Missile??

Sabrina said:
You admitted, in the part I highlighted, that the flash occurred AFTER the penetration of the building by the plane. That is what your very words stated:

tmd: "As I said explain to me how an almost perfectly circular flash is visible AFTER penetration?"

Prior to this post you kept insisting the flash occurred BEFORE the nose of the plane impacted the building, so I congratulated your concession to the truth when it appeared that you had a moment of sanity. Apparently I was wrong; my apologies.



Except for the teeny little problem that this is the only projectile-based weapon of that type in existence, and it cannot be modified to do what you (erroneously) think happened, since there isn't a weapon in existence that can be fired and in a split second arm itself enough to detonate upon impact.

tmd, I'm going to explain a simple concept to you; weapons can only do what they are DESIGNED to do. There is some flexibility within the design that allows for some modification, but not to the extent you are suggesting. The whole purpose behind a projectile-based weapon is to kill or destroy something FROM A DISTANCE so as to allow for fewer or no friendly casualties. Modifying such a weapon, even setting aside the fact that it's impossible to modify a projectile-based weapon to that extent, completely negates that purpose, and for no good reason; the plane was already traveling sufficiently fast to penetrate the building with no help whatsoever from your imaginary weapon. Had there been a missile aimed at the tower on 9/11, there would not have been a plane literally a split second behind it filled with screaming passengers on their way to their death. Period. End of story. I highly suggest you shelve this ludicrous theory pronto, because the only thing you are doing is making yourself look utterly ridiculous by making suppositions about things you know nothing about. For proof of that, just make the suggestion to any weapons designer that you believe a missile could:

A) be fired from a passenger jet with no one noticing the giant modification made to the plane

B) be able to arm itself in less than a second and detonate almost immediately thereafter

You'd be laughed out of the building before you finished outlining your theory, I can just about guarantee that.
Click to expand...

Don't you know that the NWO and the shills in the military keep this technology a dark secret?
 
dafydd said:
Don't you know that the NWO and the shills in the military keep this technology a dark secret?
Click to expand...

Shhhhhh, don't let the cat hear you! You'll be in his office for "retraining" in five seconds flat!

;)
 
Sabrina said:
Shhhhhh, don't let the cat hear you! You'll be in his office for "retraining" in five seconds flat!

;)
Click to expand...

My cat Chairman Meeow is a real pussycat,he would never do anything like th.......... AAAARGHH
 
tmd2_1 said:
Ah I have found something I think demonstrates the concept of what could (I emphasize could have been used). Missile fires 3 sub missiles are fired from that missile. Full description here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Starstreak_(missile)
Click to expand...
which rapidly accelerates the missile to burn out velocity of about Mach 3.5 four hundred meters away from the operator
Click to expand...

So it would have reached top speed a few hundred meters beyond the far wall of the tower? Sorry tmd I still fail to see how such a weapon would be used to 'ensure maximum penetration". Please elaborate on this. Yes I am asking how this, or something based on it, could be used since THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE SUGGESTING!

HOW does this concept fit your idea that it could be used to ensure maximum penetration, which is something you "are sure the conspirators would have made sure hapened"?



As I said explain to me how an almost perfectly circular flash is visible AFTER penetration?
Click to expand...

Why is the shape of the flash significant? How much different from a circle would it have to be in order to not be suspicious? How would an O2 bottle explosion, or a violently destructed radar klystron, not produce a close to sperical explosion?
 
tmd2_1 said:
What are you talking about? I never said any such thing. I was asking how it would be possible to have an almost perfect circle after penetration. Because I can't see how it is.

As far as Mach 3.5. Remember I simply said this was a general concept. It would not have to go nearly that fast, and you know what. You have a flying projectile, another projectile is fired from it, it is used for penetration and can self detonate. Sounds exactly like what could have been used.
Click to expand...

Why not just opine that there was a ten pin bowling ball fired from a cannon on the aircraft to ensure maximum penetration. It would make as much sense as the wishy washy, unsubstantiated or fleshed out contention you have made.
 
jaydeehess said:
Why is the shape of the flash significant? How much different from a circle would it have to be in order to not be suspicious? How would an O2 bottle explosion, or a violently destructed radar klystron, not produce a close to sperical explosion?
Click to expand...

The same thought had occurred to me. There is nothing about the crash that even faintly suggests the possibility of a missile.
 
jaydeehess said:
Why is the shape of the flash significant? How much different from a circle would it have to be in order to not be suspicious? How would an O2 bottle explosion, or a violently destructed radar klystron, not produce a close to sperical explosion?
Click to expand...
You sit staring into the gaping maw of a new truther meme and you question it using logic and reason?

How dare you sir, how dare you!

:rolleyes:
 
jaydeehess said:
I don't have the time right now. Can someone calculate the acelleration of a Starstreak and then we can determine how much velocity it would gain in 1 second after launnch
Click to expand...

ok, I'm back for a bit.

Starstreak topped out at 3.5 Mach in 400 meters
d=0.5(a)(t)2
and a=deltav/t >> t=deltav/a

substituting we get
d=0.5(a)(deltav/a)2
If we round off the aircraft speed to mach 1 then the missile gains 2.5Mach or about 700 meters/sec

a=612m/s2 or 60 g's
I invite people to check my math and correct any mistakes, please.v=at = 612 (1) for the gain in velocity one second after launch (in m/s), approximately double its original speed while attached to the a/c

However, that assumes a missile launch a full second before impact. Even if we accept tmd's claim of pre-impact flash, and of course this is shown to be false anyway, let's make this time to impact a full 5 frames of video before the plane reaches the building. 0.17 seconds
It would gain about 100 m/s velocity in that time frame, or IOW an increase of about 17% over the velocity of the aircraft (the missile's original velocity)


When the missile is a safe distance from the operator the second stage fires
Click to expand...

-the second stage, responsible for the bulk of the acelleration, does not even fire until launch.
-this missile is not designed to be launched from an aircraft doing several hundred MPH which would require a complete re-engineering (basically it would not even resemble Starstreak anymore)
- how much damage can be caused to a large column in 0.17 seconds, how many columns would have to be damaged to 'ensure maximum penetration' over what would occur simply by ramming 100,000 pounds of aircraft into a building?
- how would the explosive shock wave affect the oncoming aircraft?(slow it down , tear parts off and throw them outward?)
 
Last edited:
dafydd said:
The same thought had occurred to me. There is nothing about the crash that even faintly suggests the possibility of a missile.
Click to expand...
and since the KE energy in the plane alone is greater than any conventional explosive weapon and penetration takes only a small proportion of that what possible reason would there be for having a missile on the plane....


Oh Oh I've thought of one the twoofers will like :)

they equipped the 767s with AIM 9L Sidewinders so that they could shoot down any fighter that didn't obey orders and stand down! And they fired them just before hitting the building to make sure none of them got through the building in one piece and gave the game away. They painted them the same colour as the aircraft and fitted them with auxiliary contact detonators so that they would explode on impact and disable the normal arming mechanism because they didn't care that it went off on launch......I mean who would notice it? Little did they guess people would put the high def video on youtube where it all became crystal clear!!!! inside jobitty job!



Remember you heard it here first:cool:
 
jaydeehess said:
ok, I'm back for a bit.

Starstreak topped out at 3.5 Mach in 400 meters
d=0.5(a)(t)2
and a=deltav/t >> t=deltav/a

substituting we get
d=0.5(a)(deltav/a)2
If we round off the aircraft speed to mach 1 then the missile gains 2.5Mach or about 700 meters/sec

a=612m/s2 or 60 g's
I invite people to check my math and correct any mistakes, please.v=at = 612 (1) for the gain in velocity one second after launch (in m/s), approximately double its original speed while attached to the a/c

However, that assumes a missile launch a full second before impact. Even if we accept tmd's claim of pre-impact flash, and of course this is shown to be false anyway, let's make this time to impact a full 5 frames of video before the plane reaches the building. 0.17 seconds
It would gain about 100 m/s velocity in that time frame, or IOW an increase of about 17% over the velocity of the aircraft (the missile's original velocity)




-the second stage, responsible for the bulk of the acelleration, does not even fire until launch.
-this missile is not designed to be launched from an aircraft doing several hundred MPH which would require a complete re-engineering (basically it would not even resemble Starstreak anymore)
- how much damage can be caused to a large column in 0.17 seconds, how many columns would have to be damaged to 'ensure maximum penetration' over what would occur simply by ramming 100,000 pounds of aircraft into a building?
- how would the explosive shock wave affect the oncoming aircraft?(slow it down , tear parts off and throw them outward?)
Click to expand...

Can you point out the faults,if any,tmd?
 
sheeplesnshills said:
and since the KE energy in the plane alone is greater than any conventional explosive weapon and penetration takes only a small proportion of that what possible reason would there be for having a missile on the plane....


Oh Oh I've thought of one the twoofers will like :)

they equipped the 767s with AIM 9L Sidewinders so that they could shoot down any fighter that didn't obey orders and stand down! And they fired them just before hitting the building to make sure none of them got through the building in one piece and gave the game away. They painted them the same colour as the aircraft and fitted them with auxiliary contact detonators so that they would explode on impact and disable the normal arming mechanism because they didn't care that it went off on launch......I mean who would notice it? Little did they guess people would put the high def video on youtube where it all became crystal clear!!!! inside jobitty job!



Remember you heard it here first:cool:
Click to expand...

You do realize that some twoofers will believe that.
 
jaydeehess said:
how would the explosive shock wave affect the oncoming aircraft?(slow it down , tear parts off and throw them outward?)
Click to expand...
Of course it would do all of that. Additionally, it would have torn off aluminum cladding and throw it a great distance to all sides of the point of impact.
 
jaydeehess said:
ok, I'm back for a bit.

Starstreak topped out at 3.5 Mach in 400 meters
d=0.5(a)(t)2
and a=deltav/t >> t=deltav/a

substituting we get
d=0.5(a)(deltav/a)2
If we round off the aircraft speed to mach 1 then the missile gains 2.5Mach or about 700 meters/sec

a=612m/s2 or 60 g's
I invite people to check my math and correct any mistakes, please.v=at = 612 (1) for the gain in velocity one second after launch (in m/s), approximately double its original speed while attached to the a/c

However, that assumes a missile launch a full second before impact. Even if we accept tmd's claim of pre-impact flash, and of course this is shown to be false anyway, let's make this time to impact a full 5 frames of video before the plane reaches the building. 0.17 seconds
It would gain about 100 m/s velocity in that time frame, or IOW an increase of about 17% over the velocity of the aircraft (the missile's original velocity)




-the second stage, responsible for the bulk of the acelleration, does not even fire until launch.
-this missile is not designed to be launched from an aircraft doing several hundred MPH which would require a complete re-engineering (basically it would not even resemble Starstreak anymore)
- how much damage can be caused to a large column in 0.17 seconds, how many columns would have to be damaged to 'ensure maximum penetration' over what would occur simply by ramming 100,000 pounds of aircraft into a building?
- how would the explosive shock wave affect the oncoming aircraft?(slow it down , tear parts off and throw them outward?)
Click to expand...

I came up with slightly different numbers, but they are close enough that I am not going to argue. We can both agree that there is some arbitrary numbers such as rounding to Mach 1, again nothing to be to concerned with.

What does bother me however is your starting point for missile fire. I would argue it is at least a second before it would have impacted the building. As seen in this video here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wc4wsjKbYTQ&feature=related

But also I found a nice video of what this weapon can do. Truly amazing weapon. It's steel piercing ability is spectacular.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=c53_1223582333


Now of what value would it be. I think we can agree that if you have a big enough hole in a wall, and then tried to punch through it it would be easier than no hole. Of course notice I said big enough, if it's to small it will make no difference. This of course could be calculated by the conspirators (if there was one).

Let me also add again this is only the concept I am talking about, I don't claim this exact weapon was used (or any weapon for that matter)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom