Plane atomizes at 500 knots into fortified concrete wall

www.sandia.gov...

apparently this test was conducted in 1988. At the bottom of page in the link
there is a longer video. Some different angles but nothing from behind.
If you read the study you will see why there wasn't. The test was to study the
impact forces not penetration capacity.

www.physicsforums.com...

and here is an excellent discussion of the video.

As a first-hand witness and crash recovery member to an F-16 crash at Carswell AFB,TX in Oct.89, I'll tell you that other than engine core, there was nothing left of the aircraft and its 2 pilots that was salvageable. The a/c nosed over and went into the ground at less the 500 Kts IAS at 45 degree angle. There was just bits and pieces over a about half mile square oval area. This was an tough little military fighter a/c hitting a patch of grass. If a commercial civilian a/c that hit the pentagon hit at any speed over 350 mph, I kind of doubt that you were going to find anything but the very largest, hardest and densest pieces of the aicraft left. With a subsequent fire much of the remainder will have burned away. Small bits of a/c aluminum burn quite easily in an intense fire. In fact, powdered aluminium is used as explosive enhancer in the explosive mixture for th US Mark 80 series bomb bodies. I also remember seeing a blurry video on 9-11-01 of something running into the Pentagon. It looked like video from a convenience store camera. Besides the real crime here isn't the actual how these crimes were done but the fact that they were allowed to happen at all. Tom Clancy wrote about the use of large aircraft used as bombs many years before this happened. If a civilian writer can think of this, why couldn't our intelligence agencies see it? I firmly believe that these crimes were allowed to happen as an excuse to topple certain gov'ts who are uncooperative with the global energy conglomerate's agenda. As I told a corporate exec type long ago, follow the money and you will find who is ultimately responsible.

Hi crgintx,

I remember seeing and hearing about reports made to the administration with the title
something like 'Al-qaeda to fly planes into buildings' or something. Don't remember
who sumbitted it.

I was quickly able to find this:

"(CBS) Two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, an analysis prepared for U.S. intelligence warned that Osama bin Laden's terrorists could hijack an airliner and fly it into government buildings like the Pentagon.

"Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House," the September 1999 report said..."

which came from here: www.buzzflash.com...

Do you think a secondary explosion inside the pentagon could have caused an
internal object to create the exit hole?

I like you giving that experience to us. That was a bad day for a heroe! While I in now way agree with your politcal beliefs on this post.

GO KINKY!!!

Are you still living by Cars? Hot today..... Eh?(sorry off topic)
Back to your regular schedualed program.

Modern Politics is nothing but the puppet theater. Why is the gov't sticking its nose in the bedroom and not the boardroom? For what it's worth, I 've written my US Representative and Senators and told the to quit wasting our tax money on non-issues like gay marriage. We only have marriage licenses in this country because the D*** Yankee states didn't want whites marrying Indians and Blacks and that happened even before the colonies broke away from the UK. How about meaningful tax reform to eliminate corporate tax loopholes or properly funding healthcare for veterans and active duty military dependents?

Did you post in the right thread?

Have an opinion on what I asked you in my previous post?

Many of the secondary explosions could have been caused by the fire igniting flammable items. Any fire extinguishers that were in the fire area would have burst and become deadly missiles quite capable of penetrating walls. I think any holes on the interior walls were probably caused by the shockwave from the blast of the fuel tanks exploding. Fragmentary projectiles will also penetrate far into the building,possibly even the interior walls. The potential and kinetic energy alone of the aircraft crash is equal to several thousand pounds of high explosive. Which is why I have a hard time believing the notion of the WTC being brought down detonating charges, I'm surprised they stood as long as they did after the planes flew into them. Their design was delicate when compared to the Pentagon. If a military grade explosive weapon had struck the Pentagon the blast and damage pattern would have been entirely different. I've seen what a 500 lb bomb can do to aircraft bunker in Kuwait. I've only seen pictures of the Pentagon damage but IMHO it sure doesn't look like explosive damage.

Originally posted by nextguyinline
Hi crgintx,

I remember seeing and hearing about reports made to the administration with the title
something like 'Al-qaeda to fly planes into buildings' or something. Don't remember
who sumbitted it.

I was quickly able to find this:

"(CBS) Two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, an analysis prepared for U.S. intelligence warned that Osama bin Laden's terrorists could hijack an airliner and fly it into government buildings like the Pentagon.

"Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House," the September 1999 report said..."

which came from here: www.buzzflash.com...

Do you think a secondary explosion inside the pentagon could have caused an
internal object to create the exit hole?

Originally posted by crgintx
Modern Politics is nothing but the puppet theater. Why is the gov't sticking its nose in the bedroom and not the boardroom? For what it's worth, I 've written my US Representative and Senators and told the to quit wasting our tax money on non-issues like gay marriage. We only have marriage licenses in this country because the D*** Yankee states didn't want whites marrying Indians and Blacks and that happened even before the colonies broke away from the UK. How about meaningful tax reform to eliminate corporate tax loopholes or properly funding healthcare for veterans and active duty military dependents?

That was a waste of your time, writing a letter like that, it was most probably laughed at and tossed out, remember money makes the world go round.

Shattered OUT...

I can't believe these stupid 9/11 theories. If the government was going stage 9/11, wouldnt they, i dunno *GASP* USE A FREAKIN 757 TO CRASH INTO THE PENTAGON INSTEAD OF USING MISSILE/DRONE??

Originally posted by pugachev
I can't believe these stupid 9/11 theories. If the government was going stage 9/11, wouldnt they, i dunno *GASP* USE A FREAKIN 757 TO CRASH INTO THE PENTAGON INSTEAD OF USING MISSILE/DRONE??

Sad as I am to say it..... your point is actually a very very good arguement...... I mean.... holy crap.... if I were going to blow up a few thousand of my own countrymen in a staged accident according to a script - I'm not going to launch a freakin' cruise missile when the script says "757 crashed into WTC" in a city full of several million pairs of eyes.

It's not like those backwoods murders staged to look like animal accidents where the only witness heard a shriek in the middle of the night.

I've calculated odds that the federal government would, on any given day, be conducting a drill (calculating the odds of a terrorist attack is irrelivant to the final data of the likelihood of any given day having that occour as a terrorist attack can occour any day and every day and not determined by statistical odds) ..... I forget my findings..... but it was like 0.1% or something along those lines..... if I remember right... it was a bunch of ridiculousness.... Which are fairly decent odds. Certainly not the numbers given in a few quotes I've seen. Even if you account for deviations from the numbers I used - dramatic ones.

I'll agree to what has been said about the plane vaporizing on impact being 'normal' (if a plane crash is normal). However, that it was allowed to happen is a bit of a stretch. The number of various reports regarding potential threats are numerous. Thousands upon thousands per year. Many will be ignored - especially if there are contingiency plans in existance that cover just such an event. Also - the federal government can do very little to intercept the attack. Simple concept of innocent until proven guilty. You need proof of their specific involvement in a plot.

The government is also in no position to dictate airline policy. Unless we want to further convert our system of government into a facist one..... I'm not up for that idea.