• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

JT9D-7J Engine

MrRandomGuy

Student
M
Joined
Mar 2, 2009
Messages
45
It seems like the "wrong engine" claim on Murray and Church street has taken a different turn than what I've seen in the past. Now instead of the prior claims a truther has claimed that it's a JT9D-7J using this site:

http://ckpi.typepad.com/christopher_king/2009/09/murray-street-engine.html

as well as this video saying the first 1 minute and 40 seconds is relevant to his point:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nX0e_AplhWw

I pointed the Truther to this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=208381 and encouraged him to register on the forum to debunk what was said in the thread with his evidence. He has yet to do so and made the excuse "oh the thread is over 2 years old it would be redundant posting blah blah blah."

So I'M creating this thread for him, because I have several questions of my own about this claim.

- Is it possible that a 767 does use the JT9D-7J model of engine around that time period or later? If so are there examples of this?

- What is the difference between the JT9D-7J and the JT9D-7R4D?

- The Truther claims that the FAA and United Airlines say the engine is JT9D-7R4D. I can't seem to find this and am wondering if they really did confirm it was that type of engine, or if that's just something the Truther pulled out of thin air.

I think that's about it for the moment. The reason I'm not posting in the existing thread is because while the claim is similar it is not exactly the same thing and I'm not sure if bumping year old threads is frowned upon here.

P.S. I think the wrong engine claim is complete bull and I'm posting the claim on here because I know it's going to be refuted by people who are far more knowledgeable in this area than I will ever be.

Thanks in advance guys!
 
Last edited:
Given the obvious relativity of the two engines (they're both clearly iterations of the same engine, JT9D-7x; and I would go as far as expecting most of their parts to be interchangeable), I would say this claim is too negligible to spend serious time on until someone can explain what makes them think they can tell the burned-up remains of each type of engine apart in a way that can't be explained by the above characteristics.
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, if one burned, then dropped, both a Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo and a Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited, from 1000 feet above ground, I wonder how easy it would be to tell which is which?
 
MrRandomGuy said:
- The Truther claims that the FAA and United Airlines say the engine is JT9D-7R4D. I can't seem to find this and am wondering if they really did confirm it was that type of engine, or if that's just something the Truther pulled out of thin air.
Click to expand...

Why are you looking for statements in which they claim to have identified the engine as a JT9D-7R4D?
If he claims that the FAA and the airline said that then its up to him to reference where those two entities issued such a statement. No second hand sources now. Finding a truther website that says that the FAA said it does not count. Original source for such claims counts.
 
jaydeehess said:
Hmmm, if one burned, then dropped, both a Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo and a Jeep Grand Cherokee Limited, from 1000 feet above ground, I wonder how easy it would be to tell which is which?
Click to expand...
From a single frame pulled from a low-def video capture? For a Truther, 100%
;)
 
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...

I think this post from the old thread pretty much covers it. They're comparing a cooling duct to a cooling duct assembly.
 
That engine is now hanging in a museum in Washington. It was not buried as stated in the video.

pb-110831-911exhibit-jc-04photoblog900.jpg


The information from the website you posted came from this thread at pumpitout.

http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/1829738/1/

If you follow the thread to the end you will find the truthers saying this:

Inquisitive - Darren had an engine mechanic help him and concluded the engine is not suspicious. that is why he no longer looks into it with the same vigour.

noozilander - you put words into Darren's mouth then claim you want him to speak for himself.


Ask yourselves: Why has Pilots for 9/11 Truth not got the engine front and centre in their presentations? Because it is not speculative. The engine is the correct engine. There are photos of this engine everywhere. There's no smoking gun here.
Click to expand...

http://s1.zetaboards.com/pumpitout/topic/2393287/6/
 
MrRandomGuy said:
- Is it possible that a 767 does use the JT9D-7J model of engine around that time period or later? If so are there examples of this?
Click to expand...

According to the TCDS, no. There might be a STC out there that allows it, but there isn't any to the best of my knowledge.

MrRandomGuy said:
- What is the difference between the JT9D-7J and the JT9D-7R4D?
Click to expand...

You would have to check their relevant TCDS, but the primary difference is that the JT9D-7R4D are located on Boeing 767s and JT9D-7J are not.

MrRandomGuy said:
- The Truther claims that the FAA and United Airlines say the engine is JT9D-7R4D. I can't seem to find this and am wondering if they really did confirm it was that type of engine, or if that's just something the Truther pulled out of thin air.
Click to expand...

According to the TCDS:

A1NM said:
Engines: 2 Pratt and Whitney JT9D-7R4D, JT9D-7R4
E, JT9D-7R4E4, PW4052, PW4056, PW4060A, or 2 General
Electric CF6-80A, CF6-80A2, CF6-80C
2-B2, -B4, -B6 or CF6-80C2B4F,
-
B6F, -B7F.
Click to expand...
As to whether the specific engine was mounted on any of the aircraft on 9/11 and found on location, that I can not say.
 
Last edited:
jaydeehess said:
Why are you looking for statements in which they claim to have identified the engine as a JT9D-7R4D?
If he claims that the FAA and the airline said that then its up to him to reference where those two entities issued such a statement. No second hand sources now. Finding a truther website that says that the FAA said it does not count. Original source for such claims counts.
Click to expand...

Good point you're right, I shouldn't have to look for the original statements (though curiosity did get the better of me however and I sure as hell tried.)

Reactor drone said:
I think this post from the old thread pretty much covers it. They're comparing a cooling duct to a cooling duct assembly.
Click to expand...

Probably why people fall for this scam so easily.

waypastvne said:
snip
Click to expand...

I think we can call this post a successful rebuttal of the claim - and using a few Truthers as a way to debunk it was a very nice touch.
 
When I attempted to make my first post on this thread the following message appeared:

You are only allowed to post URLs (e.g. xxxxxxx) to websites after you have made 15 posts or more.

Note: If you use the built-in "Enhanced Editor" to type your responses and you select a smilie from the smilie list you may find the system will believe you are trying to include an URL in your post. If you experience this problem either use the "Standard Editor" (UserCP>Edit Options>Miscellaneous Options>Message Editor Interface) or add smilies by typing the text alternative e.g. :)

We are sorry for any inconvenience this may cause.

I find this to be an arbitrary and utterly ridiculous rule, but apparently there is no way around it and since my post would be missing a huge amount of pertinent information without the links I will wait until I can post what I have as written.
 
You can post your links as www(dot)name(dot)com and we will fix them for you.

Let's just hope it's worth it...
 
Freeclimber44 said:
I find this to be an arbitrary and utterly ridiculous rule...
Click to expand...

Well, since you need to burn up another 14 posts perhaps you could start a thread to discuss why that rule exists and whether it serves a useful purpose or is indeed merely arbitrary and ridiculous.
 
I will try that, but on other sites you have to put a space between almost every character in a link in order to post it.
I'd also like to know why if you don't click something on a thread within almost every minute you have to go log in again.
 
Here are 4 sites stating that the engines on N612UA, the United Airlines Boeing 767-200 alleged to have crashed into WTC2, the South Tower, were Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D :

http : / / www(dot)airfleets(dot)net/ficheapp/plane-b767-21873(dot)htm

http : / / aviation-safety(dot)net/database/record(dot)php?id=20010911-1

http : / / www(dot)planespotters(dot)net/Production_List/Boeing/767/21873,N612UA-United-Airlines(dot)php

http: / / registry(dot)faa9(dot)gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results(dot)aspx?NNubertxt=612UA

The last one is the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Registry page for N612UA and states that the engine manufacturer was Pratt & Whitney and the engine model number was 52054 which is apparently the FAA's own engine model code. In order to find out what engine type that number matches, I had to do my own cross-checking. I found another plane having engines of that model number.

A deregistered A310-222 Airbus with registration N449FE also had P&W model 52054 engines. The ONLY type of P&W engines installed on the Airbus A310-200/222 are the JT9D-7R4D. So 52054 matches to the P&W JT9D-7R4D engine. 4 independent sources including the FAA Registry confirms N612UA had Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D engines. I don't believe there can be any rational dispute as to the type of engines on N612UA.

This video concisely presents the problem of the anomalous components on the wrecked "Murray Street" engine:

http : / / www(dot)youtube(dot)com/watch?v=YPO3TqQyZsU

In addition to the engine having the wrong type cooling duct, several components on the diffuser casing of the engine were found to be exact matches to the P&W JT9D-7J engine installed exclusively on Boeing 747's.

http: / / z3(dot)ifrm(dot)com /46/112/0/p173684/_5705_747_engine_comparison04(dot)jpg

The photo shows 8 parts matching those on a P&W JT9D-7J engine on a Boeing 747 as is apparent from the forward section of the fuselage in view.
 
Freeclimber44 said:
I find this to be an arbitrary and utterly ridiculous rule, but apparently there is no way around it and since my post would be missing a huge amount of pertinent information without the links I will wait until I can post what I have as written.
Click to expand...

This is a standard precaution against spammers trying to advertize their wares. As others said, provide the link in a broken format, and one of us will be happy to make it a normal link. :)
 
Freeclimber44 said:
Here are 4 sites stating that the engines on N612UA, the United Airlines Boeing 767-200 alleged to have crashed into WTC2, the South Tower, were Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D :

http://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-b767-21873.htm

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20010911-1

http://www.planespotters.net/Production_List/Boeing/767/21873,N612UA-United-Airlines.php

http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbertxt=612UA

The last one is the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Registry page for N612UA and states that the engine manufacturer was Pratt & Whitney and the engine model number was 52054 which is apparently the FAA's own engine model code. In order to find out what engine type that number matches, I had to do my own cross-checking. I found another plane having engines of that model number.

A deregistered A310-222 Airbus with registration N449FE also had P&W model 52054 engines. The ONLY type of P&W engines installed on the Airbus A310-200/222 are the JT9D-7R4D. So 52054 matches to the P&W JT9D-7R4D engine. 4 independent sources including the FAA Registry confirms N612UA had Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D engines. I don't believe there can be any rational dispute as to the type of engines on N612UA.

This video concisely presents the problem of the anomalous components on the wrecked "Murray Street" engine:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YPO3TqQyZsU

In addition to the engine having the wrong type cooling duct, several components on the diffuser casing of the engine were found to be exact matches to the P&W JT9D-7J engine installed exclusively on Boeing 747's.

http://z3.ifrm.com/46/112/0/p173684/_5705_747_engine_comparison04.jpg

The photo shows 8 parts matching those on a P&W JT9D-7J engine on a Boeing 747 as is apparent from the forward section of the fuselage in view.
Click to expand...

Do you have a photo showing that those feature aren't present on a P&W JT9D-7R4D? The same engine family will share a lot of common features.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom