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.
Originally posted by ghofer
Well, considering that you had claimed that the plane would break up at Vmo, 50 knots over is a large degree. Considering the 737 was not damaged and is still flying, one has to wonder, how much faster can it fly before it falls apart. A 737 may not be a 767 but the design principals, tolerance limits are similar.
LA Woman as you can no doubt see, the spooks are out in full force now....
which confirms that what you allude to is hurting them...
Keep your cool up LA Woman.....their tactics are clear.....and they are well trained, hunting in packs, trying to provoke you ....you have won the Moral Battle here....now to win the War...
I hope to see many more of your well thought out and presented threads soon here on ATS....
Either these people don't have much of a life (which is obvious), are insecure little twits who get their jollies from ridiculing others (also obvious), or are extremely threatened to see their despicable scam falling apart, piece by piece.
Whatever the case, it is better to have a conscience and stand on the right side of history, than to be a morally corrupt dirtbag who has to whore around and sell his soul for a paycheck or a pat on the back. Only someone with a very limited intelligence and no moral compass is capable of such behavior. Therefore, their constant juvenile and idiotic responses should come as no surprise to anyone.
some information, easily obtained from the web and other sources:
From Twenty –First Century Jet – The Making and Marketing of the Boeing 777, Karl Sabbagh
Page 320 (comments paraphrased)
A Pan AM 707 flying Paris – NY encountered CAT and began a dive to deck. Recovery occurred at 4.5 g’s (limit 3.75 g’s)
1965 outboard engine of a 707 exploded, destroying 25’ of wing. Plane circled around and landed (fuel load, etc)
767 static test aircraft subjected to test loads – the fuselage broke before the wings did.
777 wing test - wing failed at 154% beyond design specifications
In 1965, a 707 collided with a Constellation at 11,000, lost 35’ of wing. – a/c landed safely and the Connie, which lost a good portion of its tail, made a crash landing - only 2 passengers and the pilot, who had returned to the burning aircraft to rescue a passenger, died.
Bunches of military aircraft have had parts of their aircraft ripped off from midairs and from high-speed runs and still flown back to a base.
Then there was the 737 in January 2009 on a customer demonstration flight profile, entered into a 21,000 fmp dive at observed speed of above 440 indicated. A/C recovered (Vmo was exceeded by 100 knots). Oh yeah...that aircraft is still flying, as of Dec 2009 (www.airframes.org... )
Don't forget that the Concord had an MMO of 2.04, but the certification aircraft went up to M 2.23.
etc.......
What evidences do they have to support anything regarding the OS, nothing they have absolutely nothing, that is why these OS supporters are so frustrated, because they have nothing to support their version of the OS
Originally posted by ghofer
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
The point being is these aircraft can indeed exceed, sometimes to a large degree,
None of the above were to a "large degree" as was the speed reported for the alleged UA175.
Well, considering that you had claimed that the plane would break up at Vmo, 50 knots over is a large degree. Considering the 737 was not damaged and is still flying, one has to wonder, how much faster can it fly before it falls apart. A 737 may not be a 767 but the design principals, tolerance limits are similar.
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
Seems you missed this Tricky....
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Trebors' [Sic] post was, as usual, a house of cards.
[edit on 16-7-2010 by TiffanyInLA]
Originally posted by TiffanyInLA
For perhaps the 40th time.
EA990, a 767, broke up at 425 KEAS.
65 knots over Vmo. 5 knots over it's limit dive speed.
Again, it's not so much duration rather that when it hits its "design limits" it breaks. Period.
... when it hits its "design limits" it breaks. Period.
For perhaps the 40th time.
EA990, a 767, broke up at 425 KEAS.
Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Mobius1974
Yes, my apoligies. I really should stop demanding that persons making statements about engineering provide something more than "he said so and he's smarter than you". We should just trust anyone that will post his name on the internet. That's the real clincher.
Originally posted by prestel
reply to post by trebor451
Did anyone successfully contradict that a commercial jet cannot fly 500mph at sea-level?
Just to make amends to debunkers, who, after all, I consider to be truthers in waiting, I should say that I did talk to an airline pilot three or four years ago about the ability of a novice pilot to fly a plane out of Logan, heading west into the WTC.
The points during the flight at which the VOR receivers were tuned to new frequencies are shown on the map in Figure 2 as yellow diamonds. The points shown occur after the hijackers took control of the cockpit. Lines from the airplane flight path to the stations indicate the VOR stations tuned by the left and right VOR receivers. The point on the flight path from which the lines originate are the points at which the station was first tuned, i.e., the points at which the VOR station frequency selected by each receiver changed.
Note that while the EFIS was initially in MAP mode, the left and right VOR receivers were tuned to stations whose bearings from the airplane differed by about 90 degrees, at the time at which the VOR station pairs were changed. This illustrates the method the system uses for obtaining VOR position fixes to update the INS.
During the turn back to the east, the frequency of the right VOR receiver was set to 111.0 MHz, corresponding to the VOR station located at Washington Reagan National Airport (DCA). At the time the DCA frequency was selected, the station was too far away for its signals to be received by the receiver. The right VOR receiver remained tuned to the DCA VOR for the remainder of the flight, except for a 1-minute period at 9:15. The left VOR receiver was tuned to various frequencies, but was tuned to 113.5 (AML in Herndon, VA near Dulles Airport) at approximately 9:08. At approximately 9:18, the left distance measuring equipment (DME) began receiving information from the AML VOR. After receiving the DME
signal, the airplane remained on a constant heading towards the Washington area. At 9:32, both VOR receivers were tuned to the DCA VOR.
the ability of a novice pilot to fly a plane out of Logan, heading west, into the WTC.
"No problem", he said. "Just keep the Great Lakes on your right until you see the Hudson Valley, then fly down the valley and point it at the biggest things you see at the mouth of the river."
I sputtered, "But, but, but . . . it's more complicated than that. They circled . . ."
Unfortunately he was already headed back to the bar.
That's the best argument for remote controlled planes I've ever read.