Moderated What Caused the Plane Shaped Hole

yankee451 said:
What happens when you compare apples to break dancing?
Click to expand...

You see an example of your complete lack of scientific knowledge, lol

The lead bullet goes right though it of course - but how can that happen?
 
There is a vast sea of ignorance about the strength of materials being shown here.
The reason for a tube structure for one.
Here is a simple 8-1/2" x 11" sheet of ordinary printer paper rolled into a tube,
with a small piece of tape holding the ends together. Placed on a digital scale.
The weight on the tube is incrementally increased, using quite heavy toy car batteries.
At 226 times the weight of the empty tube... 34 oz... the tube begins to exhibit buckling at the lower taped end.
With longitudinal stiffeners added, the basic paper tube can support much more weight than is shown here.
Airplane structures are designed for way higher loads than this, and can, as was seen in the WTC collisions, penetrate modern buildings.
 

Attachments

  • Tube-01.jpg
    Tube-01.jpg
    61.4 KB · Views: 4
  • Tube-02.jpg
    Tube-02.jpg
    71.8 KB · Views: 4
  • Tube-03.jpg
    Tube-03.jpg
    62 KB · Views: 3
  • Tube-04.jpg
    Tube-04.jpg
    64.7 KB · Views: 3
  • Tube-05.jpg
    Tube-05.jpg
    66.3 KB · Views: 5
I Ratant said:
There is a vast sea of ignorance about the strength of materials being shown here.
The reason for a tube structure for one.
Here is a simple 8-1/2" x 11" sheet of ordinary printer paper rolled into a tube,
with a small piece of tape holding the ends together. Placed on a digital scale.
The weight on the tube is incrementally increased, using quite heavy toy car batteries.
At 226 times the weight of the empty tube... 34 oz... the tube begins to exhibit buckling at the lower taped end.
With longitudinal stiffeners added, the basic paper tube can support much more weight than is shown here.
Airplane structures are designed for way higher loads than this, and can, as was seen in the WTC collisions, penetrate modern buildings.
Click to expand...

:jaw-dropp
 
I Ratant said:
There is a vast sea of ignorance about the strength of materials being shown here.
...
Click to expand...
You missed that by order of magnitude (which they don't understand)
Vast sea? I would say a couple of universes world of ignorance topped off with disrespect and the ability for rapid negative learning. We have to get some of what they are taking...

What is funny, it takes 11 minutes for 451 to do a post at 13 to 15 wpm.

It boils down to ignorance and political bias against the USA. He hates us for our education, knowledge, logic, critical thinking skills, etc.

When someone disagrees or laughs at his fantasy
I see another intellectually stunted JREF blowhard wandered away from the protection of the herd.
Careful, you are in danger of learning something.
Click to expand...
He is JREF too, not sure he understand that, but why would he join up if he was not a skeptic. Guess he missed the part of evidence, logic, and knowledge. And since JREF has the BIG E, he is against Education, so don't tell him the what the E Is.

Can it get more silly? Missiles are next, part to of the 7 second first video self-debunking special. Over in 7 seconds, showing Flt 11 impact the WTC, debunks the rest of the video, and makes Video 2 a waste.
When you are anti-education, logic does not miss the cut.
 
Last edited:
yankee451 said:
Finally I have met someone who knows all.

Do tell me oh wise one, what is beyond my comprehension, and what am I thinking now?
Click to expand...

I Ratant didn’t mention anything about being a know it all, and I am certainly not a know it all either. However, I do know what you are thinking. You are thinking the same old nonsense that you have been thinking all along
 
Loonatic93 said:
Have you noticed the similarity between the words "conceivable" and "inconceivable?"

If steel is harder and stronger than ice, does that mean that there is no way that ice can puncture steel?
Click to expand...

Have you noticed all the straws the denizens of this site will clutch at to avoid a valid comparison?
 
Slowvehicle said:
Thank you.

How fast was the leading edge of the wing of the 767 travelling when it hit the tower?
Click to expand...

Depends on whether your doing an accurate and honest calculation of the interaction between the radome, cockpit and forward cabin and the exterior steel box columns, but spare us the drama trauma and just give us the whole calculation all at once.
 
We dont have to explain the finer points of some bits of bent metal in the impact hole because:

1. Eye witness and video evidence clearly shows a plane hitting the building and exploding.


Thats it. You then start from there. Who was flying the plane.

Simples/
 
yankee451 said:
Depends on whether your doing an accurate and honest calculation of the interaction between the radome, cockpit and forward cabin and the exterior steel box columns, but spare us the drama trauma and just give us the whole calculation all at once.
Click to expand...

How fast was the leading edge of the wing traveling when it hit the tower? (Be conservative--use sig fig. How fast do you, personally, calculate that the leading edge of the wing was travelling when it was observed to hit the tower?)
 
Last edited:
Slowvehicle said:
How fast was the leading edge of the wing traveling when it hit the tower? (Be conservative--use sig fig. How fast do you, personally, calculate that the leading edge of the wing was travelling when it was observed to hit the tower?)
Click to expand...

First tell me how much the radome, cockpit and forward cabin impact retarded the forward momentum of the whole plane. We all know a real jet's wings would snap off at that point but there it is on the TeeVee, the whole plane sliding like butter into the building, so be conservative, how much did the fuselage impact slow down the rest of the plane?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom