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

[cjnewson88]

High pressure = high water velocity through the jets.

 

[yankee451]

Ladys and Gentleman we have winner!!

Only took 40 pages...

Is this the commone consensus? Can we get a vote? I want to know who agrees with this?

How about the other pilot, the instructor? Will the wing cut the car in half because only velocity and mass matter? Density, hardness of materials and the construction of the impacting bodies mean nothing in the equation, right?

Mass and velocity is all that matters.

Anyone disagree?

 

[cjnewson88]

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

Just when I thought he was getting it.

Wing = Mass.

>Mach 1 = Velocity

If either of these are high enough, the mass will cut through anything.

Just like the water.

Just like the ping pong ball.

Just like a bullet.

 

[yankee451]

Is this the commone consensus? Can we get a vote? I want to know who agrees with this?

How about the other pilot, the instructor? Will the wing cut the car in half because only velocity and mass matter? Density, hardness of materials and the construction of the impacting bodies mean nothing in the equation, right?

Mass and velocity is all that matters.

Anyone disagree?

I'm the layman here remember, I don't know so I'm asking.

 

[yankee451]

Just when I thought he was getting it.

Wing = Mass.

>Mach 1 = Velocity

If either of these are high enough, the mass will cut through anything.

Just like the water.

Just like the ping pong ball.

Just like a bullet.

How is a wing like a bullet?

 

[cjnewson88]

How is a wing like a bullet?

**** this. I give up. You guys take it from here. I'm out.

 

[beachnut]

Fantasy fails - Physics win

Is this the commone consensus? Can we get a vote? I want to know who agrees with this?

How about the other pilot, the instructor? Will the wing cut the car in half because only velocity and mass matter? Density, hardness of materials and the construction of the impacting bodies mean nothing in the equation, right?

Mass and velocity is all that matters.

Anyone disagree?

The car is nonsense - the WTC is not a car. The car is not under stress, it is not holding up the WTC, it is not responsible for the lateral support of the WTC. It does not matter if a wing can cut a car, the WTC is not a car.

You can't do the phyics to understand reality.


A plane at 200 mph and below does no major damage. At 470 and 590 mph, an aircraft enters the WTC easy, and stops when all the energy is gone. Physics, one topic the School of Hard Knocks skipped.

RADAR proves you wrong, we don't need the physics, you do. lol, you ignore reality and spew fantasy.

From the MIT study, you ignore. It debunked you, yet you think you debunked it.

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Chapter-IV-Aircraft-Impact.pdf
Remember you commented version?

 

[TJM]

The car is nonsense - the WTC is not a car. The car is not under stress, it is not holding up the WTC, it is not responsible for the lateral support of the WTC. It does not matter if a wing can cut a car, the WTC is not a car.

You can't do the phyics to understand reality.


A plane at 200 mph and below does no major damage. At 470 and 590 mph, an aircraft enters the WTC easy, and stops when all the energy is gone. Physics, one topic the School of Hard Knocks skipped.

RADAR proves you wrong, we don't need the physics, you do. lol, you ignore reality and spew fantasy.

From the MIT study, you ignore. It debunked you, yet you think you debunked it.

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Chapter-IV-Aircraft-Impact.pdf
Remember you commented version?

Quoted again for beachnut the ignored.

No paraphrasing required.

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

How is a wing like a bullet?

Ooh, ooh, I know this one!


They both exist

 

[yankee451]

Just when I thought he was getting it.

Wing = Mass.

>Mach 1 = Velocity

If either of these are high enough, the mass will cut through anything.

Just like the water.

Just like the ping pong ball.

Just like a bullet.

You claim to be a pilot and you sit there and say this stuff? No it's not just mass and velocity, that might work for a math problem but there are other condiderations like what part of the jet wing hits what part of the car.

You're saying that the wing will slice right through an engine block even if the thin aluminum spar slaps into it sideways - then you accuse me of not understanding physics! The reason the water jet, bullet and ping pong ball are able to penetrate dense materials is because their integrity is maintained long enough to transfer the energy to the target. That's why pressure is so important in the water jet, to maintain the integrity and coherence of the column of water long enough for the pressure of the water to overcome the steel, but even then only if it is very tiny aperature and very close to the steel, and even then if it is thick steel they need to add abrasives.

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

Bullets work for the same reason - small impact point means maximum penetration, more drag equals less penetration.

For use against armored targets, or large, tough game animals, penetration is the most important consideration. Focusing the largest amount of momentum on the smallest possible area of the target provides the greatest penetration. Bullets for maximum penetration are designed to resist deformation upon impact, and usually are made of lead that is covered in a copper, brass, or mild steel jacket (some are even solid copper or bronze alloy). The jacket completely covers the front of the bullet, although often the rear is left with exposed lead (this is a manufacturing consideration: the jacket is formed first, and the lead is swaged in from the rear). For penetrating substances significantly harder than jacketed lead, the lead core is supplemented with or replaced with a harder material, such as hardened steel. Military armor piercing small arms ammunition is made from a copper jacketed steel core; the steel resists deformation better than the usual soft lead core leading to greater penetration. The current NATO 5.56 mm SS109 (M855) bullet uses a steel tipped lead core to improve penetration, the steel tip providing resistance to deformation for armor piercing, and the heavier lead core (25% heavier than the previous bullet, the M193) providing increased sectional density for better penetration in soft targets. For larger, higher velocity calibers, such as tank guns, hardness is of secondary importance to density, and are normally sub-caliber projectiles made from tungsten carbide, tungsten hard alloy or depleted uranium fired in a light aluminum or magnesium alloy (or carbon fibre in some cases) sabot. Many modern tank guns are smoothbore, not rifled because practical rifling twists can only stabilize projectiles, such as an armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS), with a length to diameter ratio of up to about 5:1, the spin imposed by rifling interferes with shaped charge rounds, and also because the rifling adds friction and reduces the velocity it is possible to achieve. To get the maximum force on the smallest area, anti-tank rounds have aspect ratios of 10:1 or more. Since these cannot be stabilized by rifling, they are built instead like large darts, with fins providing the stabilizing force, negating the need for rifling. These subcaliber rounds are held in place in the bore by sabots. The sabot is a light material that transfers the pressure of the charge to the penetrator, then is discarded when the round leaves the barrel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_ballistics

Poke a hole in your ping pong ball and shoot it through the paddle.


Why is a jet wing like a bullet and why would it cut a car in half?

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

Why is a jet wing like a bullet and why would it cut a car in half?

I think it might have something to do with you not being able to provide evidence of missiles.

 

[yankee451]

[qimg]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/Paris_Tuileries_Garden_Facepalm_statue.jpg/300px-Paris_Tuileries_Garden_Facepalm_statue.jpg[/qimg]

**** this. I give up. You guys take it from here. I'm out.

I have answered every one of your questions.

 

[beachnut]

No Plane lie hits Reality

You claim to be a pilot and you sit there and say this stuff? No it's not just mass and velocity, that might work for a math problem but there are other condiderations like what part of the jet wing hits what part of the car.

Car? It is the WTC that 767s hit, not a car. You can't do the physics for the car, or the WTC. You mocked MIT, you do fantasy.

You're saying that the wing will slice right through an engine block even if the thin aluminum spar slaps into it sideways - then you accuse me of not understanding physics! The reason the water jet, bullet and ping pong ball are able to penetrate dense materials is because their integrity is maintained long enough to transfer the energy to the target. That's why pressure is so important in the water jet, to maintain the integrity and coherence of the column of water long enough for the pressure of the watter to overcome the steel, but even then only if it is very tiny aperature and very close to the steel, and even then if it is thick steel they need to add abrasives.

No you are doing a gish gallop.

Wrong. You don't do physics, and now try to explain why shot guns don't work.

Bullets work for the same reason - small impact point means maximum penetration, more drag equals less penetration.

OH?
Faster than a bullet.

Planes are made with minmum drag. What is your point?

Poke a hole in your ping pong ball and shoot it through the paddle.

The 767 did not have holes poked in them. In fact at 590 mph at 700 feet, a hole in a 767 might destroy it. You don't understand flight, or drag, because you don't physics.
You upset a hollow plastic ball can be the same as large jet? The jet is also like a balloon, it is pressurized.

Why is a jet wing like a bullet and why would it cut a car in half?

Who said a jet wing would cut a car? A wing is part of a plane, it is a system. The whole plane did the damage on 911, not only the wing. You are now posting nonsense.

The jet is like a bullet, but the jet is powered; it goes further.

A primer on physics for 911 truth?

 

[yankee451]

I think it might have something to do with you not being able to provide evidence of missiles.

This thread is about the 9/11 Crash Test project.

Have you watched the video in the OP?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kn3a--hf7_s

 

[beachnut]

451 debunked by Video and RADAR, Reality kills Fantasy

This thread is about the 9/11 Crash Test project.

Have you watched the video in the OP?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kn3a--hf7_s

Oops, no math to prove a 767 can't do what we see happened. Like denial and no physics force you to lie and spread your fantasy.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9zBGgpzl0I&feature=player_embedded Ping Pong

Like a ping pong ball going fast can break a paddle, a 767 going fast can break a thin steel shell of the WTC. The 767 can do it, not a wing, the whole plane is needed. This physics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cddIgb1nGJ8 Purdue flight sim

Purdue did the math; you ignor math and skip to talk, and you want to vote? You want to vote? Did you vote on math quizes?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VGR0Gw4c5M4 175 impacts, proves your claims, failed fantasy.


Flight 175, was tracked the same time, the same place by mulitple RADAR sites. OOPS - no math needed, this is that empirical stink you wanted, but you ignore.

Here is the RADAR data, it proves the videos that match, are real.
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/foia/9_11/Flight_Path_Study_UA175.pdf

 

[yankee451]

Quoted again for beachnut the ignored.

No paraphrasing required.

Ask him if he thinks the wing would cut the car in half at speeds greater than mach 1.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

How is a wing like a bullet?

Look at your spar and the relatively small holes in it. LOOK AT IT. At the immediate millisecond of impact there is fuel in front of it that is pressing against the leading wind edge AND the top and bottom of the wing and against the spar. There is also fuel BEHIND the spar that is also pressing against it and Bernoulli's principal only allows for so much flow through a certain sized aperture (hole if you need it dumbed down) at any given pressure. Even if they are breached by the overpressure of the front tank strike on the face of the building there will still be tons of mass behind the spar to continue to press that fuel mass against the back side of the spar propelling it forwards.

The amount of time spent exerting that huge amount of potential energy (mass + velocity) is but a few hundredth's of a second but that's all it would take because the airplane wing didn't "Cut" through the exterior columns but it instead broke the mechanical bonds used in holding together the buildings exterior panels. You are thinking along the lines of cutting with a chisel instead of the more accurate example hitting with a sledgehammer. Both cause damage but the outcome is decidedly different.

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

This thread is about the 9/11 Crash Test project.

Have you watched the video in the OP?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kn3a--hf7_s

Yep, I watched it back when it was first posted.

It's mental.



I absolutely want you to perform your crash test though.

 

[TJM]

Ask him if he thinks the wing would cut the car in half at speeds greater than mach 1.

In case you've missed it:

The car is nonsense

Yo.

 

[yankee451]

Look at your spar and the relatively small holes in it.

Okay...

LOOK AT IT.

I AM!

At the immediate millisecond of impact there is fuel in front of it that is pressing against the leading wind edge AND the top and bottom of the wing and against the spar.

And the leading wind edge AND the top and bottom of the wing and spar will be pushing back at the fuel in an equal and opposite reaction relative their mass, material and construction.

There is also fuel BEHIND the spar that is also pressing against it and Bernoulli's principal only allows for so much flow through a certain sized aperture (hole if you need it dumbed down) at any given pressure.

Thanks for dumbing it down. Are you making a point here? Can I stop looking at the holes in the spar now?

Even if they are breached by the overpressure of the front tank strike on the face of the building there will still be tons of mass behind the spar to continue to press that fuel mass against the back side of the spar propelling it forwards.

What hit the building first? The leading edge that the Pink Flamingo got wedged in?

Wouldn't the coherence of the wing be broken in that millisecond? Considering the wings were swept back about 30 degrees, by the time the engines disappeared into the building, the rest of the wing wasn't even attached to the plane, so are you saying it happened so fast it beat the "millisecond" clock?

The amount of time spent exerting that huge amount of potential energy (mass + velocity) is but a few hundredth's of a second but that's all it would take because the airplane wing didn't "Cut" through the exterior columns but it instead broke the mechanical bonds used in holding together the buildings exterior panels. You are thinking along the lines of cutting with a chisel instead of the more accurate example hitting with a sledgehammer. Both cause damage but the outcome is decidedly different.

It's amazing they caught it on high speed camera from so many angles.

Well thanks for the physics lesson.