Pentagon vs Boeing 757 interesting

[Monkey]

Kinda interesting http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pentagon.html#Main

[Brizz]

Great find! good point of view.



~waits for someone with a political ajenda to chime in~


"Ill bet Bush did it." or "Kerry call his vietnam friends to do to sabotage Bush"



~waiting~

[1000RR]

I don't have a political agenda, but if your interested in more different points of view and some disturbing facts, spend some time browsing this site:

http://911research.wtc7.net/

I'm not going to say "Bush did it" or anything like that, but I do think there are stange contradictions and many things that have been hidden from the public.

[Mista Black]

actually, there are eye witnesses who watched the plane fly in and hit the building. i dont buy the whole "no parts found" theory crap...

http://www.humanunderground.com/11september/s11-media/et7.jpg

[Project Sh*tbox]

creepy.

-ASC

[NorCALSpeed]

That's a pretty small hole. Compare that damage to the towers' damage. The planes in NY punched almost all the way through the buildings. I think it was a small plane, or maby an RPG type thing. Who knows, the gov. is just "protecting us".

[KooLaid]

Always a conspiracy theory about something.... true or not. And as for government secrets aka withholding information from the publie.... Somethings the public just shouldn't and better off NOT knowing.

[shmoab]

Always a conspiracy theory about something.... true or not. And as for government secrets aka withholding information from the publie.... Somethings the public just shouldn't and better off NOT knowing.

The gov. thinks we are better off not knowing the truth, they were instrumental in the "terrorist" attacks, otherwise they would release all the info they have.

[Mista Black]

yes the hole in the side of the Pentagon is small compaired to the utter devistation of the WTC. but have you looked at the difference in size between the 757 (that hit the Pentagon) and the 767's (that hit the WTC)?? come on people do a little home work before you jump on a band wagon!!

the 757 is almost 50 feet shorter than the 767 (155'3" vs 201')
the 757 has a wing span close to 50 feet less than the 767 (124'10" vs 170'4")
the height is almost 10 feet shorter than the 767 (44'6" vs 55'4")
the body width is about 4 feet less (11'7" vs 15'6")
and OMG the weight is about half that of the 767 (225,000 vs 450,000 lbs)

the 757 is a VERY small, lightweight aircraft compared to the 767. the 767 is just one damn big plane to be hitting buildings. i'm sure that looking back on it, the terrorists in charge of putting that operation together probably wish they'd used a 767 for the pentagon too.

get all the info before you try to pass this conspiricy crap as "fact"

[Monkey]

I don't think anyone is trying to pass any conspiracy as fact, I found an interesting thing online.. thought I'd share..

Quit jumping to conclusions that people are posting conspiracy theories.

Like the heading says.. interesting.

Not OMFG THEY LIED!

:321:

[The GECCO]

Well, I believe it was a plane, for those that don't, please explain:

- what happened to flight 77? if it didn't hit the Pentagon, where did it go? if you think it simply was a made up flight created to cover up whatever DID happen, then you should call the families of the people who got on the plane that morning and tell them their loved ones are still alive and it wasn't their remains found at the scene

- why were flight 77's black boxes found at the scene?

as far as the debris (or lack thereof) and the damage (or lack thereof) I will steal some wording from HERE (http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://paulboutin.weblogger.com/2002/03/14)


QUESTION:
The first satellite image shows the section of the building that was hit by the Boeing. In the image below, the second ring of the building is also visible. It is clear that the aircraft only hit the first ring. The four interior rings remain intact. They were only fire-damaged after the initial explosion. Can you explain how a Boeing 757-200, weighing nearly 100 tons and travelling at a minimum speed of 250 miles an hour* only damaged the outside of the Pentagon?


ANSWER:
Paul: The question and photos are misleading: Parts of the plane penetrated the ground floors of the second and third rings of the building. These photos show only their intact roofs. Eyewitnesses and news reporters have talked about the twelve-foot hole punched through the inside wall of the second ring by one of the plane’s engines.

More importantly, the question focuses on the plane’s size and weight, making it sound extraordinarily heavy, but leaves out the size and weight of the Pentagon – America’s largest office building with three times the floor space of the Empire State Building - as well as the difference in relative stiffness and energy absorption between a building and an airplane. Each side of the Pentagon contains over 100,000 tons of Potomac sand mixed into the steel-reinforced concrete under its limestome facade. There are nearly 10,000 concrete piles anchoring each side of the building. And in the wake of bombings in Oklahoma City and Saudi Arabia, that portion of the Pentagon had just been reinforced with a computationally modeled lattice of steel tubes designed to prevent it from collapsing after an explosion.

By contrast, the plane is only 100 tons of custom alloys stretched thin enough to fly. It’s not like a giant bullet; more like a giant racing bike. Even so, the plane knocked down 10,000 tons of building material - 100 times its own weight - in the crash and subsequent collapse. Another 57,000 tons of the Pentagon were damaged badly enough to be torn down. The Brobdingnagian scale of the Pentagon makes the total area of damage seem small, but it would hold several Silicon Valley office buildings, or an airport terminal.

Patrick: Watch the videotapes of the planes hitting the World Trade Center. They were traveling at approximately 400 mph, and they hit an aluminum and glass building. An entire plane went in, and hardly anything came out the other side, 208 feet away.

Here we have a plane traveling at nearly 250 mph (just over 1/2 the velocity of the WTC planes, meaning just over 1/4 of their kinetic energy), hitting the ground (which would absorb much of that energy), and only then sliding at a much slower speed into a steel-and-kevlar-reinforced concrete and brick building. Obviously, it's not going to go very far. Still, parts of the plane penetrated into the C ring.



When you really think about it, flying a plane into the pentagon is like throwing a kite at a truck.

Furthermore, here is a picture (yes, a poor one, but it's all I could find) of a crash scene I got to see first hand. This is the scene of the crash of United Airlines flight 585 that crashed on approach in Colorado Springs in 1991. This was a 737, a plane roughly the same size as the 757. Note that it did not hit a reinforced concrete building, it simply hit the ground. Does anyone see any evidence of an airplane? Neither did I when I was there. The entire 125' long, 150,000 pound plane was now in a hole just 11 feet deep.

http://www.cosportbikeclub.org/uploads/ua585a.jpg

[eaheer]

Kinda interesting http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pentagon.html#MainThat was very interesting website. Thanks.

[Mister Z]

Some interesting pictures.... :shock:

http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm

[Tink]

that was a creepy vid... :| very well put together, altho i still think a plane hit it.

[Monkey]

I think it was an evil suicide squirrel!

[Snowman]

Here’s a really sick question…

If this is all true what do you think happened to the real plane and all of its passengers?

[Anonymous]

Yeah let's see...

One aircraft, smaller and slower, hits a reinforced structure designed specifically to withstand a large force (i.e. explosion from a bomb), possibly sacrificing it's outer layers to protect what is more sensitive within.

Another aircraft, larger and faster, hits a building that is strong only at it's center (WTC was a structure where the center was extremely strong and the outer sections were light and relatively very weak - just there to maintain shape and space).

:roll: C'mon people, physics just ain't that complicated here.

[KooLaid]

What ever you say :lol: Dunno, still sounds like a conspiracy theory to me. Not accusing anyone of anything. But :321: sit n spin Maybe "interesting" to you, but it's also "interesting" to me, only sounds like more conspiracy theories and big brother blah blah blah.... yeah...... Entitled to what you think. Entitled to what I think. Unless it's not a huge sin to have an opinion?

[Cwilly]

Another aircraft, larger and faster, hits a building that is strong only at it's center (WTC was a structure where the center was extremely strong and the outer sections were light and relatively very weak - just there to maintain shape and space).

BUZZ, minor point here, but structurally, the WTC was supported by the exterior steel columns you saw mangled after the wreck, regardless, the MAIN thing that brought the WTC down was the lack of fireproofing on most of the floors and interior spaces. there was a lot of jet fuel (because they were very long flights, and they were early in their flight plans) and the jet fuel ignited, heated up the steel until it was no longer structurally sound and collapsed those floors. after those floors collapsed, the rest of the building could not withstand the force of the upper floors and the buildings collapsed. (ask me how I know this)

i personally dont believe any of the conspiracy stuff, but I think it is good that occasionally people question this stuff. especially because there is a lot of blind trust in our government sometimes. question authority!

[Tink]

Another aircraft, larger and faster, hits a building that is strong only at it's center (WTC was a structure where the center was extremely strong and the outer sections were light and relatively very weak - just there to maintain shape and space).

BUZZ, minor point here, but structurally, the WTC was supported by the exterior steel columns you saw mangled after the wreck, regardless, the MAIN thing that brought the WTC down was the lack of fireproofing on most of the floors and interior spaces. there was a lot of jet fuel (because they were very long flights, and they were early in their flight plans) and the jet fuel ignited, heated up the steel until it was no longer structurally sound and collapsed those floors. after those floors collapsed, the rest of the building could not withstand the force of the upper floors and the buildings collapsed. (ask me how I know this)

i personally dont believe any of the conspiracy stuff, but I think it is good that occasionally people question this stuff. especially because there is a lot of blind trust in our government sometimes. question authority!well said...