This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Flight MH370 Wreckage Found, Close To Madagascar
16 Months after Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 disappeared off the coast of Malaysia, The Telegraph reports that fragments of a wing washed up in the French island of Reunion (near Madagascar) could be wreckage from the missing plane, according to an aviation expert.
Vareious consipracy theories surrounded the plane's disappearance...
But as The Telegraph reports, there may be some resolution...
Xavier Tytelman, a former military pilot who now specialises in aviation security, was contacted on Wednesday morning by a man living on the island of Reunion, in the Indian Ocean. The man sent Mr Tytelman a series of photos showing wreckage of a plane, which the Frenchman said could possibly be the missing jet.
"I've been studying hundreds of photos and speaking to colleagues," Mr Tytelman told The Telegraph. "And we all think it is likely that the wing is that of a Boeing 777 – the same plane as MH370.
"Police in Reunion examining the wreckage say that it looks like it's been in the water for around a year, which again would fit with MH370. We can't say for certainty, but we do think there is a chance that this is it."
The wing fragment....
And an expert explains...
Similitudes incroyables entre le flaperon d'un #B777 et le débris retrouvé ce matin à #LaReunion... #MH370 ? pic.twitter.com/GDkzRLwi2h
— Xavier Tytelman (@PeurAvion) July 29, 2015
Where the wing fragment was found...
* * *
Writing on his blog, Mr Tytlemann explains, (via Translate)
The day starts with an innocuous call of the meeting. Was found on the beach of debris that resemble those of an aircraft wing. A few photos later, no certainty, that it is actually a piece of plane (asymmetry above/below). Too convex, not deep enough, the piece doesn't look like yet the wing of a modern airliner or a recreational tourism plane.
The AvGeek team was then launched in the search. It is a forum in which pilots, aviation specialists and enthusiasts share away from prying, allowing all hypotheses... ideas abound and lead on the most likely: the box of an airliner.
Remains is to define what aircraft, and we are launching in the comparison of hundreds of photos of airliners. The missing element will come from a driver, LustuCrewfriend, who sends me the Boeing 777 flaperons patterns.
The similarity is amazing,"we can see the slot for the outboard actuator, the seal... "Here is the small made mounting:
Comparison between the flaperon of a B777 and the debris found at the meeting
Have found the first debris from the MH370, the Boeing 777 of the Malaysia Airlines been in March 2014 to the Australia wide without leaving any trace? The debris seems not very degraded and constables on the spot believe that they could be immersed for about a year...
A reference is also indicated on the debris: BB670. This code corresponds to the registration of an aircraft, or the serial number of a device. On the other hand, if this flaperon belongs to the MH370, it is clear that this reference will allow to identify rapidly. In a few days, we will have a definitive answer.
* * *
»
- 176330 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
mh17 will be found in Syria then.
Yep, Syria will be accused by the USSA of shooting down the plane and then attacked. Sound farfetched? The USSA is known for aggressive attacks against countries based on false evidence. Just ask the Iraqis, Aftgani's, Libyans etc, etc.
Then again, airplane wings from large jets typically end up on African beaches. Nothing to see here, move along.
Still no answers, almost like it went down the memory hole ...
Very curious development. I wonder if wing fragments are heavier than water, and how they wound up being washed ashore.
I suppose that a proper investigation will/would tell us a lot in the coming days.
If they investigate properly and release the truth.
Maybe a completely undamaged passport will wash ashore next....
Theres no possible way this could have been planted there
Probably just some SpaceX wreckage.
Oh. I see. Like the media and governments have been so honest...
That SpaceX wreckage is everywhere, I made a disco ball out of the satellite that landed in my backyard.
Like my bud the retired crypto guy said, the 767 is the "most hackable entity ever devised by man".
Last radar contact near Medan Malaysia, an area covered intensely by military and radar due to it being one of the most crowded shipping points on Earth
And fraught with Pirates!
I call Bullshit
"Two pristine Iranian passports were found inside the wing, miraculously surviving the heat, fire and water ....."
....doh!
Were any planes taken in the tsunamis of 2004, Thailand, Sri Lanka, etc?
Get out of here with your logic!
If this plane was shot down in Ukraine there is no way it could explode over to Madagascar. Teh we is not stupid!
Washed up? From where? I don't see an ocean or any significant body of water.
Shot down close to Diego Garcia and the wreckage is washing up. I am sure the USA military grabbed as much as it could trying to dispose of it.
Hold out till they find the rest rooms.
They have the defining data.
@Waylon Bits (Formerly known as Fonestar until banned using that and several other names): "If this plane was shot down in Ukraine there is no way it could explode over to Madagascar. Teh we is not stupid!"
You have the wrong MH foney, this is (allegedly) MH370 not MH017. I'm hoping that you knowledge of Bitcoin is better than it is of aviation, but not holding my breath...
@Knucks. Medan is actually the capital of the Province of North Sumatera, Indonesia.
WRT MH017 it is evident that the "Investigation" is being suppressed and I really feel for the loved ones of those on board, mostly Dutch and Australian, whose Governments are toadying to US interests rather than responding to the interests of their citizens. Those perfectly ROUND entry and exit holes evident in pictures taken in the early days, match those of 30MM cannon used on the SU25 fighter jet, of which Kiev flies many and of which one was reported by Russian radar as "Approaching MH017 from behind and below". But of course Russia cannot be trusted so please believe the (Lack of) evidence provided by The US to support the claim of a Missile strike by the Russian Separatists. The US had satellites positioned right over the Donbass region but has chosen NOT to publish what would be conclusive evidence. Now, I wonder why that could be? The preliminary "Investigation" report used weasel words to report that the impact markings were "Consistent with those of HIGH IMPACT PROJECTILES" which, in common language actually means "Bullets" but was obfuscated in such a way that it could also be interpreted as being from a missile strike (Although Missiles are not well known for leaving bullet holes in targets). Very sad the whole affair but illustrative of the state of morality in the Western world, particularly The US....
Vapour trails from missiles that fly ground to 30,000 ft exist for a long time until air currents disperse them. Not one image of that but lots of the fallen debris. Thing that make you go .... Hmmmmm.
Yup and also the fact that the registered flight path was changed by ATC to route it directly over the war zone. The SU25 would be operating close to its operational ceiling but I'm sure it was just a coincidence that MH017 was instructed by Kiev ATC to descend from its registered cruise altitude by 2000 feet? (/Sarc)
If MH 17 was at 33,000 or even 30,000 feet, that would be at least 7000 to 12000) feet above the Sukhoi's ceiling.... of the air-to-air missiles possibly on the Sukhoi, one would have been way out of range of the jetliner, and the other would be an infrared-homing missile, which would have struck the pwerplants or engines on the jet, certainly not the cockpit....
Of course if it was a R-60, and the Sukhoi was as "close" as some have said, the airliner would still have been to high, and too far for the missile 5 kilometer range.
Unless you read Pravda, and not the specs of the missile.
That is not true. According to many reports (I am too busy now to research them again but there are credible souces and you can do so unless you are a Government Troll, which seems probable. Hi there.) the SU25 CAN actually operate well above its advertised theoretical ceiling. And we are actually talking about CANNON fire and not necessarily an AAM. Otherwise, how do you explain thise perfectly round approximately 30MM holes in the fuselage? And Purlease, don't tell me they were made AFTER the wrechkage was already on the ground.
Conversely, with low cloud ceilings on the day of the incident and without ATC or Military secondary radar, how would the Russian Separatists have been able to launch a "Captured" highly sophisticated BUK SAM without any training on an invisible target at a FL of over 300? Why doesn't The US just release its satellite imagery to resolve the matter once and for all? As of now the (Time stamped) Russian radar images are the only credible data? And that is not only from Pravda, so that was a silly insinuation which is without any substance.
PS. I am a Libertarian not a Communist and I also do not agree that Sepp Blatter should get a Nobel Prize, the corrupt asshole should be behind bars for the rest of his life. But then, so should Hitlery? I just believe in truth and integrity. Which our Western Governments obviously do not.
.
We is Gruberific. We has pewblik edewkayshin. Which is why we don't noes the Capitol of Souf Dakota.
Who cares that Pierre is South Dakota's State Capitol, or, that Bismarck is the Capitol of North Dakota...other than the stateists whose only claim to pride is living in a particular geographical location, celebrating their enslavement to a tax master...an owner?
IT IS FUCKING TRIVIAL.
The problem with the Public Education system, that which you rant about, is that it fills heads with all sorts of TRIVIAL INFORMATION and does not teach the indoctrinated to think critically.
The bullshit trivia matters little. Nobody, and I mean nobody, has ever PAID ME because I knew the Capitol of the state of South Dakota , or, of South Carolina (Charleston if you really must know...DAMN...I AM TRYING MY BEST TO FORGET THIS BULLSHIT!!!), or of any other state capitol as far as that goes.
I have not collected one red cent, or, anything more than that, because I knew the name of a State Capitol.
It is VALUELESS CLUTTER which I shall, and may God Almighty help me, conveniently FORGET.
It SERVES NO PURPOSE. There is NO GAIN.
Fuck South Dakota. Fuck South Carolina. Fuck them all.
The only airplanes taken during the tsunami were those flying below 50 feet altitude right over the beech.
So, Beechcraft, right?
There's no algae, no barnacles, no growth on that wing section. Usually one month and anything floating in the ocean looks green and ugly. After a year you'd expect a lot more growth than what is seen in the photo.
Dude! Hollywood doesn't do barnacles!
?
Hollywood is 1% A-listers. EVERYONE else is a barnacle.
Smells fishy ... like week old Escobar.
A guy who looks alot like gene rosen just said on CNN that it did have barnacles.
777
I'd say more like 666. This is the work of the Devil. And He be US. Funny how that 'crazy Ivan' type flight path crossed so closely to that little tiny speck of an Island named Diego Garcia. Hmmm. Let's blame it on the dead pilot. I'm shocked that 'wing' didn't have one of those little values you have to blow into to inflate a pool toy.
Pssst! Satellites are made out of disco balls.
lol
It was dissembled at the hellish paradise island of Diego Garcia. By now the whole plane has probably been sawed into peices the size of that one, and maybe put through a chipper. There is no way psychopaths will tell what happened. They're all in it together, and if one shows signs of turning he's a goner.
I wonder where they put all the passengers. Probably chopped them up also and sold their parts on the Organ Donation web sites? Ebay? Ali Baba?
Gruesome thought, eh.
Planned Parenthood knows a guy
They used them as chum to bait the great whites filmed for Shark Week.
Too soon?
@Never One Roach, after the killers had the plane where they wanted it, and got whatever information or items they craved so badly that they would do this, the passengers were probably murdered quickly and disposed of without a trace. The planning that went into taking the plane also had to prepare for the passengers, so the killers were ready.
Dear Idiot Downvoter,
Please elaborate as to why you believe the hijackers/killers would allow the witnesses to go free. They would not show mercy to the youngest passengers, terrified children rounded up for death. The first thing all violent criminals do is kill the witnesses. Why are you covering for them?
All they need to do is put it back in the water and see if it floats. If not, then.... the emperor is naked.
Classic.... +1
Dude, if it floats it's a witch and must be burned.. You know nothing
Trapped air in the unit or bouyant materials inside it could have made it semi bouyant at depth. IOW it wouldnt float at the surface but floated at 50 feet or more down. Currents play a role too.
Shhh - it's more fun when you wear the tinfoil!
Bouyancy is due to air or something lighter than water. If it is air and it is trapped it would likely compress due to cold and pressure at depth then it would increase in density and continue on its way to the bottom of the ocean. Floating at some depth due to a higher density of water caused by a thermocline in the middle of the ocean is realy far fetched.
They need to contact the owner and see what he says.
I call bullshit on this one but I do not think this is a false flag just hypoprobability.
The Indian Ocean is a vast expanse of water. It is lightly traveled and that light travel is usually commenced along prescribed Shipping Lanes.
The chances that any objects are spotted away from any shipping lane are pretty much zero.
Can it be that it floated on the surface along a current until it washed up on a beach near Madagascar?
Not everything is a devious and underhanded conspiracy brought about into a nefarious motion by the overlords.
Let's apply Occam's Razor here, perchance?
Having recovered snowmobiles and bodies that went through the ice, snowmobiles go straight down and stayed in place. The victims sink too but because of the makeup of the human body, they are 'semi-bouyant' at that stage. We looked for 'drag marks' on the bottom where the current moved them.
It's a witch!!!
...and what else floats?
Wood...a duck?
Good sir, who are you who knows so much in the ways of science?
Hope Floats.
Gas filled shit in the toilet.
+1. Ocean current maps reveal a bit too. South Equatorial would have a current more from Diego Garcia to Reunion Island, not Malaysia to Reunion Island. I see a naked emperor.
It might be possible that the recovered piece got separated from the rest during destruction while being transported from one spot to another. This one piece will not throw the psychopaths off their game.
If the investigators veer too close to the truth they will get a friendly reminder to either revise or avoid. If they have to be told again they will be very lucky. There will not be a third time.
"Late that night, under a moonless sky, the commandos dropped the wingpiece onto the beach and exfiltrated by their rubber boats."
landed Maldives > landed Diego Garcia > dumped in ocean near Madascgar
How can a plane's thin wing tips go through the steel WTC, wouldn't they fold up?
Kinetic Energy = 1/2mv2
The wings can sheer the columns easily at these speeds.
"The wings can sheer the columns easily at these speeds." How do you know that? What speed are you refereing to?
at 50,000 MPH he would be correct to bad the aircraft was probably only at 500 mph, darn the zeros.
To use the formula, we will show the mass as weight ÷ gravity and the velocity of the object will be in feet per second. This is necessary to end up with units in foot-pounds. Example: A Boeing weighing 600,000 lb is flying with a velocity 900 fps. (600mph) How many foot-pounds of kinetic energy does the airplane possess?
KE = 1 ?2 Mass × Velocity2 = 1 ?2 × 600,000 ÷ 32.2 × 9002 KE = 3,354,037,267 ft-lb
3 trillion ft-lb would not do it?
Verify it with your physics professor and take it back please.
I think that calculation is a bit off, but the general idea is right.
A 757 a hour or so into flight is probably somewhere around 85,000 kg. 550 mph is about 245 mps, so the kinetic energy at impact (spread across a pretty small cross section) would be around 2.5 billion Joules or about 1.8 billion ft-lb.
Basically, you don't want to be anywhere near there when that happens, especially since a good percentage of that mass is made up of igniting jet fuel.
Thank you. Sometimes it's difficult to change someone's religion
Using math correctly is racist.
Green arrow, you freaking racist!
How about the math on multiple symetrical collapses? Especially on the building that no plane hit? Was the velocity so great that the invisible shockwave went through the building, turned around, and slammed into WTC7? Where the hell is that equation?
There is no doubt that these buildings were intentionally taken down. No Debt knows that. I know that.
But dammit, actual airplanes struck WTC#1 and WTC#2.
They were destroyed by CONTROLLED DEMOLITION a THERMITE IMPLOSION, afterwards...just like WTC#7.
These same people cannot understand that a One Pound Chunk of FOAM pierced a hole through a Reinforced Carbon Fiber Leading Edge Panel on a Space Shuttle wing. That strike happened at 500 m.p.h.
That Space Shuttle Orbiter Carbon Fiber Reinforced Panel has a much greater tensile strength than any Structural Steel Beam has ever had. And that strike blew a gaping hole right through Space Shuttle Columbia's Port wing, dooming that Shuttle some 14 days later.
(I have worked in the Structural Steel Industry so Ii do know about the strengths of Structural Steel.)
But on a similar note just how can the Flesh of a Bird, the relatively soft tissues of a bird, SHRED TITANIUM FIN BLADES and cause Jet Engine Failures, with, at times, subsequent crashes?
Of course it is due to KINETIC ENERGY.
We have entire weapon systems built upon this and this alone. The speed of impact does the explosive damage and there is no need for a warhead of any type.
Oh I know 911 was a scam. There is no doubt in my mind about that. And I have also told these same people that.
And when I tell them that an aircraft can cut through a Structural Steel Bulding like a knife through a cake these same people will somehow convolute that TRUTH to a support of the "Official Story"...which is a BULLSHIT Story....WHICH I CANNOT BUY
Because, of course, if anyone believes that a small mass falling at a low velocity will pulverized a much larger mass then they have never seen the aftermath of a minor collision between a car and a Semi Truck. The Semi is generally unscathed whereas the car is demolished. But in no case has a car entirely disintegrated a Semi Truck. And yet the Government will have me believe that this is somehow possible as we are writing about the proportionality of the two masses colliding?
And if it cannot happen as a result of a collision between a car and a Semi Truck then it CERTAINLY cannot have happenend with the much, much smaller mass of the building section at the top colliding with the much more massive section anchored to the bedrock in Manhattan.
Skyscrapers are built as pyramids with the appearnce of being a rectangular slab. If they were Top Heavy then they would be UNSTABLE and topple over. As I wrote I did work in the Structural Steel industry.
And yet this LIE, between that which was observed, and the Official Story, is also exposed by...YOU GUESSED IT...KINETIC ENERGY.
Isn't Kinetic Energy wonderful after all?
Tom, the issue is, people do those calculations and present a number as if it is a point impact.
When a bird can shred a wing at a couple hundred mph, what the frig is a steel beam going to do?
or how about that concrete bridge over in china?
https://youtu.be/RZjhxuhTmGk
That's about 1/4 of the KE of the 9/11 planes, and hitting "a concrete wall built to withstand a nuclear blast."
Which was not the design tolerance for the WTC.
built wall for nuclear central protection against plane crash... has been designed, but i never see a finished built central exposed to real testing.
just to say.
no - but it was designed to survive a hit from an airliner - a foreseeable situation.
Of course, let's posit that it turns out your assessment is right [it certainly is a simpler explanation] -
2 things:
This doesnt mean the official narrative is true. Indeed, I have tended to think the focus on the nuts and bolts of the collapse is largely a distraction from the more important issue of whether or not "Al Qaeda" independently set this up, or if the operation was run by intelligence agencies and military.
In short: the "cui bono" question and the means/motive/opportunity question are larger. and theres not merely the middle east stuff - but financial records/investigations destroyed both in nyc and, more strangely, at the pentagon, where the pilor swung around to make a very difficult approach to hit the only section reinforced................................. rather than crash into the top to kill the most people.
think on it.
;0}
"The New Pearl Harbor" movie on youtube does a pretty good job covering the norad/air defense stand down and missing generals {and promotions!} and doesnt even reach the very deep israeli connections.
There's also the issue of novice pilots trained on little prop planes knowing how to aim to their target and to turn their transponders off right at the edge of radar coverage maps.
All that aside.
If 2 planes could take down 3 sky scrapers built to be more durable than most - why hasnt there been a mad rush to change building codes?
A more simple critique of the DonnaK plane-cuts-columns hypothosis ... Ok, DonnaK the plane cut columns ... how many stories up? Answer: Many. So why did all three towers, even the one not hit by a plane collapse to ground level? How did the columns get cut so close to the ground? Answer: Pre-wired controlled demolition. Oklahoma City also has severed columns, far from the truck blast.
But doesn't this math only describe the kinetic energy of all that mass focused in one small object? The surface area of the aircraft is quite large... even the frontal area is quite large... not all that eneryg is possessed by every square inch of the frontal area... it would be shared.
The cross section of a 757 fuselage is about 15,000 square inches. 1.8 billion foot-pounds / 15,000 square inches is 120,000 foot-pounds per square inch.
Once the wings and engines hit, you need to add their cross sections into the calculation, and I'd guess that reduces the KE to about 30-50k fp/in^2, but that's still a tremendous amount of force hitting with a relatively small cross section.
Can the plane do 500 MPH at low altitude. The air resistance would be huge.
With the engines wide open, sure. Especially if they were diving from altitude before leveling off prior to impact. Video evidence suggests the first plane to hit the WTC was going 470 mph, and the second one was doing 590.
your statement is irrefutable and yet some religious fanatic downvoted you.
I received 2 down arrows just for asking?
Now I got 3 more for bitching.
Fight club, biatch
It's impossible for a large aircraft with a long wingspan to fly as close to the ground as the one that supposedly hit the Pentagon because of an aerodynamic law know as ground effect.
Not true. Ground effect becomes noticiable about twice the wingspan above the ground manifested as a pitch up tendancy. Simply fixed with a bit more forward elevator trim. There is more than sufficent elevator force available to overcome this in a modern jet even at 350 Knots indicated airpreed.
And now address the chances that a novice pilot pulling that trick off without nosing the plane into the ground because of overcompensation?
Perhaps he needed to have used the phrase, "NEAR IMPOSSIBLE", for most Jet Pilots, and "PRACTICAL-ly IMPOSSIBLE" for Cessna Pilots.
Do you see the problem with the Official Version of the FICTIONAL ACCOUNT which you so gracefully illustrated?
Microsoft Flight Simulator had all these features.
Unlimited simulator practice for cheap.
Yeah...I bet that the simulation has all of the sensations felt in the cabin during the time spent...
And I bet that it was also widely available in 2000 and 2001...some FOURTEEN YEARS AGO...NOT!!!
Even seasoned jet pilots had difficulty pulling that feat off during the professional simulations of that period. They failed repeatedly.
To just what lengths will you go to justify that batshit craziness of a storyline?
Just because the vast majority of Americans will watch a movie like "Twister" where a truck emerges UNSCATHED...after colliding with a HOUSE, does not mean that the critical thinker will, suspend his disbelief, and buy into that for a second.
I am not invited to the movies as I destroy it for my friends when I have been invited. (And just because I was the only one in the crowd, cheering loudly during that "Law Aiding Citizen" scene, when the antagonist tortures that rapist...Now that shouldn't have had any bearing on their future decisions, should it? That was the last flick when I was invited.)
And I cannot buy into that 911 Production anymore than I can buy into any other fictional movie production...when it contradicts the SCIENCE.
And it will be an absolute pleasure using that as a litmus test post civilizational collapse.
That still doesnt get you anywhere close to explaining the lack of engine-holes in the building. they were the most solid part of the "aircraft" yet the fuselage punched a hole, and the engines, what, fuggin EVAPORATED?
you're using ballistics for a solid projectile----apples and oranges--I'm thinking you're less than smart--just a bullshitter.
You are assuming that aircraft are more rigid than steel beams however. In reality, a few inches of aluminum and some fuel are much less rigid than a steel beam, let alone several meters thick of steel reinforced concrete. Furthermore, most portions of the wings are far less rigid than other portions of the craft, such as the engines.
At high impact speeds, the rigidity of the material isn't that important. Bear in mind the example of the the foam falling off the space shuttle and punching holes in the wings after only a brief period of relative acceleration. The surface tension of water doesn't make it very rigid when hit at slow speed, but if you jump off a high bridge, it's like hitting concrete.
30,000 psi is more than enough to crush concrete and tear apart some of the steel reinforcement. Obviously, not all of it, since the planes didn't exit the far side of the buildings, but the facade support and some of the columns were taken out.
And that's just from the kinetic energy of the impact. There was a lot more kinetic energy locked up in the fuel that ignited and caused an extreme overpressure inside the impact areas. That 1-2 punch, the impact and the overpressure, in rapid succession, did a lot of damage. And then after that, what you basically had was a jet-fuel fed kiln inside the buildings, raising temperatures to the point that the support structures for the floors started to sag.
So we all agree aluminum wingtips can punch through 5in steel columns and fire brought down building 7.
What a productive day this is turning out to be.
and amateur pilots can pull of negative 5g's and hit their target 2 feet off the ground
Shit, someone tell the military they're wasting their time with DU and Tungsten rounds(fired at 25 times the speed of sound); if Aluminum wingtips can punch through 5in support columns at 500mph we should be using it against 2.5in tank armour.
You're failing to take the KE into account. DU and Tungsten rounds don't weigh 85k kilograms.
Ugh. Go peddle your nonsense elsewhere. If you believe the bullshit your spewing, you truly are a fucking retard. If you don't, you're the worst kind of liar.
100% ad hominem. Is that the best you can do? Not a single point of refutation? Wow.
already been refuted so many times its not even funny
Ahhh... now I get it, thanks. I believe THIS sums it up.
Productive indeed. Its all over but the drinks
"30,000 psi is more than enough to crush concrete and tear apart some of the steel reinforcement. Obviously, not all of it, since the planes didn't exit the far side of the buildings, but the facade support and some of the columns were taken out."
"And then after that, what you basically had was a jet-fuel fed kiln inside the buildings, raising temperatures to the point that the support structures for the floors started to sag."
Not disagreeing with the premise you propose. Keep in mind, the a jet airliner hitting and entering a building is a chaotic event. It only makes sense, that a chaotic input, would be far more likely to produce a chaotic output, than not, right? So if only "some of the columns" were taken out, as you stated, then wouldn't it make sense, then, that the top the tower would collapse unevenly? The weakened columns, would've given way and the top of the tower would tilt en-masse and topple over, leaving the bottom intact.
How both Towers and WTC 7, came down, perfectly in their own footprints in excactly the same style as a Las Vegas Hotel demolition, is beyond me, because it sure wasn't 'natural', that's for sure...
My understanding is that what brought the towers down wasn't the breach of the support columns, but the disconnection of the floors from the facade and the support columns. That may have started off uneven, but the outer wall tended to keep the impacts centered on the building's footprint as the mass from above impacted each floor and disconnected it from the outer wall and the vertical support columns.
As the collapse continued, the now disconnected outer wall was pushed out - peeled like a bannana, while the inner columns were pushed over and broken off, becoming part of the accelrating falling mass.
WTC7 was hit by quite a bit of that pushed out curtain wall, which is what started the problem in that building.
Bullshit. Those buildings were blasted apart with a massive amount of explosives. So many huge girders were blow out horizontally that the buildings across the street from them looked liked pincushions. I had some respect for ZH readers until today, and never expected so many government trolls or gullible fools to be lurking here.
The multilevel basements of all three buildings were still filled with molten steel two weeks later and were measured at around 1500 degrees Fahrenheit by NASA IR imaging satellites. The only thing that can produce that kind of heat are explosives because they contain their own oxidizers. No air fueled fire could have possibly created that much heat. The government's bullshit story has far too many holes in it to go into here.
My understanding is that what brought the towers down wasn't the breach of the support columns, but the disconnection of the floors from the facade and the support columns. That may have started off uneven, but the outer wall tended to keep the impacts centered on the building's footprint as the mass from above impacted each floor and disconnected it from the outer wall and the vertical support columns.
--------------------------------------------------
holy shit you believe some tall tales
Frozen foam and ice fell from a lifting rocket at high speeds and knocked tiles off--not punched holes in wings--where the fuck did you come from---your shit is unreal--
The ground tests simulating the impacts punched holes:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Impact-test.jpg
rigidity is all important ----the most important thing in an impact followed by mass and density---or why don't you offer you exceptional materials understanding to the auto industry for crash defomation design----
you are bloviating to extreme---let me be the first to call you STUPID---or maybe you're a troll for the WTC official story crowd.
Yes, you can be the first to resort to ad hominem. You're welcome to it.
ad hominem is name calling ---I'm making an observation based on your comments.
Throwing out a label without backing up your position with facts or logical arguments. Yep, that's ad hominem.
And btw, since automobile crashes don't typically happen at 500+ mph, I have no idea where you're going with that.
Absolute BS. Why not make APFSDS rounds out of Aluminium then? You have zero credibility regarding physics, and probably everything else as well.
You sound like that guy at Manhattan just after the building collapses. Same talking points.
Check your assumptions about KE. You're missing something, and if you think about it, I'd bet you'll figure out what it is.
shape is though.
youre essentially arguing that a hollow aluminum tube can strike a much harder, much much heavier and denser object/materiel - which as you know pushes *back* on impact...
and none of the **central** columns were proven to be taken out - that's the *theory* but its to me virtually impossible a hollow, even if heavy aluminum tube impacted through the outer structure, inner structure, and had anything like ebough energy to cut through those columns...
they were *massive*
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/core.html
sagging for sure - temps just needed to weaken the steel.
But how does any of that convert those steel core columns to dust?
Let me draw you a simple analogy. I used to waterski a lot.
If I wiped out at 20 knots it wasn't so bad, you just fell into the water which acted like a giant wet pillow.
Now if I was waterskiing at 40 knots, and wiped out, guess what, you do not fall gently into the water. Instead you skip along the surface like you are bouncing on fucking concrete until you slow down enough to break the surface tension.
Was I personally any less rigid?
At Dona K -----bull shit----the front of the wing may hit but the back of the wing keeps going--no transfer of energy ---the nose hits but the tail keeps on moving--no transver of energy ---you are beyond stupid if you think the whole plane stops instantly and transfers the Ke to the building---duh oh look the plane hit and stopped instantly ---its just sitting there out side the buildig with the nose touching transfering all the energy ---you are sooooooo fucking dumb I'm imbarrassed for you
no molecular deformation?? no heat??? no material compression?? no plasticity?? no vector analisis?? just go to another blog---stupid fuck---
"3 trillion ft-lb would not do it?" What??? I know how the KE equation works. The edge of an alunminum airplane wing would not impart that kind of energy to a point on a column. If the entire mass of the plane was concentrated at that point, I would be agreeable to your theory, but that is toally sloppy appliction of physics. Sorry, I think you need to go back to JR college physiscs class.
Now perhaps you can explain what happened to the massive titanium alloy engines at the Pentagon and in Shanksville. No debris was found at Shanksville, and the only engine found at the Pentagon was from a heat seeking cruise missle. With all the kinetic energy of the 767 engines that supposedly hit the Pentagon, one would think they might have left a hole or at least an indentation in the Pentagon wall but the only hole in the Pentagon was about 12 feet in diameter. No engine or wing impact of any kind.
Gone to plaid.
Sometimes when you shoot a man in the stomach .... all the blood stays inside .... like WTC .... the fan hit the shit .... the plane didn't sheer the I-beams so much .... the heat did them in .... the plane went into a steel bladed shredder .... flotsam and jetsam and fireball exited .... impossible to fake .... it happened just the way it should have happened .... no one really ever sat down and imagined it before hand .... tons and tons of molten plastic poured out .... and some said .... nuclear device melted the steel .... BS .... torrents of molten flaming plastic fall to earth at the same speed as molten steel out of a blast furnace .... Newtonian physics .... meet Monedian Logic !
I've read a lot of dumb things, but that's the dumbest. Kerosene does not weaken I-beams, especially the I-beams around the tenth floor, which are strong enough at that location to hold the entire structure above them....yet they collapse in nice little lengths and offer no resistance? You should probably understand Newtonian physcis before spouting off about it, you sod. Here's a trick - If you imagine the top floor sections as a Prius, and the bottom floors as a tractor-trailer, and you crash them into each other...what 9/11 basically says is that the Prius will continue through the collision relatively unscathed, and the 18-wheeler will explode into nice little pieces. C'mon.
This is 7th grade physics, people. 7th grade.
THANX, Killtruck, for having the patience to answer these simpletons!
How many times do you have to explain to someone that if you were standing on the second tower, and dropped a tennis ball at the same time the first tower collapsed, the collapsed tower hit the ground before the tennis ball, even though the ball would have met no resistance (other than standard atmospheric resistance) on the way to the ground?
Obviously, there is no study to validate the steady-state collapse of the towers!
PERIOD! Compound resistance did exist that day, as on all the other days, just as Newton's laws of gravity likewise existed!
Obviously, Killtruck, you did not pass the 7th grade.
It's entertaining reading through all of the nut-job theories. I hadn't really appreciated what all the hype was about until now. Carry on.
Meantime, let's all just ignore Building 7 shall we as if it was a non-event?
What Building 7? /sarc
Ironically, plastics are non-Newtonian.
300 mph tornadic winds can drive straw or other normaly soft objects through poles and trees. So a wing moving at 500+ mph...
I saw Sharknado, anything is possible
...Would split in half and go around a small rigid object, because around would be the path of least resistance for the vast majority of the mass.
This is the part of high-speed impacts that most people don't seem to understand. There's no time for that to happen.
The kinetic energy of the impact was about the same as that of a 2,000 lb Mark 84 bomb - about half a ton of TNT. But when a bomb explodes, the energy gets released in every direction. This impact acted more like a shaped charge - with the explosive force of a Mk84 being focused to drive what amounts to a 125 foot long knife into the buildings.
Armor piercing shaped charges often use molten copper as the cutting agent. Liquid metal is a lot less rigid than armor plate, right? But the molten copper still cuts through.
Same effect here - if you bang an aluminum wing against a support column at slow speeds, the support column is going to win because there's time for the more elastic substance to deform. Do it at high speeds, and compressability doesn't matter.
If you don't believe that's true, you could prove me wrong by jumping into a swimming pool first from 5 feet up and then from 200 feet up, but I wouldn't recommend doing that.
And as far as some of these collapse conspiracy theories go, the same effect is in play. Sure the lower portions of the building could hold the weight of the upper floors, but could they overcome the *impact* of all of that weight hitting at speed? You may be able to hold a 100 lb bag of sand over your head, but that doesn't mean you can catch one dropped from 100 feet.
Love the discussion and analysis, so +1.
I still have some questions on how towers actually collapsed and some odd observations surrounding the event. There is still much investigation and analysis to be done. I sometimes have my doubts on the conspiracy as the buildings were actually hit by planes.
The thing I cannot seem to get past is 2 planes, ... 3 buildings, ... free fall speed. I just don't buy any of the explanations around building 7.
The floors pancaked, and if you look at the way the WTC towers were built, the connection points between the floors, the columns, and the outer shell were the weak points. So for the whole thing to collapse, the weight of the building above the failure point doesn't have to be sufficient to vertically crush the support columns. All that has to happen is for that weight, set in motion, to hit with sufficient force to shear each floor below it away from its connections to the vertical supports.
And each time that happens, the moving mass from above gets larger and faster, while the resistance - the individual resistance of each floor, stays the same.
The floors pancake down, the vertical columns with suddenly absent horizontal support are easily pushed over by the floors falling from above, and large sections of the outer wall peel off like the skin of a bannana.
It's either that, or someone spent weeks prepping the buildings for demolition without being discovered, and I think the standard of proof for believing that is much higher than anything a conspiracy theorist has thus far produced.
Reenact the event then. Build a World Trade Centre and fly a remote plane into it at 500 mph. Save money by building it at a smaller scale or just have Larrry insure it.
Bad I disagreee with you for reasons I will venture to suppose you have probably heard before so I'll not relitigate the matter - but +1 for the sober, thoughtful and knowledgeable analysis {i.e. rather than distributing terms of opprobrium for those of us who do don tin foil hats as to the WTC}
I'll just note that there is in fact some evidence of power shut downs and construction crews etc etc., that the shearing off floors of columns *does not* explain the near free fall collapse of the core columns, and most "debunker" arguments fail to even try to explain the **lateral** energy expended to throw very heavy pieces of material dozens of yards away.
the core columns werent merely pushed over - they were pulverized.
we could speak more intelligently about it if, quite unusually, the metal wasn't rapidly sent to china for scrap before serious analysis took place.
anyway...
I think there's some bad stuff behind 9/11 - particularly about who knew what when about Saudi Royal family involvement. That's something I think every American deserves to know more about, but that information is being kept secret, and it smells.
My understanding is that the core columns were pulverized because they were broken into sections as the upper mass of the building smashed into them, immediately after the floors supporting them laterally had pancaked. Heavy debris (like sections of the outer wall) ended up being thrown away from the building because they were pushed by the upper sections of the buildings as they fell. Lighter debris was probably pushed out by air pressure. The pancaking acted like a big piston, so the air on the lower floors compressed and blew out of the building just ahead of the collapse.
It's not that I don't believe it's possible someone rigged those buildings for demolition - but this is an Occam's razor issue for me. Why go to all of that trouble and risk of exposure when sending the planes in themselves was bad enough?
I'm always open to looking at new or better evidence, but so far I haven't seen any that's sufficient to bring me to believe that someone would bother to rig those buildings vs. just arranging to have three or four more planes hit each one. Or have truck bombs drive up next to them during the building evacuations.
There are just easier ways that the planners could have caused more mayhem with less risk of prior exposure. That's why I find most of the conspiracy theories about 'demolition' hard to believe.
all very sensible - it certainly "could" have been impact + fires + creeping weakening and such and as I note elsewhere by making most of th etalk about "how" - who/cui bono/means and motive etc is overlooked.
Gotta admit thought, Building 7 is tougher to explain. Oh, there were fires and lots of damage, too - but not on the top floor - where the collapse started.... and that looked exactly like a deliberate demo.. which seems very highly unlikely for asymetric damage and fires that were essentially in a few middle floors.
But yeah, those of us who tend to think there were explosives ought to consider we could be wrong.
The whodunnit and why is more interesting anyway.
in **that** vein, you have a related problem when Israel is mentioned...
many people will automatically refuse to consider it, assuming that the accusation is extracted from thin air, out of malice.
which is a convenient way to avoid means/motive, similar past, and a whole slew of zionist/neocon policy papers that point to not just a 'new pearl harbor' but the **result** of 9/11.
If you view 9/11 as a crime, as I do...
Israel [with US insider help for sure] is more of a suspect than Salafist Arabia, which stood to gain nothing.
"could have taken them down" is one thing.
but anyone with more than three brain cells will be able to tell you, having passed seventh grade the first time around, that such inexactness would have a one in quadrillion+ chance of said collapse being in any way shape or form symmetrical, as we all saw.
1 & 2 would have tipped off to the side and the lowest floors would not have been touched; the top of 1 would have landed on 6 and also hit 7 (magine that, it would have had some what of a reason to have gone down...but hey, 93 never made it there so the plan went awry...) and 2 would have fallen on top of the Bankers Trust and St Nicholas church.
7 would have buckled and tipped to its side and hit the Verizon building and wtc6, if in fact "fires" caused from that exploding tank could have actually taken the building down. We would NOT have seen the top portion of the roof drop and then the perimeter drop a fraction of a second later, the entire perimeter of the roof within a quarter second of itself;
and the WTC spire would not have been the first thing to begin its descent either!!! the core was taken out and removed!
Yeah, but we bought a bunch of the same metal back to make that destroyer or guided missile frigate or whatever, so there! Good olde fashioned high quality American scrap recycled for good use in ... um.... uh ... er .... ... .. we .... ah .... humph!
bull shit ---an aluminum wing is not a shaped charge---just bull shit----
link plss---an a duh photo---everybody knows straw goes through wood in a tornado cause I heard it some place---
Try Google. I did and found lots of examples, including a rubber hose pushed through the trunk of a tree.
Enjoy the pictures.
https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=AwrTcXNPIrpV90QAQS2JzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTBsZ29xY3ZzBHNlYwNzZWFyY2gEc2xrA2J1dHRvbg--;_ylc=X1MDOTYwNjI4NTcEX3IDMgRiY2sDM3RiMnMzNWFyNGwzYSUyNmIlM0Q0JTI2ZCUzREEua1MwaDlwWUVLSDZka0tyTGp5X0J5VWlmRTdmQXhaSURwX2R3LS0lMjZzJTNEbTIlMjZpJTNEUXR5b0xocTZsa1VjU0JScUtvQlkEZnIDc2ZwBGdwcmlkA2J0TXBFUC5SVDZlMmswTWJ3eXM2bEEEbXRlc3RpZANudWxsBG5fc3VnZwMxBG9yaWdpbgNpbWFnZXMuc2VhcmNoLnlhaG9vLmNvbQRwb3MDMQRwcXN0cgNzdHJhdyBpbnRvIHRyZWUEcHFzdHJsAzE1BHFzdHJsAzMxBHF1ZXJ5A3N0cmF3IGludG8gdHJlZXMgZnJvbSB0b3JuYWRvZXMEdF9zdG1wAzE0MzgyNjE4NzkEdnRlc3RpZANudWxs?gprid=btMpEP.RT6e2k0Mbwys6lA&pvid=atBzhjIwNi4.rFwZVbJUahGHNzIuMQAAAABuD9X7&p=straw+into+trees+from+tornadoes&fr=sfp&fr2=sa-gp-images.search.yahoo.com&ei=UTF-8&n=60&x=wrt
But this one is really impressive...This is a chair embedded into a concrete wall...
http://www.dudelol.com/chair-stuck-in-wall-after-joplin-tornado
And this is a Mind Blowing Clip from Mythbusters where they shoot a Ping Pong Ball through a Ping Pong Paddle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=qV4xVAYCK8Q#t=0
KINETIC ENERGY.
impressive point impacts
junker will not discern between solid objects and almost entirely hollow - doesnt fit the bedtime story!
I am not voting either way on the above comments, other than to suggest keeping an open mind.
I have shot holes in a steel I-beam with a web about 3/8 of an inch thick with a 0.223 AR15. The lead slugs appeared to have vaporized, I never found a trace of them, but they punched out steel pellets from the I beam which sunk roughly flush into plywood behind it.
Also, don't forget the slack-jawed NASA engineers after they shot the foam insulation at the shuttle wing mock-up, and it blew a hole in it. Things don't always act like you might think when crashing at 500 plus mph.
more hype in type----if the foam was on the booster it was traveling the same speed as the orbiter---when it fell off it would have slowed due to air friction --the distance from where the foam broke to the place where it hit would mean it had to accelerate at many Gs to impact the wing at 2000fps --thats the speed the foam was traviling at when it impacted the piece of wing when shot out of the "gun" in the test-----apples and oranges----
It hit at about 530 mph. Once the foam detached from the tank, you're right - air friction slowed it down, and that was actually the problem. If the foam were aerodynamic, it would have slowed a lot less from the point where it detached to the moment it hit the orbiter. It's *because* it slowed down so quickly that the impact speed was so high (a little under 800 fps).
Or maybe you're right and the NASA engineers doing the test just managed to completely get it wrong, lol.