Flight 175 plane speed challenged

[Blender Head]

I thought that this “forum” might be a source of some genuine information, but I seem to have wandered into a den of verbal thugs: “I disagree with what you say, and I will abuse you to Hell and back, for saying it.”

It’s been like wandering into a bar full of bikers and ordering the wrong drink, so you’ll just have to get on with your bigotry and find someone else to kick around, because: I’m out’a here!

Don't let the Truth hit your ass on the way out!

 

[Reheat]

The Concorde, which was however, traveled at Mach 2 (1,300+ kts) continuously, something military aircraft don't operate at, and the latest generation aircraft such as the F-22 Raptor are not even designed to exceed.[/COLOR][/SIZE]

If your point is that fighters don't routinely travel at Mach 2+, you are correct. However, unless I misunderstand you're wording you are mistaken. Nearly all of the fighters since the 1960's have been capable of exceeding Mach 2, some even near Mach 3 capable. I'll name them - F-111, F-14, F-18, F-15, F-16, F-22 and those are just the American built fighters. I won't bother to provide a link as the specs are easy to find and I can personally testify that both the F-111 and the F-16 will easily exceed Mach 2+.

The main reason they don't routinely exceed Mach 2 is that there is no requirement to do so. Another very practical reason is that airspace for this type of speed is also very limited. Even supersonic airspace is quite limited and is usually over water with a couple of exceptions.

 

[rwguinn]

Beachnut:

Thank you for your response. How quickly you seem to have made up your mind about me and my position regarding 9/11. In the video I do not say the fires were out, I say "Most of the fires were out", which I genuinely believe to have been the case.

And: Yes, I believe if something looks like a controlled demolition then it most probably was a controlled demolition, because buildings do not usually collapse, in such a manner, without a unifyng influence. The "This is an Orange" video is asking people to use their own eyes and not to rely on the unsubstantiated claims of others, which you also seem to be suggesting, in some of your posts.

You clearly do not want to help me to get at the truth, regarding airspeed capabilities, so please accept my apologies for bothering you.

The unifying influence is physics; specifically, the forces due to two masses in proximity, known popularly as "Gravity"
You see, what CD does is damage the structure so that gravity can take over. You weaken it so that the force due to grtavity is greater that the structure can bear.
It matters not whether the damage is done with explosives, automobiles, hacksaws, chanes and ropes, or a very large airplane laden with people and fuel.
Once the force due to gravity exceeds the capability of the structure, it will come down.
Down is defined as a vector from the point of mass to the center of the Earth. It is a vector, and it is a straight line.
No other way for something to fall, absent a side force of some sort. This has been discussed and proved innumerable times here. We get really tired of the same old stuff from people who refuse to do any research, such as yourself.

 

[LogicallyYours]

One obvious point that people are missing is, there are plenty of eye witnesses who were on the ground, who watched the second plane hit....the NJ eye witnesses who watched the plane, from a distance, the planes last 5 seconds....AND DID IN FACT WATCH A 767 WITH A EXTREME RATE OF DESCENT, HIGH SPEED IMPACT THE WTC.

THAT IS GAME, SET, AND MATCH.

 

[X]

One obvious point that people are missing is, there are plenty of eye witnesses who were on the ground, who watched the second plane hit....the NJ eye witnesses who watched the plane, from a distance, the planes last 5 seconds....AND DID IN FACT WATCH A 767 WITH A EXTREME RATE OF DESCENT, HIGH SPEED IMPACT THE WTC.

THAT IS GAME, SET, AND MATCH.

Did you accidentally reply to the wrong thread?

 

[LogicallyYours]

Did you accidentally reply to the wrong thread?

No, not at all. The truthers want to try to pick apart what we all witnessed live on TV by pointing to little details that, when taken out of context, of what we all saw, might have some validity.

The point is, it happened. There were actual eye witnesses who saw the planes impact the building. There were air traffic controllers who were able to calculate the speed of the planes and rate of descent.

Their point are moot in the context of what really happened that day.

 

[X]

No, not at all. The truthers want to try to pick apart what we all witnessed live on TV by pointing to little details that, when taken out of context, of what we all saw, might have some validity.

The point is, it happened. There were actual eye witnesses who saw the planes impact the building. There were air traffic controllers who were able to calculate the speed of the planes and rate of descent.

Their point are moot in the context of what really happened that day.

Yes, but this thread that was nearly a year dead.

 

[Gravy]

Welcome to ignore, no-planer.

 

[twinstead]

Even fellow truthers think no planers are idiots. That's GOTTA hurt.