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 )

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Boeing 767 Low-altitude Top Speed

Guest_Ningen_*
post Sep 2 2007, 01:35 AM
Post #1





Guest






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
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cary
post Sep 2 2007, 06:04 PM
Post #2


Ragin Cajun


Group: Respected Member
Posts: 3,691
Joined: 14-August 06
From: Baton Rouge, LA
Member No.: 5



First up, welcome to the forum Ningen. Second, there is a thread with an audio interview of engineer, Joseph Keith, that is posted here.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum...showtopic=8714

This interview talks about how fast a large Boeing can fly at low altitude. Very enlightening.

Hope this helps.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Ningen_*
post Sep 2 2007, 06:15 PM
Post #3





Guest






Thanks, Cary. Actually, I was being a little cagy about where I got the figures I cited, which was from Mr. Keith's interview. I've learned to tread lightly on "no plane" arguments. But thank you for posting it, and thanks to you and johndoex for the kind welcomes.

The way I see it, these are discrete facts that are what they are, and I just want to nail down what a Boeing 767 can and can't do.

This post has been edited by Ningen: Sep 2 2007, 06:16 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_Ningen_*
post Sep 2 2007, 10:22 PM
Post #4





Guest






It looks like there is a thread already going about Joe Keith's statements, so I'll see what I can find there. Thanks!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ogrady
post Oct 1 2007, 07:20 PM
Post #5





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 139
Joined: 1-October 07
Member No.: 2,291



Hi. I'm new here today and verifying Mr. Keith's statements is just what I was interested in doing. I was hoping there might be other engineers or pilots who could add to his statements.

Happy for the opportunity to talk to people who might have technical expertise.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Factfinder Gener...
post Oct 2 2007, 02:43 AM
Post #6





Group: Newbie
Posts: 743
Joined: 23-August 07
Member No.: 1,808



QUOTE (ogrady @ Oct 1 2007, 06:20 PM)
Hi. I'm new here today and verifying Mr. Keith's statements is just what I was interested in doing. I was hoping there might be other engineers or pilots who could add to his statements.

Happy for the opportunity to talk to people who might have technical expertise.

Hi there, ogrady! cheers.gif Pleased to make your aquaintance.

Like Ningen before you, you might want to check out these three Joseph Keith related posts:

Shure's

painter's

Factfinder General's

Something in there will maybe be of interest.

Sincerely, FfG. thumbsup.gif

This post has been edited by Factfinder General: Oct 2 2007, 02:44 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
alfonslof
post Jul 31 2008, 09:18 PM
Post #7





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 3
Joined: 22-December 06
Member No.: 354



QUOTE (Ningen @ Aug 31 2007, 03:35 AM) *
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.


I am not sure how to use this thing, so sorry if this is wrong.

I am working on a similar project, video to come, and so far I made this page.
Top speed for a 767 is 898 kph/558 mph and that is at an altitude of about 30,000 feet, source: http://www.zap16.com/civ%20fact/civ%20Boeing%20767-200.htm at 30,000 feet the atmosphere is 1/3 the thickness of atmosphere at 700 feet. This would cause approximately 3 times as much drag so the top speed would be about 1/3 of the top speed at 30,000 feet, or about 200 to 300 mph at best, and that is with no wind.

In a youtube video 175 travels 720 feet in 1.06 seconds = 720 Feet per Second = 490.90 Miles per Hour
http://www.v911t.org/175Velocity.php and therefore that plane is likely not a 767. It may not be a real plane at all.

Alfons v911t
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tit2
post Aug 2 2008, 05:58 AM
Post #8





Group: Private Forum Pilot
Posts: 133
Joined: 27-April 07
Member No.: 999



Quote: "It may not be a real plane at all."

Debris of the airplane are visible in this video "unseen footage 9/11", 7minutes10 seconds after his beginning:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1...5L5_q2gLV8pGyBQ

A suspicious debris?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
streetcar304
post Aug 4 2008, 10:02 PM
Post #9





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 8
Joined: 4-August 08
Member No.: 3,751



QUOTE (alfonslof @ Jul 31 2008, 09:18 PM) *
Top speed for a 767 is 898 kph/558 mph and that is at an altitude of about 30,000 feet, source: http://www.zap16.com/civ%20fact/civ%20Boeing%20767-200.htm at 30,000 feet the atmosphere is 1/3 the thickness of atmosphere at 700 feet. This would cause approximately 3 times as much drag so the top speed would be about 1/3 of the top speed at 30,000 feet, or about 200 to 300 mph at best, and that is with no wind.


Is there an aeronautical principle you are quoting here or are these just your thoughts?

I asked an old friend who has been flying MD-10's for FED EX for the past 25+ years about this "How fast...?"question. I asked, verbatim:

QUOTE
Got a question for you. How fast do you think a 767 or 757 (or some current airliner) could go at, say, in a low altitude environment? By low I mean 1000 feet or something along those lines. Forget about 250 knots below 10k and whatever structural limitations are published – if you just went balls to the wall, full throttle, all that jazz.


Bottom line, a 757-sized aircraft will be able to exceed 450 knots easily at low altitude.

I am somewhat surprised that a website such as this with as many "pilots" as they claim to have, nobody has opined on this topic with this sort of information before and that none of your "pilots" have provided a detailed analysis of low-altitude/high-speed performance capabilities.

What about you, Rob? You are an "airline pilot". What about the experience you claim this board has in aircraft such as the MD-88, CRJ, 737, 757, 767, 747, DC-10? Where are all those pilots and their experience/expertise in low-altitude/high-speed flight? Where is Wittenberg? Where is Aimer? Where is Field McConnell? Where is Trood? Where is Mustanich? All these pilots - you'd think SOMEONE would come up with a definitive opinion on 7x7-class aircraft low altitude/high speed flight capabilities.

Guess not.

Here is my friend's answer, in full:

QUOTE
Well............Let me make a few statements that will qualify what I am about to say. As you are probably well aware, commercial aircraft don't have the forward throttle stops that military tactical aircraft have...........meaning, jamming a throttle full forward, to the stops, on a fighter aircraft is common practice and is routinely done. For example, on takeoff, climb-out, and especially
during a dogfight those throttles are bent forward to 100% RPM (or slightly under). The fuel control unit (military) will not allow that engine to overspeed and self distruct, if properly rigged. ( a guy's got to have means to get home after wrenching a kill on the enemy)

On commercial aircraft, the throttle must be set for takeoff and continually monitored and adjusted during climb by the pilot(s) or auto-throttles, if one's lucky enough to have them. The only time a throttle is bent forward on a commercial a/c is if ground contact appears imminent and it ain't a runway of intended contact. ie, the "escape" maneuver when an a/c is about to hit a mountain. It's firewall power, pull the nose up into buffet, and climb to the moon to clear any obstacle. Should a guy get himself safely on the ground somewhere thereafter, it is mandatory engine inspection and probably all engine removal and replacement. The engines will have been oversped and overtemped with possible other mechanical damage.

So.............of the arecraft of which I am familiar, the redline speed of an MD-10 at 10,000' is 375 KIAS. At sea level, it is 350 KIAS. ( the MD-11 is less than these speeds for a number of reasons that would only get boring) I'm quite sure the 757 and the 767 have very similar max speeds give or take 20-30 knots.

Interestingly, if a pilot didn't pull the throttles back to "cruise" settings (on a commercial a/c) when he leveled off at altitude, the aircraft would accelerate right thru redline on it's way to possible self destruction...........the engines are that powerful.

You know that the safety factors built into aircraft are 1.5 for structural components (wings, fuselage,etc.) and 2.5 safety factor for engines and landing gear, and control surfaces. Don't quote me on these exact components..........this is from memory from years ago. But it means that the design limits imposed by the manufacturer are what are safe to fly with, ie the speeds listed above and the "g" loadings. In reality, the aircraft has to be able to withstand 1.5 times the "g" loading design limits in order to be certified. I'm not sure if the same is true of the speeds, but I feel reasonably sure it is true as well. What this means is........ an aircraft will not show signs of destruction until it reaches the 1.5 times the design speed limit or its "g" limit. At least that is what the manufacturer guarantees, as required by the FAA. So..........

If I were to level off at 5000' (or 1000') and leave the throttles set at climb power, this aircraft would exceed the 350 KIAS (knots, indicated air speed) design limit. But it probably wouldn't come apart............yet. I don't know how fast it would ultimately go because I've never done that in a commercial airplane. We are not allowed to do that. But I do know that if a pilot then pushed the throttles up to the physical limits (stops), exceeding all the engine redline limits and warnings, the engines would accelerate and eventually self destruct as would the airframe itself..........say around 1.5 times 350 knots or 525 KIAS. Reasonably, I would guess the aircraft would start shedding pieces as it approached 500 KIAS.

In answer to your question...............a 757, or a 767, or an MD-11 can easily do 450 KIAS at low altitude at least once and maybe many times before it would show signs of damage and could do well beyond that if it were meant to be total destruction.


I look forward to comments on this information.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 4 2008, 11:48 PM
Post #10



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,706
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (streetcar304 @ Aug 4 2008, 10:02 PM) *
What about you, Rob? You are an "airline pilot". What about the experience you claim this board has in aircraft such as the MD-88, CRJ, 737, 757, 767, 747, DC-10? Where are all those pilots and their experience/expertise in low-altitude/high-speed flight? Where is Wittenberg? Where is Aimer? Where is Field McConnell? Where is Trood? Where is Mustanich? All these pilots - you'd think SOMEONE would come up with a definitive opinion on 7x7-class aircraft low altitude/high speed flight capabilities.

Guess not.



http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=9272 yawn.gif

Try looking around before lambasting and looking more a fool "streetcar". We dont have time to read and respond to every post as soon as it is posted.

Also, your friend has done alot of speculating, yeah we can do that too. However, we are searching for actual data.

Someone point this troll to the questions thread in the debate forum before i show him a quick exit.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
streetcar304
post Aug 5 2008, 05:58 AM
Post #11





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 8
Joined: 4-August 08
Member No.: 3,751



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Aug 4 2008, 11:48 PM) *
http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index.php?showtopic=9272 yawn.gif

Try looking around before lambasting and looking more a fool "streetcar". We dont have time to read and respond to every post as soon as it is posted.

Also, your friend has done alot of speculating, yeah we can do that too. However, we are searching for actual data.

Someone point this troll to the questions thread in the debate forum before i show him a quick exit.


Sorry. Didn't mean to get you all torqued off. Just trying to add some facts to this absurd idea that a 7x7 class aircraft would "shake itself apart" at 220 knots in a low-altitude regime.

I disagree that someone with 25+ years flying a MD-10 would be "speculating" at what would happen if you go balls-to-the-wall at low altitude.

As far as "actual data", you need to have a chat with some of your other posters, then, about their "actual data". Like "amazed" with this comment, which doesn't seem to have a whole lot of "actual data" when they posted:

QUOTE
Transport aircraft are not meant to fly close to the ground, except configured during landing. Flying at that speed that close to the ground would be virtually impossible...


or "alfonslof" who stated, again, without any "actual data" (and I actually asked if there was any specific aerodynamic principle being addressed here):

QUOTE
at 30,000 feet the atmosphere is 1/3 the thickness of atmosphere at 700 feet. This would cause approximately 3 times as much drag so the top speed would be about 1/3 of the top speed at 30,000 feet, or about 200 to 300 mph at best, and that is with no wind.


When I post the observations of a well seasoned MD-10 pilot and query why all the other pilots here who have time in large transport aircraft haven't opined on this question, you get all bent out of shape.

With all due respect to your past posts, there still doesn't seem to be any definitive answer posted anywhere about the low-altitude/high speed regime question. I believe my submission addresses it. A large transport-type 7x7 class aircraft can easily exceed 450 knots in a low altitude environment.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 5 2008, 08:42 AM
Post #12



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,706
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



Your friend is speculating unless he himself has accelerated a 757/767 100-150 knots over Vmo. Has he? If he has, we would love to speak with him (from reading your posts, he hasnt even flown a 75/76 nor does he even know Vmo/Mmo, so his opinion means nothing, but we have plenty 75/76 drivers, some post here, some arent into internet forums). Does your "friend" have a name?

As for others here who have posted their opinion, its just like your "friends", opinion. Please note the big white bold letters at the top of every page of this forum. (once again, you're not too observant).

There is a reason Vmo/Mmo is established and different on each type airframe. Pilots For 9/11 Truth are attempting to obtain actual wind tunnel data (and if you had browsed our forum, you would already realize as such). As many may not be surprised, we are hitting many brick walls.

As for us getting "bent out of shape". We arent the ones looking like a fool because you failed to click a few links. We have "opined". Unfortunately, you arent that observant and you assume too much. But you are the only one looking like an ass. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Aug 6 2008, 03:31 PM
Post #13





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 3,933
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



I've never flown a Boeing or any other airliner type, but I've flown 15 or 20 smaller aircraft out beyond the redline, for the purposes of production test flights. Nothing ever came off, and no deformation. Of course it is a tense few moments. And the only way little airplanes can go to the redline is in a dive, usually a pretty steep one.

I'm sure the big airframes can do the same thing, and I suppose depending upon gross weight could do it in more level flight.

If the aircraft were remote controlled and about to be sacrificed anyway, who cares?

Whether compressor stall in the engines would become a factor is another question.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
thyket
post Aug 6 2008, 07:52 PM
Post #14





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 6
Joined: 14-February 07
Member No.: 603



QUOTE (streetcar304 @ Aug 3 2008, 01:02 AM) *
Is there an aeronautical principle you are quoting here or are these just your thoughts?

I asked an old friend who has been flying MD-10's for FED EX for the past 25+ years about this "How fast...?"question. I asked, verbatim:



Bottom line, a 757-sized aircraft will be able to exceed 450 knots easily at low altitude.

I am somewhat surprised that a website such as this with as many "pilots" as they claim to have, nobody has opined on this topic with this sort of information before and that none of your "pilots" have provided a detailed analysis of low-altitude/high-speed performance capabilities.

What about you, Rob? You are an "airline pilot". What about the experience you claim this board has in aircraft such as the MD-88, CRJ, 737, 757, 767, 747, DC-10? Where are all those pilots and their experience/expertise in low-altitude/high-speed flight? Where is Wittenberg? Where is Aimer? Where is Field McConnell? Where is Trood? Where is Mustanich? All these pilots - you'd think SOMEONE would come up with a definitive opinion on 7x7-class aircraft low altitude/high speed flight capabilities.

Guess not.

Here is my friend's answer, in full:



I look forward to comments on this information.

757/767 captains I have talked to over 6 years back up your friend's post. One 767 captain said, "with VD at 420 KCAS, the few seconds the two jets exceed 420 KIAS before building impact, was not a factor, even if the planes fell apart where do you think they are going to land going 420 KIAS." "If you want to hit building and speed, pick a Boeing, or I ain't going" – terrorist talk 2001.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 6 2008, 08:16 PM
Post #15



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,706
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (thyket @ Aug 6 2008, 07:52 PM) *
757/767 captains I have talked to over 6 years back up your friend's post. One 767 captain said, "with VD at 420 KCAS, the few seconds the two jets exceed 420 KIAS before building impact, was not a factor, even if the planes fell apart where do you think they are going to land going 420 KIAS." "If you want to hit building and speed, pick a Boeing, or I ain't going" – terrorist talk 2001.


There is no "friend". A friend of mine informed me that "Pinch" posted the above word for word on another site, which he found on yet another site, not from some "friend" (pathetic). Its third hand and completely anonymous speculation copy and pasted by proven trolls, and now, liars.


thyket, we also know you are a troll. So no doubt your "friend" is just another anonymous person on another forum. I imagine the only "friends" Gov loyalists have.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
fransan
post Aug 7 2008, 12:42 AM
Post #16





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 47
Joined: 27-April 08
Member No.: 3,238



I would like to tell you some of my own experience of high speed at low altitude flying.
Many years ago, we didn´t have the limitation of 250 kias max below 10000 feet in México, and oil prices where not a factor. The time it took to get to places however, somehow had become very important and attractive to people and our airline execs. So we flew all the time at max. speeds. I think about it now and find it hard to believe.
But we acctually flew (B.727 by the way) at up to 390 kias as low as a 1000 feet. (Yes one thousand feet) CRAZY.
What I´m trying to say, basically is, there´s no problem with those airplanes going up to max speed at any altitude.
Many times also we would go beyond "barber pole" (the max. speed shown on the indicator) on descent and hear the "tac, tac, tac, tac" (similar to a machine gun) warning, pull back a little to go back to within limits.
There was an incident, I believe it was an AA B727 that had a very scarry spyraling descent where the FDR went beyond the graph and there was speculation that it had gone beyond MACH 1 for a few secs. Maybe some of the pilots here can remember the case. (The pilots had deactivated the leading edge slats at cruise to extend 2 degrees of flaps, trailing edge only, and the FE came back from the bathroom, saw the CB out and pushed it in, they where something like FL350 and as the leading edge slats started to extend by this action, the airplane became uncontrolable, and kind of spyraled down, the pilot was able to recover from the dive after extending the landing gear, way above max. landing gear extension speed, at something like 12000 feet. The aircraft sustained some damage but still was able to continue for a landing basically in one piece.)
The speed at which a Boeing will start coming appart I would think is very hard to determine, they must have a ball park figure I guess (Boeing). I think it should be just beyond MACH 1 as these are not supersonic aircraft.

My $ 2c
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
streetcar304
post Aug 7 2008, 06:28 AM
Post #17





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 8
Joined: 4-August 08
Member No.: 3,751



QUOTE (rob balsamo @ Aug 6 2008, 08:16 PM) *
There is no "friend". A friend of mine informed me that "Pinch" posted the above word for word on another site, which he found on yet another site, not from some "friend" (pathetic). Its third hand and completely anonymous speculation copy and pasted by proven trolls, and now, liars.


thyket, we also know you are a troll. So no doubt your "friend" is just another anonymous person on another forum. I imagine the only "friends" Gov loyalists have.


Cripes. Someone asked for some information here, I asked someone about the question and provided the answer (along with independent corroboration twice over) and its now a federal case and I'm in the dog house. A little touchy, are we?

If you want to continue to live in the land of denial regarding a large 7x7 class aircraft and its no-sh*t top-end speed, that's fine. Doesn't do much for your case, though.

As far a VmO or MmO goes and how it relates to flying the aircraft, the FAA regs (Part 2.5, Airworthiness Standards, Transport Category Airplanes; Subpart G--Operating Limitations and Information, Sec. 25.1505 Maximum operating limit speed) states :
QUOTE
The maximum operating limit speed (VMO/MMO airspeed or Mach Number, whichever is critical at a particular altitude) is a speed that may not be deliberately exceeded in any regime of flight (climb, cruise, or descent), unless a higher speed is authorized for flight test or pilot training operations.
(bold and italicize mine)

link at http://www.astech-engineering.com/systems/...faapart25g.html

"Deliberately exceed". Says nothing about VmO being the absolute max an aircraft can aerodynamically fly. Of course aircraft can go beyond VmO, especially with those big mothers of engines pushing them.

If I were you I'd rethink about hitching your wagon or allowing to stand unchallenged anyone who says an aircraft can't fly faster than 220 knots in a low-altitude regime or someone who arbitrarily comes up with some cockamamie home-made aerodynamic principle about air being one-third as thick at 1,000 than it is at 30,000 so an aircraft can only go 1/3 as fast (or whatever that was). Those claims are so patently absurd that it really, really does make the technical expertise quotient of this board amount to about zero.

This post has been edited by streetcar304: Aug 7 2008, 06:30 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
rob balsamo
post Aug 7 2008, 10:20 AM
Post #18



Group Icon

Group: Admin
Posts: 9,706
Joined: 13-August 06
Member No.: 1



P4T never claimed Vmo/Mmo is the max speed an aircraft can fly. Once again your strawman arguments give you away as the troll you are and a sock of "Pinch" (its ok Pinch.. we know you're obsessed with us.. smile.gif). Your IP also gives you away as the liar you are.

As for being "touchy", you're the one arguing a claim we never made, not to mention we called it "hogwash" if you click the link, which in turn makes you an ass (another good indicator of you being "Pinch"). smile.gif


Any speed over Vmo/Mmo is excessive for any aircraft, period. We are trying to get actual data beyond Vmo for many aerodynamic factors which become an issue exceeding Vmo/Mmo and the purpose for manufacturers setting a Vmo/Mmo. We wont give opinion or speculate like your imaginary "friend" has done.

QUOTE
Those claims are so patently absurd that it really, really does make the technical expertise quotient of this board amount to about zero.


Once again i direct you to the white bold letters atop every page of our forum since it s clear you didnt understand it the first time, and if past performance is any indication, you failed to read it..., so i'll copy and paste the statement...

All views expressed in this forum are not necessarily the views of pilotsfor911truth.org

Do you understand what those words mean Pinch? err... Streetcar? If not, let us know and perhaps someone will come along to dumb it down for you.

Edit to add: For those who arent familiar with "Pinch", he claims to be a retired F-14 pilot (more like a Maverick wannabe, probably sings "Highway To The Danger Zone" in the shower every morning..lol) and is obsessed with our work. He has written up articles solely for the purpose of personally attacking P4T and its members (not a very professional aviator, if in fact he is one), and has created numerous socks here just so he can stalk/attack the people with which he is obsessed, arguing claims we never made (as seen above). The guy is a bit loopy if you ask me... Here is more if you have time to kill...

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....showtopic=13872
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Omega892R09
post Aug 7 2008, 11:43 AM
Post #19





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



QUOTE (amazed! @ Aug 4 2008, 06:31 PM) *
Whether compressor stall in the engines would become a factor is another question.

I am fairly sure that would be a problem.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Seatnineb
post Aug 16 2008, 04:27 AM
Post #20





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 38
Joined: 11-June 08
Member No.: 3,546



one thing is for sure....a 767 incurs aerodynamic stress after 360 knots......



How Airliners fly
Page 59
By Julien Evans(767 pilot)
(1999)



....yet the plane that hit WTC2 was flying at:


a speed of about 590 mph into the south side of the South Tower of the World Trade Center, crashing through the 77th and 85th floors. By this time, several media organizations are covering the first plane crash and millions see the impact live.

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/inside911 ...


According to this web site:
http://www.militaryfactory.com/conversioncalculators/sp ...

590mph is 512 knots....

that means the plane was flying 152 knots faster than it is permitted to do so...

can a hijacker control a plane flying 152 knots faster than it's permitted ias?

i don't think so..

This post has been edited by Seatnineb: Aug 16 2008, 04:30 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
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: 31st October 2014 - 04:23 AM