How the Shanksville Crater Was Made

[yankee451]

At what point have I ever said that a jet "disappeared" into the ground?

If you do not understand the function of the fuselage, and if you think that the fuselage is "fiberglass", and do not understand how a JASSM achieves "penetration" against hardened targets, and do not understand what the result of such a shallow angle would be, and do not have a feel for the performance envelope of a wing with the aspect ratio seen on a JASSM, why select it for your idea?

"Aerostable slug"? Here: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=aerostable+slug

So you don't know what an aerostable slug is. Check.

What do you think happened to the jet?

There was no visible debris around the crater and all the newspapers used words like "disappeared" and "burrowed" and "swallowed", and "the ground closed behind it like a tomb".

If you don't believe the official story of the jet disappearing into the ground where did it go?

 

[Slowvehicle]

Proving they did exist is easy as easy as a backspace too; it only continues to harm your own credibility by claiming they didn't exist.

This is a dishonest misquote. What is the difference between "did not exist" (your words) and "were not available" (my words)?

You tell me. How tall are the trees?

It isn't my scenario, but yours. Consider drawing a line from the edge of the wing gouge in the crater, in line with the axis of the wing gouge in the crater, and calculating how short the trees would have to be for a JASSM to fly over them and still hit the ground at 10°. That would be a start. Then figure out how tall the trees really were in 2001.

What's the turning radius of the JASSM?

...have a look at the aspect ratio of the wings.

Ultimately do the answers matter when it comes to calculating whether a 900lb cylinder measuring 12x60 inches could cause those gashes? Once the calculations are done, I'm assuming the trajectory will be easy to glean and duplicate. If they're not 10 degrees, fine - it doesn't matter either, it was just a guess based on some oblique meteorite photos I saw. The math is coming. All will be settled.

Yes, the answers do matter. The fact that you do not understand why does not speak well for your scenario.

 

[chris lz]

I have already admitted I'm not a crash expert

Fine. You are now on recording as 1) accepting that buried fuselages are possible (F710); and 2) claiming buried wings are NOT possible (see post 1140), as might, for example, have been the case had flight 710's wings stayed attached.

So if you lack crash expertness, on what basis do you conclude only fuselages are capable of burying themselves and not wings? What physical laws determine how much of an aircraft structure can be rendered invisible? Is it 100% of fuselage, but only 23.6 % of the wings? How can you know any of this w/o knowing crash physics? And if you don't know, why not just say "I really don't know for sure."

All this isn't petty in the least. It gets to the heart of whether a flight 93 type impact crater is "impossible," which seems to be one of your main themes here.

Thanks,
Chris

[edited for better wording]

 

[Slowvehicle]

So you don't know what an aerostable slug is. Check.

No, silly, I'm just not going to do your homework for your scenario. Did you look "aerostable slug" up? Which one of the words is confusing you?

What do you think happened to the jet?

It hit the ground at high speed in a nose-down, inverted attitude. Much of it was imbedded in an impact crater; some was burned; the rest was scattered about the impact site, as is visible from contemporaneous photographs.

There was no visible debris around the crater and all the newspapers used words like "disappeared" and "burrowed" and "swallowed", and "the ground closed behind it like a tomb".

What were you saying about backspace? Multiple posters have put up multiple contemporaneous photographs. Look again...

If you don't believe the official story of the jet disappearing into the ground where did it go?

Please provide a source for your claim that the "official story" is that the 757 "disappeared" into the ground.

 

[yankee451]

Fine. You are now on recording as 1) accepting that buried fuselages are possible (F710); and 2) claiming buried wings are NOT possible (see post 1140), as might, for example, have been the case had flight 710's wings stayed attached.

So if you lack crash expertness, on what basis do you conclude only fuselages are capable of burying themselves and not wings? What physical laws determine how much of an aircraft structure can be rendered invisible? Is it 100% of fuselage, but only 23.6 % of the wings? How can you know any of this w/o knowing crash physics? And if you don't know, why not just say "I really don't know for sure."

All this isn't petty in the least. It gets to the heart of whether a flight 93 type impact crater is "impossible," which seems to be one of your main themes here.

Thanks,
Chris

[edited for better wording]

It disappeared into the ground, wings and all, even the huge 757 tail was 15 feet underground. Not at the bottom of a muddy crater but the jet was BURIED UNDER GROUND.

They're not the same crash. Not even close.

 

[leftysergeant]

Fine. You are now on recording as 1) accepting that buried fuselages are possible (F710); and 2) claiming buried wings are NOT possible (see post 1140), as might, for example, have been the case had flight 710's wings stayed attached.

History confirms this. The ground in Normany more resembles that in southern Indiana than it does Shanksville.

Paul Klipsch's Spitfire was buried wings and all to a depth of 15 feet max.

 

[AdMan]

I have already admitted I'm not a crash expert

That you are no expert on anything relevant has been obvious to anyone following this thread. And yet despite your obvious and admitted ignorance, you continue to push your nonsense, even when it's clear to everyone else that you are plainly wrong. Why won't you admit your mistakes? Too many years devoted to pushing truther nonsense, so that admitting any error is too difficult?

 

[yankee451]

History confirms this. The ground in Normany more resembles that in southern Indiana than it does Shanksville.

Paul Klipsch's Spitfire was buried wings and all to a depth of 15 feet max.

 

[leftysergeant]

It disappeared into the ground, wings and all, even the huge 757 tail was 15 feet underground.

One of the first fire fighters on the scene reported seeing what he thought was the tail of a small aircraft back in the woods. The tail print at the edge of the crateris skewed strongly to the left. It is clear that it had already started breaking free when it hit the ground. The impact would, clearly, have shattered all but the most rigid parts of it Since the fragments would lack the mass and velocity to penetrate the ground, they would have continued on down-range for some distance. Nothing in theory or reported fact supports your conjecture.

Not at the bottom of a muddy crater but the jet was BURIED UNDER GROUND.

You still seem to be lacking some basic knowledge of geology and it leads you to march straight into a brick wall. Both Flt 710 and the Caspian aircraft smacked into rather compact and WET substrate. As is clear from the video I post of bullet strikes, a great deal of heat is generated in such an impact. Clay and mudstine also conduct shock waves much better, thus a great deal of material was ejected from both craters and failed to back-fill the hole. The undisturbed clay held its shape as clay normally does.

Dry glacial till of\r coal mining tailings will slide back into the hole about as quick as you can dig one.

For your Geology 101 class, you have eartned a solid FAIL.

They're not the same crash. Not even close.

This is exactly what we have been trying to say, and you fail to grasp the signifcance of it.

Excuse any snarky responses. Respect around here, is earned by presenting rational and plausible arguments along with plausible alternative theories.

You theories fly like a lead penguin.

 

[yankee451]

No, silly, I'm just not going to do your homework for your scenario. Did you look "aerostable slug" up? Which one of the words is confusing you?

I'm just looking for any single one of you to take a stand a stand on something and try to make your case. What do you think "aerostable slug" means when referring to a 900 lb warhead? It's not a trick question.

It hit the ground at high speed in a nose-down, inverted attitude. Much of it was imbedded in an impact crater; some was burned; the rest was scattered about the impact site, as is visible from contemporaneous photographs.

Not these:

What were you saying about backspace? Multiple posters have put up multiple contemporaneous photographs. Look again...

These guys just hang around. They're not worried about where they're walking - they're not picking through debris and body parts. They're chatting.

No parts visible here, but it does look like there's enough debris in the crater to account for a couple missiles equalling about 5 tons total. More posing for the cameras. Missile parts? Sure. Jet parts; Body parts? Not so much.

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/P200059_11.jpg

"I know of two people - I will not mention names - that heard a missile," Stuhl said. "They both live very close, within a couple of hundred yards. . .This one fellow's served in Vietnam and he says he's heard them, and he heard one that day." The mayor adds that based on what he knows about that morning, military F-16 fighter jets were "very, very close."
http://web.archive.org/web/20011119...ntent/daily_news/2001/11/18/local/SHOT15C.htm

Please provide a source for your claim that the "official story" is that the 757 "disappeared" into the ground.

The media are the official mouthpieces of the government from whence we get our information.

Some of the plane's cargo was found intact � 200 kilograms of mail in the hold, a Bible, its cover scorched but its pages undamaged and later, as the excavation began, the passport of one of the four hijackers.

The rest of the 757 continued its downward passage, the sandy loam closing behind it like the door of a tomb
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/09/09/1031115990570.html

The site had been mined for coal, then refilled with dirt. It was still soft when Flight 93 crashed, and firefighters said the Boeing 757 tunneled right in. They had to dig 15 feet to find it.
http://www.sptimes.com/2003/09/10/news_pf/Worldandnation/Small_town_shoulders_.shtml

Even in the middle of it all, where trees were scorched and the Boeing 757's fuselage disintegrated in a crater that collapsed on itself to leave a gouge maybe 14 feet across, the destruction was so complete that it was hard to imagine what happened.

http://old.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011015newsmaker1015p2.asp

* THE DEBRIS FIELD. The reclaimed mine where the plane crashed is composed of very soft soil, and searchers say much of the wreckage was found buried 20-25 feet below the large crater.
http://web.archive.org/web/20011119...ntent/daily_news/2001/11/18/local/SHOT15C.htm

A handful of people working near or driving through a rural area of Somerset County watched as the plane flipped over and disappeared with a smoky boom at 10:06 a.m. yesterday, between the tiny communities of Lambertsville and Shanksville.
http://old.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912somerscenenat4p3.asp

 

[abaddon]

So you don't know what an aerostable slug is. Check.

And?

What do you think happened to the jet?

It crashed at speed into the ground at Shanksville. Your turn, What do you think happened to the jet, crew and passengers?

There was no visible debris around the crater

Wrong

and all the newspapers used words like "disappeared" and "burrowed" and "swallowed", and "the ground closed behind it like a tomb".

Journalistic hyperbole. Another thing you fail to understand.

If you don't believe the official story of the jet disappearing into the ground where did it go?

You tell us. You are the one presenting a hugely complicated baseless story, you tell us where the plane passengers and crew went.

 

[Jack by the hedge]

The media are the official mouthpieces of the government from whence we get our information.

So anything any journalist writes = "The Official Story"

Hilarious.

 

[threadworm]

I'm just looking for any single one of you to take a stand a stand on something and try to make your case. What do you think "aerostable slug" means when referring to a 900 lb warhead? It's not a trick question.





Not these:

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/shanksville0181.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/f93_crater1.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Flight_93_treeline1.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/th_n_12september_00_11_shanksville_cra1.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/aerial_woc1.jpg[/qimg]

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/shamnksville-road.png[/qimg]






These guys just hang around. They're not worried about where they're walking - they're not picking through debris and body parts. They're chatting.

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Topped-Trees.png[/qimg]

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/shanksville12.jpg[/qimg]

No parts visible here, but it does look like there's enough debris in the crater to account for a couple missiles equalling about 5 tons total. More posing for the cameras. Missile parts? Sure. Jet parts; Body parts? Not so much.

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/flight93_21.jpg[/qimg]

http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/P200059_11.jpg

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/gallery3-41.jpg[/qimg]





The media are the official mouthpieces of the government from whence we get our information.

Times and dates please for the aerial shots of the site you have carefully chosen for us. As there are no people or vehicles in shot (but vehicle tracks indicate they were there), I invite you to consider that the absence of visible debris is because crash investigators have already removed it.

 

[switchpoint]

Unilke EVERY other high speed crash, Shanksville had no depris around the crash site;

Yes it did. Repeating that if didn't over and over again doesn't change the reality, just signifies your relationship to it.

not visible from the air nor from the ground. The only parts shown are in tight photographs, most without context.

How can invisible material show up in a photo?

Where's the wing debris the engine was attached to?

All over.

Wouldn't the more massive engine have buried deeper than the wing?

You realize, of course, that the wings and engines are not solid, monolithic objects, right?

The jet should have been turned to confetti which would have been visible all around the site, but the official story ihas it the deeper they went, the more they found in the dry, hard rocky ground that had been settling for more than a decade.

How do you know it wasn't visible all around the site, like is shown in the pictures? I assume from your detailed analysis that you must have been on the site - what time did you get there?

 

[Slowvehicle]

I'm just looking for any single one of you to take a stand a stand on something and try to make your case. What do you think "aerostable slug" means when referring to a 900 lb warhead? It's not a trick question.

I have done so: you have mocked it (without substantively addressing the problems with your scenario.

What does your research lead you to beleive "aerostable slug" means as it applies to a JASSM, and how does that help your scenario?

Have you even looked at the site trigonometry yet?

Have you provided your source that shows the "official story" is that the 757 "disappeared"?

The media are the official mouthpieces of the government from whence we get our information.

If this is true for you, this would explain much...it is not true for me.

For the most part, "the media" are concerned with selling advertising. As such, they tend to be focused on sensationalism rather than rigorous accuracy. They also tend to be written at or below a 9th-grade reading level, and tailored to short attention spans.

What do the reports of the NTSB say?

 

[Macgyver1968]

Here's what I don't understand about your 2-3 missile theory. Since the two missiles had to strike the ground at precisely the right spot in order to create a plane shaped hole....this would mean the "perps" had to pick that specific location and that particular orientation. Why would they make it harder for themselves and pick a location so close to trees...when they could have moved a couple 100 meters away, and been in the middle of an open field with no obstacles to avoid?

That doesn't make any sense. No one would do that.

 

[Scott Jurgenson]

Here's what I don't understand about your 2-3 missile theory. Since the two missiles had to strike the ground at precisely the right spot in order to create a plane shaped hole....this would mean the "perps" had to pick that specific location and that particular orientation. Why would they make it harder for themselves and pick a location so close to trees...when they could have moved a couple 100 meters away, and been in the middle of an open field with no obstacles to avoid?
That doesn't make any sense. No one would do that.

</thread> IMO.

 

[332nd]

Here's what I don't understand about your 2-3 missile theory. Since the two missiles had to strike the ground at precisely the right spot in order to create a plane shaped hole....this would mean the "perps" had to pick that specific location and that particular orientation. Why would they make it harder for themselves and pick a location so close to trees...when they could have moved a couple 100 meters away, and been in the middle of an open field with no obstacles to avoid?

That doesn't make any sense. No one would do that.

Instead of KISS, CTers use KIRC. (Keep It Ridiculously Complicated)

 

[DGM]

That doesn't make any sense. No one would do that.

Did you skip "Evil plans 101"?

Wait............I see here you took the career credit for that. See your schedule for your refresher.

 

[Macgyver1968]

Did you skip "Evil plans 101"?

Wait............I see here you took the career credit for that. See your schedule for your refresher.

Aww...geez DGM...does this mean I have to come in on a Saturday? Dang it. At least schedule that instructor with the epic boobs...she's hawt.