9/11 what do you think?

[NoDrama]

This is an example of a meme ... an idea that propagates itself for no other reason than "because". it is also completely wrong. Any burning hydrocarbon in air can be pushed to at least 2500 degrees F. cn

not without the aid of somehow getting air into it, free burning jet fuel cannot get hotter than 520F without some kind of extra oxygen source. There were no bellows up in those buildings.

 

[NoDrama]

I would like to address Doer's posts. My problem is that I can't understand them so I have no idea how to respond. I am not dissing you, Doer, but when I read your posts I never know what the hell you meant.

I just nod and politely agree all the while trying to extract myself.

I can't make heads nor tails of 90% of it.

 

[tokeprep]

This is an example of a meme ... an idea that propagates itself for no other reason than "because". it is also completely wrong. Any burning hydrocarbon in air can be pushed to at least 2500 degrees F. cn

Of course, you don't need the fires burning that hot anyway. Steel weakens at substantially lower temperatures; add deficient fireproofing and you have a serious problem.

What temperature does drywall burn at?

 

[echelon1k1]

If you've only ever driven a car, is it difficult to suddenly drive a truck? Even if it's difficult, is it doable?

Doable with practice? sure... Doable first time, under pressure, real world, not so sure... But at least you can pull a vehicle over. But yeah cars, trucks and planes are so similar.

 

[tokeprep]

Doable with practice? sure... Doable first time, under pressure, real world, not so sure... But at least you can pull a vehicle over. But yeah cars, trucks and planes are so similar.

They had lots of practice. I'm sure flying school wasn't the only thing they did--a cheap flight simulator program will teach you a lot about flying. A plane certainly isn't a car or a truck, but it's also not that different, if you don't have to worry about taking off or landing. Pointing is easy; changing numbers in a navigation panel is easy.

 

[echelon1k1]

They had lots of practice. I'm sure flying school wasn't the only thing they did--a cheap flight simulator program will teach you a lot about flying. A plane certainly isn't a car or a truck, but it's also not that different, if you don't have to worry about taking off or landing. Pointing is easy; changing numbers in a navigation panel is easy.

pointing a gun is easy too, doesn't mean you'll fire it with any accuracy...

 

[tokeprep]

pointing a gun is easy too, doesn't mean you'll fire it with any accuracy...

If you shoot a gun 5,000 feet away from a target, the bullet goes where it will go. If you're flying the bullet, able to control it as it hurtles toward the target, your accuracy should be substantially better than if you just took a shot from some distance.

 

[cannabineer]

not without the aid of somehow getting air into it, free burning jet fuel cannot get hotter than 520F without some kind of extra oxygen source. There were no bellows up in those buildings.

Link?
Also, those buildings were chimneys. They entrained gales of air when the fire started. cn

 

[echelon1k1]

If you shoot a gun 5,000 feet away from a target, the bullet goes where it will go. If you're flying the bullet, able to control it as it hurtles toward the target, your accuracy should be substantially better than if you just took a shot from some distance.

You finished? If you apply your theory to flight 77 it all falls apart.

 

[tokeprep]

You finished? If you apply your theory to flight 77 it all falls apart.

Am I finished? No one was shooting planes out of barrels from a mile away. You made the comparison, not me.

What about Flight 77?

 

[abandonconflict]

I just nod and politely agree all the while trying to extract myself.

I can't make heads nor tails of 90% of it.

Only reason I knew he was referring to me is because he followed me from thread to thread with the same post in 4 or 5 threads telling people I am a butt worm or something. So while 90% is unintelligible, the other 10% is infantile.

 

[echelon1k1]

Am I finished? No one was shooting planes out of barrels from a mile away. You made the comparison, not me.

What about Flight 77?

i'm trying to keep up with the bullshit comparisons you keep putting out like comparing a Cessna 172 with a Boeing 757...

Hani Hanjour was a pathetic pilot by all accounts, but hit the pentagon no problems. Just pointed and prayed did he?

 

[tokeprep]

i'm trying to keep up with the bullshit comparisons you keep putting out like comparing a Cessna 172 with a Boeing 757...

Hani Hanjour was a pathetic pilot by all accounts, but hit the pentagon no problems. Just pointed and prayed did he?

I didn't compare them, you did. It's not in dispute that the pilots were all training on Boeing simulators; pointing the plane, whether it's a Cessna 172 or a Boeing 757, just isn't a difficult thing to do. We know the terrorists used autopilot to get back to Washington on Flight 77, for example.

I used to live next to the Pentagon. I've been inside too, to the site of the impact of Flight 77. Do you know how huge the place is? Evidently not if you're suggesting that it would be difficult to hit.

 

[NoDrama]

Link?
Also, those buildings were chimneys. They entrained gales of air when the fire started. cn

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel

Link to proof of gales of air being forced into the atomized fuel load?

 

[NoDrama]

Only reason I knew he was referring to me is because he followed me from thread to thread with the same post in 4 or 5 threads telling people I am a butt worm or something. So while 90% is unintelligible, the other 10% is infantile.

Don't mess with an X-Box warrior!

 

[echelon1k1]

I didn't compare them, you did. It's not in dispute that the pilots were all training on Boeing simulators; pointing the plane, whether it's a Cessna 172 or a Boeing 757, just isn't a difficult thing to do. We know the terrorists used autopilot to get back to Washington on Flight 77, for example.

I used to live next to the Pentagon. I've been inside too, to the site of the impact of Flight 77. Do you know how huge the place is? Evidently not if you're suggesting that it would be difficult to hit.

at 500mph in 757? please....

 

[cannabineer]

at 500mph in 757? please....

Naval aviators routinely hit a much much smaller window at 200 mph in all weather, and in aircraft not much lighter and with higher wingloading. cn

 

[NoDrama]

i'm trying to keep up with the bullshit comparisons you keep putting out like comparing a Cessna 172 with a Boeing 757...

Hani Hanjour was a pathetic pilot by all accounts, but hit the pentagon no problems. Just pointed and prayed did he?

Don't forget that he wrestled control of the flight from the Captain first.

Charles Burlingame, Naval Aviator, 6'4", 240 lbs

Hanjour was what, 140?


Flying a heavy jet is exactly like playing x-box, only 4 or 5 controls, the rest is just hollywood magic. Airplanes don't really have all those instruments. Just a pedal, a steering wheel and a blinker. Flying a 747 heavy is the same as flying a hang glider, just gotta lean into it.

 

[echelon1k1]

Naval aviators routinely hit a much much smaller window at 200 mph in all weather, and in aircraft not much lighter and with higher wingloading. cn

I have no doubt at all a qualified naval aviator could hit that mark, proof of this are carrier landings. But a shitty unqualified "pilot" who couldn't even do a solo flight in a Cessna 150 flies like a pro when it counts? Something isn't right there...

 

[MuyLocoNC]

Don't forget that he wrestled control of the flight from the Captain first.

Charles Burlingame, Naval Aviator, 6'4", 240 lbs

Hanjour was what, 140?


Flying a heavy jet is exactly like playing x-box, only 4 or 5 controls, the rest is just hollywood magic. Airplanes don't really have all those instruments. Just a pedal, a steering wheel and a blinker. Flying a 747 heavy is the same as flying a hang glider, just gotta lean into it.

Awesome. Too good.