Physics Says an Airplane Going 540 MPH That Hits the Thick Steel Outer Columns of a Stationary Building
is just like the thick outer steel columns of a building going 540 mph impacting a stationary airplane.
In the latter case, who maintains that the plane WON'T show any signs of crumpling and won't explode at the very moment it impacts the building?
Who says a cluster of thick 14 inch steel columns going 540 mph won't rip the wings right off a stationary plane?
Pinch?
In the latter case, who maintains that the plane WON'T show any signs of crumpling and won't explode at the very moment it impacts the building?
Who says a cluster of thick 14 inch steel columns going 540 mph won't rip the wings right off a stationary plane?
Pinch?
posted by spooked at 9:29 AM
17 Comments:
seems like rhetorical questions at this point.
so far you have had exactly 2 comments re: the crash physics of a REAL 767 hitting a wtc - one from me and one from mr. silly-putty:
1)the front portion of the fuselage would indeed crumple up on the face of the wtc just like a beer can. this crumpled wad of aluminum would then act as a cushion between the somewhat heavy but extremely brittle engines, maybe protecting the engines from shattering, although it is possible that each engine could miraculously hit exactly between 2 columns and between floors but this would be a miraculous coincidence indeed. when the engines came to an instantaneous halt against the wad of crumpled aluminum fuselage the momentum of the wings that carried the fuel would tear them off and an explosion of jetfuel would splash across the face of the wtc.
none of the plane would be inside the wtc at this point.
~h is for me.
2)What imposible physics? Do you understand the relationship between aerodynamics, fluid mechanics, plasticity and the concepts of potential energy, kinetic energy and speed?
~mr. silly-putty
----
i submit that in actuality my scenario is correct and mr. silly-putty is simply trying to distract from the issue that we were all fooled by TV FAKERY on 9/11/01.
(see: evan fairbanks, Michael Hezarkhani (CNN), jennifer spell, spiegel TV & cheney)
Yo Spook911! I'm waiting with baited breath for your take on the Blue Angel crash in SC yesterday. Was the pilot close to going public about how the military was actually in on the whole Chimpy McHitler/911 episode?
He HAD to be killed!
By the way, what *does* "plasticity" mean? Encyclopedia says it has something to do with the property of a material to undergo a non-reversible change of shape in response to an applied force. That has nothing to do with an aircraft crashing into a building. Obviously.
""what *does* "plasticity" mean? Encyclopedia says it has something to do with the property of a material to undergo a non-reversible change of shape in response to an applied force""
again, the flimsy aluminum/plastic front fuselage of a REAL 767 would squash like a beer can against the massive hardened steel of a wtc.
i guess that would indeed be a non-reversible change of shape for the poor occupants of a REAL 767 hitting a wtc.
since we don't see this occurring in even 1 of the 4 videos of alleged ua175 entering the wtc2 we are left with only 2 choices:
1) the event we are witnessing was not a true event.
2) the laws of physics did not apply on the day of 9/11/01.
hit the *road* Encyclopedia Brown!
yo! Once again, Pinch avoids the questions!!!
CNN FAKE FOOTAGE BLASTED!
way to go bsregistration!
2:12pm:
Are you saying that the aircraft did *not* go through a non-reversible change of shape in response to the applied force, that being 530 knots of kinetic energy, as it impacted a ?
Is that "physics" in the Spooky world? It reminds me of the Soviet Union and how there was "physics" to the rest of the world and there was Lenin Physics - and the twain did *not* meet in many cases.
Remember the piece of styrofoam insulation that pierced the leading edge of the Columbia's left wing? A piece of styrofoam. Can be broken apart in your hands. Insulation, for God's sake. Mostly air surrounded by a brittle surface and sub-structure. Bringing down a space vehicle that can go 17,000 mph and re-enter the earth's atmosphere with incredible temperatures.
In the tests on a spare wing it even left a cut-out hole in the shape of the styrofoam piece.
I suppose in the world where "Spooky Physics" exists that was a physical impossibility as well.
Rock on, asshole.
@6:17p
i am saying exactly what i said @11:06a and 2:12p:
the aluminum/plastic front fuselage portion of a REAL 767 would squash into a crumpled wad of aluminum against the side of the massive hardened steel/concrete wtc like a beer can stomped beneath your little ballet slipper.
is THIS what you meant by "plasticity", asshole?
2:12pm Anonymous SHILL:
Are you saying that you know you aren't fooling anyone, but you "have" to try, because you like to eat?
Here's the story about the Columbia.
http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts107/030415breach/
Anonymous-2:12, if the wing was breached by a piece of insulation, why wouldn't a wing be destroyed by steel columns? I'm not following your logic here.
By the way, the foam insulation damaged the wing's insulation, causing it to be severely damaged by the reentry heat. It didn't directly destroy the wing.
"In the tests on a spare wing it even left a cut-out hole in the shape of the styrofoam piece."
Not true, in the test I saw. It merely dented the wing section and the foam bounced off.
In any case, the key question remains-- will 14 inch thick steel columns going 540 mph shear off the wings of a 767, or will the wings break the columns in two?
first of all i was anon @2:12.
i hope that you guys meant to say anon @6:17 is the shill and not me.
i say that the steel columns would definitely win.
I didn't call anyone a shill, but yeah, I was responding to anon@6:17
anon@8:13-8:20
Anon at 9:28pm:
I suppose I should be used to the Spooky Toe Suckers being uninformed fools and basically ignorant of events, but it still surprises me when it is broadcast so loudly here.
Go read the report of the shuttle foam impact tests blowing a hole in the leading edge of a shuttle wing. It sonly nearly 4 years old - perhaps you just missed it. It is at:
http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts107/030707impacttest/
Here is a snippet:
"Foam impact test blows hole in shuttle wing panel
BY WILLIAM HARWOOD
STORY WRITTEN FOR CBS NEWS "SPACE PLACE" & USED WITH PERMISSION
Posted: July 7, 2003
In a dramatic test that drew startled gasps from onlookers, engineers fired a chunk of foam insulation at a mockup of a shuttle wing leading edge today, blowing a gaping 16-inch-wide hole in the carbon composite structure and putting to rest any lingering doubts a launch-day foam strike was responsible for the Columbia disaster.
"We believe we have found the smoking gun, we believe we've established that the foam block that fell off the external tank (during Columbia's launching) was, in fact, the most probable cause, the direct cause of the Columbia accident," said Scott Hubbard, a member of the Columbia Accident Investigation Board. "I've now got a direct connection between foam shedding creating a hole that's the same order of magnitude as what must have been there when Columbia came home on Feb. 1."
Eighty one seconds after liftoff Jan. 16, a 1.67-pound chunk of foam insulation broke away from the shuttle's external fuel tank and slammed into the left wing at more than 500 mph. Enhanced video from the one camera that viewed the impact point indicated the foam struck the leading edge at or very near the lower side of reinforced carbon panel No. 8, one of 22 such panels making up the leading edge of the left wing."
Regarding your other question:
"In any case, the key question remains-- will 14 inch thick steel columns going 540 mph shear off the wings of a 767, or will the wings break the columns in two?"
Of course they will and the wing pieces will pass alongside and by those steel columns. The same way the wing, traveling at 500+ knots, would shred and pass around the steel columns , maintaining their momentum and energy in speed. Why someone thinks material or wreckage would “bounce back” or simply crumple "like a beer can" when the only physical resistance is 18" wide - I have no idea - unless, of course, they exist in the "Spooky World of Fun and Fantastic Fysics!"
BTW, accelerate any 100 ton mass up to 540 knots and I *guarantee* it will do damage to anything – even a skyscraper facade.
Anon @10:22
So, the wings will "shred and pass around the steel columns , maintaining their momentum and energy in speed."-- but at the same time cleave through the columns and also that the fuel in the wings doesn't blow up as this happens?
Is that what you're saying?
I agree the wings will shred on the columns. The question is why the columns got cut in two by wings that shredded on them-- and why the fuel didn't explode as it was liberated from the shredded wings.
I eagerly anticipate your reply!
and surely the parts of the wings that impact the columns and shred will bounce backwards along with the fuel inside, right?
You're not saying the shredded wings somehow make a little turn to go around the column and inside the building are you?
----
oh way to go anon@10:22!
""will 14 inch thick steel columns going 540 mph shear off the wings of a 767, or will the wings break the columns in two?"
""Of course they will and the wing pieces will pass alongside and by those steel columns""
so you finally admit that the massive hardened steel columns would shred the lightweight aluminum wings - if any of the wing were to slip between said steel columns (highly doubtful) then some pieces of the wing would be caught by said steel columns right?
why don't we see this occurring in any of the 4 vids of alleged ua175 entering the wtc2?
what we do see in all 4 vids is a phony looking plane slipping entirely into the wtc2 without a single piece breaking off or even slowing down and there is no hole in the tower at this oint
then and only then does an explosion occur.
and when the smoke clears we see a smaller than a real 767 plane-shaped hole in the side of the tower. some of the columns are even severed (how did that happen? by your own words the massive hardened steel columns would defeat the thin delicate aluminum wings.)
i say again:
before even the brittle engines, much less the wings, encountered the steel columns the front fuselage portion of a REAL 767, which is a fragile aluminum tube with a smooth rounded plastic nosecone would squash against the massive steel/concrete wtc like a beer can beneath my clown shoe or your ballet slipper, whichever can generate more force.
h is for ha.
Post a Comment
<< Home