When did Iran get C-130's in the first place?

"Arketip" wrote in message
...
Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
"john smith" wrote in message
...

In article ,
"xerj" wrote:


Are they legacy aircraft from the days of the Shah?

Yep!!
Along with the F-14 Tomcats.
I understand there are a lot of parts they need now available in the
Arizona desert now.


As far as C-130 parts there are several in the street in Tehran.

was that ment to be funny?

Yep and it was. Lighten up, you'll never make it out alive!

------------------------------------------
DW

"Big John" wrote in message ...
Israel has been buying parts from us and selling them to Iran for
years.

Started with the hostage operation as I recall.

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` ```````````



So what happened to the 'bad guys' who were convicted to selling the C-130 parts to Iran? Sounds like they were bad guys
because they were cutting out the middle man (Israel?)

OH YEA! We sold lots of aircraft to Iran when they "said" they liked
us! The better question is where do they get the parts to keep them
flying? Oh, that right they are starting to fall out of the sky!

xerj wrote:

Are they legacy aircraft from the days of the Shah?

how can that building still stand after c-130 hit it?
the building still has 10 stories and any people can walk in and out
as I saw in the pictures

compare to 911

Darkwing wrote:
"Arketip" wrote in message
...

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

"john smith" wrote in message
...


In article ,
"xerj" wrote:



Are they legacy aircraft from the days of the Shah?

Yep!!
Along with the F-14 Tomcats.
I understand there are a lot of parts they need now available in the
Arizona desert now.


As far as C-130 parts there are several in the street in Tehran.

was that ment to be funny?


Yep and it was. Lighten up, you'll never make it out alive!

------------------------------------------
DW




Just asking, you need to lighten up a bit too :-)

C-130 is smaller, slower. It may not have carried as much fuel. The WTC
stood for several hours until fire weakened the structure enough for it
to collapse. It is a lot easier to fight a fire in a ten story building
than a fire in a 100 story building.

cjcampbell wrote:
C-130 is smaller, slower. It may not have carried as much fuel. The WTC
stood for several hours until fire weakened the structure enough for it
to collapse. It is a lot easier to fight a fire in a ten story building
than a fire in a 100 story building.

The fuel only started the fires at the WTC. What kept them burning for long
enough to collapse was the tons of paper in the offices. They're probably not as
paper happy in Iran.

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

What kept them burning for long enough to collapse was the tons of paper in the offices.

Paper burns at a lower temperature, probably too low to melt steel, so
I'm not convinced. Do you have a reference for paper as the cause of
the collapse?

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Did the structural steel actually melt or deform under the loads?

"Jose" wrote in message
.. .
What kept them burning for long enough to collapse was the tons of
paper in the offices.

Paper burns at a lower temperature, probably too low to melt steel, so
I'm not convinced. Do you have a reference for paper as the cause of
the collapse?

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"sfb" wrote in message news:Kc8mf.27746$SY.17277@trnddc06...
Did the structural steel actually melt or deform under the loads?

The steel did not melt, but rather lost strength due to the heat. The
fireproofing was not rated for the length of time the burning fuel caused,
nor that high of temperatures. I am also skeptical about the paper claim.
I am sure it contributed, but there was one hell of a lot of fuel, contained
in a relatively small area, burning very hot.
--
Jim in NC