Possibilities for the Flight 93 Crash
I think the "official" scenario of the crash is basically impossible: that the plane flew upside down into the ground at a 45 degree angle, blew up into millions of tiny pieces that spread for miles leaving no large pieces anywhere above ground YET most of the fuselage burrowed into the ground and the plane still left a head-on profile-shaped imprint on the ground.
I think there are five basic possibilites to explain the crash site:
1) the plane dove straight down at a 90 degree angle, mostly going into the ground and also exploded such that the fuselage acted a bit like a rocket tube-- plane parts and human remains blew out the back end. The problem with this scenario is that there was no tail section seen anywhere, no wing pieces and no seats. Overall, the explosion seems too violent for an ordinary plane crash, no matter how fast the plane was going. Note also, a 90 degree angle of impact would conflict significantly with the official story, since the plane was supposedly going very low to the ground and could not have had room to go into a head-first 90 degree dive.
2) the plane crashed as described in (1) but there was a bomb on board the plane that blew everything to smithereens when the plane hit the ground.
3) the plane crashed as described in (1) but jet fighters came along and bombed the crap out of what was left of the plane on the ground. This could explain the crater, the explosion, the extreme fragmentation of the human remains and why no large plane parts were visible. The problem with this scenario is the timing is tricky and they had to be lucky that no one saw this.
4) the plane was going at a higher altitude (1000 feet?) than reported (100 feet) and was shot by a missile that blew off the front of the plane, immediately causing the plane to plummet head-first into the ground. It was reported that the front section of the plane was smashed on the ground while most of the rest of the plane went underground. This scenario might account for that. The wide-spread debris could be explained by the plane being smashed apart in mid-air. This could explain the pattern assuming that it was just "luck" that the rest of the plane disappeared into soft ground, though it doesn't explain why not even the tail was visible at the crash site. Perhaps the tail section was blown off by a second missile? Then just the middle fuselage and wings would have created the crater. This is possible, and seems to be the only way a true shoot-down scenario could have gone. Certainly there are abundant rumors that there was a shootdown.
5) the crash site is a hoax-- there was no plane crash, the site was merely seeded with a few plane parts and made to look like a plane crash, much like the Pentagon site looked like a plane crash but if you look in detail it doesn't add up. Fighter jets may have bombed the site to create the crater. The problem with this scenario is that it involves a large cover-up and planting of human remains.
I think 4 and 5 are most likely, though I can't completely rule out any of the five. Perhaps number 4 fits all the evidence best, if we assume there were two hits on the plane.