Shanksville Debris 8 Mile Field?

[Walter Ego]

The truther I talked to in Savannah this week used the ‘8 mile debris field’ in Shanksville as ‘proof’ that the Flight 93 was blown up in midair before it crashed.

Gravy addresses this issue here. The BBC Conspiracy Files 911 program interviewed Somerset county residents who found lightweight debris (paper, insulation) at Indian Lake one mile away (starting at about 30:00 in).

My readings indicate the debris found distant from the crash site was lightweight debris not what you’d find from a midair explosion. So is there any significance to the ‘8 mile debris field’ that would indicate anything other than a plane hitting the ground at high speed?

 

[jhunter1163]

There's nothing at all unusual about the debris field of UA93. You could contrast it with the debris field from Pan Am 103, which did explode in midair. That debris field was in the thousands of square kilometers.

 

[A-Train]

The truther I talked to in Savannah this week used the ‘8 mile debris field’ in Shanksville as ‘proof’ that the Flight 93 was blown up in midair before it crashed.

Gravy addresses this issue here. The BBC Conspiracy Files 911 program interviewed Somerset county residents who found lightweight debris (paper, insulation) at Indian Lake one mile away (starting at about 30:00 in).

My readings indicate the debris found distant from the crash site was lightweight debris not what you’d find from a midair explosion. So is there any significance to the ‘8 mile debris field’ that would indicate anything other than a plane hitting the ground at high speed?

First of all, Gravy didn't really address the issue; he simply quoted an FBI agent named Crowley who opined that the wind (it was 9mph that day) blew debris to the New Baltimore site eight miles from Shanksville.

A one ton engine core was found 2000 feet from the main crash site. No word yet from Gravy on Special Agent Crowley's explanation for that.

The evidence shows that UAL93 broke up before impacting the ground. That does not, however, necessarily indicate a shoot down of the plane. Such a breakup could have been caused by explosives in a suitcase or elsewhere on the plane.

 

[jhunter1163]

The FDR shows all systems were go on the airplane right up to impact. No explosions, no loss of cabin pressure, no nothing. The engine core was found 2000 feet away in the direction of travel; it could have bounced/rolled there.

 

[Reheat]

The truther I talked to in Savannah this week used the ‘8 mile debris field’ in Shanksville as ‘proof’ that the Flight 93 was blown up in midair before it crashed.

I believe the large debris field myth of 8 or MORE miles long got started because someone calculated distance using a road map.

The debris field WAS NOT consistent with even a low altitude shoot down.

In addition, no one has been able to show any fighter within range of UA93 to shoot it down. Any fighter would have had to hide from the FAA, NORAD, and the ATC folks at Johnstown in addition to other eyewitnesses. There were no stealth fighters capable of air-to-air shots in 2001.

All that exists regarding another aircraft in the area is a fantasy of one of the CIT kooks who contends there was an A-10 or a UAV of some sort that flew below utility lines. It is pure and utter horse hockey.

 

[Reheat]

The evidence shows that UAL93 broke up before impacting the ground. That does not, however, necessarily indicate a shoot down of the plane. Such a breakup could have been caused by explosives in a suitcase or elsewhere on the plane.

You again!

 

[A-Train]

The FDR shows all systems were go on the airplane right up to impact. No explosions, no loss of cabin pressure, no nothing. The engine core was found 2000 feet away in the direction of travel; it could have bounced/rolled there.

So the rest of the plane impacts the ground with such force that it imbeds itself many feet into the ground, so that almost nothing is visible at ground level-- but a one ton engine core is able to "bounce" and roll nearly half a mile away? Can you please describe in detail how that could happen?


To Reheat: please read my above post.

The evidence shows that UAL93 broke up before impacting the ground. That does not, however, necessarily indicate a shoot down of the plane. Such a breakup could have been caused by explosives in a suitcase or elsewhere on the plane.

 

[Reheat]

The FDR shows all systems were go on the airplane right up to impact. No explosions, no loss of cabin pressure, no nothing. The engine core was found 2000 feet away in the direction of travel; it could have bounced/rolled there.

The evidence shows that UAL93 broke up before impacting the ground. That does not, however, necessarily indicate a shoot down of the plane. Such a breakup could have been caused by explosives in a suitcase or elsewhere on the plane.

So the rest of the plane impacts the ground with such force that it imbeds itself many feet into the ground, so that almost nothing is visible at ground level-- but a one ton engine core is able to "bounce" and roll nearly half a mile away? Can you please describe in detail how that could happen?

What, you don't understand physics? Well, anyone who believes people can escape through a nose wheel door in a B-767 doesn't understand much of anything at all.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Instead why don't you explain how an aircraft could break up in mid-air, but the FDR for that airplane shows all systems that would be affected by ANY anomaly such as an explosion were completely normal.

Either you can read and respond or you're a robot who believes in invisible, no effect explosions.

 

[Walter Ego]

The truther I talked to in Savannah this week used the ‘8 mile debris field’ in Shanksville as ‘proof’ that the Flight 93 was blown up in midair before it crashed.

Gravy addresses this issue here. The BBC Conspiracy Files 911 program interviewed Somerset county residents who found lightweight debris (paper, insulation) at Indian Lake one mile away (starting at about 30:00 in).

My readings indicate the debris found distant from the crash site was lightweight debris not what you’d find from a midair explosion. So is there any significance to the ‘8 mile debris field’ that would indicate anything other than a plane hitting the ground at high speed?

I believe the large debris field myth of 8 or MORE miles long got started because someone calculated distance using a road map.

The eight mile distance was covered in the BBC program. The Loose Change boys used an internet road map and the distance to Indian Lake (one mile away), where lightweight debris was found, was actually eight miles by road.

Most of the debris was near the crash site. However, Gravy does have a map of the debris field on his page showing debris found up to eight miles away. Video news reports from Fox News on the scene in LCFC report the same eight mile distance. (Though typically they don’t say when Fox reported this. It was on probably 9-11 or 9-12.)

My question is whether this was lightweight debris like paper or insulation found eight miles away.

 

[rwguinn]

8 miles by car /= 8 miles as the crow (or, in this case, pieces of paper and lightweight stuff) flies.

oops--I see I was beat to it. Sorry Walter. Hope I didn't bruise you Ego...

 

[OldTigerCub]

First of all, Gravy didn't really address the issue; he simply quoted an FBI agent named Crowley who opined that the wind (it was 9mph that day) blew debris to the New Baltimore site eight miles from Shanksville.

A one ton engine core was found 2000 feet from the main crash site. No word yet from Gravy on Special Agent Crowley's explanation for that.

The evidence shows that UAL93 broke up before impacting the ground. That does not, however, necessarily indicate a shoot down of the plane. Such a breakup could have been caused by explosives in a suitcase or elsewhere on the plane.

Two corrections:
One engine core was found buried in the crater at the crash site. The other engine core was found approximately 300 yards away, not 2000 feet, in a catch basin:
From Popular Mechanics

FACT: Experts on the scene tell PM that a fan from one of the engines was recovered in a catchment basin, downhill from the crash site. Jeff Reinbold, the National Park Service representative responsible for the Flight 93 National Memorial, confirms the direction and distance from the crash site to the basin: just over 300 yards south, which means the fan landed in the direction the jet was traveling. "It's not unusual for an engine to move or tumble across the ground," says Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 out of New York City in 1996. "When you have very high velocities, 500 mph or more," Hynes says, "you are talking about 700 to 800 ft. per second. For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards." Numerous crash analysts contacted by PM concur.

I will reinforce jhunter's comment about the FDR with the addition of a link to the graph of the flight recorder from Flight 93, which does in fact, show that all systems were normal right up to impact.

 

[chris lz]

On the engine: there have been three distances given in the media: 2 miles; about 1800 ft; and the 900 ft mentioned by PM. There is no report that states 1/2 mile, I believe. The 1st has never to my knowledge been linked to a direct source . The 2nd is an estimate given by Trooper Marshall, who stated "it was about 600 yards." That makes the latter two possibilities better sourced. Other crashes have thrown debris over 1,000 ft.

On the 8 miles: some debris was found in New Baltimore, which is 8 crow miles from the impact site.

 

[Reheat]

Regardless of the distances given, does anyone know of a photograph of that separated engine/engine part? The CT articles referenced said it was the engine core, A-Train said it was a 1 ton engine core, and the PM articles indicated it was a fan from one of the engines. There is more than a slight difference between these particular items from an engine. It would be nice to establish exactly what it was from the engine as well as the distance from the main crash site FROM THE BEST RELIABLE SOURCE.

I'm only interested since I can't find a reference on Gravy's site and this needs to be put to rest.

 

[peteweaver]

First of all, Gravy didn't really address the issue; he simply quoted an FBI agent named Crowley who opined that the wind (it was 9mph that day) blew debris to the New Baltimore site eight miles from Shanksville.

A one ton engine core was found 2000 feet from the main crash site. No word yet from Gravy on Special Agent Crowley's explanation for that.

The evidence shows that UAL93 broke up before impacting the ground. That does not, however, necessarily indicate a shoot down of the plane. Such a breakup could have been caused by explosives in a suitcase or elsewhere on the plane.

Eight miles by road.
Not in a straight line across country.
The road snakes around a lake.

This is the area:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&h....879776&spn=0.043891,0.079479&z=14&iwloc=addr

And the fragments which reached the lake, were very very small.

 

[Walter Ego]

On the 8 miles: some debris was found in New Baltimore, which is 8 crow miles from the impact site.

This was lightweight debris that could have been blown by the wind, I assume. Most of the debris was near the crash site. LCFC claims or proposes a missile shoot down of AA93 which would not be consistent what was actually found in different locations.

 

[cloudshipsrule]

So the rest of the plane impacts the ground with such force that it imbeds itself many feet into the ground, so that almost nothing is visible at ground level-- but a one ton engine core is able to "bounce" and roll nearly half a mile away? Can you please describe in detail how that could happen?

So this is the ONE presumable anomaly that has you convinced the greatest cover-up in US history is behind the terrorist attacks of 9/11 so Bush could go to war and drive down gas prices by taking oil from Iraq? Seen the price at the pumps lately?

You have much to learn about physics my friend. Energy is neither created, nor destroyed, but it sure can make an engine bounce 2000 feet when a plane traveling at ludicrous speed hits the ground at the right angle. (Yes, even when most of the plane buries itself in the ground.)

Explain the following image with math (Please show your work):

http://www.stormeyes.org/tornado/SkyPix/palmstab.jpg

You see, when forces are at work which are greater than the normal forces you encounter in your daily life, seemingly strange things can happen. It really is as simple as that. The strange things aren't really all that strange when you look at them from a physics perspective. They are relative to the forces involved. No conspiracy necessary!

 

[leftysergeant]

The plane hit the ground belly-up. and rolling slightly to the left, as I recall from the reports. That puts both engines above the surface as the wings bit in. Depending on the exact angle they were to the ground and how hard the ground was at the point where either pylon made contact with the ground, they would either dig in or break off. We have one of each here. That the front fan disk broke off and was found that far away is not surprising. Engines are surprisingly fragile. I recall reading that more of the engine was found even farther away. This, also, is not surprising. It was going forward at about 500mph at impact. That is a lot of momentum. Given that the ground is rather flat there, bouncing is entirely to be expected.

Given the descriotions I have read of debris found at the site eight miles away, I would rule out the shoot-down. For one thing, it was down-range and down wind. The debris was mostly paper. In a shoot-down, one would expect at least some sheet metal, insulation and luggage. There would also be a rocket motor laying about somewhere. The heaviest debris found at Indian Lake included seat cushions and upholstery. This is, again, far more consistant with disintegration of the rear part of the fuselage on impact than with a shoot-down.

 

[MG1962]

I love Flight 93 - It so exposes the hollowness of the truth movement - I am yet to hear any truther give an explanation of why you would fake a crash in a field miles from anything either important or photogenic - And the shoot down theory just adds to the ammusment - Why on such a carefully scripted day was there a need to shoot down an aircraft? What was it doing it should not have been?

To believe the plane was shot down, is to believe someone not following the script was in charge - That would that be the terrorists. So suddenly we have one plane the truthers believe was hijacked, otherwise an un-authorised shoot down is not required

 

[ref]

I have written this short explanation.

• Claim: Flight 93 was shot down. Debris was found miles from the crash site.

Discussed here:
http://www.911myths.com/html/missing_engine.html
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...42.html?page=7
http://www.popularmechanics.com/tech...42.html?page=8
http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence.../producer.html
http://www.debunk911myths.org/topics...le=Indian_Lake
http://cnnstudentnews.cnn.com/2001/US/09/13/penn.attack/

In Brief: There was a white jet in the vicinity of Flight 93--a Dassault Falcon 20 business jet owned by the VF Corp. of Greensboro, N.C. The FAA asked them to investigate and they did. They got down within 1500 ft. of the ground when they circled. They saw a hole in the ground with smoke coming out of it. They pinpointed the location and then continued on. The only military plane in the vicinity of the crash site was an unarmed C-130 cargo plane. The cargo plane was returning to Minnesota before Flight 93 crashed and was flying at 24,000 feet about 17 miles from the crash site.​

A fan from one of the engines was recovered in a catchment basin, just over 300 yards south of the crash site, which means the fan landed in the direction the jet was travelling. "It's not unusual for an engine to move or tumble across the ground" says Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert.​

Human remains were confined to a 70-acre area directly surrounding the crash site. Paper and tiny scraps of sheet metal landed in Indian lake. Indian Lake is less than 1.5 miles southeast of the impact crater, easily within range of debris blasted skyward by the heat of the explosion from the crash. ​

If a missile had hit Flight 93, there would have been more evidence of it and a much larger heavy debris area. It's worth noticing, that lighter debris was blown miles away by the winds. But it was only small pieces of paper, pages of magazines and thin nylon. The wind was blowing towards Indian Lake and New Baltimore at 9 knots.​

This study by the NTSB shows, that flight 93 flew at heights below 12000ft in the last 10 minutes of its flying time.​

It is also claimed, that the call by Ed Felt, where he described seeing some white smoke, is identification of a shot plane. Felt made the call at 9:58. At that time the plane was at 5000ft. What makes this claim very suspicious, though, is the fact that a couple of minutes later the plane once again climbed to 10000ft, before it crashed. Would a plane that was shot down climb another 5000ft for a few minutes after being shot, before crashing?​

Also, if the plane was already shot at 9:58, it was still 5 minutes away from the crash scene. Even at the very low speed of 300mph a plane would fly a distance of 5 miles in one minute. In 5 minutes the distance would be 25 miles. And that is at the speed of 300mph. The plane was moving faster than that. If it was shot already at 9:58, we would see debris maybe tens of miles away from the scene, not just a few miles.​

 

[Timothy]

I love Flight 93 - It so exposes the hollowness of the truth movement - I am yet to hear any truther give an explanation of why you would fake a crash in a field miles from anything either important or photogenic

The *real* truth has already been revealed in a previous thread

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=55332