Only a part of the landing gear exited. A piece of the landing gear. Landing gear on the plane were not single wheels but sets of wheels. Your piece did not exit without damaging the WTC. In fact the piece gave up most it's energy to damaging the WTC. Facts hurt your case and Dr Jones ignores them in his petition and his 9/11 work.
None of the simulated debris impacting the south wall happened to contain landing gear fragments. 340 NIST NCSTAR 1-2B, WTC Investigation
It is believed that a portion of the main landing gear of AA 11 exited WTC 1 at the 94th or 95th floor and landed at the corner of Rector and West Streets. This
debris is believed to be a tire, wheel, brake assembly, and hub of a main landing gear, as shown in Figure 9–122. Based on the final position of the landing gear and assuming the landing gear to be a projectile with a horizontal initial velocity, the exit speed of the landing gear from the south wall of WTC 1 can be estimated to be about
105 mph.
344 NIST NCSTAR 1-2B, WTC Investigation
Another piece of landing gear debris, shown in Figure 9–123, was found embedded in what is postulated to be the panel containing columns 329, 330, 331, running from the 93rd to the 96th floors. This panel was dislodged from the building and found at Cedar Street near its intersection with West Street. As little other damage had been documented on the south face of WTC 1, it is postulated that the landing gear debris that landed at the corner of Rector St. and West St. also
exited through this panel location. NIST NCSTAR 1-2B, WTC Investigation 345
A portion of the landing gear of UAL 175 exited WTC 2 and landed on the roof of 45 Park Place. No photographic evidence was available to document the size of the fragment and whether this was a nose or main landing gear. 352 NIST NCSTAR 1-2B, WTC Investigation
A portion of the port main landing gear was seen to exit the building at approximately 230 mph in the more severe impact analysis,
as shown in Figure 9–131(b). No landing gear debris exited the building in either the base case or less severe simulations. At the conclusion of the simulation, the base case analysis had a substantial piece of the starboard main landing gear still at approximately 130 mph that was expected to impact the northeast corner. NIST NCSTAR 1-2B, WTC Investigation 353
Observed trajectories of specific aircraft components, such as the landing gear and engines,
were considered to be of lower importance in validating the simulated damage to the tower. A fairly precise knowledge of the internal configuration of the building would be needed in order to simulate the trajectory of specific aircraft debris. Damage to the opposite side of each tower from the point of impact was also of lower importance. These parts of the tower were modeled with lower resolution and as a result, the models were not sufficient to capture the detailed damage.
Table 9–13. Comparison with observables from WTC 1.
Landing gear trajectory was
deemed by NIST to be
slightly significant and in
poor agreement.NIST NCSTAR 1-2B, WTC Investigation 363
Table 9–14. Comparison with observables from WTC 2.
Landing gear trajectory was
deemed by NIST to be
not significant and in
fair agreement.NIST NCSTAR 1-2B, WTC Investigation 363
There you have the specifics on the landing gear!
MM
