Flt 93 crater was not unique

[Corsair 115]

I think it would have dug a bigger crater pushing out in the direction it was traveling and then most of the plane as it started crumpling and breaking would have bounced out of the crater and scattered everywhere.

See post #34.

 

[WilliamSeger]

Doesn't look like a Boeing 757 did.

Uh, yes it does. Perhaps a visual aid will help (although it didn't seem to help Tweeter/Spooked911 any).

 

[Alferd_Packer]

Planted evidence won't convince me.

Nothing will convince you, since you have made up your mind, reardless of reality.

Please provide proof that evidence was planted.

 

[chris lz]

Nothing will convince you, since you have made up your mind, reardless of reality.

Please provide proof that evidence was planted.

And why they needed to kill grass.

 

[Brainache]

And why they needed to kill grass.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0475276/

Overview
Directoraul Greengrass

Writer (WGA)aul Greengrass (written by)

Release Date:17 August 2006 (Australia) more

Coincidence?

HMMMM.....

 

[chris lz]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0475276/


Coincidence?

HMMMM.....

Seriously, let's face it. Without the dead grass, how could the Grand Conspiracy have succeeded? Three other plane crashes, 3,000 fatalities and three demolished buildings pale in comparison.

 

[chris lz]

I want to see where a plane has left wing impressions in the ground after crashing other than what is observed at Shanksville.

BEA flight 706/ Oct 2 1971:

"The Vanguard's impact was so vertical and violent that, as well as a crater six metres deep, the frontal shape of the wings was deeply imprinted in the soft ground"

 

[Mel Odious]

You are neglecting a vital bit of data — the speed of the aircraft. A velocity of 500+ miles per hour results in a rather different crash site than a velocity of 150 miles per hour.

To bolster Corsair 115's point, an aircraft descending at 500 m.p.h. hits the ground with over 11 times the kinetic energy of a plane hitting the ground at 150 m.p.h. And if the aircraft also has a significantly larger mass, that number goes up another click or two.

Tweeter, if your post was a just a bit funnier, I'd nominate you for a Stundie.

 

[LashL]

Uh, yes it does. Perhaps a visual aid will help (although it didn't seem to help Tweeter/Spooked911 any).

Am I reading this correctly as Tweeter=Spooked of bunny cage arsonist infamy?

 

[uk_dave]

Those are all the kinds of things I'd expect to have been recovered if the government had faked a plane crash.

No, if the government had faked the plane crash you wouldn't see anything wrong with it because it would look exactly how you imagine it should.

It's just the air crash investigators of the world who'd be a bit puzzled, especially by the slightly crumpled tail section sticking out of the ground.

 

[leftysergeant]

BEA flight 706/ Oct 2 1971:

"The Vanguard's impact was so vertical and violent that, as well as a crater six metres deep, the frontal shape of the wings was deeply imprinted in the soft ground"

Got a link to that? I've google myself sick looking for more info on that one.

 

[funk de fino]

Those are all the kinds of things I'd expect to have been recovered if the government had faked a plane crash.

Wheres the plane and the passengers then?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Those are all the kinds of things I'd expect to have been recovered if the government had faked a plane crash.

They're also the kinds of things you'd expect to have been recovered from a real plane crash. That's kind of implicit in the definition of the word "faked". In other words, this is a non-argument.

Planted evidence won't convince me.

That's the classic difference between truthers and debunkers. Evidence of planting evidence would convince us that there was something wrong with the evidence. You've just chosen to believe it was planted because it doesn't fit your conclusion.

Dave

 

[chris lz]

No, if the government had faked the plane crash you wouldn't see anything wrong with it because it would look exactly how you imagine it should.

Nicely stated. The same for Mark Bingham's phone call, Bush's pet goat story, and a host of others. The quirk factor of real life, something many truthers seem unable to comprehend, is more than reason to doubt that these were pre-planned scripts.

 

[chris lz]

Got a link to that? I've google myself sick looking for more info on that one.

My apologies. I thought I'd given the source. I'm more of a paper person, so there's no link. It's from Air Disaster vol. 4 by MacArthur Job - p180/photo caption.

In vol. 1 of that series, one may note the similarity of Swissair flight 306 (1963) to UA 93/ 585 & Co. There's virtually no sign of a plane anywhere in the picture, just a a very empty looking crater. Nor were any bodies found. However, it's possible wreckage had been cleared before the picture was taken. More details needed, if anyone can supply it.


Chris

 

[TC329]

This statement is unfathomably stupid. Please tell me you're joking.

-Gumboot

it makes perfect sense that a plane approaching at a 40 degree angle would leave an imprint resembling a 90 degree angle.

the 40 degree angle also explains why the excavation hole was dug straight down to match a 90 degree impact.

it doesn't matter that the fdr contradicts all of the eyewitness accounts too.

 

[leftysergeant]

[qimg]http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f178/myphotos1960/UA93FDR3small.jpg[/qimg]

it makes perfect sense that a plane approaching at a 40 degree angle would leave an imprint resembling a 90 degree angle.

the 40 degree angle also explains why the excavation hole was dug straight down to match a 90 degree impact.

it doesn't matter that the fdr contradicts all of the eyewitness accounts too.

Bad Science. You have the plane going in right-side up. It was upside down.

And the hole was not dug straight down. It was dug in the direction the plane was going, pushing up earth on the downrange side of the crater.

Part of the reason you became a twoofer may be your inability to understand visual information.

 

[fuelair]

Originally Posted by Tweeter;3318145...

Thus, once again, it makes NO SENSE that UA93 disappeared into the ground when it hit at this 40 degree oblique angle.

At a 40 degree angle, the plane should have crashed and bounced, and large sections should have scraped along the ground, making an extended crater-- and produced large debris.

The plane-shaped crater that UA93 officially produced and the lack of any large debris defies logic-- over and over. [url
http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2007/02/northwest-710-crash-versus-official.html[/url]


Really??
Considering a meteor entering our atmosphere, is traveling at 10 to 40 kilometers per second, or roughly 50 times the speed of Concorde makes your questions pointless.

Have you considered a career in engineering? Stop now, you will not make it through. Go into the humanities or something harmless.

 

[leftysergeant]

Have you considered a career in engineering? Stop now, you will not make it through. Go into the humanities or something harmless.

What part of the humanities would that be? Most fields require a little better ability to interpret data.

I would really recommend technical college instead, something in the hospitality industry.

 

[chris lz]

it doesn't matter that the fdr contradicts all of the eyewitness accounts too.

Many gave no mention of the exact angle. Others said 90, or straight down. Lee Purbaugh gave 45 degrees.