Shanksville pics..?

I know it must seem like a silly question to veterans here, but is this really a ground-level pic from Shanksville?



It seems absurdly small and neat. No craters from the engines? It looks like the set from a B-grade summer movie...

Are there more pics that people are familiar with? If so, please post them. I don't want to choke my browser with odd searches.

You'd have to claim the wings and engines came off before an impact between 89 and 91 degrees...

www.google.com...

a reply to: FlyingFox

I'll give you this, it does appear to be odd. Some quotes by officials at the scene of the crash of Flight 93.

"This crash was different. There was no wreckage, no bodies, and no noise." - Somerset County Coroner Wallace Miller [1] "I was looking for anything that said tail, wing, plane, metal. There was nothing." - Photographer Scott Spangler [2] "I was amazed because it did not, in any way, shape, or form, look like a plane crash." - Patrick Madigan, commander of the Somerset barracks of the Pennsylvania State Police [3]

Here is a bloggers transcript with more detailed information and quoted details. My feeling based upon what I have read and have seen over time is that anything is possible when involving incredible velocity, trajectory and final impact. Other than the official report, I have no other evidence to disclaim it.

Here is an interesting source from where the above statements were taken.

United Flight 93 crash on 9/11/01 - Source document
[url=http://911blogger.com...[/url]

Peace

KD

For instance, I've seen comparisons with "real" place crashes...

brightcove04.o.brightcove.com...

I just don't remember the Shanksville crater to be THAT amatauer.

That doesn't look like a picture from the incident, in fact refer to above post (phage) . . . my best guess is that this picture is actually from a b-movie set.

Also, I had the slight assumption that the flight may have been shot down, making the whole "clean impact" less plausible.

Whoops, I resurrected a 17 year old thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Lots of info there.

I only wanted a simple yes/no answer, but things go a little deeper....pun not intended.

Still a good question. Yes, it is an "actual" pic. No, it sure does not look legit.

I remember the old thread and will look it over.

files.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: FlyingFox

You have seen pictures ...??

Well I have done recovery at a REAL plane crash......

There was no crater at this crash ( ground was rocky) = Point # 1 plane crashes do not always leave crater

Ground at Shanksville was soft, it was landfill at old strip mine

Debris size/distribution is dependent on velocity of the impact. Faster plane hits, smaller the resultant pieces
will be Same with any people. Will get ground into "human hamburger" with little recognizable - accounting
for fact there were no recognizable bodies at scene

originally posted by: Phage
www.google.com...

i have to say, the google images section seem to hurt your case if what you mean to say is that an actual plane crashed here.

plane aside, there were no bodies.

originally posted by: FlyingFox
I know it must seem like a silly question to veterans here, but is this really a ground-level pic from Shanksville?

It seems absurdly small and neat. No craters from the engines? It looks like the set from a B-grade summer movie...

Are there more pics that people are familiar with? If so, please post them. I don't want to choke my browser with odd searches.

wow. have never seen this picture before.

this is entirely inconsistent with a plane crash.

a reply to: facedye

plane aside, there were no bodies.

But there were pieces of flesh sufficient for DNA analysis. Or are you still hung up on Loose Change?

a reply to: facedye

this is entirely inconsistent with a plane crash.

Investigated a lot of plane crashes, have you?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: facedye

plane aside, there were no bodies.

But there were pieces of flesh sufficient for DNA analysis. Or are you still hung up on Loose Change?

pieces of flesh and no bodies? what did they do, explode?

if you concede that there were no bodies recovered, how does that make sense in your mind?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: facedye

this is entirely inconsistent with a plane crash.

Investigated a lot of plane crashes, have you?

in efforts to understand this one? definitely.

pieces of flesh and no bodies? what did they do, explode?

In effect, yes. On impact.

if you concede that there were no bodies recovered, how does that make sense in your mind?

I understand kinetic energy.


a reply to: facedye
Ah. Boots on the ground at crashes where the plane went in perpendicular.
NTSB?

originally posted by: Phage

pieces of flesh and no bodies? what did they do, explode?

In effect, yes. On impact.


a reply to: facedye
Ah. Boots on the ground at crashes where the plane went in perpendicular.
NTSB?

so you can't actually explain it in a reasonable way to me or even yourself? you just defer to NTSB?

a reply to: facedye

E= 1/2mv^2

A human body is a pretty frail thing when it's moving very, very fast and stops suddenly. So is an airplane.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: facedye

E= 1/2mv^2

A human body is a pretty frail thing when it's moving very, very fast.

So you're saying every passenger on board exploded along with the plane, without a trace aside from DNA scraps?

do passengers typically explode and only leave behind traces of DNA when a plane crashes?

a reply to: facedye

Pieces of flesh are more than traces of DNA. But yes at speeds in excess of 600mph, there is little left intact. I'm surprised you aren't aware of that from your first hand experience.