World Trade Center probably could not have been destroyed by planes

[Dale Smith]

It is a real blessing to come across someone like you and some others here that know the things that I do and have taken the time to read and research. It is people like you that keeps me going even when I am being dogpiled on in other forums. I have a close knit group of truthers that are a part of my inner circle and we lean on each other and pass on information to each other. I look forward to learning what I can from you and I hope I am able to return the favor and that you might be able to take some of the things I have garnered and be of use to you as well. We are all in this together and it seems that the powers that be are doubling down on their efforts to bring about their totalitarian, feudalistic two class system of elites and serfs. I want you to know that there are "white hats" working on our behalf and there are inner- agency wars going on that the media never speaks of and what will help them is people waking up...that is the thankless job that you and a few others have here.

I'm not real keen on the "us against them" paradigm.

I've heard the term, "white hats," before, and I'm not sure I like it.

Isn't it the elites that like to think in an "us against them" paradigm as well? Don't you think they actually believe they are doing the best thing for the planet?

Wasn't it Spock that said, "Then needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few?"

Or do you believe they are purposely setting about on a course of purposeful evil?



I've read that grandiose conspiracy stuff, and I am not sure I buy it.

I've specialized in political science at university. What we have here are nothing more than interest groups. Albeit, "clandestine interest groups." This is a classic example of folks that take Plato's Republic seriously.

And yet, they are NOT philosopher kings.

I have also lived and worked among the lower class. I've had friends that came from the slums, the hood and the trailer parks. Some have been extraordinarily gifted, others are exactly as written about in the Republic, in need of guidance by the educated classes.


So, in the final analysis, are these elite controllers doing these things for the good of the world's population or exclusively for their own gain? It is something we need to consider before we uniformly think in terms of an us vs. them paradigm.

I highly recommend the documentary by the great grandson of the founder of the Johnson and Johnson company "The One Percent." If nothing else, you find out the truth about Warren Buffett, and how he's not really such a nice guy.





You know, I search, do lots of research, and that is one of the few terms that never brings up anything meaningful. "Clandestine Interest Groups." It's sort of like trying to find out the name of China's intelligence agency, isn't it?

I did stumble across at least one of them. . . I don't think these folks want any press. . .

does anyone know if this website is real or fake : http://www.guilderberg.com/?

You need at least four million net worth to log into this forum.
Guilderberg | A Gathering of Distinguished Individuals - Dørene Er Åpnet

There is a FB page that is open to the public, it's pretty pedestrian.


Once into that site, I am sure there are other sites that don't even show up in google.


My son was invited to join a program at the local college for accelerated students at age eleven. Now mind you, FB has a policy that one needs to be thirteen to have an account on FB.

After he joined, they told him they had a private group on FB that didn't even show up in Google searches or FB searches that was only open to their students.

I'm like, WTF? He shouldn't even be on that site, none of them should be.

But that is the nature of clandestine interest groups. Does this mean the college or these kids have a "nefarious agenda?" No, it just means they don't want the public involved in what they do in any way.

If they can do it, then be sure, there are lots of other groups doing the same thing. I am also sure that the majority of them are doing it because they feel that the masses will just obstruct their functioning, and they feel they are doing what they are doing for the public good.


You will never be dog piled if you view those who are dog piling you as your friends, your family and your country men.

Everyone at USMB believes as they do for a reason. We all have interests, we need to recognize them. Why, in the final analysis, does the truth threaten these interests? Then you will understand why folks "dogpile."

Sometimes an uncomfortable lie is better than the sinister truth.

Having a close knit group of friends can lead to tunnel vision, guard yourself always, be open to the possibility that those who you believe are your enemies, may in fact, just be your misguided saviors.

I sometimes wonder if the tales of John Titor might have been true. What if 9/11 were all his fault? What if it hadn't been for him, we would have been in civil war and invaded by now? Who can say? Would that have been better?

At least our government would have been honest. But look at that world he was living in. . . .

I meant to get back to this post sooner but got sidetracked. I will address it in more detail when I get home this morning. Great post.....

 

[MisterBeale]

I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.

And its turtles, all the way down.

Oh, there are facts, you just refuse to listen to them.

Folks tell you who was working for PTECH, you don't listen.

Folks tell you that NIST classified the DATA that they used to model the collapse of WTC, you ignore them.

Folks tell you this, that, and the other, you pretend it doesn't exist.

I have posted fact after fact in this thread. The FACTS are, none of those Muslims had the qualifications to fly those planes into those towers. The planes were either remotes, or they didn't exist. Those are the facts.

You refuse to believe that. THE FACTS ARE, THE PLANES THAT ARE SAID TO HAVE HIT THOSE BUILDINGS COULDN'T HAVE. MATH AND SCIENCE DOESN'T LIE.

9/11: Speeds Reported For World Trade Center Attack Aircraft Analyzed
For Immediate Release
9/11: World Trade Center Attack Speed Analysis
Pilots For 9/11 Truth have calculated the Equivalent Airspeed for EA990 peak speed of .99 Mach at 22,000 feet as the equivalent dynamic effects of 425 knots at or near sea level. This airspeed is 65 knots over max operating for a 767, 85 knots less than the alleged United 175, and 5 knots less than the alleged American 11. Although it may be probable for the alleged American 11 to achieve such speed as 430 knots is only 5 knots over that of EA990 peak speed, It is impossible for the alleged United 175 to achieve the speeds reported by the NTSB using EA990 as a benchmark.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have further studied if a 767 could continue controlled flight at such reported speeds. According to the NTSB, EA990 wreckage was found in two distinct debris fields, indicating in-flight structural failure which has been determined to have occurred a few seconds after recording peak speed. Based on EA990, it is impossible for the alleged United 175 to have continued controlled flight at more than 85 knots over the speed which failed the structure of EA990.

Full detailed analysis, including analysis of a recent simulator experiment performed, and interviews with United and American Airlines 757/767 Pilots can be viewed in the new presentation, "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" available only at Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Although other factors come into play within the transonic ranges, Dynamic pressure is dynamic pressure. Math doesn't lie. Boeing needs to release wind tunnel data for the Boeing 767. Despite the fact that the data can be fabricated, such a release of data may alert more pilots and engineers to the extremely excessive speeds reported near sea level for the Boeing 767 in which they can decide for themselves. Update: Since our article on WTC Aircraft Speed Analysis was written, more evidence has been gathered to reflect the research provided by Pilots For 9/11 Truth and in the film "9/11: World Trade Center Attack". A more thorough understanding and explanation of why V speeds are established based on wind tunnel tests performed by the manufacturer is also available virtually making the need to gather documents from Boeing based on wind tunnel testing, moot. We already have their results of such tests in the form of the V Speeds they have established through wind tunnel testing required by definition as outlined in the Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics and all other related text. For more information and to review the evidence gathered, click here.

 

[Gamolon]

I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.

And its turtles, all the way down.

Oh, there are facts, you just refuse to listen to them.

Folks tell you who was working for PTECH, you don't listen.

Folks tell you that NIST classified the DATA that they used to model the collapse of WTC, you ignore them.

Folks tell you this, that, and the other, you pretend it doesn't exist.

I have posted fact after fact in this thread. The FACTS are, none of those Muslims had the qualifications to fly those planes into those towers. The planes were either remotes, or they didn't exist. Those are the facts.

You refuse to believe that. THE FACTS ARE, THE PLANES THAT ARE SAID TO HAVE HIT THOSE BUILDINGS COULDN'T HAVE. MATH AND SCIENCE DOESN'T LIE.

9/11: Speeds Reported For World Trade Center Attack Aircraft Analyzed
For Immediate Release
9/11: World Trade Center Attack Speed Analysis
Pilots For 9/11 Truth have calculated the Equivalent Airspeed for EA990 peak speed of .99 Mach at 22,000 feet as the equivalent dynamic effects of 425 knots at or near sea level. This airspeed is 65 knots over max operating for a 767, 85 knots less than the alleged United 175, and 5 knots less than the alleged American 11. Although it may be probable for the alleged American 11 to achieve such speed as 430 knots is only 5 knots over that of EA990 peak speed, It is impossible for the alleged United 175 to achieve the speeds reported by the NTSB using EA990 as a benchmark.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have further studied if a 767 could continue controlled flight at such reported speeds. According to the NTSB, EA990 wreckage was found in two distinct debris fields, indicating in-flight structural failure which has been determined to have occurred a few seconds after recording peak speed. Based on EA990, it is impossible for the alleged United 175 to have continued controlled flight at more than 85 knots over the speed which failed the structure of EA990.

Full detailed analysis, including analysis of a recent simulator experiment performed, and interviews with United and American Airlines 757/767 Pilots can be viewed in the new presentation, "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" available only at Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Although other factors come into play within the transonic ranges, Dynamic pressure is dynamic pressure. Math doesn't lie. Boeing needs to release wind tunnel data for the Boeing 767. Despite the fact that the data can be fabricated, such a release of data may alert more pilots and engineers to the extremely excessive speeds reported near sea level for the Boeing 767 in which they can decide for themselves. Update: Since our article on WTC Aircraft Speed Analysis was written, more evidence has been gathered to reflect the research provided by Pilots For 9/11 Truth and in the film "9/11: World Trade Center Attack". A more thorough understanding and explanation of why V speeds are established based on wind tunnel tests performed by the manufacturer is also available virtually making the need to gather documents from Boeing based on wind tunnel testing, moot. We already have their results of such tests in the form of the V Speeds they have established through wind tunnel testing required by definition as outlined in the Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics and all other related text. For more information and to review the evidence gathered, click here.

Maybe you should read the information at this link:
Debunked: Pilots for 9/11 truth WTC speeds

The NTSB report however does not state that the aircraft broke up at 22,000 feet. As the aircraft was descending both engines were shut down by the Relief First Officer, the person suspected of deliberately crashing the 767 (disputed by the Egyptians but not germane to the discussion), and the aircraft was still intact as it went through 17000 feet when both the FDR and CVR lost power due to the engine shutdown. Radar returns then have the aircraft climbing to 25,000 feet where it began another descent, apparently intact till it crashed into the ocean.

At no point in the NTSB report is it suggested that the aircraft broke up in flight.

Furthermore, the so called analysis of the loads on the aircraft neglects to mention that analysis of the FDR has the aircraft at just below 17000 feet, at 485 knots and crucially, experiencing 2.5 G as the Captain fought to regain control.

Furthermore, the aircrafts dual elevators were at opposite ends of their travel as the Captain pulled the control wheel back, and the First Officer was pushing it forward, introducing a large torsion moment on the tail assembly.

Furthermore, from the FDR the maximum Mach of 0.99 was actually experienced at 29500 feet, not 22,000 feet giving an EAS of 361 knots, 1 knot over VMO.

Here is the FDR data.



Two facts emerge from this.

1. This 767 airframe underwent a EAS of 462 knots whilst pulling 2.5G and with both elevators at opposite ends of their travel and survived. To say it could survive that and not survive the 1G flight at the speeds of the WTC attacks is not credible.

2. Pilots for 911/truth either did not read the report; couldn't interpret it correctly; or deliberately concocted the breakup/M.99 at 22,000 feet story, to further their own agenda. Take your pick.

 

[Gamolon]

What I am 100 percent sure of is that it was an inside job and that explosives were planted in WTC 1,2 and 7. Case closed as far as I am concerned.

What proof do you have of explosive that makes you 100% sure?

 

[Gamolon]

I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.

And its turtles, all the way down.

Oh, there are facts, you just refuse to listen to them.

Folks tell you who was working for PTECH, you don't listen.

Folks tell you that NIST classified the DATA that they used to model the collapse of WTC, you ignore them.

Folks tell you this, that, and the other, you pretend it doesn't exist.

I have posted fact after fact in this thread. The FACTS are, none of those Muslims had the qualifications to fly those planes into those towers. The planes were either remotes, or they didn't exist. Those are the facts.

You refuse to believe that. THE FACTS ARE, THE PLANES THAT ARE SAID TO HAVE HIT THOSE BUILDINGS COULDN'T HAVE. MATH AND SCIENCE DOESN'T LIE.

9/11: Speeds Reported For World Trade Center Attack Aircraft Analyzed
For Immediate Release
9/11: World Trade Center Attack Speed Analysis
Pilots For 9/11 Truth have calculated the Equivalent Airspeed for EA990 peak speed of .99 Mach at 22,000 feet as the equivalent dynamic effects of 425 knots at or near sea level. This airspeed is 65 knots over max operating for a 767, 85 knots less than the alleged United 175, and 5 knots less than the alleged American 11. Although it may be probable for the alleged American 11 to achieve such speed as 430 knots is only 5 knots over that of EA990 peak speed, It is impossible for the alleged United 175 to achieve the speeds reported by the NTSB using EA990 as a benchmark.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have further studied if a 767 could continue controlled flight at such reported speeds. According to the NTSB, EA990 wreckage was found in two distinct debris fields, indicating in-flight structural failure which has been determined to have occurred a few seconds after recording peak speed. Based on EA990, it is impossible for the alleged United 175 to have continued controlled flight at more than 85 knots over the speed which failed the structure of EA990.

Full detailed analysis, including analysis of a recent simulator experiment performed, and interviews with United and American Airlines 757/767 Pilots can be viewed in the new presentation, "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" available only at Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Although other factors come into play within the transonic ranges, Dynamic pressure is dynamic pressure. Math doesn't lie. Boeing needs to release wind tunnel data for the Boeing 767. Despite the fact that the data can be fabricated, such a release of data may alert more pilots and engineers to the extremely excessive speeds reported near sea level for the Boeing 767 in which they can decide for themselves. Update: Since our article on WTC Aircraft Speed Analysis was written, more evidence has been gathered to reflect the research provided by Pilots For 9/11 Truth and in the film "9/11: World Trade Center Attack". A more thorough understanding and explanation of why V speeds are established based on wind tunnel tests performed by the manufacturer is also available virtually making the need to gather documents from Boeing based on wind tunnel testing, moot. We already have their results of such tests in the form of the V Speeds they have established through wind tunnel testing required by definition as outlined in the Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics and all other related text. For more information and to review the evidence gathered, click here.

More information at this link:
EasyJet 737 incident debunks Pilot for 9/11 truth V-G diagram video

The claim:

Pilots for 9/11 truth have published several videos claiming that airliners travelling slightly above the Design Dive Speed; known as Vd, are subject to structural failure. This assertion, amongst others, forms the basis of this video;



The video itself takes numerous licences with what it states; which will be addressed later, but for now let us concentrate on their claims about the ramifications of flying faster than Vd.

The specific claim at 5.00 is that Egypt Air 990 suffered structural failure at 425 KEAS. (Vd+5).

(EAS is Equivalent Air Speed, is a value mainly used by test pilots to equate the aerodynamic loads on an aircraft at different altitudes and speeds to a speed at sea level, where the air is thickest.)

This claim is completely without merit and contradicts the NTSB report into the incident as discussed in this post. Analysis of the FDR data shows that the 767 suffered no structural failure at Vd+23 knots or 443 KEAS whilst pulling 2.1G, with split elevators.

Research has uncovered another incident of a Easyjet 737-700, G-EZJK^ which pitched down during a test flight whilst flying at 15,000 ft. The aircraft had its hydraulic flight controls turned off as part of the test. The AAIB investigation into the incident finds that the aircraft, which has a Vd of 380 KEAS, recovered slightly below 6000 feet after achieving 429 KCAS which converts to 424 KEAS, or Vd+44 knots.

The aircraft, according to the report, landed undamaged and continues to fly in Brazil for GOL airlines^ as PR-VBI. During the recovery this aircraft pulled ~1.7G at ~420KEAS.

Another 737 did go much further past Vd before it unfortunately broke up. The report of the Adam Air Flight 574 crash on New Years Day 2007 in Indonesia shows that whilst descending in a tight spiral dive after the pilots mishandled problems with the aircraft's navigational equipment and lost spatial awareness, the aircraft broke up whilst pulling 3.5G (max G limit 2.5) whilst flying at 495 KCAS at 12,000ft.

This aircraft was a 737-400 which has a Vd of 400 knots. The KEAS value at the point of breakup is 480 or Vd+80.

Pilots for 9/11 truth make these videos in an attempt to push their claim that UA 175, a United Airlines 767-200 was in some way modified to achieve the highest speed reported by the several studies that were done into UA175, that of ~508 KEAS or VD+88. They claim it is not possible for an unmodified 767 to survive at these speeds.

EA990, a 767-300 was undamaged @Vd +23/2.1G and split elevators (Which caused massive twisting loads on the tailplane).

G-EZJK, a 737-700 was undamaged @Vd +44/1.7G and recoverable with hydraulic controls switched off.

Adam Air 574, a 737-400 did not break up till reaching Vd+80 and pulling 3.5G. There is no indication of structural failure before that point.

None of this data proves that UA175 could get to Vd+88 and survive. However UA175 did not reach Vd+80 until about 5 seconds before impact with the South Tower of the WTC. It was in a slight descent and rolling towards 38 degrees of bank. The G force in that scenario would be slightly over 1G.

 

[MisterBeale]

I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.

And its turtles, all the way down.

Oh, there are facts, you just refuse to listen to them.

Folks tell you who was working for PTECH, you don't listen.

Folks tell you that NIST classified the DATA that they used to model the collapse of WTC, you ignore them.

Folks tell you this, that, and the other, you pretend it doesn't exist.

I have posted fact after fact in this thread. The FACTS are, none of those Muslims had the qualifications to fly those planes into those towers. The planes were either remotes, or they didn't exist. Those are the facts.

You refuse to believe that. THE FACTS ARE, THE PLANES THAT ARE SAID TO HAVE HIT THOSE BUILDINGS COULDN'T HAVE. MATH AND SCIENCE DOESN'T LIE.

9/11: Speeds Reported For World Trade Center Attack Aircraft Analyzed
For Immediate Release
9/11: World Trade Center Attack Speed Analysis
Pilots For 9/11 Truth have calculated the Equivalent Airspeed for EA990 peak speed of .99 Mach at 22,000 feet as the equivalent dynamic effects of 425 knots at or near sea level. This airspeed is 65 knots over max operating for a 767, 85 knots less than the alleged United 175, and 5 knots less than the alleged American 11. Although it may be probable for the alleged American 11 to achieve such speed as 430 knots is only 5 knots over that of EA990 peak speed, It is impossible for the alleged United 175 to achieve the speeds reported by the NTSB using EA990 as a benchmark.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have further studied if a 767 could continue controlled flight at such reported speeds. According to the NTSB, EA990 wreckage was found in two distinct debris fields, indicating in-flight structural failure which has been determined to have occurred a few seconds after recording peak speed. Based on EA990, it is impossible for the alleged United 175 to have continued controlled flight at more than 85 knots over the speed which failed the structure of EA990.

Full detailed analysis, including analysis of a recent simulator experiment performed, and interviews with United and American Airlines 757/767 Pilots can be viewed in the new presentation, "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" available only at Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Although other factors come into play within the transonic ranges, Dynamic pressure is dynamic pressure. Math doesn't lie. Boeing needs to release wind tunnel data for the Boeing 767. Despite the fact that the data can be fabricated, such a release of data may alert more pilots and engineers to the extremely excessive speeds reported near sea level for the Boeing 767 in which they can decide for themselves. Update: Since our article on WTC Aircraft Speed Analysis was written, more evidence has been gathered to reflect the research provided by Pilots For 9/11 Truth and in the film "9/11: World Trade Center Attack". A more thorough understanding and explanation of why V speeds are established based on wind tunnel tests performed by the manufacturer is also available virtually making the need to gather documents from Boeing based on wind tunnel testing, moot. We already have their results of such tests in the form of the V Speeds they have established through wind tunnel testing required by definition as outlined in the Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics and all other related text. For more information and to review the evidence gathered, click here.

Maybe you should read the information at this link:
Debunked: Pilots for 9/11 truth WTC speeds

The NTSB report however does not state that the aircraft broke up at 22,000 feet. As the aircraft was descending both engines were shut down by the Relief First Officer, the person suspected of deliberately crashing the 767 (disputed by the Egyptians but not germane to the discussion), and the aircraft was still intact as it went through 17000 feet when both the FDR and CVR lost power due to the engine shutdown. Radar returns then have the aircraft climbing to 25,000 feet where it began another descent, apparently intact till it crashed into the ocean.

At no point in the NTSB report is it suggested that the aircraft broke up in flight.

Furthermore, the so called analysis of the loads on the aircraft neglects to mention that analysis of the FDR has the aircraft at just below 17000 feet, at 485 knots and crucially, experiencing 2.5 G as the Captain fought to regain control.

Furthermore, the aircrafts dual elevators were at opposite ends of their travel as the Captain pulled the control wheel back, and the First Officer was pushing it forward, introducing a large torsion moment on the tail assembly.

Furthermore, from the FDR the maximum Mach of 0.99 was actually experienced at 29500 feet, not 22,000 feet giving an EAS of 361 knots, 1 knot over VMO.

Here is the FDR data.



Two facts emerge from this.

1. This 767 airframe underwent a EAS of 462 knots whilst pulling 2.5G and with both elevators at opposite ends of their travel and survived. To say it could survive that and not survive the 1G flight at the speeds of the WTC attacks is not credible.

2. Pilots for 911/truth either did not read the report; couldn't interpret it correctly; or deliberately concocted the breakup/M.99 at 22,000 feet story, to further their own agenda. Take your pick.

Could you please find a direct link to the NTSB report? I don't really want to

I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.

And its turtles, all the way down.

Oh, there are facts, you just refuse to listen to them.

Folks tell you who was working for PTECH, you don't listen.

Folks tell you that NIST classified the DATA that they used to model the collapse of WTC, you ignore them.

Folks tell you this, that, and the other, you pretend it doesn't exist.

I have posted fact after fact in this thread. The FACTS are, none of those Muslims had the qualifications to fly those planes into those towers. The planes were either remotes, or they didn't exist. Those are the facts.

You refuse to believe that. THE FACTS ARE, THE PLANES THAT ARE SAID TO HAVE HIT THOSE BUILDINGS COULDN'T HAVE. MATH AND SCIENCE DOESN'T LIE.

9/11: Speeds Reported For World Trade Center Attack Aircraft Analyzed
For Immediate Release
9/11: World Trade Center Attack Speed Analysis
Pilots For 9/11 Truth have calculated the Equivalent Airspeed for EA990 peak speed of .99 Mach at 22,000 feet as the equivalent dynamic effects of 425 knots at or near sea level. This airspeed is 65 knots over max operating for a 767, 85 knots less than the alleged United 175, and 5 knots less than the alleged American 11. Although it may be probable for the alleged American 11 to achieve such speed as 430 knots is only 5 knots over that of EA990 peak speed, It is impossible for the alleged United 175 to achieve the speeds reported by the NTSB using EA990 as a benchmark.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have further studied if a 767 could continue controlled flight at such reported speeds. According to the NTSB, EA990 wreckage was found in two distinct debris fields, indicating in-flight structural failure which has been determined to have occurred a few seconds after recording peak speed. Based on EA990, it is impossible for the alleged United 175 to have continued controlled flight at more than 85 knots over the speed which failed the structure of EA990.

Full detailed analysis, including analysis of a recent simulator experiment performed, and interviews with United and American Airlines 757/767 Pilots can be viewed in the new presentation, "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" available only at Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Although other factors come into play within the transonic ranges, Dynamic pressure is dynamic pressure. Math doesn't lie. Boeing needs to release wind tunnel data for the Boeing 767. Despite the fact that the data can be fabricated, such a release of data may alert more pilots and engineers to the extremely excessive speeds reported near sea level for the Boeing 767 in which they can decide for themselves. Update: Since our article on WTC Aircraft Speed Analysis was written, more evidence has been gathered to reflect the research provided by Pilots For 9/11 Truth and in the film "9/11: World Trade Center Attack". A more thorough understanding and explanation of why V speeds are established based on wind tunnel tests performed by the manufacturer is also available virtually making the need to gather documents from Boeing based on wind tunnel testing, moot. We already have their results of such tests in the form of the V Speeds they have established through wind tunnel testing required by definition as outlined in the Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics and all other related text. For more information and to review the evidence gathered, click here.

Maybe you should read the information at this link:
Debunked: Pilots for 9/11 truth WTC speeds

The NTSB report however does not state that the aircraft broke up at 22,000 feet. As the aircraft was descending both engines were shut down by the Relief First Officer, the person suspected of deliberately crashing the 767 (disputed by the Egyptians but not germane to the discussion), and the aircraft was still intact as it went through 17000 feet when both the FDR and CVR lost power due to the engine shutdown. Radar returns then have the aircraft climbing to 25,000 feet where it began another descent, apparently intact till it crashed into the ocean.

At no point in the NTSB report is it suggested that the aircraft broke up in flight.

Furthermore, the so called analysis of the loads on the aircraft neglects to mention that analysis of the FDR has the aircraft at just below 17000 feet, at 485 knots and crucially, experiencing 2.5 G as the Captain fought to regain control.

Furthermore, the aircrafts dual elevators were at opposite ends of their travel as the Captain pulled the control wheel back, and the First Officer was pushing it forward, introducing a large torsion moment on the tail assembly.

Furthermore, from the FDR the maximum Mach of 0.99 was actually experienced at 29500 feet, not 22,000 feet giving an EAS of 361 knots, 1 knot over VMO.

Here is the FDR data.



Two facts emerge from this.

1. This 767 airframe underwent a EAS of 462 knots whilst pulling 2.5G and with both elevators at opposite ends of their travel and survived. To say it could survive that and not survive the 1G flight at the speeds of the WTC attacks is not credible.

2. Pilots for 911/truth either did not read the report; couldn't interpret it correctly; or deliberately concocted the breakup/M.99 at 22,000 feet story, to further their own agenda. Take your pick.

We are sorry, the page you are looking for can't be found.


The URL may be misspelled or the page you're looking for is no longer available. We recognize that our website used to present a challenge, and that many people have memorized the path through the maze or bookmarked the information they need. Unfortunately, due to the new organization of our website content, those trails of breadcrumbs and bookmarks will no longer work. We apologize but we think you'll have a much easier time finding the information you need using the search options below. Please Contact us if you need any further information.

 

[Gamolon]

Could you please find a direct link to the NTSB report? I don't really want to

Seriously?

My search turned this up:
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAB0201.pdf

 

[MisterBeale]

I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.

And its turtles, all the way down.

Oh, there are facts, you just refuse to listen to them.

Folks tell you who was working for PTECH, you don't listen.

Folks tell you that NIST classified the DATA that they used to model the collapse of WTC, you ignore them.

Folks tell you this, that, and the other, you pretend it doesn't exist.

I have posted fact after fact in this thread. The FACTS are, none of those Muslims had the qualifications to fly those planes into those towers. The planes were either remotes, or they didn't exist. Those are the facts.

You refuse to believe that. THE FACTS ARE, THE PLANES THAT ARE SAID TO HAVE HIT THOSE BUILDINGS COULDN'T HAVE. MATH AND SCIENCE DOESN'T LIE.

9/11: Speeds Reported For World Trade Center Attack Aircraft Analyzed
For Immediate Release
9/11: World Trade Center Attack Speed Analysis
Pilots For 9/11 Truth have calculated the Equivalent Airspeed for EA990 peak speed of .99 Mach at 22,000 feet as the equivalent dynamic effects of 425 knots at or near sea level. This airspeed is 65 knots over max operating for a 767, 85 knots less than the alleged United 175, and 5 knots less than the alleged American 11. Although it may be probable for the alleged American 11 to achieve such speed as 430 knots is only 5 knots over that of EA990 peak speed, It is impossible for the alleged United 175 to achieve the speeds reported by the NTSB using EA990 as a benchmark.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have further studied if a 767 could continue controlled flight at such reported speeds. According to the NTSB, EA990 wreckage was found in two distinct debris fields, indicating in-flight structural failure which has been determined to have occurred a few seconds after recording peak speed. Based on EA990, it is impossible for the alleged United 175 to have continued controlled flight at more than 85 knots over the speed which failed the structure of EA990.

Full detailed analysis, including analysis of a recent simulator experiment performed, and interviews with United and American Airlines 757/767 Pilots can be viewed in the new presentation, "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" available only at Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Although other factors come into play within the transonic ranges, Dynamic pressure is dynamic pressure. Math doesn't lie. Boeing needs to release wind tunnel data for the Boeing 767. Despite the fact that the data can be fabricated, such a release of data may alert more pilots and engineers to the extremely excessive speeds reported near sea level for the Boeing 767 in which they can decide for themselves. Update: Since our article on WTC Aircraft Speed Analysis was written, more evidence has been gathered to reflect the research provided by Pilots For 9/11 Truth and in the film "9/11: World Trade Center Attack". A more thorough understanding and explanation of why V speeds are established based on wind tunnel tests performed by the manufacturer is also available virtually making the need to gather documents from Boeing based on wind tunnel testing, moot. We already have their results of such tests in the form of the V Speeds they have established through wind tunnel testing required by definition as outlined in the Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics and all other related text. For more information and to review the evidence gathered, click here.

More information at this link:
EasyJet 737 incident debunks Pilot for 9/11 truth V-G diagram video

The claim:

Pilots for 9/11 truth have published several videos claiming that airliners travelling slightly above the Design Dive Speed; known as Vd, are subject to structural failure. This assertion, amongst others, forms the basis of this video;



The video itself takes numerous licences with what it states; which will be addressed later, but for now let us concentrate on their claims about the ramifications of flying faster than Vd.

The specific claim at 5.00 is that Egypt Air 990 suffered structural failure at 425 KEAS. (Vd+5).

(EAS is Equivalent Air Speed, is a value mainly used by test pilots to equate the aerodynamic loads on an aircraft at different altitudes and speeds to a speed at sea level, where the air is thickest.)

This claim is completely without merit and contradicts the NTSB report into the incident as discussed in this post. Analysis of the FDR data shows that the 767 suffered no structural failure at Vd+23 knots or 443 KEAS whilst pulling 2.1G, with split elevators.

Research has uncovered another incident of a Easyjet 737-700, G-EZJK^ which pitched down during a test flight whilst flying at 15,000 ft. The aircraft had its hydraulic flight controls turned off as part of the test. The AAIB investigation into the incident finds that the aircraft, which has a Vd of 380 KEAS, recovered slightly below 6000 feet after achieving 429 KCAS which converts to 424 KEAS, or Vd+44 knots.

The aircraft, according to the report, landed undamaged and continues to fly in Brazil for GOL airlines^ as PR-VBI. During the recovery this aircraft pulled ~1.7G at ~420KEAS.

Another 737 did go much further past Vd before it unfortunately broke up. The report of the Adam Air Flight 574 crash on New Years Day 2007 in Indonesia shows that whilst descending in a tight spiral dive after the pilots mishandled problems with the aircraft's navigational equipment and lost spatial awareness, the aircraft broke up whilst pulling 3.5G (max G limit 2.5) whilst flying at 495 KCAS at 12,000ft.

This aircraft was a 737-400 which has a Vd of 400 knots. The KEAS value at the point of breakup is 480 or Vd+80.

Pilots for 9/11 truth make these videos in an attempt to push their claim that UA 175, a United Airlines 767-200 was in some way modified to achieve the highest speed reported by the several studies that were done into UA175, that of ~508 KEAS or VD+88. They claim it is not possible for an unmodified 767 to survive at these speeds.

EA990, a 767-300 was undamaged @Vd +23/2.1G and split elevators (Which caused massive twisting loads on the tailplane).

G-EZJK, a 737-700 was undamaged @Vd +44/1.7G and recoverable with hydraulic controls switched off.

Adam Air 574, a 737-400 did not break up till reaching Vd+80 and pulling 3.5G. There is no indication of structural failure before that point.

None of this data proves that UA175 could get to Vd+88 and survive. However UA175 did not reach Vd+80 until about 5 seconds before impact with the South Tower of the WTC. It was in a slight descent and rolling towards 38 degrees of bank. The G force in that scenario would be slightly over 1G.

Interesting.

I suppose, in the hands of a super experienced pilot you might have a case. . . .

 

[Dale Smith]

What I am 100 percent sure of is that it was an inside job and that explosives were planted in WTC 1,2 and 7. Case closed as far as I am concerned.

What proof do you have of explosive that makes you 100% sure?

Military grade thermite was detected in dust particles for one thing. Then there is the testimony of Dr Steve Pieczenik, who spent thirty years in the CIA that offered to testify in a Senate hearing that a General told him exactly how 9/11 was pulled off. He was also the first to reveal that Osama bin Laden died on December 13 2001 of Marfan's syndrome and had been visited in a military hospital in Dubai and debriefed by the CIA and other intel spooks in July of 2001. He only confirmed what I had already researched but he is definitely a credible source.

 

[MisterBeale]

Could you please find a direct link to the NTSB report? I don't really want to

Seriously?

My search turned this up:
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAB0201.pdf

Thank you for this. This doc. will take some time to analyze.


I don't doubt that "pilots for truth" have an agenda. Though, to be sure, a site titled "metabunk" probably has an agenda as well, wouldn't you say?

I have a terrible migraine today and have to lay down, and then a load of things to get done today. I am confident that this report is above board though.


I will analyze it as soon as I get the chance.

 

[Gamolon]

I suppose, in the hands of a super experienced pilot you might have a case. . . .

We aren't discussing experience yet. Just your link to the data regarding why you agree it was supposedly physically impossible for a plane to perform under those conditions.

 

[SAYIT]

I just don't get Truthers. Their solution for an absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy they can't back factually is to invent an even more absurdly complicated, wildly elaborate conspiracy to back it.

And its turtles, all the way down.

Oh, there are facts, you just refuse to listen to them.

Folks tell you who was working for PTECH, you don't listen.

Folks tell you that NIST classified the DATA that they used to model the collapse of WTC, you ignore them.

Folks tell you this, that, and the other, you pretend it doesn't exist.

I have posted fact after fact in this thread. The FACTS are, none of those Muslims had the qualifications to fly those planes into those towers. The planes were either remotes, or they didn't exist. Those are the facts.

You refuse to believe that. THE FACTS ARE, THE PLANES THAT ARE SAID TO HAVE HIT THOSE BUILDINGS COULDN'T HAVE. MATH AND SCIENCE DOESN'T LIE.

9/11: Speeds Reported For World Trade Center Attack Aircraft Analyzed
For Immediate Release
9/11: World Trade Center Attack Speed Analysis
Pilots For 9/11 Truth have calculated the Equivalent Airspeed for EA990 peak speed of .99 Mach at 22,000 feet as the equivalent dynamic effects of 425 knots at or near sea level. This airspeed is 65 knots over max operating for a 767, 85 knots less than the alleged United 175, and 5 knots less than the alleged American 11. Although it may be probable for the alleged American 11 to achieve such speed as 430 knots is only 5 knots over that of EA990 peak speed, It is impossible for the alleged United 175 to achieve the speeds reported by the NTSB using EA990 as a benchmark.

Pilots For 9/11 Truth have further studied if a 767 could continue controlled flight at such reported speeds. According to the NTSB, EA990 wreckage was found in two distinct debris fields, indicating in-flight structural failure which has been determined to have occurred a few seconds after recording peak speed. Based on EA990, it is impossible for the alleged United 175 to have continued controlled flight at more than 85 knots over the speed which failed the structure of EA990.

Full detailed analysis, including analysis of a recent simulator experiment performed, and interviews with United and American Airlines 757/767 Pilots can be viewed in the new presentation, "9/11: World Trade Center Attack" available only at Pilots For 9/11 Truth. Although other factors come into play within the transonic ranges, Dynamic pressure is dynamic pressure. Math doesn't lie. Boeing needs to release wind tunnel data for the Boeing 767. Despite the fact that the data can be fabricated, such a release of data may alert more pilots and engineers to the extremely excessive speeds reported near sea level for the Boeing 767 in which they can decide for themselves. Update: Since our article on WTC Aircraft Speed Analysis was written, more evidence has been gathered to reflect the research provided by Pilots For 9/11 Truth and in the film "9/11: World Trade Center Attack". A more thorough understanding and explanation of why V speeds are established based on wind tunnel tests performed by the manufacturer is also available virtually making the need to gather documents from Boeing based on wind tunnel testing, moot. We already have their results of such tests in the form of the V Speeds they have established through wind tunnel testing required by definition as outlined in the Illustrated Guide To Aerodynamics and all other related text. For more information and to review the evidence gathered, click here.

As usual with these 9/11conspiracy theories, it's garbage in/garbage out. Read the comments section where a "truther" tries to scientifically debunk the debunk and ends up with serious egg-on-face.

Debunked: Pilots for 9/11 truth WTC speeds

"Two facts emerge from this.

1. This 767 airframe underwent a EAS of 462 knots whilst pulling 2.5G and with both elevators at opposite ends of their travel and survived. To say it could survive that and not survive the 1G flight at the speeds of the WTC attacks is not credible.

2. Pilots for 911/truth either did not read the report; couldn't interpret it correctly; or deliberately concocted the breakup/M.99 at 22,000 feet story, to further their own agenda. Take your pick."

 

[Gamolon]

I don't doubt that "pilots for truth" have an agenda. Though, to be sure, a site titled "metabunk" probably has an agenda as well, wouldn't you say?

What does this have to do with the data contained in the links? If it's wrong, then show how. If data is made up because of an agenda, then the mistakes should be able to be pointed out right?

I have a terrible migraine today and have to lay down, and then a load of things to get done today. I am confident that this report is above board though.


I will analyze it as soon as I get the chance.

No problems. I hope you fell better. Migraines are not fun.

 

[Gamolon]

Military grade thermite was detected in dust particles for one thing.

Military grade was detected? Are you speaking of the Harrit paper or something else?

Then there is the testimony of Dr Steve Pieczenik, who spent thirty years in the CIA that offered to testify in a Senate hearing that a General told him exactly how 9/11 was pulled off.

This isn't proof at all. An certainly not proof of explosives.

He was also the first to reveal that Osama bin Laden died on December 13 2001 of Marfan's syndrome and had been visited in a military hospital in Dubai and debriefed by the CIA and other intel spooks in July of 2001. He only confirmed what I had already researched but he is definitely a credible source.

Ok, but where does that prove explosives?

If your first reference is of Harrit and finding military grade explosives, we can start there. If not, what is the reference for your proof of military grade explosives?

 

[Dale Smith]

Military grade thermite was detected in dust particles for one thing.

Military grade was detected? Are you speaking of the Harrit paper or something else?

Then there is the testimony of Dr Steve Pieczenik, who spent thirty years in the CIA that offered to testify in a Senate hearing that a General told him exactly how 9/11 was pulled off.

This isn't proof at all. An certainly not proof of explosives.

He was also the first to reveal that Osama bin Laden died on December 13 2001 of Marfan's syndrome and had been visited in a military hospital in Dubai and debriefed by the CIA and other intel spooks in July of 2001. He only confirmed what I had already researched but he is definitely a credible source.

Ok, but where does that prove explosives?

If your first reference is of Harrit and finding military grade explosives, we can start there. If not, what is the reference for your proof of military grade explosives?

Pieczenik named people in the US Government as having been involved in the 9-11 atrocity and stated: “It was called a stand down, a false flag operation in order to mobilize the American public under false pretenses….it was told to me even by the general on the staff of Wolfowitz – I will go in front of a federal committee and swear on perjury who the name was of the individual so that we can break it open... he was furious and knew it had happened”...I taught stand down and false flag operations at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I knew exactly what was done to the American public... I am happy to testify in court so that we can unravel this thing legally, not with the stupid 9/11 Commission that was absurd."


http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/646...been-used-to-demolish-the-wtc-skyscrapers.htm

 

[Gamolon]

Pieczenik named people in the US Government as having been involved in the 9-11 atrocity and stated: “It was called a stand down, a false flag operation in order to mobilize the American public under false pretenses….it was told to me even by the general on the staff of Wolfowitz – I will go in front of a federal committee and swear on perjury who the name was of the individual so that we can break it open... he was furious and knew it had happened”...I taught stand down and false flag operations at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I knew exactly what was done to the American public... I am happy to testify in court so that we can unravel this thing legally, not with the stupid 9/11 Commission that was absurd."


http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/646...been-used-to-demolish-the-wtc-skyscrapers.htm

Two things.

1. The quote you provided above says nothing about explosives.
2. The link does not work.

I found this working link:
FAQ #8: What Is Nanothermite? Could It Have Been Used To Demolish The WTC Skyscrapers?

You left off the "l" for "html" at the end.

 

[Dale Smith]

Pieczenik named people in the US Government as having been involved in the 9-11 atrocity and stated: “It was called a stand down, a false flag operation in order to mobilize the American public under false pretenses….it was told to me even by the general on the staff of Wolfowitz – I will go in front of a federal committee and swear on perjury who the name was of the individual so that we can break it open... he was furious and knew it had happened”...I taught stand down and false flag operations at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I knew exactly what was done to the American public... I am happy to testify in court so that we can unravel this thing legally, not with the stupid 9/11 Commission that was absurd."


http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/646...been-used-to-demolish-the-wtc-skyscrapers.htm

Two things.

1. The quote you provided above says nothing about explosives.
2. The link does not work.

In order to understand what nanothermite is, we first must understand what ordinary commercial thermite is. Thermite is a mixture of a metal and the oxide of another metal, usually aluminum (Al) and iron oxide (Fe2O3), in a granular or powder form. When ignited, the energetic Al-Fe thermite reaction produces molten iron and aluminum oxide, with the molten iron reaching temperatures well in excess of 4000° F. These temperatures are certainly high enough to allow cuts through structural steel, which generally has a melting point of around 2750° F.

There is also a variant of thermite known as thermate, which is a combination of thermite and sulfur, and is more efficient at cutting through steel. This form of thermite is believed to have been used in the demolition of World Trade Center Building 7. Although conventional thermite has the capability to cut through structural steel, it is technically an incendiary and not an explosive.

Nanothermite (also known as superthermite), simply put, is an ultra-fine-grained (UFG) variant of thermite that can be formulated to be explosive by adding gas-releasing substances. A general rule in chemistry is that the smaller the particles of the reactants, the faster the reaction. Nanothermite, as the name suggests, is thermite in which the particles are so small that they are measured in nanometers (one billionth of a meter). The authors of the peer-reviewed Active Thermitic Materials paper, which documents the discovery of these materials in the WTC dust, explain:

Available papers [by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and others] describe this material as an intimate mixture of UFG aluminum and iron oxide in nano-thermite composites to form pyrotechnics or explosives. The thermite reaction involves aluminum and a metal oxide, as in this typical reaction with iron oxide:

2Al + Fe2O3 ? Al2O3 + 2Fe (molten iron), ?H = -853.5 kJ/mole.

According to Randy Simpson, director of the Energetic Materials Center at LLNL, “since these ‘nanostructures’ are formed with particles on the nanometer scale, the performance can be improved over materials with particles the size of grains of sand or of powdered sugar”
The public announcements of the development of nanothermite composite materials as explosives date back several years before 9/11. As Dr. Frank Legge points out , “ researchers were describing methods of preparing nano-sized particles, using them in superthermite, and calling such material ‘explosive’ in 1997. It would therefore not be correct to assert that by 2001, four years later, they would be unable to utilize the material in demolition.”

In additon, 911research.wtc7.net notes the following:

One of the critiques of theories that thermite was used to destroy the World Trade Center skyscrapers asserts that thermite preparations don’t have sufficient explosive power to account for the observed features of the buildings’ destruction. This criticism seems to be uninformed by knowledge of some of the aluminothermic preparations known to exist – particularly those being researched for military applications.

Indeed, as 9/11 researcher Kevin Ryan has shown, there is substantial documentation detailing how nanothermite has been formulated to be explosive. For example, a summary report released at the 2008 AIChE conference by chemists at the University of Houston describes how nano-thermite composites can be engineered to create explosives:

Nanoenergetic thermite materials release energy much faster than conventional energetic materials and have various potential military applications, such as rocket propellants, aircraft fuel and explosives. They are likely to become the next-generation explosive materials, as they enable flexibility in energy density and power release through control of particle size distribution, stoichiometry and choice of fuel and oxidizer.

Some critics have also claimed that neither thermite nor nanothermite has ever been used to demolish steel structures. Even if this assertion were true, it would not be proof in and of itself that these materials could not be used in demolition. As Dr. Legge notes :

It could be true, and probably is true, that the three buildings which came down on 9/11 were the first in which some variation of the thermite reaction was used in demolition. It is however not logical to say something cannot have happened merely because it had not happened before: there has to be a first time for everything. It is certainly true that thermite had been used many times in arson attacks prior to 9/11.

However, we find that thermite has in fact been used to demolish steel structures in the past. For example, Popular Mechanics itself documents that thermite was used in the demolition of structures such as the Skyride Tower in Chicago and the dome of the German Reichstag. Furthermore, experiments conducted by civil engineer Jonathan Cole have shown that ordinary thermate can be used to effectively cut through steel columns. And as described earlier, the effectiveness of nanothermite is much higher than that of ordinary thermate.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Those pieces don't seem to come even close to weighing two tons to me....do you have access to a scale? It may have been a drone plane, might have been the original planes that were allegedly hijacked and then taken over by a a computer because planes have had the ability to be "taken over" since the 1960's...who's to say? I am just saying that I am open to any possibility....which plane hit building 7?

So how'd the plane engines, the fuselage, the body remains from the passengers get into lower Manhattan?

Phone calls from the planes prove it was a hijacking.

Yeah, they couldn't possibly fake those at all (rolls eyes). I am not saying that there was no planes or if they were drones or not. What I am 100 percent sure of is that it was an inside job and that explosives were planted in WTC 1,2 and 7. Case closed as far as I am concerned.

there you go feeding the shill again.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Not retreating from anything. I am simply not a naysayer when some believe that there wasn't an actual plane that hit the towers. Why would they use planes when explosives were planted? Are you kidding me? I can't believe you would even ask that question...think, son...think.

"Then there is the Pentagon attack; Are you stating that it was separate?"

Separate from what???? You are turning into a time waster.

No answer for why they would hijack planes for no reason....as expected.

You didn't last as long as the other conspiratards.

I know more than you and I can tell that it irks you....good.

He indeed goes into meltdown mode and gets angry when he cant get you to fall for his propaganda and BS he spews.probably because his handlers dont pay him near as much money as he wants for the constant ass beatings he gets here everyday from you and others so he gets frustrated and has his temper tantrems.

 

[Dale Smith]

Not retreating from anything. I am simply not a naysayer when some believe that there wasn't an actual plane that hit the towers. Why would they use planes when explosives were planted? Are you kidding me? I can't believe you would even ask that question...think, son...think.

"Then there is the Pentagon attack; Are you stating that it was separate?"

Separate from what???? You are turning into a time waster.

No answer for why they would hijack planes for no reason....as expected.

You didn't last as long as the other conspiratards.

I know more than you and I can tell that it irks you....good.

he indeed goes into meltdown mode and gets angry when he cant get you to fall for the his propaganda and BS.probably because his handlers dont pay him near as much money as he wants for the constant ass beatings he gets here everyday so he gets frustrated and has him temper tantrems.

You know what is so confusing to me? Why is it that people get so mad when you question the official narrative? What does it hurt? Seriously, some of these deniers act like their sense of decorum has been horrifically offended. Why get all butthurt because some people don't buy all the shit this corporate entity disguised as a "gubermint" tries to feed us?