• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Jet engine of wrong type found near Ground Zero

Greedo said:
Is it morally wrong if I consider this thread entertainment? :D


Anders, you may find it helpful to read through (yeah, it's hard, cause you know, you need to read, and making sh** up is so much easier)
all the tons of debunkings? I'm an ex CTer (never really into 911 Twoof though) and I have read for hours and hours until I found that what I used to believe in was complete BS. All of it. And I believed in most CTs out there. Anders, what can you lose?
I'm starting to think you're just a troll. :drool:
Click to expand...

The same answer again, see: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7161255&postcount=79
 
Elypsis44 said:
[qimg]http://i1143.photobucket.com/albums/n632/Elypsis44/OhSnap.gif[/qimg]

[qimg]http://i1143.photobucket.com/albums/n632/Elypsis44/applause.gif[/qimg]


[qimg]http://i1143.photobucket.com/albums/n632/Elypsis44/cuckoo.png[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Ohhh yes, great graphics! I love it! I laughed so hard I almost busted a lung!
 
This image shows that there are less than 24 holes in the jet engine part found near Ground Zero:

i751qd.jpg


EDIT: Note that only the equidistant holes of equal diameter are counted (not the extra smaller holes in the picture). And it could be that the corresponding part for the correct jet engine type (7R4D) looks the same except it does have 24 holes! So this is no definite proof that the jet engine found near Ground Zero is of the wrong type, but it could still be!
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
This image shows that there are less than 24 holes in the jet engine part found near Ground Zero:

...

EDIT: Note that only the equidistant holes of equal diameter are counted (not the extra smaller holes in the picture). And it could be that the corresponding part for the correct jet engine type (7R4D) looks the same except it does have 24 holes! So this is no definite proof that the jet engine found near Ground Zero is of the wrong type, but it could still be!
Click to expand...
Better tell CBS, NBC, and ABC. What did they say? Did you report this to the FBI? You are withholding evidence in a murder of 3,000 people, why have you failed to take action? Why?
Should I report you for withholding evidence in the murder of 3,000 people? What will you do? fail
 
beachnut said:
Better tell CBS, NBC, and ABC. What did they say? Did you report this to the FBI? You are withholding evidence in a murder of 3,000 people, why have you failed to take action? Why?
Should I report you for withholding evidence in the murder of 3,000 people? What will you do? fail
Click to expand...

First all cooling ducts for version 7R4D must be examined to rule out the part found near Ground Zero. That could be tedious work. The sources must be verified to be reliable. And if it turns out that the part found is indeed different, such as from an earlier version of the engine, then that will indeed be interesting, and that's enough for me. I'm just curious about finding out about a possible staged event, not to report findings to legal authorities etc.
 
wj6p7s.jpg


Okay. Isn't the part labelled HPT Stage 1 cooling duct assembly

supposed to be screwed on the part labelled HPT 1 Stage cooling duct?

What exactly is wrong with the part found near GZ? I'm getting confused :D
 
Greedo said:
[qimg]http://i52.tinypic.com/wj6p7s.jpg[/qimg]

Okay. Isn't the part labelled HPT Stage 1 cooling duct assembly

supposed to be screwed on the part labelled HPT 1 Stage cooling duct?

What exactly is wrong with the part found near GZ? I'm getting confused :D
Click to expand...

Yes, I think you are correct. That's why I posted this image: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7161524&postcount=83

There are 24 holes in the part for the correct type (7R4D), yet the assembly part has fewer than 24 holes at the bottom rim!
 
Right. So what does that prove? The holes that aren't 24, but are supposed to be 24 can't be seen on the GZ photos. So this doesn't prove or disprove anything.


So to clear this up: The correct engine would use / have used a part very similar to the HPT stage 1 cooling duct assembly, only that it would have had 24 holes, right (with the curved things still remaining) ?
 
Maybe to get hold of the correct engine is easy. For example here they sell the correct type used in 767s: http://www.trade-a-plane.com/search...&s-lvl=2&make=Pratt+&+Whitney&model=JT9D-7R4D

I even saw a post on a forum where they said that a JT9D engine was for sale on eBay! :D $20,000 something or something like that, so I doubt that it was a fully functioning engine but anyway.

So for a shadow group to plant a part (the core) from such an engine in one of the WTC towers would be most likely be doable.
 
Anders Lindman said:
...
So for a [hypothetical] shadow group to plant a part (the core) from such an engine in one of the WTC towers would be most likely be doable.
Click to expand...

ftfy

Why did I know this thread would ultimately lead to that conclusion?

So uhm Anders, do you think you have won yet?
 
Last edited:
Greedo said:
Right. So what does that prove? The holes that aren't 24, but are supposed to be 24 can't be seen on the GZ photos. So this doesn't prove or disprove anything.


So to clear this up: The correct engine would use / have used a part very similar to the HPT stage 1 cooling duct assembly, only that it would have had 24 holes, right (with the curved things still remaining) ?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's right. If there are parts for the correct type of engine that look like that, and with 24 holes, then the engine found near ground zero would likely be the correct type. The problem is I haven't found any information about that. Sometimes the Web sucks. Tons of info yet no single image of such parts. :mad:
 
Anders Lindman said:
Yes, that's right. If there are parts for the correct type of engine that look like that, and with 24 holes, then the engine found near ground zero would likely be the correct type. The problem is I haven't found any information about that. Sometimes the Web sucks. Tons of info yet no single image of such parts. :mad:
Click to expand...

:o

So, are there no aviation enthusiasts on the JREF forum that can enlighten this curious individual? :D
Don't worry, you aren't going to need to do a lot of explaining. After all, he's easily convinced :D

And if it turns out that the part found is indeed different, such as from an earlier version of the engine, then that will indeed be interesting, and that's enough for me. I'm just curious about finding out about a possible staged event, not to report findings to legal authorities etc.
Click to expand...

I just realized how ^^that^^ could have been perfect with the "I'm just a normal guy" argument :D
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
Yes, that's right. If there are parts for the correct type of engine that look like that, and with 24 holes, then the engine found near ground zero would likely be the correct type. The problem is I haven't found any information about that. Sometimes the Web sucks. Tons of info yet no single image of such parts. :mad:
Click to expand...

Also, that the part that would distinguish it from the correct model is not visible on any of the Murray St. engine photos?
 
Anders Lindman said:
Maybe to get hold of the correct engine is easy. For example here they sell the correct type used in 767s: http://www.trade-a-plane.com/search...&s-lvl=2&make=Pratt+&+Whitney&model=JT9D-7R4D

I even saw a post on a forum where they said that a JT9D engine was for sale on eBay! :D $20,000 something or something like that, so I doubt that it was a fully functioning engine but anyway.

So for a shadow group to plant a part (the core) from such an engine in one of the WTC towers would be most likely be doable.
Click to expand...

Ha! Here are several such engines for sale: http://www.speednews.com/EquipmentResults.aspx?Search=Engine&Engine=JT9D&Type=-7R4D

To me this means that even if the engine found near ground zero turns out to be the correct type and version then I still believe it was complete TV fakery.
 
Greedo said:
Also, that the part that would distinguish it from the correct model is not visible on any of the Murray St. engine photos?
Click to expand...

The curved nozzles or what they are called are very easy to identify on the cooling duct assembly, and if the version used in Flight 175 does NOT look like that, then the jet engine core found near ground zero is of the wrong type. The nozzles are a fairly old design: http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p201479/TOBI_Nozzles_1977.jpg
 
Greedo said:
Who would have guessed :D

Copious amounts of lulz have been provided.
Click to expand...

Not to go off topic too much but compare getting hold of a second-hand JT9D-7R4D (not to mention the older JT9D versions) to getting hold of four black boxes and having the knowledge and capability to program them with the correct flight data and voice recordings etc. That's immensely more difficult. And whaddayaknow! No black boxes found at Ground Zero!
 
Anders Lindman said:
And just to show that there are 24 holes in the part for the correct version 7R4D, here is a larger image: http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p173687/_chromalloy02_edit.jpg
Click to expand...

Okay. So you're pointing to a part, wich even if it was (or wasn't for that matter) installed on the Murray St. engine would not be visible because it would be obscured by the cooling duct assembly (wich looks, exept for the holes that can't be seen, the same on both types)? :boggled:
 
Last edited:
Greedo said:
Okay. So you're pointing to a part, wich even if it was (or wasn't for that matter) installed on the Murray St. engine would not be visible because it would be obscured by the cooling duct assembly (wich looks, exept for the holes that can't be seen, the same on both types)? :boggled:
Click to expand...

I'm looking for a parts that have 24 holes at the bottom rim. If any of those parts have those characteristic curved nozzles, then that's evidence for the engine being of correct type. Alternatively, if it can be shown that some JT9D-7R4D engines can have a difference part than this: http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p173687/_chromalloy02_edit.jpg then more or less than 24 holes rim is possible too (depending on what types of assemblies are possible).

So, in short, I would like to see a cooling duct assembly with those 20 curved nozzles that is for a JT9D-7R4D.
 
Last edited:
At first I thought the HPT Stage 1 Cooling Assembly bolts onto the HPT Stage 1 Cooling Duct. Both have 24 bolt holes on their flanges.

Then having looked at it a bit closer it appears that in the photo of the HPT Stage 1 Cooling Duct, the duct is upside down. The flange with the 24 bolt holes should be on the bottom for a comparison because it would be logical for both flanges with 24 bolt holes to mate with another part.

What I find odd in the picture is why someone is comparing 20 tobi tubes with 24 bolt holes. :confused:

Whomever is trying to do the comparison doesn't know the difference between a tobi tube and a bolt hole.

If this is an JT9D-7A/7F/7J rather than a JT9D-7R4D then what's the problem? Both are used on the 767.
 
Sunstealer said:
At first I thought the HPT Stage 1 Cooling Assembly bolts onto the HPT Stage 1 Cooling Duct. Both have 24 bolt holes on their flanges.

Then having looked at it a bit closer it appears that in the photo of the HPT Stage 1 Cooling Duct, the duct is upside down. The flange with the 24 bolt holes should be on the bottom for a comparison because it would be logical for both flanges with 24 bolt holes to mate with another part.

What I find odd in the picture is why someone is comparing 20 tobi tubes with 24 bolt holes. :confused:

Whomever is trying to do the comparison doesn't know the difference between a tobi tube and a bolt hole.

If this is an JT9D-7A/7F/7J rather than a JT9D-7R4D then what's the problem? Both are used on the 767.
Click to expand...

My first comparison was with the 20 curved nozzles in the first image with the 24 holes in the second image. Already then I suspected that the second image showed a bottom part, not the assembly but anyway.

Then I did this match which shows that the assembly with the nozzles has LESS than 24 holes at the bottom rim: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7161524&postcount=83
 
Anders Lindman said:
My first comparison was with the 20 curved nozzles in the first image with the 24 holes in the second image. Already then I suspected that the second image showed a bottom part, not the assembly but anyway.

Then I did this match which shows that the assembly with the nozzles has LESS than 24 holes at the bottom rim: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7161524&postcount=83
Click to expand...
Funny how you yourself are saying it has 24 holes after doing a comparison and then you quote yourself to prove it has less than 24 holes??? The bottom flange on the HPT 1 Cooling Stage Assembly has 24 bolt holes. It's easy just to count them for god's sake.

Those 24 holes allow both of these parts to mate with another part in the engine. Bearing in mind one is an assembly and the other is not, then it wouldn't surprise me if there was another part containing tobi tubes that mates to the HPT Stage 1 Cooling Duct - we just don't have a picture of it.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I thought of that too, that the lower part may be the bottom part and the upper picture showing a part that is mounted on top of that, BUT, the upper part has LESS than 24 holes in its outer bottom ring. So, either way, I win!
Click to expand...

So you have now established that the two items pictured are not variants of the same part and they do not bolt together. A triumph of investigation.

If you ever find out how many bolt holes there are on the 9/11 engine's part and how many there ought to have been, that might actually be interesting.
 
Sunstealer said:
Funny how you yourself are saying it has 24 holes after doing a comparison and then you quote yourself to prove it has less than 24 holes??? The bottom flange on the HPT 1 Cooling Stage Assembly has 24 bolt holes. It's easy just to count them for god's sake.

Those 24 holes allow both of these parts to mate with another part in the engine. Bearing in mind one is an assembly and the other is not, then it wouldn't surprise me if there was another part containing tobi tubes that mates to the HPT Stage 1 Cooling Duct - we just don't have a picture of it.
Click to expand...

Isn't this part the top: http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p173686/_chromalloy01_edit.jpg

And this part the bottom: http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p173687/_chromalloy02_edit.jpg

The bottom part has 24 holes. The top part has LESS than 24 holes.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
So you have now established that the two items pictured are not variants of the same part and they do not bolt together. A triumph of investigation.

If you ever find out how many bolt holes there are on the 9/11 engine's part and how many there ought to have been, that might actually be interesting.
Click to expand...

OR, that the nozzles on the more modern version 7R4D of the cooling duct assembly look different than: http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p201479/TOBI_Nozzles_1977.jpg EDIT: OR that the number nozzles on the 7R4D part is other than 20.
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
Isn't this part the top: http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p173686/_chromalloy01_edit.jpg

And this part the bottom: http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p173687/_chromalloy02_edit.jpg

The bottom part has 24 holes. The top part has LESS than 24 holes.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that these two parts fit together?

I don't think they do - the reason is simple, they are for different engine variations. You can't fit both in the same engine.

They both have 24 holes in their bottom flanges otherwise they wouldn't be able to mate with the same part. You obviously have no experience with aircraft engines.
 
Anders Lindman said:
OR, that the nozzles on the more modern version 7R4D of the cooling duct assembly look different than: http://209.85.62.24/46/112/0/p201479/TOBI_Nozzles_1977.jpg EDIT: OR that the number nozzles on the 7R4D part is other than 20.
Click to expand...
That's a developmental engine. 1977 is the clue. There's no reason why the tobi tubes couldn't be redesigned between then and 1982 (when it first flew) or as a modification to the engine post 1982. It's possible that these engines had a mod whereby the turbine section from a 7A- was installed.

If you are really this concerned Anders I suggest you write to P&W and ask them directly. Ask for the relevant pages in the IPC.
 
Sunstealer said:
Are you saying that these two parts fit together?

I don't think they do - the reason is simple, they are for different engine variations. You can't fit both in the same engine.

They both have 24 holes in their bottom flanges otherwise they wouldn't be able to mate with the same part. You obviously have no experience with aircraft engines.
Click to expand...

They do NOT both have 24 holes. See:

i751qd.jpg


Compare the actual holes with the 24 overlaid computer graphics circles.
 
Sunstealer said:
That's a developmental engine. 1977 is the clue. There's no reason why the tobi tubes couldn't be redesigned between then and 1982 (when it first flew) or as a modification to the engine post 1982. It's possible that these engines had a mod whereby the turbine section from a 7A- was installed.

If you are really this concerned Anders I suggest you write to P&W and ask them directly. Ask for the relevant pages in the IPC.
Click to expand...

Yeah, one poster on another forum said that they made a lot of improvements:

"The name of the component is HPT Stage1 Cooling Duct Assembly. There is a history behind this assembly as I began to read more. This component was part of the early JT9D-7 series engines that were used in development of Boeing's 747 line of aircraft. The "7" series engines have gone through many revisions but are exclusively used on 747's. Many years later, P&W decided to work with NASA in the development in a new technology to improve engine performance and reliability. This improvement was made specifically to this section of engine."

From: http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/1829738/1/
 
Anders Lindman said:
but I would like to see evidence that proves the claim wrong.
Click to expand...
Yay for negative proof!

So what happened exactly? A jet engine was there before the crash and no one saw it? Someone dumped the engine right at the crash and no one noticed? The engine was planted in the building without anyone seeing it and when the explosions went off it ejected it out?
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
Yeah, one poster on another forum said that they made a lot of improvements:

"The name of the component is HPT Stage1 Cooling Duct Assembly. There is a history behind this assembly as I began to read more. This component was part of the early JT9D-7 series engines that were used in development of Boeing's 747 line of aircraft. The "7" series engines have gone through many revisions but are exclusively used on 747's. Many years later, P&W decided to work with NASA in the development in a new technology to improve engine performance and reliability. This improvement was made specifically to this section of engine."

From: http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/1829738/1/
Click to expand...

This changes what exactly?
 
Anders Lindman said:
They do NOT both have 24 holes. See:

[qimg]http://i55.tinypic.com/i751qd.jpg[/qimg]

Compare the actual holes with the 24 overlaid computer graphics circles.
Click to expand...
Your overlay is wrong because you aren't taking perspective into account - the view is not a circle. You can count 12 visible holes on one half of the ring.
 
grandmastershek said:
Yay for negative proof!

So what happened exactly? A jet engine was there before the crash and no one saw it? Someone dumped the engine right at the crash and no one noticed? The engine was planted in the building without anyone seeing it and when the explosions went off it ejected it out?
Click to expand...

Let's focus on the type and version of the jet engine first, but to briefly answer your question: my theory is that the engine part was planted in one of the WTC towers and made to shoot out of the building like a cannonball by placing explosives behind it.

Listen to the sharp short bang when the engine shoots out of the South Tower like a projectile: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNRatnY5ymM
 
Sunstealer said:
Your overlay is wrong because you aren't taking perspective into account - the view is not a circle. You can count 12 visible holes on one half of the ring.
Click to expand...

Perspective has been taken into account. Notice the sizes, positions and shapes of the computer graphics circles.
 
Quoting myself here :D

Greedo said:
What is it with you CTers and perspective?
Click to expand...



Anders Lindman said:
Let's focus on the type and version of the jet engine first, but to briefly answer your question: my theory is that the engine part was planted in one of the WTC towers and made to shoot out of the building like a cannonball by placing explosives behind it.

Listen to the sharp short bang when the engine shoots out of the South Tower like a projectile: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNRatnY5ymM
Click to expand...

What could possibly make such a sound? Hmm, maybe a large passenger plane hitting a tower at 504 kts?


You do realize sound travels slower than light, right?
 
Anders, if you look at the "old design of the nozzles", you see that the nozzles are longer than on the pic you showed earlier. I'd say it is very likely they updated that part for the newer model.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom