Balsamo's goal is to sell lies on DVD, his offer no theory lies. He clearly makes claims, he forgot his offer no theory lie.
The speed of impact for flight 11 is a known speed, Vd, it was flown in test, therefore the impossible speed lie for 11 is nonsense. Flight 11 hit at about 470 knots, it is possible to estimate the speed from a film. Speed from NIST is close to what happen.
Speed of 175 appears to be about 510 knots, about 590 mph. NIST and the NTSB are close to real value and anyone who understand physics can look at the damage done and estimate the kinetic energy required and back in a good estimate of speed. Robertson who designed the WTC said the WT would resist an impact at 180 mph, and that design spec was verified by a study after 911 to be 200 mph with no major damage to the WTC.
The fact is Boeing jets do not disintegrate above the low altitude speed limit, if they did there would be a lot more dead people and crashes throughout history of Boeing Jets. I have personally flown faster than Vmo in a Boeing jet by accident, the plane handled better, smoother, and lots faster. I have had fellow USAF pilots fly low a lot faster than Vmo and do slight damage to the skin. You can't exceed Vmo constantly and expect your jet to have a long life.
What does Boeing say about flight above Vmo. Flying fast.?
No talk of impossible.
No talk of sure destruction.
No wall of can't do.
I have heard insane claims a plane can't go that fast because of thick air, but that is a lie. If that was true it would be simple to present the math. No math yet, only 11.2g moron math from Balsamo.
It takes morons to claim it is impossible for a 767/757 to exceed Vmo. We have access to the FDR for 77 and as 77 appraoched 483 knots the engines were beginning to overheat (at the limit) and roll back slightly.
Flight 175 made an approach on the WTC an lined up at 40 miles out, it was a clear day, the terrorist pilot on 175 had no problem seeing the WTC from over 20 miles out, people on the ground can, so could he! Balsamo's moronic talk of navigating to large visual targets sound hilaroius. Balsamo makes it seem hard to find the largest building on the east coast, in the largest city on the east coast. What a moron.
Balsamo brings up a plane which went 0.99 MACH and did not fall apart, not a good idea to bring up since the max MACH of 175, the alamost fastest plane on 911 was only 0.76 MACH. We have Boeing jets that can go .99 MACH and still fly, and Balsamo is saying 0.76 MACH is not possible before crashing into the WTC, and 0.72 MACH at the Pentagon.
The Pentagon flight 77 was only over Vmo for 20 or 30 seconds, after a lazy turn to line up visually with the Pentagon. No fancy flying, any kid off the street in the USA could fly without training better than the terrorists, and Balsamo lies and says it takes a professional pilot; and he and his moron pilots, Rotten Ralph, and Rusty Aimer can't hit the largest building in a simulator. What a group of failed aviators, make up lies and sell them on DVD. This is what pilots for truth is, a way to make money and tell lies about the government. Real political issue are all over the place, and Balsamo has to create his own delusions, so he can make a living.
I have been over Vmo for seconds, the plane was outstanding. No pilot would take his plane over Vmo knowingly, and in airliners there would be evidence the pilot was speeding.
The FDR at the WTC were not found, and FDR are not made to survive two building collapses of 130 tons of TNT kinetic energy, that is a fact someone can look up and destroy Balsamo implied lie; wait, Balsamo doesn't have a point.
The entire video is designed on purpose or in ignorance by Balsamo to mislead. He implies airspeed indicator is not used above 22,000 feet, he is funny in a moronic way.
Did anyone do the KEAS for 700 feet at 510 knots? Anyone? It is only 504 KEAS. Balsamo said it would be more than 586 KEAS and like 1.3 MACH, but it is exactly like .77 MACH at 700 feet. Funny how speed is speed, if you know what speed u b looking for. Balsamo can't do math, Balsamo can't do 911, Balsamo makes it clear he offers no theory, and the reason is, he can't do math, he can't do aerodynamics. The only thing Balsamo got right is the total pressure at 700 feet is higher than flying 1.36 MACH at 22,000 feet? SO? (from part 2/5, Balsamo's failed aero class, for morons, by morons)
It gets worse! If someone takes Balsamo seriously, they have zero knowledge on flying and are near insane to believe someone who threatens to kill people who expose his nonsense. Not someone to take seriously; Balsamo is a moron on flying and math, the video proves it will very little effort. In fact, Balsamo debunks himself on the speed issue; it is real funny in a boring jargon filled world of flying. This is a stundie, but it would take too much effort to explain why Balsamo's 1.36 MACH math is far out dumber than rocks falling faster than free-fall into the black-hole of ignorance.
The video set only gets worse... wow, the stupid burns and has no equal save Judy Wood and her myopic beam weapon.
In the second video, Balsamo talks about 1.36 MACH, but to have the same total pressure at 22,000 feet as 175 going 510 knots at 700 feet, you have to go 1.5 MACH at 22,000. But the KEAS stuff was applied back-wards, and 175 is only going 510 knots, that is equal to 510 KTAS, which is 504 KEAS. At 22,000 feet 504 KEAS would be 1.17 MACH and still not be more total pressure than 175 going 504 KEAS at 700 feet. Balsamo never had it, and never will.
At standard sea level KEAS is the same as calibrated airspeed (KCAS) and true airspeed (KTAS). Balsamo has no clue. You can't do what Balsamo did in the video, the video exposes Balsamo as a moron, get copies now, a rational person would pull the videos.
It was funny Balsamo compares an aircraft carrier with a 60 foot wide runway, on the ocean where the pilot has to land within feet of center to 207 foot wide 1300 foot tall WTC towers on a clear calm day. A few feet of spot landing is not the same as hundreds of feet hit anywhere WTC terrorist flying. I would do the math but Balsamo will not comprehend the results.
Did you watch all 5 videos?
Last edited:
At least, they will have to claim that and find all kinds of bizarre reasons for saying it such as the cockpit door never opened etc...
). Maybe I'd have to go back to the original sources of these claims as it is possible that the same two merely claimed three of the boxes had been found rather than they had found the boxes themselves. But as you say, if it turns out that they claimed by themselves to have discovered three out of four (the missing one to strengthen their argument perhaps or does it defeat the argument that there is no such thing as an unfound black box?) then we can dismiss them as obvious liars from the beginning.
And he hid it sooo well. Typical no-claimer.
