph at 700 feet......it also dove and turned at the same time:

(IMG:http://img240.imageshack.us/img240/1309/wb11li1.gif)
(IMG:http://www.911research.dsl.pipex.com/ggua175/foreman_time_lapse_panoramic_merged.jpg)

(IMG:http://www.freewebs.com/joecraine/NSAFligth175altitude.jpg)

unreal...

[dMz]

It was not just that fl175 flew at 500+mph at 700 feet......it also dove and turned at the same time:
...
unreal...

Agreed S9B,

You all knew that I was only listing a speed (0.7176M for "UA175" if anyone is interested BTW) for the last 12 seconds of "UA175" RADES data in #2 above, right?

The errr.... "interesting" parts of the RADES data I posted a few months ago at post #6:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10742683

Does anyone care to explain those "UA175" ground speeds to me, and exactly how they were achieved with what type of propulsion?

[Omega892R09]

The errr.... "interesting" parts of the RADES data I posted a few months ago at post #6:

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10742683

Does anyone care to explain those "UA175" ground speeds to me, and exactly how they were achieved with what type of propulsion?

Which leaves just about at the brick wall you indicate at post #20 in that thread.

It is evident that there are distinct variations in flight path during the approach of UA175 across different video clips and therefore this may be a distraction due to video tampering as such none of these should be held onto as evidence.

But it seems to me that, given for example information in Seatnineb's #20 post in this thread, that the authorities are clearly lying so why is it not possible to bring a case against the NTSB, FEMA or FBI or whoever in order that they have to bring all this data out into the open so that we can all see where they are coming from?

The aircaft involved that day (Yeah I know!) simply could not have performed in the manner alleged by the OCT. Therefore it is a tissue of lies (which we understand) and all involved in its production should be placed in detention pending a full and independant inquiry. If this does not happen then what is the truth movement about?

Until there is some action like this then we are all simply peeing into wind!