Aeronautical Engineer says Official 9/11 Story Not Possible

Johnny Bravo wrote:
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 15:07:51 GMT, Orval Fairbairn
wrote:

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

(snipped)

People are going to believe what they want to believe. If namecalling
****heads like you are gonna refute common sense and logic just to prove
your absurd bull**** 9/11 version correct (the government's version),
then that is your prerogative.. I have given you name calling assholes
enough information to look into it yourselves. I have no time, nor the
care, to be communcating with you ****ing idiots anyone. If you want to
know why this country is going down hill, take a look in a mirror, and
you'll see why. You insult me? I'm gonna insult you. You ****ing idiots
use insults as part of your way to communicate, therefore I will
retaliate in the only way that you will understand. You want to have an
intelligent discussion? Fine. Shut your ****ing trap with the insults.
But right now, my free time is up, and I am done in here.
Translation: "The men in the white coats, with the nets and the
nicely-fitting jacket with the fashionable straps on it are at the front
door." Do they also have a good brace of tranq darts with them?

Further translation: "Everybody in this NG, and in other NGs where
knowledgeable people congregate is crazy and *I* am the only sane one
here!"

More translation: "Nobody believes that the monsters under my bed are
going to kill me and then eat me!"

C'mon, "TRUTH," go quietly -- they are going to take you away, to the
*HAPPY* farm!

Even more translation (based on his earlier comment),
"I'm more heroic than a police officer or a fire fighter, only *I* have the
courage to tell the "truth"."

He also said in another thread he had to hide his identity because
he was afraid of retribution. Poor child keeps contradicting himself.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

mrtravel wrote:
TRUTH wrote:


How many times do you need to have it explained to you that there was
no need for any of them to be instrument trained ? Flying in clear
skies does not require an instrument rating.

Graham

At 30,000 feet it does

But they went lower, didn't they?

At 30000 feet, do you think it would be possible to figure out where
Manhattan is, on a clear day? If you spend some time looking at maps, it
wouldn't be that difficult.
Doofus doesn't realise the slant view range from 10,000 to 30,000 feet
would make it easy to pick up landmarks like large cities...

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Pooh Bear wrote in
:

Dan Luke wrote:

"Jose" wrote:

Very neat, very tidy, very hard to disprove.

(for the record, I do not believe it, but it is still neat,
tidy,
and
hard to disprove - the ideal conspiracy theory)

Just about anything is hard to DISprove--if not impossible.

What about the Invisible Pink Elephant that lives in your house?
Probably put there by the Bush administration to mind-control you
into
supporting the Iraq war.

Did the Pink Elephant arrive in a Black Helicopter ?

Why, you misiing that one in your planespotters logbook?

You know, that's actually pretty close to being humorous ! ;-)

You driving Buses or Boeings these days ?

I drive lots of things, wannabe.

unlike you.

Trying the suckup approach again, BTW?

Bertie

Has it ever struck you that your 'netkopp' obsession has become a little
tired ?

Graham

I would like to give you my input as to the events on September 11, and
why it is a physically provable fact that all of the damage done to the
Pentagon could not have occurred solely from a Boeing 757 impact, and
therefore the 9/11 Commission report is not complete and arguably a
cover up. I will not speculate about what may have been covered up, I
will only speak from my professional opinion.

I am a Mechanical Engineer who spent many years in Aerospace, including
structural design, and in the design, and use of shaped charge
explosives (like those that would be used in missile warheads).

The structural design of a large aircraft like a 757 is based around
handling the structural loads of a pressurized vessel, the cabin, to
near atmospheric conditions while at the lower pressure of cruising
altitudes, and to handle the structural and aerodynamic loads of the
wings, control surfaces, and the fuel load. It is made as light as
possible, and is certainly not made to handle impact loads of any kind.

If a 757 were to strike a reinforced concrete wall, the energy from the
speed and weight of the aircraft will be transferred, in part into the
wall, and to the structural failure of the aircraft. It is not too far
of an analogy as if you had an empty aluminum can, traveling at high
speed hitting a reinforced concrete wall. The aluminum can would
crumple (the proper engineering term is buckle) and, depending on the
structural integrity of the wall, crack, crumble or fail completely.
The wall failure would not be a neat little hole, as the energy of the
impact would be spread throughout the wall by the reinforcing steel.

This is difficult to model accurately, as any high speed, high energy,
impact of a complex structure like an aircraft, into a discontinuous
wall with windows etc is difficult. What is known is that nearly all of
the energy from this event would be dissipated in the initial impact,
and subsequent buckling of the aircraft.

We are lead to believe that not only did the 757 penetrate the outer
wall, but continued on to penetrate separate internal walls totaling 9
feet of reinforced concrete. The final breach of concrete was a nearly
perfectly cut circular hole in a reinforced concrete wall, with no
subsequent damage to the rest of the wall. If we are to believe that
some how this aluminum aircraft did in fact reach this final wall. It
is physically impossible for the wall to have failed in a neat clean
cut
circle, period. When I first saw this hole, a chill went down my spine

see pictures: http://images.google.com/images?q=pentagon%20hole

because I knew it was not possible to have a reinforced concrete wall
fail in this manner, it should have caved in, in some fashion.

How do you create a nice clean hole in a reinforced concrete wall? with
an explosive shape charge. An explosive shape charge, or cutting charge
is used in various military warhead devices. You design the geometry of
the explosive charge so that you create a focused line of energy. You
essentially focus nearly all of the explosive energy in what is
referred
to as a jet. You use this jet to cut and penetrate armor on a tank, or
the walls of a bunker. The signature is clear and unmistakable. In a
missile, the explosive charge is circular to allow the payload behind
the initial shape charge to enter what ever has been penetrated.

I do not know what happened on 911, I do not know how politics works in
this country, I can not explain why the main stream media does not
report on the problems with the 911 Commission. But I am an engineer,
and I know what happens in high speed impacts, and how shaped charges
are used to "cut" through materials.

I have not addressed several other major gaps in the Pentagon/757
incident. The fact that this aircraft somehow ripped several light
towers clean out of the ground without any damage to the aircraft
(which
I also feel is impossible,) the fact that the two main engines were
never recovered from the wreckage, and the fact that our government has
direct video coverage of the flight path, and impact, from at least a
gas station and hotel, which they have refused to release.

You can call me a tin hat, crazy, conspiracy theory, etc, but I can say
from my expertise that the damage at the Pentagon was not caused solely
by a 757.


====

u2r2h speculation:

The shaped charge was between the tree and the wall.
It was timed to conincide with the impact.
Its task was to kill the engineers inside who were
running the show... killing witnesses.
if you don't believe, check the job descriptions
of the victims inside.

In article .com,
wrote:

When I first saw this hole, a chill went down my spine

see pictures: http://images.google.com/images?q=pentagon%20hole

because I knew it was not possible to have a reinforced concrete wall
fail in this manner, it should have caved in, in some fashion.

Unless, as the contractors have already told the world, that hole was
punched out by a backhoe after the impact.

http://www.rense.com/general63/pmm.htm

This was through one of the links from your URL above.

wrote:

How do you create a nice clean hole in a reinforced concrete wall? with
an explosive shape charge. An explosive shape charge, or cutting charge
is used in various military warhead devices. You design the geometry of
the explosive charge so that you create a focused line of energy.

And, they actually were able to hit the exact spot in the wall with a
757 with pinpoint accuracy.

wrote:


I have not addressed several other major gaps in the Pentagon/757
incident. The fact that this aircraft somehow ripped several light
towers clean out of the ground without any damage to the aircraft
(which
I also feel is impossible,) the fact that the two main engines were
never recovered from the wreckage, and the fact that our government has
direct video coverage of the flight path, and impact, from at least a
gas station and hotel, which they have refused to release.

You can call me a tin hat, crazy, conspiracy theory, etc, but I can say
from my expertise that the damage at the Pentagon was not caused solely
by a 757.

That would have been one heck of a shaped charge. It would have had to
have been as big as, um, as big as... a 757. Secretly installing an
invisible shaped charge of that size without anyone noticing was quite
an accomplishment. The Pentagon has security people who walk around the
building all of the time. It is difficult to believe that all these low
level security types would have been in on the conspiracy.

Or maybe you subscribe to the 'missile' theory. Trouble is, missiles
are not shaped charges. The kind of damage done to the Pentagon would
require at the least a ground penetrating fuel air bomb, which the US
did not have at the time and which has to be launched from a C-130. Of
course, a 757 is a ready made fuel air bomb. And missiles do not have
jet engine fans and aircraft landing gear such as you see in photos
both inside and outside the Pentagon. Neither do bombs.

And how do you explain how the aircraft parts got there? All the photos
there show an intact Pentagon and immediately after a big hole with
lots of pieces of what is obviously a 757. Are you suggesting that they
were trucked in?

There was no nice, neat hole. A 757 is not a beer can. It weighs more
than 275,000 lbs and carries more than 11,000 gallons of fuel. That is
a lot of kinetic energy and explosive energy which, in a plane crash,
is all directed forward to a small point of impact. For all practical
purposes, it might as well be a shaped charge. What, did you think that
the airplane would make an airplane shaped hole, kind of like Wile E.
Coyote makes a coyote shaped hole when he runs through a wall? Real
life ain't the cartoons.

Who says the light towers did not damage the aircraft? There were
aircraft parts all over the place.

The two main engines were recovered. Who says they weren't? There are
photos of at least one of them lying inside the outer ring of the
Pentagon. The photos were taken almost immediately after the crash.

The 757 did not strike the Pentagon directly. The terrorists missed,
landing short of the target. But the plane did skid along the ground
and the trench is clearly visible in the photos.

What I don't understand is why the conspiracy theorists think that
anyone is fooled by their concentration on just one or two of the
photos available while ignoring all the rest that disprove their
theories.

I have still yet to hear a plausible explanation of how someone is
supposed to have accomplished a controlled demolition of the WTC
towers. There are only a very few businesses in all of America that
could do it. It is very expensive. The government does not have the
capability or expertise. Demolition companies require enormous work
crews working round the clock for months to demolish such a large
building. Big holes have to be drilled in the walls at every corner and
every floor and at regular intervals around the floor. Structural
supports have to be removed. The explosive charges are highly visible
with wires coming out of them -- there is no mistaking what they are.
No one could have gone to work at the WTC every day without noticing
all this activity. Suggestions that thousands of people did so every
day for months without noticing that anything unusual was going on are
just ridiculous. It is difficult to picture all these lawyers,
international traders, secretaries, etc., all being in on the secret
and being willing to sacrifice their own lives for some government
conspiracy, or even allowing all this construction and demolition work
to continue in their offices without complaint or even mild curiousity
what is going on.

In article .com,
on 2 Mar 2006 15:17:05 -0800,
attempted to say .....

While you may be an engineer you seem to know nothing of how a shaped charge
works.

It really needs to be in contact with the surface of the target to work best.

And yes, you are a nutcase


I would like to give you my input as to the events on September 11, and
why it is a physically provable fact that all of the damage done to the
Pentagon could not have occurred solely from a Boeing 757 impact, and
therefore the 9/11 Commission report is not complete and arguably a
cover up. I will not speculate about what may have been covered up, I
will only speak from my professional opinion.

I am a Mechanical Engineer who spent many years in Aerospace, including
structural design, and in the design, and use of shaped charge
explosives (like those that would be used in missile warheads).

The structural design of a large aircraft like a 757 is based around
handling the structural loads of a pressurized vessel, the cabin, to
near atmospheric conditions while at the lower pressure of cruising
altitudes, and to handle the structural and aerodynamic loads of the
wings, control surfaces, and the fuel load. It is made as light as
possible, and is certainly not made to handle impact loads of any kind.

If a 757 were to strike a reinforced concrete wall, the energy from the
speed and weight of the aircraft will be transferred, in part into the
wall, and to the structural failure of the aircraft. It is not too far
of an analogy as if you had an empty aluminum can, traveling at high
speed hitting a reinforced concrete wall. The aluminum can would
crumple (the proper engineering term is buckle) and, depending on the
structural integrity of the wall, crack, crumble or fail completely.
The wall failure would not be a neat little hole, as the energy of the
impact would be spread throughout the wall by the reinforcing steel.

This is difficult to model accurately, as any high speed, high energy,
impact of a complex structure like an aircraft, into a discontinuous
wall with windows etc is difficult. What is known is that nearly all of
the energy from this event would be dissipated in the initial impact,
and subsequent buckling of the aircraft.

We are lead to believe that not only did the 757 penetrate the outer
wall, but continued on to penetrate separate internal walls totaling 9
feet of reinforced concrete. The final breach of concrete was a nearly
perfectly cut circular hole in a reinforced concrete wall, with no
subsequent damage to the rest of the wall. If we are to believe that
some how this aluminum aircraft did in fact reach this final wall. It
is physically impossible for the wall to have failed in a neat clean
cut
circle, period. When I first saw this hole, a chill went down my spine

see pictures: http://images.google.com/images?q=pentagon%20hole

because I knew it was not possible to have a reinforced concrete wall
fail in this manner, it should have caved in, in some fashion.

How do you create a nice clean hole in a reinforced concrete wall? with
an explosive shape charge. An explosive shape charge, or cutting charge
is used in various military warhead devices. You design the geometry of
the explosive charge so that you create a focused line of energy. You
essentially focus nearly all of the explosive energy in what is
referred
to as a jet. You use this jet to cut and penetrate armor on a tank, or
the walls of a bunker. The signature is clear and unmistakable. In a
missile, the explosive charge is circular to allow the payload behind
the initial shape charge to enter what ever has been penetrated.

I do not know what happened on 911, I do not know how politics works in
this country, I can not explain why the main stream media does not
report on the problems with the 911 Commission. But I am an engineer,
and I know what happens in high speed impacts, and how shaped charges
are used to "cut" through materials.

I have not addressed several other major gaps in the Pentagon/757
incident. The fact that this aircraft somehow ripped several light
towers clean out of the ground without any damage to the aircraft
(which
I also feel is impossible,) the fact that the two main engines were
never recovered from the wreckage, and the fact that our government has
direct video coverage of the flight path, and impact, from at least a
gas station and hotel, which they have refused to release.

You can call me a tin hat, crazy, conspiracy theory, etc, but I can say
from my expertise that the damage at the Pentagon was not caused solely
by a 757.

While you may be an engineer you seem to know nothing of how a shaped charge
works.

It really needs to be in contact with the surface of the target to work best.




====

u2r2h speculation:

The shaped charge was between the tree and the wall.
It was timed to conincide with the impact.
Its task was to kill the engineers inside who were
running the show... killing witnesses.
if you don't believe, check the job descriptions
of the victims inside.





--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

wrote in message
oups.com...

I would like to give you my input as to the events on September 11,

Remember when you ran away
And I got on my knees
And begged you not to leave
Because I'd go berserk

Well you left me anyhow
And then the days got worse and worse
And now you see I've gone
Completely out of my mind

And they're coming to take me away ha-haaa
They're coming to take me away ho ho hee hee ha haaa
To the funny farm
Where life is beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see those nice young men
In their clean white coats
And they're coming to take me away ha haaa

You thought it was a joke
And so you laughed
You laughed when I said
That losing you would make me flip my lid

Right? You know you laughed
I heard you laugh. You laughed
You laughed and laughed and then you left
But now you know I'm utterly mad

And they're coming to take me away ha haaa
They're coming to take me away ho ho hee hee ha haaa
To the happy home with trees and flowers and chirping birds
And basket weavers who sit and smile and twiddle their thumbs and toes
And they're coming to take me away ha haaa

I cooked your food
I cleaned your house
And this is how you pay me back
For all my kind unselfish, loving deeds
Ha! Well you just wait
They'll find you yet and when they do
They'll put you in the A.S.P.C.A.
You mangy mutt

And they're coming to take me away ha haaa
They're coming to take me away ha haaa ho ho hee hee
To the funny farm where life is beautiful all the time
And I'll be happy to see those nice young men
In their clean white coats

And they're coming to take me away
To the happy home with trees and flowers and chirping birds
And basket weavers who sit and smile and twiddle their thumbs and toes
And they're coming to take me away ha haaa!