NASA Engineer (ret.) is a Twoofie?

[Sabretooth]

what?

Yeah...that goes for me, too...

 

[DGM]

This says, the pilot heading to the tower has less than half the time to make corrections (at the same included angle) as a pilot landing on a runway at approach speed.
.

So if the pilot kept the tower in the center of the windshield he would be OK.

 

[Fonebone]

Final report NTSB investigation AA Flt 77

Have you read the NTSB crash report on AA77?

Hint 1: http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp

Hint 2: NTSB knew this plane did not suffer a malfunction or human error which had to be investigated in order to prevent the situation in future.

Hint 3: This plane crashed at about the same speed as AA77, except it had far less mass. Try to imagine the size of the pieces. https://share.sandia.gov/news/resources/video-gallery/index.html#rocketsled. (Who said phantoms can go through walls?)

Hint 1 : Complete report of NTSB investigation into AA flt 77
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20020123X00105&key=1

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Safety Board provided requested technical assistance to the FBI, and any material generated by the NTSB is under the control of the FBI. The Safety Board does not plan to issue a report or open a public docket.


The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

The Safety Board did not determine the probable cause and does not plan to issue a report or open a public docket. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Safety Board provided requested technical assistance to the FBI, and any material generated by the NTSB is under the control of the FBI.

hint 2 : Based on an investigation with supporting evidence ?
OR based on the official narrative ?

hint 3 : The exterior of the pentagon was a fortress wall--constructed and
designed to repel attacks from state of the art weaponry circa WWII
The wedge of the pentagon attacked on 09-11-2001 was recently upgraded to repel
21th century weaponry.
Six inches of Indiana limestone slabs plus eight inches of non-masonary
bricks backed by ten inches of reinforced concrete--
a total of 24 inches of fortification .The nose of a Boeing 757 is a plastic radome disc followed by the pilot's windows.

 

[beachnut]

Hint 1 : Complete report of NTSB investigation into AA flt 77
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20020123X00105&key=1



hint 2 : Based on an investigation with supporting evidence ?
OR based on the official narrative ?

hint 3 : The exterior of the pentagon was a fortress wall--constructed and
designed to repel attacks from state of the art weaponry circa WWII
The wedge of the pentagon attacked on 09-11-2001 was recently upgraded to repel
21th century weaponry.
Six inches of Indiana limestone slabs plus eight inches of non-masonary
bricks backed by ten inches of reinforced concrete--
a total of 24 inches of fortification .The nose of a Boeing 757 is a plastic radome disc followed by the pilot's windows.

What is your moronic point? Got one?

The NTSB know Flight 77 was in perfect condition because a terrorists flew it into the building. This is a fact seen on the FDR, RADAR, and witnesses saw 77 in one piece, no fire, no missing parts, fly right into the Pentagon.

Witnesses on the aircraft said bad men took the plane from the pilots; did you fail to read anything about 911 before making up idiotic insane claims.

I have the FDR information, it shows a perfect jet until the last second when full scale accelerations were noted at impact. OOPS, proved wrong by facts and evidence; got more idiotic claims?

The cause of 77 crash, terrorists flying into the Pentagon. NTSB knows the cause, so does the FBI. The NTSB did supply products to support the FBI, and they show the terrorist flew on purpose into the Pentagon. So the NTSB work verified what was suspected!

If Deets can comprehend the FDR, he could stop endorsing the flyover lie, and cut ties with the idiots at CIT.

 

[waypastvne]

The nose of a Boeing 757 is a plastic radome disc followed by the pilot's windows.

And a very large, heavy nose wheel.

 

[Thunder]

funny thing is, there is only evidence of a plane crashing into the Pentagon. there is evidence of nothing else.

Truthers just can't get around this little fact.

 

[carlitos]

No, I never said it was not possible. I said it was improbable.

In that case, you will want to correct Rob Balsamo, who seems to be misrepresenting your claim.

NASA Flight Director Confirms 9/11 Aircraft Speed As The "Elephant In The Room" For OpEdNews: rob balsamo - Writer

06/22/2010 - (PilotsFor911Truth.org) Recently Pilots For 9/11 Truth have analyzed the speeds reported for the aircraft utilized on 9/11. Numerous aviation experts have voiced their concerns regarding the extremely excessive speeds reported above Maximum Operating for the 757 and 767, particularly, United and American Airlines 757/767 Captains who have actual flight time in all 4 aircraft reportedly used on 9/11. These experts state the speeds are impossible to achieve near sea level in thick air if the aircraft were a standard 757/767 as reported. Combined with the fact the airplane which was reported to strike the south tower of the World Trade Center was also producing high G Loading while turning and pulling out from a dive, the whole issue becomes incomprehensible to fathom a standard 767 can perform such maneuvers at such intense speeds exceeding Maximum Operating limits of the aircraft. Especially for those who research the topic thoroughly and have expertise in aviation.

The article above is cross-posted at all of the "truth" websites, like Balsamo's own site and 911blogger.

.....

Oh dear, you also said this?

"The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved."

So we can add argument from incredulity to your argument from probability. You may want to take a logic class in your free time.

 

[The Big Dog]

Hint 1 : Complete report of NTSB investigation into AA flt 77
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20020123X00105&key=1



hint 2 : Based on an investigation with supporting evidence ?
OR based on the official narrative ?

hint 3 : The exterior of the pentagon was a fortress wall--constructed and
designed to repel attacks from state of the art weaponry circa WWII
The wedge of the pentagon attacked on 09-11-2001 was recently upgraded to repel
21th century weaponry.
Six inches of Indiana limestone slabs plus eight inches of non-masonary
bricks backed by ten inches of reinforced concrete--
a total of 24 inches of fortification .The nose of a Boeing 757 is a plastic radome disc followed by the pilot's windows.

Funny, all those windows on the Pentagon didn't look 24 inches thick.

 

[BigAl]

Hint 1 : Complete report of NTSB investigation into AA flt 77
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20020123X00105&key=1

All of your claims have to git these facts:

140 tons of Flight 77 debris and the identified bodily remains of all 64 people that boarded it were found inside the Pentagon 90 minutes after taking off from Dulles airport. The approach, the crash and the forensic recovery was under continuous observation by countless people. We know the names and have the statements of about 250.

An estimated 7,000 first responders and forensic investigators worked on the Flight 77 hijacking. They would all be very surprised to find it was the wrong plane.

How do you explain the fact that the bodies of everyone that boarded Flight 77 were identified in the debris of essentially the entire airplane buried inside the Pentagon 90 minutes after takeoff. All of this was witnessed by hundred of people, we have the statements of about 250. The black boxes were recovered. The audio box records Arabic language and a hijacking. The data box shows a flight path that agrees with the FAA radar track and the cellphone/airphone data and shows that the plane was being flown on manual control by the hijackers control right to the end. We have the boarding manifest. We have video of them boarding. Like Flt 93, 11 and 175, the plane and occupants have never been since that day. This includes my work-mate, Ed Felt on flight 93.

 

[T.A.M.]

please tell me an NASA scientist did not just invoke the "Pyroclastic clouds" canard...OMG.

TAM

 

[DGM]

So MM:
Mr Deets has spoken, are you impressed?

 

[T.A.M.]

Interesting little quote from MMs article...

Finally, an unexplained cascade of molten metal from the northeast corner of the south tower just before it collapsed might have started when a floor carrying pieces of one of the jetliners began to sag and fail. The metal was probably molten aluminum from the plane and could have come through the top of an 80th floor window as the floor above gave way, Dr. Pitts said.

TAM

 

[DGM]

Interesting little quote from MMs article...



TAM

You are supposed to ignore that part! Focus only on the CT.

 

[beachnut]

please tell me an NASA scientist did not just invoke the "Pyroclastic clouds" canard...OMG.

TAM

In his own words!

Dwain A. Deets, Former Aerospace Research Engineer. While at NASA Dryden Flight Research Center, held positions of Chief, Research Engineering Division, Director for Aeronautical Projects, and Flight Research Program Manager.
"The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved."

He has company. Tony, the real-cd-deal is on the list of Gage's aerospace engineers.
http://www2.ae911truth.org/info/145

 

[dadeets]

In that case, you will want to correct Rob Balsamo, who seems to be misrepresenting your claim.



The article above is cross-posted at all of the "truth" websites, like Balsamo's own site and 911blogger.

That statement using the "impossibility" word did not include me. When someone was ready to post this to 911blogger, I was asked if I agreed with that statement. I said I didn't. Thus, when it was posted to 911blogger, it was as a sub heading to a major heading, where the major heading used the "improbability" word.

 

[pgimeno]

Hint 1 : Complete report of NTSB investigation into AA flt 77
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20020123X00105&key=1

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Safety Board provided requested technical assistance to the FBI, and any material generated by the NTSB is under the control of the FBI. The Safety Board does not plan to issue a report or open a public docket.


The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:

The Safety Board did not determine the probable cause and does not plan to issue a report or open a public docket. The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 are under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The Safety Board provided requested technical assistance to the FBI, and any material generated by the NTSB is under the control of the FBI.

Yup, you got it.

Hint 2: NTSB knew this plane did not suffer a malfunction or human error which had to be investigated in order to prevent the situation in future.

hint 2 : Based on an investigation with supporting evidence ?
OR based on the official narrative ?

Oh wait! Do you think the crash was a result of human error? Maybe that an autopilot malfunction perhaps made the plane to turn around and head to the Pentagon and crash there by chance, without the pilots noticing? Well, in that case yes, you're right, you should push for the NTSB to investigate the accident and put all the pieces together in an hangar.

hint 3 : The exterior of the pentagon was a fortress wall--constructed and
designed to repel attacks from state of the art weaponry circa WWII
The wedge of the pentagon attacked on 09-11-2001 was recently upgraded to repel
21th century weaponry.
Six inches of Indiana limestone slabs plus eight inches of non-masonary
bricks backed by ten inches of reinforced concrete--
a total of 24 inches of fortification .The nose of a Boeing 757 is a plastic radome disc followed by the pilot's windows.

The limestone was loose enough as to come off in some areas close to the impact without being impacted, therefore it could not contribute any strength to the wall except its own mass (inertia), which wasn't very significant compared to the plane.

The infilled double brick is quite common in civil buildings, I've been told (and indeed this search seems to prove that). As for the concrete reinforcement, it was not present in so many places of the renovated area, just in those without windows; see here: http://frustratingfraud.blogspot.com/2007/07/outer-wall-how-many-inches-of-what.html

And a plane is much more than plastic.

 

[T.A.M.]

Mr. Deets:

Is this pyroclastic flow?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzZBXuyIE28

here is another view

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbzJornQlRE&feature=related

are any of these pyroclastic flow?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK50So-yYRU

If not, then what distinguishes these from the dust cloud seen on 9/11, that makes you think it was a "pyroclastic flow"?

thanks

TAM

 

[pgimeno]

Mr. Deets:

Is this pyroclastic flow?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzZBXuyIE28

here is another view

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbzJornQlRE&feature=related

are any of these pyroclastic flow?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sK50So-yYRU

If not, then what distinguishes these from the dust cloud seen on 9/11, that makes you think it was a "pyroclastic flow"?

thanks

TAM

Let me add these...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p22OkclAU3o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KB-6Sp7mKlQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wfpRO9bTfo

 

[carlitos]

That statement using the "impossibility" word did not include me. When someone was ready to post this to 911blogger, I was asked if I agreed with that statement. I said I didn't. Thus, when it was posted to 911blogger, it was as a sub heading to a major heading, where the major heading used the "improbability" word.

Balsamo misrepresents your position. I agree. What does that say about his credibility?

 

[Miragememories]

"The cruise speed of a Boeing 767 is 530 mph = 777 ft/s."

"Boeing 767's have exceeded this speed by a considerable margin at even lower altitudes on their way to crashes."

"That does not sound like a controlled flight scenario."

"That is funny; the speed of a 767 can be .86 MACH. OOPS!@"

The cruise speed of a Boeing 767 like I said, is still 530 mph or Mach 0.80 at 35,000 ft.
Yes, its maximum cruise speed is 568 mph or Mach 0.86 at 35,000 ft.
Your point?

"The speed limit below 10,000 feet is 250KIAS, the speed limit on the air frame of 175 for Dive speed was 410 KCAS, or so, and 175 was going 510 knots at impact. You failed to make a point."

Translation: At an MSL of 8500 with an OAT Estimation Correction of 0.02, the speed limit below 10,000 feet is 250KIAS (~290 mph), the speed limit on the air frame of 175 for Dive speed was 410 KCAS (~475.6 mph), or so, and 175 was going 510 knots (~586.9 mph) at impact. That is, according to your numbers.

From NIST NCSTAR 1-2B, Table E-3. Summary of refined aircraft impact conditions
UAL 175 (WTC 2), Impact Speed (mph) 542 +/- 24 (or 518 mph min. to 566 mph max.)

"Deets is retired, not a working professional."

In other words, much like yourself, only he is more knowledgeable and careful in what he has to say.

"What is your point since you failed to figure out the speed a 767 can go?"

Apparently you need a magnifying glass.

The cruise speed number I gave was correct. I never said it was the maximum cruise speed which Boeing lists as a separate parameter.

MM