Missile??

[Sunstealer]

Never in doubt? Well according to this it was till in the air, AFTER the south tower collapsed. Now I don't want to discuss this much here, because it is mentioned in the other thread. If you want to talk about it, I would prefer to do it there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdXGSefI6pM

So in reference to the two fairbank's frames, instead of looking at them and seeing what everyone else sees which is the sun reflecting off the fuselage and not a missile, you choose to move the goal posts.

And you wonder why we think you are idiots and liars. Amazing. Try being honest for once in this thread.

 

[jaydeehess]

Ok let me see if I can make this simple for everyone. Basically what you're saying is if the plane was traveling 700 ft a second a missile or projectile is fired from about 100ft away from the nose of the plane. For the missile to catch up it has to be going 100ft per second faster than the plane (of course I'm just rounding numbers.)

NO!
It has to go 100 feet further than the nose of the plane in the same amount of time, not 100fps faster.
I thought you could follow the math?

 

[Oystein]

NO!
It has to go 100 feet further than the nose of the plane in the same amount of time, not 100fps faster.
I thought you could follow the math?

Haha you'll never lose hope, eh?

 

[NoahFence]

Amazing. Try being honest for once in this thread.

Would a truther being honest qualify for the "something new and fresh" thread we had a while back?

 

[jaydeehess]

delete

 

[jaydeehess]

Haha you'll never lose hope, eh?

Well I notice he has not picked up the mistake in my math.

I will redo it all and post again.

 

[jaydeehess]

Let's try this again;

The plane is moving at over 700 feet per second. Let's round it down to 700fps and have the missile fire 1 second prior to impact. This puts the missile launch when the plane is 700 feet from the tower.

IIRC I calculated 60 g's for the acelleration of the Starstreak missile.The missile has to travel 100 feet further than the nose of the plan(approximately)
if d=the distance from the nose to the WTC then the distance from missile to WTC is d+100 (feet)
d+100=v₀t + 0.5at²and the missile hits the tower very close to the same time as the plane but let's make missile and nose impact simultaneous
d+100=700(1.0) + 0.5(60X32)(1.0)²d= 1560 feet
However we already know that the plane is moving at 700 fps and is 1 second out, therefore the plane must be 700 feet from the WTC, not 1560 feet.

Ok so the time to impact is the same for the missile and the nose of the aircraft if t=0 begins with the launch.

Here we assume that t=1 second
Distance from nose to WTC is 700 feet.
Distance from missile to WTC is 800 feet

with
d_missile=v₀t + 0.5at²800=700(1)+0.5(a)(1)²a=(800-700)X2=200 f/s/s =6.25g
Certainly not 60 g's


What if the missile was a 60 g acellerating missile? How far back was the plane and what was the time to impact?
v=700 fps
Again t(missile impact)=t(nose of a/c impact)
t(a/c)=d/700=t(missile) where d=distance from a/c nose to WTC
d+100=v₀t + 0.5at²d+100=700(d/700) + 0.5(60X32)(d/700)²100= 0.5(60X32)(1/700²)d²100= 0.001959(d²sqrt(100/0.001959)=d =225.9 feet

t=d/v=225.9/700=0.322 seconds

Conclusions:
A Starstreak type missile would launch a third of a second prior to impact.
A slower missile launching at 1 second prior to impact would be travelling at 800 fps at impact.

(I wrote it down this time rather than trying to work it out by looking at the hypertext I had on screen. So hopefully I have it right this time)

 

[WildCat]

Where did you study physics and engineering?

At good ol' UT of course. By that I mean UToob

 

[WildCat]

Never in doubt? Well according to this it was till in the air, AFTER the south tower collapsed. Now I don't want to discuss this much here, because it is mentioned in the other thread. If you want to talk about it, I would prefer to do it there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jdXGSefI6pM

Look at teh utoob!1111!tehutoobzzzzzzz1!!!11111!!!

 

[tmd2_1]

You seem to have missed (or ignored?) my post # 631. So let my try again (this is fun - thinking your thoughts through to their inevitable end).

Let's go with your higher estimate of v_plane = 895ft/s = 273m/s and v_missile = 1000ft/s = 305m/s (both rounded up).
And let's also accept your mass of missile = 40lb = 18.15kg
I get a kinetic energy of (0.5 * 18.15 * 305²)J = 860,481J - slightly below your value. I guess that's because of rounding errors as you convert ft and lb to SI units? I go with my values.

What you are missing first is the fact that the 40lb of missile already has a kinetic energy of 0.5 * 40lb * (895ft/s)² = 676,351J before being fired. So the missile adds only (860,481-676,351)J = 184,130J of destructive energy to the plane.

Now, the plane had a mass of 115,980kg according to my research. I believe your estimate is higher, but since my lower estimate is in favour of your missile theory, I am doing you the favour of going with my lower estimate, but I use your (higher) estimate of the speed, as we use the same for the missile.
Kinetic energy of the plane is thus
E_plane = 0.5 * 115,980kg * (273m/s)² = 4,321,936,710J

To this, your missile adds 184,130J, or 0.004%.

You'd need 234 of these missiles to add only 1% of kinetic energy to what the plane already has!

To add the same destructive force, the plane could carry an additional 5kg of load. That's ome more piece of carry-on luggage.

Man, we don't know the mass of the plane to within 1%, and don't know the speed of the plane to within 1%! Our calculation of the kinetic energy has a margin of error of at least 20%! That margin of error is nearly 5000 times greater than what your flimsy little missile can add!

That missile is absolutely, totally irrelevant! Insignificant as can be! Not noticed! You see, it is like this: Suppose I want to break a plank of wood by stepping on it. Suppose I weigh 70kg. What would you think about the following reasoning? "I may be too light to break this plank of wood with my weight only, hm hmmm is there a way that I can make sure I break it ... Ah! Heureca! I will place one 10-cent coin (Euro cent that is) on the plank just before I step on it, that will surely guarantee success!" Sounds nutty to you? Foolish? Laughable? It should! If it does, then now you know how we have been feeling and thinking about you since the start of this thread.

First of all we are talking about two separate events. A missile (possibly) hit
and than the plane hitting. You know all of the plane's kinetic energy isn't focused on one column. It will lose momentum on initial impact. As I said estimates of this have varied. In this thread alone (by people who support the official story) I have seen 15% momentum loss and 46% momentum loss. Quite a variation. The missile/projectile is focused on a single column, and can probably penetrate it with it's own kinetic energy. Saving the plane the trouble from having to do it. Allowing the plane to penetrate further before other parts of the plane encounter resistance. Your penny example is a bad one I believe. I believe it is more like what professional stuntman or wrestlers do. If they are going to be hit by a chair or something wooden, it is always pre-cut. Thereby when it is used, while I'm sure doesn't feel great, is still much better than taking a non pre-cut chair (or something similar) In both ways the person swinging the object swings with enough force to brake the object (even if it were not pre-cut), and hits the person. But when the object is pre-cut it takes a far less toll and the person's body, than if it were not. Much as it would make it easier for the plane the penetrate. Is this a perfect example? Probably not, but I think you get the point.

You are right about the joules. I used 22kg by mistake. I apologize for that. I must have been going to fast, and had the 1 Kg = 2.2 pounds stuck in my head. So I am sorry for that.

 

[tmd2_1]

Let's try this again;

The plane is moving at over 700 feet per second. Let's round it down to 700fps and have the missile fire 1 second prior to impact. This puts the missile launch when the plane is 700 feet from the tower.

IIRC I calculated 60 g's for the acelleration of the Starstreak missile.The missile has to travel 100 feet further than the nose of the plan(approximately)
if d=the distance from the nose to the WTC then the distance from missile to WTC is d+100 (feet)
d+100=v₀t + 0.5at²and the missile hits the tower very close to the same time as the plane but let's make missile and nose impact simultaneous
d+100=700(1.0) + 0.5(60X32)(1.0)²d= 1560 feet
However we already know that the plane is moving at 700 fps and is 1 second out, therefore the plane must be 700 feet from the WTC, not 1560 feet.

Ok so the time to impact is the same for the missile and the nose of the aircraft if t=0 begins with the launch.

Here we assume that t=1 second
Distance from nose to WTC is 700 feet.
Distance from missile to WTC is 800 feet

with
d_missile=v₀t + 0.5at²800=700(1)+0.5(a)(1)²a=(800-700)X2=200 f/s/s =6.25g
Certainly not 60 g's


What if the missile was a 60 g acellerating missile? How far back was the plane and what was the time to impact?
v=700 fps
Again t(missile impact)=t(nose of a/c impact)
t(a/c)=d/700=t(missile) where d=distance from a/c nose to WTC
d+100=v₀t + 0.5at²d+100=700(d/700) + 0.5(60X32)(d/700)²100= 0.5(60X32)(1/700²)d²100= 0.001959(d²sqrt(100/0.001959)=d =225.9 feet

t=d/v=225.9/700=0.322 seconds

Conclusions:
A Starstreak type missile would launch a third of a second prior to impact.
A slower missile launching at 1 second prior to impact would be travelling at 800 fps at impact.

(I wrote it down this time rather than trying to work it out by looking at the hypertext I had on screen. So hopefully I have it right this time)

You wrote all of this and it what I had already written previously in one sentence? What I thought and sure looks like you wrote before? I'm not sure why you feel the need to do this. It's as I stated before. Missile fires approximately 100 feet away from the nose of the plane. The plane is traveling 700 ft per second. Fired one second before impact, missile has to be traveling 800 ft per second. Now since it impacted BEFORE the nose hit the building it would be traveling a little faster, but for calculation purposes, we can stay with the 100 ft per second difference.

You don't have to take my word for the kinetic energy Oystein calculated (0.5 * 18.15 * 3052)J = 860,481J I did make an error I had 22kg instead of 18. But I mean a missile could have easily weighed that as well. The low end (meaning the plane is going 700 ft a second) the kinetic energy is now 531441 joules, with the 18kg. Again not to shabby.

 

[beachnut]

First of all we are talking about two separate events. A missile (possibly) hit
and than the plane hitting. You know all of the plane's kinetic energy isn't focused on one column. It will lose momentum on initial impact. As I said estimates of this have varied. In this thread alone (by people who support the official story) I have seen 15% momentum loss and 46% momentum loss. Quite a variation. The missile/projectile is focused on a single column, and can probably penetrate it with it's own kinetic energy. Saving the plane the trouble from having to do it. Allowing the plane to penetrate further before other parts of the plane encounter resistance. Your penny example is a bad one I believe. I believe it is more like what professional stuntman or wrestlers do. If they are going to be hit by a chair or something wooden, it is always pre-cut. Thereby when it is used, while I'm sure doesn't feel great, is still much better than taking a non pre-cut chair (or something similar) In both ways the person swinging the object swings with enough force to brake the object (even if it were not pre-cut), and hits the person. But when the object is pre-cut it takes a far less toll and the person's body, than if it were not. Much as it would make it easier for the plane the penetrate. Is this a perfect example? Probably not, but I think you get the point.

You are right about the joules. I used 22kg by mistake. I apologize for that. I must have been going to fast, and had the 1 Kg = 2.2 pounds stuck in my head. So I am sorry for that.

You failed to comprehend your delusional claim is 4,739 times smaller kinetic energy than the plane's kinetic energy. The cross section of the plane is small head-on, because the plane is a missile of sorts. You fail, the plane has no problem breaking the skin of the WTC.

Flight 175 had the energy of 2093 pounds of TNT, the WTC shell was designed to resist 187 pounds of TNT as a plane, 11 times less than Flight 175. This is why Flight 175 entered the WTC, it had more energy than the design could handle, and then excess energy from 175 destroyed 10 core columns. 11 times, 1 to enter, 10 to destroy core columns and cause massive damage.

Your tiny missile would bounce off the shell of the WTC, or make a tiny hole. You failed this time, but don't let failure stop you from spreading more lies and delusions, your duty as a loyal 911 truth Follower; spread nonsense; you are the best.

 

[Dog Town]

Missile fires approximately 100 feet away from the nose of the plane. The plane is traveling 700 ft per second. Fired one second before impact, missile has to be traveling 800 ft per second...

Wow...just, wow! And you wonder...

 

[BStrong]

You failed to comprehend your delusional claim is 4,739 times smaller kinetic energy than the plane's kinetic energy. The cross section of the plane is small head-on, because the plane is a missile of sorts. You fail, the plane has no problem breaking the skin of the WTC.

Flight 175 had the energy of 2093 pounds of TNT, the WTC shell was designed to resist 187 pounds of TNT as a plane, 11 times less than Flight 175. This is why Flight 175 entered the WTC, it had more energy than the design could handle, and then excess energy from 175 destroyed 10 core columns. 11 times, 1 to enter, 10 to destroy core columns and cause massive damage.

Your tiny missile would bounce off the shell of the WTC, or make a tiny hole. You failed this time, but don't let failure stop you from spreading more lies and delusions, your duty as a loyal 911 truth Follower it to spread nonsense; you are good at it.

Exactly.

Even if tmd's imaginary missile was an anti-armor type (known examples, not a Sheen missile of truth...) the shaped charge head would cut a hole approximately 6" in diamter, with after armor damage to soft material.

The missile theory is one of the more foolish fictional constructs that they've come up with.

 

[tmd2_1]

NO!
It has to go 100 feet further than the nose of the plane in the same amount of time, not 100fps faster.
I thought you could follow the math?

This doesn't make any sense. Especially given what you wrote below. Also why did you feel the need to write this?
d=800 feet(nose is 700 feet from tower, missile is 100 feet behind the nose)

Just for our information? I'm not sure what game you are playing.

 

[beachnut]

This doesn't make any sense. Especially given what you wrote below. Also why did you feel the need to write this?
d=800 feet(nose is 700 feet from tower, missile is 100 feet behind the nose)

Just for our information? I'm not sure what game you are playing.

lol, where exactly is the missile and how is it attached to the airframe so the pilot on his walk around will not discover it?

This gets more insane if you had a clue what goes on in the real world.

Why would you need a missile, when you have a plane (which is a missile) which has more weight, and more energy than a missile? The plane also carries 315 TONS of TNT heat energy in 66,000 pounds of jet fuel. It would take over 666,000 tons of thermite to equal the heat energy of the jet fuel.

In addition, it would take over 2,000,000 tons of thermite to equal the heat energy of the fires in the WTC towers, times 2! What will you do when you figure out 911? You will be upset with 911 truth and yourself when you wake up to reality.

 

[The Platypus]

I'm not sure what game you are playing.

Says the guy who is playing games...

 

[GlennB]

Missile fires approximately 100 feet away from the nose of the plane. The plane is traveling 700 ft per second. Fired one second before impact, missile has to be traveling 800 ft per second. Now since it impacted BEFORE the nose hit the building it would be traveling a little faster, but for calculation purposes, we can stay with the 100 ft per second difference.

Why are you continuing to argue about technicalities when the hi-res videos clearly show a total absence of missiles?

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Why are you continuing to argue about technicalities when the hi-res videos clearly show a total absence of missiles?

It's the truthers version of mental masturbation. Some people try to figure out how a magician does his illusions or how to create new ones and others make light of the deaths of thousands of people by inventing new and creative ways to kill them... again.

Both require approaching the problem from the end point and then trying to make it appear to be something that it's not to people who either don't know any better or who simply want to be fooled for whatever reason.

Accomplished magicians can do this knowing that it's harmless and in good fun. Truthers try to do this because of either some macabre sense of humor or because of mental illness. There is a third group. The charlatans and con men who prey upon the feeble minded for a quick buck or political points. I don't think that tmd is in the third group. I haven't decided where he falls in the other two groups yet.

 

[GlennB]

It's the truthers version of mental masturbation. Some people try to figure out how a magician does his illusions or how to create new ones and others make light of the deaths of thousands of people by inventing new and creative ways to kill them... again.

Both require approaching the problem from the end point and then trying to make it appear to be something that it's not to people who either don't know any better or who simply want to be fooled for whatever reason.

That bit gets my vote re tmd2_1