Flt 93 crater was not unique

uk_dave said:
Because that's the only way to allow John McClane continue to the end of the film
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if you meant that as a joke or not, but I think you are spot on with some CTists. I'm afraid for many of them, the only science and physics "reality" they know, is what they've seen on TV and in the movies.
 
On september 2nd 1998 a Swissair MD-11 crashed into the sea off Novia Scottia:
The standby attitude display showed the aircraft to be at 20 degrees nose down and 110 degrees right bank at the time of impact. The dial face on
the airspeed indicator had marks, made at the time of impact, that correspond to an airspeed of 300 knots. The structural damage indicates that the aircraft had a nose-down attitude of about 20 degrees, and a right bank in excess of 60 degrees. Analysis of the markings on various wreckage pieces indicated that the impact force was from 15 degrees right of the aircraft centreline.
Click to expand...
The report (32 MB PDF)

The impact force was estimated to be in order of at least 350 G in the longitudinal direction. The aircraft did not bounce on impact, instead it was totally shredded. It was so shredded that they gave up on using divers to recover the pieces, they ended up with using a scallop rake and finally they suction dredged the wreckage area, that was 55 meter below the surface, down to a depth of 1,5m.

Photos of the recovery work.
(Note the container with pieces at the bottom of the gallery.)
Pictures from the reconstruction of the forward of the aircraft.
The engines.

Given this, what do the truthers expect should have happened to Flight 93 hitting the ground at much higher speed and steeper angle?
 
Last edited:
Norseman said:
On september 2nd 1998 a Swissair MD-11 crashed into the sea off Novia Scottia:

The report (32 MB PDF)

The impact force was estimated to be in order of at least 350 G in the longitudinal direction. The aircraft did not bounce on impact, instead it was totally shredded. It was so shredded that they gave up on using divers to recover the pieces, they ended up with using a scallop rake and finally they suction dredged the wreckage area, that was 55 meter below the surface, down to a depth of 1,5m.

Photos of the recovery work.
(Note the container with pieces at the bottom of the gallery.)
Pictures from the reconstruction of the forward of the aircraft.
The engines.

Given this, what do the truthers expect should have happened to Flight 93 hitting the ground at much higher speed and steeper angle?
Click to expand...
Excellent example, Norseman! I'm going to add that to my flight 93 section.
 
Norseman said:
That was quick Gravy, I see that you already have added it to your site.:)
Click to expand...

That's because the NWO knew about your post before you even posted it.

No one is ever going to accuse us of being slow.................




..... and live to tell the tale.
 
This is an aerial image of the purported Flight 93 crash site in a field near Shankesville.
shankesville1aye8.png


In 1994 a U.S. Geological Survey captured this image of the same location.


Other than wear 'n tear from 7 years of additional weathering, the only appreciable change was the addition of a center crater (bomb?).

What an amazing coincidence that Flight 93 aligned itself with an existing gouge in that field.

MM
 
Last edited:
Miragememories said:
This is an aerial image of the purported Flight 93 crash site in a field near Shankesville.
[qimg]http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/7084/shankesville1aye8.png[/qimg]

In 1994 a U.S. Geological Survey captured this image of the same location.
[qimg]http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9067/aerial1994usgsry7.png[/qimg]

Other than wear 'n tear from 7 years of additional weathering, the only appreciable change was the addition of a center crater (bomb?).

What an amazing coincidence that Flight 93 aligned itself with an existing gouge in that field.

MM
Click to expand...
Totally wrong MM. The 94 photo was taken when they were backfilling the strip mine to reclaim it. That is very evident even distorted crop you posted.

For a sharp version of the above photo go to:
http://www.flashearth.com/
Choose Mircrosoft VE (aerial). Search for Shanksville, then move a little bit to the north by dragging to find the area.

Present day status can be seen by clicking on Google Maps.

Here is a sharp crop of the area, does not look like a gouge do it? Looks more like a bulldozer shoveling fresh earth, compared to the dry earth around. And the crash site was to the south of your "gouge", much closer to the road, in fact the wing tip touched the road:

(See photo in the next post by Gravy. He was quicker, so I removed my crop of the area)
 
Last edited:
Norseman said:
Totally wrong MM. The 94 photo was taken when they were backfilling the strip mine to reclaim it. That is very evident even distorted crop you posted.

For a sharp version of the above photo go to:
http://www.flashearth.com/
Choose Mircrosoft VE (aerial). Search for Shanksville, then move a little bit to the north by dragging to find the area.

Present day status can be seen by clicking on Google Maps.
Click to expand...
How much more incompetent can these people get? The crater area isn't even at the same elevation as in the '94 photo.

As for the wings "lining up" with the 250-foot gash, uh, no.

Shanksville1994Aerial.jpg


Flight93craterwidth-full.jpg


What complete wastes of the intertubes these people are.
 
Last edited:
uk_dave said:
No, if the government had faked the plane crash you wouldn't see anything wrong with it because it would look exactly how you imagine it should.

It's just the air crash investigators of the world who'd be a bit puzzled, especially by the slightly crumpled tail section sticking out of the ground.
Click to expand...

Only if the Government were as dumb as truthers... oh, um, yeah... never mind.

leftysergeant said:
Part of the reason you became a twoofer may be your inability to understand visual information reality.
Click to expand...

Fixed that for you.

gumboot said:
Air New Zealand Flight TE 109 (A DC-10) hit Mt Erebus at about a 14 degree angle, at about 500 km/h. No tail sections in sight.

-Gumboot
Click to expand...

Perhaps not tail, but there was a large section of fuselage still in approximately one piece, well at least recognisable.

AMTMAN said:
Good point. Must mean there was no plane, according to some at least.
Click to expand...

My uncle was one of the police officers that flew down to help recover bodies. I doubt he'd agree with anyone that claimed there was no plane.
 
Last edited:
Miragememories said:
This is an aerial image of the purported Flight 93 crash site in a field near Shankesville.
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/7084/shankesville1aye8.png

In 1994 a U.S. Geological Survey captured this image of the same location.
http://img142.imageshack.us/img142/9067/aerial1994usgsry7.png

Other than wear 'n tear from 7 years of additional weathering, the only appreciable change was the addition of a center crater (bomb?).

What an amazing coincidence that Flight 93 aligned itself with an existing gouge in that field.

MM
Click to expand...

Didn't Avery debunk this rubbish on LCF last year?

Have you not been paying attention MM?
 
uk_dave said:
Didn't Avery debunk this rubbish on LCF last year?

Have you not been paying attention MM?
Click to expand...

Paying attention?

Very much so. I had a feeling the 1994 gouge was too simplistic an explanation and I figured the fastest way to find out was to hand it to you folks.

Thank you for your assistance.

MM
 
Miragememories said:
Paying attention?

Very much so. I had a feeling the 1994 gouge was too simplistic an explanation and I figured the fastest way to find out was to hand it to you folks.

Thank you for your assistance.

MM
Click to expand...
Does Dylan know you are not a mindless truther now?
 
Miragememories said:
Paying attention?

Very much so. I had a feeling the 1994 gouge was too simplistic an explanation and I figured the fastest way to find out was to hand it to you folks.

Thank you for your assistance.

MM
Click to expand...

You mean like most Truthers you are far too lazy to anything like real research.
 
Yup, this sounds like a person who's brimful of doubt:
miragememories said:
Other than wear 'n tear from 7 years of additional weathering, the only appreciable change was the addition of a center crater (bomb?).

What an amazing coincidence that Flight 93 aligned itself with an existing gouge in that field.
Click to expand...
Truthers: the least competent people on planet Earth.
 
Last edited:
The "gouge " is too small, too far from the woods turned at the wrong angle relative to the woods, and was present while dirt was being brought to the site. There is considerable relief visible along the left margin of the bare field. In the crash photo, the area is nearly level.

The lack of grass in the crater on the day of the crash indicates that it was formed proximal in time to the downing of the aircraft. That the soil on the down-range side is pushed up and the grass is unburned indicate that something moved under the soil to form it, and that the grass was not removed from thecrater by a controlled burn.

The gouge, you might also notive is almost circular. More consistant with fill being dumped there and bull dozed level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom