It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Pilots For 9/11 Truth first trailer for the upcoming presentation "9/11: WORLD TRADE CENTER ATTACK" analyzing the events which took place in downtown New York on September 11, 2001.
source
Originally posted by turbofan
www.youtube.com...
I had some small contributions within this presentation; also saw some sneak peeks. Interviews with current 757/767 pilots and all. It's going to be killer!
Professional Pilots Rob Balsamo and FAA Authorized Flight Examiner/Check Airman Dan Govatos discuss the difficulty of the WTC attacks as well as attempts to duplicate the attack in an Airline Simulator on tnrlive.com.
source
Originally posted by turbofan
www.youtube.com...
I had some small contributions within this presentation; also saw some sneak peeks. Interviews with current 757/767 pilots and all. It's going to be killer!
posted by turbofan
Hey SPreston, did you read that? We're Dead?! I guess all that news coverage and growing professional organizations is just a figment of our imaginations?
I can't wait to hear what 757/767 pilots have to say abuot hitting targets via hand flown airliners.
posted by jthomas
Isn't it interesting that I have never claimed that the "security camera video shows any aircraft hitting the Pentagon." Just so we're clear about that, I want you to show everyone here any post I have made on any forum in which I have said that the security camera video shows anything hitting the Pentagon.
If you can't do that, then you will issue a public retraction right here, correct? What's that, you can't? C'mon, be a sport, just try.
In fact, as we rational people have said for years, one cannot conclude by looking at the security camera video that anything hit the Pentagon.
Hey SPreston, did you read that? We're Dead?! I guess all that news
coverage and growing professional organizations is just a figment of our
imaginations?
posted by thedman
reply to post by turbofan
On the other hand there were firemen/police from all over the country thousands of them. Talked to several of them - placed flowers at memorial plaque on TEN house wall
Draw your own conclusions....
Google Video Link |
1. The speed of the aircraft that hit the WTC was officially reported as between 500mph and 560mph ground speed, calculated by the observed point to point distance covered over time.
2. A Boeing 767-200 airframe is rated to .86 of Mach speed (speed of sound) at any altitude before the risk of structural failure. It as the aircraft approaches the speed of sound when the properties extreme high and low pressure areas can have destructive effects on the airframe. This figure is as with all limits set conservatively.
3. The speed of sound at approximate sea level is 761 mph on a standard day. Therefore the theoretical maximum speed the 767-200 can reach intact is, conservatively, .86 x 761mph = 654mph or approximately 100mph above the officially reported speed of AA11 or UA175.
4. The 767-200 is an aircraft that’s considered highly powered due to its requirement to function with only one engine for ETOPS - Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards. It is capable of taking off fully loaded with only one engine.
5. Lear’s argument: The normal maximum operating speed at sea level is 360Knots/h (Nautical miles) which equates to 415mph (a lot less than seen on 9/11). It is not, as Lear stated in his interview 360mph, which is considerably less. This maximum operating speed (Indicated) used is something that is decided by Boeing in conjunction with the operator and is not a structural or performance limit; rather it has been determined to be a safe speed at which to operate with commercial passengers on board and to prevent the need for increased maintenance.
6. The 767-200 is considered by pilots and aviation professionals to be a “slick” or “low drag” aircraft, being without bulbous construction and with highly swept 31.5 degree wings. It is well known that it is difficult to keep the 767 aircraft from over-speeding during decent; due to its low drag/high power configuration.
Considering all of these facts we are still left with the question: Can a 767-200 make 560mph ground speed at sea level or the equivalent of .74 of Mach speed? We know that it is definitely within its design parameters and that it can do so at high altitude (not in question), but can it do this at sea level (higher air density)? Considering that 560mph is 145mph faster than its recommended maximum operating speed (Lear’s argument), it is simply not possible to test this speed in a commercial 767-200 aircraft; it would be against the aircraft manufacturer’s recommendations, outside of standard company operating procedures and against the authorities’ rules (FAA in US). For these reasons we will not see a 767-200 attain 560mph in operation unless it is in the middle of an aircraft incident or accident. The only way to test this is in an accredited Full Flight Simulator.
2. A Boeing 767-200 airframe is rated to .86 of Mach speed (speed of sound) at any altitude before the risk of structural failure
posted by turbofan
Still wanna stick with your answer Thedman? What is your source?
Must not be an aircraft MFG, or pilot site
www.tscm.com...
books.google.ca...=onepage&q=Airspeed%20Mach%20Number&f=f alse
You are dead wrong about the use of the Mach number. Coincidentally, this is covered in the upcoming Pilots for Truth video.
3. The speed of sound at approximate sea level is 761 mph on a standard day. Therefore the theoretical maximum speed the 767-200 can reach intact is, conservatively, .86 x 761mph = 654mph or approximately 100mph above the officially reported speed of AA11 or UA175