What happens when an aircraft hits something that is not inclined to move?

[jaydeehess]

Yikes. I bet that was dry-ice cold when you were done with it.

I understand why you say that but, where does the heat go? into the KE of the gas?

 

[BenBurch]

I understand why you say that but, where does the heat go? into the KE of the gas?

The heat was lost when the gas was compressed.

When you compress gas it gets hot, and even if you don't hold it long before you burst the disk you have heated the compressor and the holding chamber and that heat is lost to the re-expanded gas which is then colder than its source. If you hold it until it reaches ambient temperature it would be VERY cold when expanded.

Your kitchen fridge works on this very principle.

 

[Newtons Bit]

The heat was lost when the gas was compressed.

When you compress gas it gets hot, and even if you don't hold it long before you burst the disk you have heated the compressor and the holding chamber and that heat is lost to the re-expanded gas which is then colder than its source. If you hold it until it reaches ambient temperature it would be VERY cold when expanded.

Your kitchen fridge works on this very principle.

P*V=n*r*T

They teach that in middle school and high school, and yet people forget it...

 

[Max Photon]

Would water added to F4 Phantom test crash cause an aluminum-water explosion?

I'd like to resuscitate this thread.


When the F4 Phantom hit the concrete block, the aluminum turned to powder, yet it did not ignite.

I suppose that if the jet collided into a source of iron-oxide right in front of the concrete block, that the aluminum would have ignited.

Do you agree with this supposition?


Now, what if the jet collided into not rust, but water, before colliding into the concrete?

Could water alone serve as an oxidizer, and ignite the aluminum, creating an aluminum-water explosion?

 

[A W Smith]

I'd like to resuscitate this thread.


When the F4 Phantom hit the concrete block, the aluminum turned to powder, yet it did not ignite.

I suppose that if the jet collided into a source of iron-oxide right in front of the concrete block, that the aluminum would have ignited.

Do you agree with this supposition?


Now, what if the jet collided into not rust, but water, before colliding into the concrete?

Could water alone serve as an oxidizer, and ignite the aluminum, creating an aluminum-water explosion?

That was already answered on another thread. Why do you repeat the question?

Oh yeah.. The Flow Water jet system cuts aluminum plate all the time by exploding the aluminum Go Watch Max. theres even a video

http://www.thefabricator.com/IndDir/Showroom.cfm?ID=1988

 

[beachnut]

I don't know if this video has been discussed before, but I figure it is relevant to anyone wondering why there weren't more recognizable aircraft pieces on 9/11.


http://www.bofunk.com/video/1027/rocket_disintegrates.html

No the Al did not turn to powder. Max, I think you have nothing to offer on 9/11 topics. You make up ideas and try to blame me for 9/11. So, if you do not have proof, just say so and stop making up junk.

 

[Max Photon]

Would adding water to the F4 crash test have ignited the aluminum?

Here is an excellent version of the video (not like Beachnut's wimpy version)...

F4 Phantom Test Crash > Video > 1:13 minutes

So again, the key question:

Would adding water to the crash have ignited the aluminum?


Max

 

[beachnut]

NO, max! There was water on the JET instead of fuel, your idea is busted

Here is an excellent version of the video (not like Beachnut's wimpy version)...
F4 Phantom Test Crash > Video > 1:13 minutes
So again, the key question:
Would adding water to the crash have ignited the aluminum?
Max

Not my video max, it was the OP post video; you lack of research is always present. In each and every post you show your lack of knowledge and display your fantasy world of woo. I even posted the OP, and you missed it?
So you failed to make fun of my wimpy version, it is the OP; yes the opening post video. Sad your failed wimpy insult is wasted on the OP; but this is par for your post, never even approaching reality on 9/11 topics.

BTW super research man, there was water in the PLANE. WATER was in the PLANE. You be busted again by better (al beit internet) research. Wake up MAX!

Sandia test video and photo gallery. This is better than your "super wimpy" video (I thougt you would like to know, I know it is not your video either)! Sad you did not know there was water on the JET! WATER.

The mass of the jet fuel was simulated by water; the effects of fire following such a collision was not a part of the test. The test established that the major impact force was from the engines. The test was performed by Sandia National Laboratories

Sandia test had water instead of fuel source is here.
Thus the water added to the jet did not set the Al on fire, plus the Al of the jet is not turned to powder. Why are you fantasy ideas always messed up as they pertain to 9/11? I visited your web page and it makes no sense either, just like your post here. Good luck, your ideas on 9/11 are strange you need to work real hard to move closer to reality.

The added water did not ignite the aluminum! BUSTED

 

[Max Photon]

The F4 jet had water to simulate jet fuel, yet the AL did not ignite.

Beachnut, I asked a question because I didn't know the answer. You gave an answer and I appreciate it. I am not quite sure what I am busted on.

Questions:

1. Why did water not oxidize the aluminum?
   
2. Would the aluminum have ignited had there there been not water, but iron-oxide on the jet?
   
3. If not, why not?
   
4. If not, how does this square with Crazy Chainsaw's claim that aluminum+iron-oxide will ignite with shock?
   
5. Beachnut you cheery old soul, if you don't like the word "powder" what would fit better?

 

[beachnut]

Beachnut, I asked a question because I didn't know the answer. You gave an answer and I appreciate it. I am not quite sure what I am busted on.

Questions:Why did water not oxidize the aluminum?

1. Would the aluminum have ignited had there there been not water, but iron-oxide on the jet?
2. If not, why not?
3. If not, how does this square with Crazy Chainsaw's claim that aluminum+iron-oxide will ignite with shock?
4. Beachnut you cheery old soul, if you don't like the word "powder" what would fit better?

BUSTED - on poor research.
As for your questions, please you try first and get back to us! You present fantasy all the time, now try spreading some knowledge instead of insane and false ideas on 9/11.
1. Why not research this and get back to us.
2. Look it up and get back to us.
3. Look up the information Crazy Chainsaw gave you and research those topics and get back to us.
4. I suspect you can look up how to make aluminum into powder; when you figure it out please explain it to us.

I don't know if this video has been discussed before, but I figure it is relevant to anyone wondering why there weren't more recognizable aircraft pieces on 9/11.

http://www.bofunk.com/video/1027/rocket_disintegrates.html

This was the OP; do you really have something on topic?

Busted. 1. poor researcher and not seeing the fuel was replaced with H2O. 2. For posting off topic. Take your fantasy BS questions and start another research/knowledge challenged thread on MaxPhoto ideas and explain why you make up lies about 9/11.

I find your fantasy world questions and threads to be disrespectful pertaining to 9/11. Your level of research and spewing false information is why. Your ideas are so messed, some find it interesting. I have no idea how to sugar coat that I think your posts expose your ignorance on 9/11, and how you do not care if you present false information and fantasy.

I'd like to resuscitate this thread.

Is what you said, but failed to research your question first, and now clearly off topic you persist in spreading your fantasy BS by asking stupid questions.

Just thought you would like to know what I think, but I could be wrong.

The OP is correct! On 9/11 the planes hit with about the same speed or faster as the F4 test. That is why the aircraft parts on 9/11 look a little messed up compared to LOW SPEED crashes. 11, 175, 77, 93 were doing 470, 590, 530, 600 mph. The impact debris is consistent with high speed crashes.

 

[Max Photon]

...especially the bandana.

 

[beachnut]

...especially the bandana.

Yes, I have been at accidents, the pilots head is smashed and the plane is destroyed, but an instrument from the cockpit panel was expelled, lying in perfect condition. Then you find papers from the pilots bag, with photos of his family which escaped the fire. Yes Max, as a trained aircraft accident investigator, things come through a high speed crash in perfect condition; like the experiments on the shuttle; or the pilot's foot in perfect condition in a boot only missing the rest of the body that is in tiny pieces smashed beyond recognition.

Only dolts are unable to research aircraft accidents and find out things survive even in high speed impacts. I find your ignorance on 9/11 to be pathetic. You do not even try to find facts, and persist on making light of things and making up stupid fantasy junk about 9/11.

 

[Reheat]

Yes, I have been at accidents, the pilots head is smashed and the plane is destroyed, but an instrument from the cockpit panel was expelled, lying in perfect condition.

I can go you one better. I had the misfortune to go pick up little bitty pieces of two people I knew following a terrible accident. The largest piece of human body found was a partial jawbone. All other human pieces were about the size of a 50 cent piece. Yet, an intact helmet visor cover with the Pilot's name and squadron insignia, unsinged, undamaged, perfectly intact was found among little bittie pieces of aircraft and human remains. That memento was given to the Pilot's wife.

There is nothing unusual about finding pieces of personal belongings or even parts of aircraft that are relatively intact following an aircraft accident. It is to be expected....

 

[Max Photon]

The pathetically ignorant stupid fantasy junk of Max Photon - dolt, crappy researcher

Yes, I have been at accidents, the pilots head is smashed and the plane is destroyed, but an instrument from the cockpit panel was expelled, lying in perfect condition. Then you find papers from the pilots bag, with photos of his family which escaped the fire. Yes Max, as a trained aircraft accident investigator, things come through a high speed crash in perfect condition; like the experiments on the shuttle; or the pilot's foot in perfect condition in a boot only missing the rest of the body that is in tiny pieces smashed beyond recognition.

Only dolts are unable to research aircraft accidents and find out things survive even in high speed impacts. I find your ignorance on 9/11 to be pathetic. You do not even try to find facts, and persist on making light of things and making up stupid fantasy junk on 9/11.

Beachnot, I think you slipped on a bandana peel...I was just funning you.

Now, I disagree that my ignorance on 911 is pathetic. I think it more majestic.

As far as my not even trying to find facts...I'm here at JREF presenting my ideas and asking questions to things that I don't know about in (roughly) grammatically correct English. That's a fact.

I do make light of things, but come on - I'm Max Photon. It would be a dark day if I stopped. (Don't you like your Light Cone sugar-dipped?)

Now, as far as me making up stupid fantasy junk - guilty as charged!

But tell me Beachnit, what are NIST's fire models, or impact models?


What are NIST's collapse initiation mechanisms?


Surely we can agree they were made up?

 

[beachnut]

I can go you one better. I had the misfortune to go pick up little bitty pieces of two people I knew following a terrible accident. The largest piece of human body found was a partial jawbone. All other human pieces were about the size of a 50 cent piece. Yet, an intact helmet visor cover with the Pilot's name and squadron insignia, unsinged, undamaged, perfectly intact was found among little bittie pieces of aircraft and human remains. That memento was given to the Pilot's wife.

At the class for Aircraft Accident Investigation we covered high speed crashes; countless examples of things being in good condition surviving the crash. I have been on few boards too and worked a few crash scenes. There are not a lot of sources on line for people to research high speed aircraft accidents and find out objects do survive severe crashes. People who believe 9/11 truth must get to a library and research the junk 9/11 truth spews.

It makes me mad people do not go to the library to learn! The librarian can get them the books they need to learn just a simple thing like objects that have survived severe crashes.

Your visor is a great example of something surviving a terrible crash. I found non of the items that survived 9/11 crashes to be out of the ordinary. So 9/11 truth is busted on the items surviving the crash. Simple research proves 9/11 truth wrong.

There is nothing unusual about finding pieces of personal belongings or even parts of aircraft that are relatively intact following an aircraft accident. It is to be expected....

 

[Max Photon]

Outpost 329

I asked some questions on post 329 if anyone is feeling less intellectually stingy - less ... thought police - than Beachnat.


By the way, Beachnet, you really should examine how bizarre it is that you get mad if others don't go to the library. Your health provider probably has anger management classes that can help you decouple these non-related events, so that you can live a fuller, happier, more embracing life. (Until then, everyone just go the library until Beachnuut resolves this - it's just easier that way.)

 

[beachnut]

I asked some questions on post 329 if anyone is feeling less intellectually stingy - less ... thought police - than Beachnat.


By the way, Beachnet, you really should examine how bizarre it is that you get mad if others don't go to the library. Your health provider probably has anger management classes that can help you decouple these non-related events, so that you can live a fuller, happier, more embracing life.

Your posts are off topic, take it some where else.
What happens when an aircraft hits something that is not inclined to move?

Max, this post you just made, off topic. You need to comprehend. And yes, your Al fire crap is off topic to all but fantasy minded morons.

 

[Max Photon]

Under what conditions the jet aluminum might ignite is ON TOPIC

Your posts are off topic, take it some where else.
What happens when an aircraft hits something that is not inclined to move?

Wrong.

Asking under what conditions the aluminum might ignite when an aircraft hits something not inclined to move is ON TOPIC.

 

[twinstead]

Max what is ironic is that YOU are every bit as guilty of believing the 'thought police' as beachnut, even more.

You have this dogma that you believe as gospel, with very little real evidence to support it. You just 'know'.

Your humorous claims of 'thinking outside the box' aside, except for a little more personality and likability, exactly what makes you any different than any other irrational ideologue on either side of the political aisle?

 

[Max Photon]

Pillow Talk, with Max Photon

Max what is ironic is that YOU are every bit as guilty of believing the 'thought police' as beachnut, even more.

You have this dogma that you believe as gospel, with very little real evidence to support it. You just 'know'.

Your humorous claims of 'thinking outside the box' aside, except for a little more personality and likability, exactly what makes you any different than any other irrational ideologue on either side of the political aisle?

First, I am not dogmatic. I am completely open to what initiated the collapse of the WTC towers.

What makes me different? Well, aside from the charm and dashing good looks, I'd say I'm the only one with a coherent controlled-demolition collapse-initiation model that fits the NIST Report's observations.