Merged No Planer calls for scientific study / Missiles of 9/11

[TJM]

Beachnut isn't part of my conversation.

But cj is, as is SUS and many others.

Have you watched the video in the OP?

Yes, yes I have. It's rubbish. So what?

 

[cjnewson88]

You said you are a pilot.
You claim a jet wing can cut a car in half if it goes fast enough.
I ask how this is possible if a bird can bring down a jet.
You point to a spar, that it's like an "I Beam" running up both sides of the wing.
I ask how the spar would cut in half the columns, not to mention the car if it was striking as it is shown in your diagram.

I guess I don't understand what you're getting at here - how would the spar cut a car in half, and can you tell me what material and how thick?

Yankee;

Do you know why water can cut steel?

Do you know why a ping pong ball can go through a bat?

Do you know how a bunker buster bomb can penetrate rock and concrete bunkers?

Material, normally an alloy of sorts, I am unsure. In smaller aircraft its aluminium. In larger boeing's, it would have to be much stronger.

You do not understand because you do not know physics. I answered how. I gave you 4 examples of the basic principle in action.

Mass and Velocity. If either of them are large enough, it will punched through anything.

 

[SUSpilot]

No Planer calls for scientific study

Here's an example of a not very sharp edge of a wing, well ahead of the spar (in other words, sheet aluminum) surviving the impact with a large, heavy object.

http://www.studentpilot.com/interact/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2373&d=1178907114

A Cessna 172RG hit a buzzard during climb out at Spirit of St. Louis airport. The indicated airspeed at the time of impact was about 90 knots. The pilot saw the bird hit the wing squarely, and felt the plane shudder from the impact. The student flight instructor also heard and felt the impact. The pilot requested priority landing at the airport. A normal landing was made without flaps, as the flight crew was unsure of how the impacted area might have affected the aircraft's flight characteristics.

How do I know all this?

I was the flight instructor training a flight instructor student when the bird dove down in front of us.

 

[yankee451]

Depends on the wing. In the Diamond DA20/40/42 series, for example, it's a box girder made of carbon fiber laminate.

On the Boeing 757, it's also a box girder but made up of aluminum alloys. I tried getting some specs for you, but not much success. In the airplane manufacturing business, the main trade secrets are in how the wing is built, so I'm not surprised that I couldn't find the data. Yes the FAA has that data as part of the type certificate, but they also protect proprietary data.

But no matter what, remember that the wing is structurally the strongest part of any fixed wing aircraft, and that the main spar is the backbone of the wing.

Also, in a very real sense, the fuselage is riding on the wing (singular - the spar effectively carries through the wing box under the fuselage). In effect, the fuselage was along for the ride.

Thanks,

Specs would be appreciated.

Still, aren't I Beams like the spar mostly designed for vertical loads? Doesn't that imply the spar would buckle if it impacted a vertical column?

Do you think a wing could cut a car in half if it went fast enough considering the construction of the wing and the car?

[

 

[beachnut]

Physics beats Gish-Gallop

Oh damn, fell for it.

How about you, do you believe the wing would cut the car in half?

Have you watched the video in the OP?

The car stuff, a gish-gallop; you add silly stuff, so your failed comments on the MIT paper don't expose your lack of knowledge in physics and science. Oops, too late. What did MIT say?

You have failed to answer the questions, you have failed to back up your fantasy.

Comments fail to beat physics.
http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Chapter-IV-Aircraft-Impact.pdf

451 comment -
Okay, stop right there. Look at the nose of the plane and look at what it's about to impact. Those are 4-inch thick concrete floors with steel trusses which run all the way to the opposite wall. The nose of the jet is constructed of fiberglass. plastic and aluminum.
Remember, when the nose impacts the floors at 500 MPH, the floors also impact the nose at 500 MPH, and this is after the nose cuts through the steel columns.
Do you see how silly this math problem is? The math is irrelevant, it is the propaganda I find frightening.
Students believe this stuff.

No physics from 451.

How does a plastic ball, a hollow plastic ball fly through a paddle of laminated wood, used to hit same ball???

Beachnut isn't part of my conversation.

Have you watched the video in the OP?

Because I do physics and understand you spread lies?
What happened to Flight 11 passengers?
What happened to Flgiht 175 passengers?
Look, they were tracked by RADAR to the WTC, from takeoff to landing.
You can't refute the RADAR, you ignore it. Good job.
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/foia/9_11/Flight_Path_Study_UA175.pdf
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/foia/9_11/Rec_Radar_Data_Study_all_aircraft.pdf
Empirical data for Flight 175, and 11.
Data you can't refute, you have to ignore to have a failed fantasy, a fantasy based on anti-intellectual bias, anti-science.
What happened to passengers on 11 and 175?

You mistake me for someone who cares ...

As you wish.

Your video is full of nonsense. You are the one spreading lies about 911 in your video, and due to your fantasy, you don't know it. I don't think you understand your claims are nonsense, and how many lies you put in your video.

You don't know how thick the steel is. You can't specify the energy the WTC can stop in the form of plane. I gave you the answer, you failed to write it down.

 

[yankee451]

Here's an example of a not very sharp edge of a wing, well ahead of the spar (in other words, sheet aluminum) surviving the impact with a large, heavy object.

http://www.studentpilot.com/interact/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=2373&d=1178907114

A Cessna 172RG hit a buzzard during climb out at Spirit of St. Louis airport. The indicated airspeed at the time of impact was about 90 knots. The pilot saw the bird hit the wing squarely, and felt the plane shudder from the impact. The student flight instructor also heard and felt the impact. The pilot requested priority landing at the airport. A normal landing was made without flaps, as the flight crew was unsure of how the impacted area might have affected the aircraft's flight characteristics.

How do I know all this?

I was the flight instructor training a flight instructor student when the bird dove down in front of us.

As a flight instructor do you believe the wing would cut the car in half? Because that's a whole lot easier of a test to perform than what i have in mind.

 

[yankee451]

Is anyone going to answer my questions? How would the spar cut the car in half?

 

[TJM]

The car stuff, a gish-gallop; you add silly stuff, so your failed comments on the MIT paper don't expose your lack of knowledge in physics and science.

You have failed to answer the questions, you have failed to back up your fantasy.

Comments fail to beat physics.
http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Chapter-IV-Aircraft-Impact.pdf

No physics from 451.

How does a plastic ball, a hollow plastic ball fly through a paddle of laminated wood, used to hit same ball???




Because I do physics and understand you spread lies?
What happened to Flight 11 passengers?
What happened to Flgiht 175 passengers?
Look, they were tracked by RADAR to the WTC, from takeoff to landing.
You can't refute the RADAR, you ignore it. Good job.
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/foia/9_11/Flight_Path_Study_UA175.pdf
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/foia/9_11/Rec_Radar_Data_Study_all_aircraft.pdf
Empirical data for Flight 175, and 11.
Data you can't refute, you have to ignore to have a failed fantasy, a fantasy based on anti-intellectual bias, anti-science.
What happened to passengers on 11 and 175?
As you wish.

Your video is full of nonsense. You are the one spreading lies about 911 in your video, and due to your fantasy, you don't know it. I don't think you understand your claims are nonsense, and how many lies you put in your video.

You don't know how thick the steel is. You can't specify the energy the WTC can stop in the form of plane. I gave you the answer, you failed to write it down.

quoted for yankee451 since he claims to have beachnut on ignore.

 

[cjnewson88]

Is anyone going to answer my questions? How would the spar cut the car in half?

I did answer your question. Yes. If a wing was traveling fast enough (may even need to be over MACH 1) it would cut the car. It is a basic fundamental principle of physics. The same as the ping pong ball, the same as water cutting steel.

I'll ask my question again.

Do you know why water can cut steel?

Do you know why a ping pong ball can go through a bat?

Do you know why a tennis ball could go through a solid concrete wall?

 

[yankee451]

I did answer your question. Yes. If a wing was traveling fast enough (may even need to be over MACH 1) it would cut the car. It is a basic fundamental principle of physics. The same as the ping pong ball, the same as water cutting steel.

I'll ask my question again.

Do you know why water can cut steel?

Do you know why a ping pong ball can go through a bat?

Do you know why a tennis ball could go through a solid concrete wall?

Flight 1771 hit at 1.2 and it barely even left a crater.

I am not talking about a water jet, tennis ball or ping pong ball, but in answer to your "dodge' yes. What happens if you take the air out of the balls? What happens if you don't use a jeweled aperature placed very close to the steel? What happens when there's not enough pressure?

Now, back to the wing. You say, as a pilot, that it doesn't matter how the wing is constructed, at mach 1 it would cut a car in half, right?

What I want to know is why mach 1?

 

[yankee451]

quoted for yankee451 since he claims to have beachnut on ignore.

paraphrase please

 

[cjnewson88]

Flight 1771 hit at 1.2 and it barely even left a crater.

I am not talking about a water jet, tennis ball or ping pong ball, but in answer to your "dodge' yes.

You call it a dodge because you cannot understand physics.

Water cuts steel because of mass and velocity.

Ping pong ball bunches a hole in a bat because of mass and velocity.

A bullet goes through a mans skull because of mass and velocity.

An airliner wing will punch through columns of the world trade center because of mass and velocity.

Now, back to the wing. You say, as a pilot, that it doesn't matter how the wing is constructed, at mach 1 it would cut a car in half, right?

What I want to know is why mach 1?

I did not say it would do it at mach 1. I said it may have to be above mach 1 to do it, but if its fast enough, it will do it.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Oh... My... Gawd...

I just happened to peek in here and the OP and the few follow ups to it that I have read are as dense as a neutron star.

1) The wing is not a hollow aluminum tube. It's a "Hollow" reinforced rigid structure intended to support literally hundreds of tons worth of engines, fuselage, avionics, fuel, passengers, cargo and other things traveling 600 + MPH while filled with many more tons worth of liquid fuel. This is not "Just" a hollow tube.

2) This "Not a hollow tube" is traveling at 400+ MPH. It has a substantial amount of mass and the lateral strength to withstand 600+ MPH winds. It is much stronger than a filled and sealed coke can or even an average passenger car.

3) Go watch the Mythbusters test on a rocket sled where the moving object (a concrete backed 1" piece of plate steel moving at 649 MPH) hits a much less massive compact car) and see what happened to that 1" plate steel. Here, let me help:



Now I know that you will probably say that because the car was stationary while the steel plate was moving that it's invalid but physics do not care which part is moving or stationary. That's not how it works.

Your proposed experiment has not only been done before but it used much more extreme conditions than you propose and it completely debunks your presupposed outcome. Now you can go ahead and waste your money on your experiment but you will be let down by the results.

 

[yankee451]

You call it a dodge because you cannot understand physics.

Water cuts steel because of mass and velocity.

Ping pong ball bunches a hole in a bat because of mass and velocity.

A bullet goes through a mans skull because of mass and velocity.

An airliner wing will punch through columns of the world trade center because of mass and velocity.



I did not say it would do it at mach 1. I said it may have to be above mach 1 to do it, but if its fast enough, it will do it.

You keep saying that, but I'm trying to understand really.

Okay, so only mass and velocity matter then, right?

 

[Animal]

Flight 1771 hit at 1.2 and it barely even left a crater.

I am not talking about a water jet, tennis ball or ping pong ball, but in answer to your "dodge' yes. What happens if you take the air out of the balls? What happens if you don't use a jeweled aperature placed very close to the steel? What happens when there's not enough pressure?

Now, back to the wing. You say, as a pilot, that it doesn't matter how the wing is constructed, at mach 1 it would cut a car in half, right?

What I want to know is why mach 1?

Your ignorance of physics knows no bounds.
Pressure only creates a velocity for the water......right back to square one of your ignorance of physics. An close aperture is simply for engineering efficiency.

 

[TJM]

paraphrase please

Why? Can't you read?

 

[cjnewson88]

Okay, so only mass and velocity matter then, right?

Ladys and Gentleman we have winner!!

Only took 40 pages...

 

[yankee451]

Your ignorance of physics knows no bounds.
Pressure only creates a velocity for the water......right back to square one of your ignorance of physics. An close aperture is simply for engineering efficiency.

I am not your search engine and I don't need to prove my knowledge to you, especially when you have been so wrong about so much so far. I could be just as ignorant as you all say and it wouldn't change the facts one bit, nor the fact that your accusing me of being ignorant of physics doesn't prove your case.

I so tire of having to deal with all these distractions from the thread. If I don't I'll be accused of avoiding the question.

A waterjet is a tool used in machine shops to cut metal parts with a (very) high-pressure stream of water. As amazing as it sounds, if you get water flowing fast enough it can actually cut metal.

Think of a waterjet as something with about 30 times the pressure of the power washer wand at your local car wash. Power washing at car washes is an everyday example of a dirt film being “cut” off the body, wheels and tires of an automobile.

The key to cutting metal with water is to keep the spray coherent. Waterjets are able to cut because the spray is channeled through a very narrow jeweled nozzle at a very high pressure to keep the spray coherent. Unlike metal cutters, a waterjet never gets dull and it cannot overheat.
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/energy/question553.htm

 

[yankee451]

Now can SOMEONE show me how at speeds above Mach 1 a jet's wing will cut a car in half?

 

[beachnut]

I am not your search engine and I don't need to prove my knowledge to you, especially when you have been so wrong about so much so far. I could be just as ignorant as you all say and it wouldn't change the facts one bit, nor the fact that your accusing me of being ignorant of physics doesn't prove your case.

I so tire of having to deal with all these distractions from the thread. If I don't I'll be accused of avoiding the question.

Another gish-gallop

You post some stuff that does not help you.

Your claim is refuted by phyiscs.