Plume in Flight 93 photo is different
- Thread starter Killtown
- Start date
- Status
Irrelevant, as I've already explained, and the only one running in circles is yourself.
However, as already indicated, any education is positive, so I shall answer the question anyway.
The explosion "at impact" would be sized according to the fuel distribution. At minimum, consider a case where the fuel was all contained within a volume equivalent to the wings of the aircraft. I'll let you research what the wing size is, since you need the practice. These figures are publicly available.
At maximum, consider the case where the fuel was in such a volume but scattered elastically at the moment of impact. The ground does not recoil, so the fuel can conceivably spread at the aircraft's former speed, but fanning in (potentially) all directions. The speed of the aircraft has already been presented to you from the FDR. For sake of argument, assume one second between impact and complete engulfment of the fuel (this time is an estimate, but there is absolutely no way to predict just how long it took to ignite, or where). Multiply the speed by one second, and add it to each extreme of the first calculation.
Show us your answers, and we will see if they were computed properly. Expect answers for the first on the order of 10-30 meters, and > 300 meters for the second.
In effort to move this experiment along, would you concede that 93's explosion was more similar to the Moav bomb video, or the B-52 crash video in how its fireball spread and began to rise up in the shape of a plume. DON'T WORRY ABOUT the size of the plume expanding after it gets higher up in the air. We'll go over that next.
Moav = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7tG7keSe-0
B-52 = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB92iQ6yf6c
Moav = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7tG7keSe-0
B-52 = http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB92iQ6yf6c
How did 93's fireball react so differently then?
The fireballs in the Moav/B-52 video are not a whole heck of a lot different. the 52 one spilled forward more where as the Moav one made more of a circle shape which I would suspect 93's would have made because it nose-dived. Agreed?
The fireballs in the Moav/B-52 video are not a whole heck of a lot different. the 52 one spilled forward more where as the Moav one made more of a circle shape which I would suspect 93's would have made because it nose-dived. Agreed?
Last edited:
Killtown, did you account for the focal length of Val's lens to determine the size of the plume?
Usually, lens with longer focal length tend to distort the size of objects, make them seem closer than their real distance.
http://www.paragon-press.com/lens/lenchart.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_length
http://cp.c-ij.com/english/photoshooting/techniques/camerafunction/camerafunction02.html
Usually, lens with longer focal length tend to distort the size of objects, make them seem closer than their real distance.
http://www.paragon-press.com/lens/lenchart.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_length
http://cp.c-ij.com/english/photoshooting/techniques/camerafunction/camerafunction02.html
Last edited:
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
It looks like KT has been taking lessons from Christophera. That is to say, once you have been proven utterly wrong, start over with your original post. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Another idea to move things along. 757 wingspan is about 125ft/38m. You would all agree the fireball 93 would have made would be at least twice as wide (250ft/76m) in diameter compared to the wingspan when it hit?
I mean your min plume width is 600m and you max is 1000m, so you'll need to start explaining how such a large plume could come from a plane with only a 38m wingspan.
I mean your min plume width is 600m and you max is 1000m, so you'll need to start explaining how such a large plume could come from a plane with only a 38m wingspan.
So you are starting to pull back from you MONSTEROUS plume size? I wouldn't blame you.
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
Killtown.
Please read this.
This briefly discusses the math needed to determine the diffusion of smoke and the change in volume.
Apparantly, you've done this calculation absed on various size fireballs (because you've "proven" that it couldn't have gotten that large), so let's see that math, please.
Please read this.
This briefly discusses the math needed to determine the diffusion of smoke and the change in volume.
Apparantly, you've done this calculation absed on various size fireballs (because you've "proven" that it couldn't have gotten that large), so let's see that math, please.
We are still working on the fireballs size. what's the minimum diameter of yours?
SRW
Master Poster
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2001
- Messages
- 2,903
Thanks for the heads up that will save me from having to go back to the beginning and reading this entire thread.
I saw the B-52 crash but I didn't see the Empire State building in that video. Is is that due to the re-editing of Loose Change?.
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
Since we know nothing about the crash conditions, the radius of the fireball could have been anywhere from 150 feet by 30 feet (elliptically shaped, assuming all fuel stayed in the wings) to the equivalent of a 100 ton TNT blast (assuming all the fuel was aerosolized).
There's not much way to determine what extent within these bounds (with the exceptions of the extremes that can be ruled out).
I'd suggest that a two orders of maginute result could be obtained assuming a fireball of equivalent diameter to the blast pattern left on the ground.
There's not much way to determine what extent within these bounds (with the exceptions of the extremes that can be ruled out).
I'd suggest that a two orders of maginute result could be obtained assuming a fireball of equivalent diameter to the blast pattern left on the ground.
Last edited:
Jumping back and forth between fireball and smoke plume again, are we. Must be all that time watching videos.
Killtown, I accept your estimate of the minimum initial fireball size. Partial credit. Now please compute the maximum initial fireball size, like we discussed before. After you've done that, we can discuss how the fireball evolved. We're not ready to jump to that step yet.
She had a "new" digital camera. My guess it would have been at most an average priced one since they were under financial constraints. She said she "didn't even aim" so that says to me that she didn't stop to focus, but just snapped the picture.
So tell me, what does that all mean to you about your focal length?
so your min fireball width when it crash was only 48m wide, but grew to the width of 600-1,000m???
- Status