View Full Version: A Suggestion

Loose Change Forum > Flight 93 - Shanksville Crash Site > A Suggestion


Title: A Suggestion
Description: compare with comparable crashes


nicolas - August 27, 2006 10:34 AM (GMT)
Maybe someone could make a web page to compare the pictures of the Shanksville dump site (or the site of the shot down flight 93 debris) to many other comparable events : large planes that were either crashed or shot down.
For each, we need the date and location, and the type of aircraft along with its dimension.

That would probably help making our mind about what really happened : a truckload of trash dumped in a freshly dug hole, or a shot down plane. Or even a B757 that crashed (I know, that one is a bit far fetched...).

A good start could be http://www.planecrashinfo.com . Note that this website is not the owner of the copyrights.

You can notice for example that http://www.planecrashinfo.com/w941031.htm shows a crash site with not much left... but the plane was 5 times smaller than a B757, so the comparison doesn't help.

Maybe this has already been done, or suggested ?

kimmy - August 27, 2006 02:42 PM (GMT)
I did this once a while back.

Much confusion has been circulating on the internet in the past few years about some of the occurances that happened on 9-11-2001. The official story states that Flight 93 ran into the ground at 550mph and 99.9% of the aircraft vaporized. Check out the photos from the Flight 93.

user posted image
Civilans arrive first gawk at hole. No smoking in the hole. No smoke in the trees. It is still morning and the sun falls to leave the treeline in shadow.
user posted image
Yellow and white suited people arrive. Scare off the civilians and begin doing stuff. No one knows who these people were. No one knows what they were doing. Notice the exact location of the yellow suited man on the far side of the closeest foreground - we will call him Bob. Bob is going to plant something.

user posted image
They continue to do it. There is no sign of any smoke coming from anywhere. The trees are still pristine. Bob surveys hit plant job.
user posted image
Smoke! Fire ! The third guy from the left looks down at what just began smoking in front of his shoes. The wind blows gently from left to right in the frame.
user posted image
Fire pours from the treeline. The yellow and white suits begin to melt into the treeline.
user posted image
The fire department now arrives and is cleared to enter - only two yellow suited men remain. Whatever Bob planted now comes to life as smoke gently comes from exactly what he was standing over in the second and third photo.
user posted image
The news arrives. John Q. Public watches. The lie that is the crash site becomes immortalized.

So let us start at the beginning.

Flight 93 and everyone aboard it went missing.
Yes.

It was reported to have landed later that morning in Cleveland.
Just one AP report said so.

It crashed in Somerset County, PA.
For the first time in avation history a 100 ton aircraft vanished into a crater.


Look at the pictures of the scene of flight 93 alleged crash. What about it is unlike any other aviation mishap in history?

If you think that it was shot down. Great. But do your damn homework. Being shot down rains debris over a large area. It rains humans down on a large area. Dense parts of the aircraft (gear and engines) make ballsitic impacts on the ground. Tail sections and other light parts break up but are otherwise unvaporized.

Keep in mind to vaporize metals the material you want to vaporize has to be in contact with explosives or a plasma cutter or the sun. The vaporization radius on conventional explosives is not very large - comprising, at best, 2x the diameter of the explosives. The blast however is exceedingly large, but blasts only blow materials apart - it does not vaporize. I worked in demolitions back in the Corps.

So if you wanted to vaporize a 100 ton commercial airliner what would you have to do ?

1 - Fly into the sun. Yeah that'd do it.

2 - Plasma arc all of it - bit by bit with electricity. Sure that'd take years with all the worlds cutters.

3 - Coat all of it with roughly 50 tons of high grade military explosives. This, of course, could not fly. No one has suggested this. It is silly.

Re-entry into earths atmosphere will not vaporize - If you all recall the Columbia breaking up over Texas. Everything from landing gear to helmets to tiles to other items were recovered from a wide swath of the southern United States.

What was recovered from Columbia?
user posted image

Use the pictures and physics and past crash data. No plane crashed here. Look up craters for missles and bombs.

user posted image

user posted image


See a commonality? For all intensive purposes the crater in Somerset county, PA is a missle crater. Bombs usually create circular craters and missles create angular craters. So you can say that it is a missle impact crater with a high degree of certainty.

Since I am no expert in avaition technology I looked at crash scene photos of the past.

There is a similar crash in avaition history where a commercial airliner hit the ground at full speed.


Helios Airways Flight 522 crashed on August 14, 2005 at 12:04 EEST into a mountain north of Marathon and Varnavas, Greece. Rescue teams located wreckage near the community of Grammatiko. Pictures.

user posted image
Entire Tail section.
There are more pictures of the Helios crash - look them up on google. But that 1 picture alone has more wreckage that both the flight that hit the Pentagon and Flight 93 combined.


Some say that Flight 93 was shot down. Well that has happened before as well. (note: the method of a plane exploding be it internal(bomb) or external(missle) have little or nothing to do with the fact that indeed - exploded)

Pan Am Scene (exploded at altitude)
Cockpit
user posted image

Engine Parts
user posted image

user posted image

Bodies
user posted image

Reconstruction
user posted image

user posted image


Flight 800 (shot down or exploded at altitude)

user posted image


user posted image

user posted image

user posted image

See what I am saying about wreckage remaining after shoot downs?


If you think flight 93 crashed in somerset county re-read and review this post. Perhaps review all of the pictures of flight 93 crash site. Repeatedly - look for aircraft parts.

If you think flight 93 crashed elsewhere and escaped all eyewitness accounts or pictures being taken of it - then you are silly.

If you think flight 93 landed somewhere because it didnt crash somewhere else; congratulations you do indeed know how gravity works.

nicolas - August 27, 2006 02:52 PM (GMT)
OK, I was in a rush. I saw another threaad were someone pretended that he knew someone that said that the crash in Shanksville looks normal.
Except, of course, that no victim could be found there. Anyway, homework's got to be done.

A big plane crashes about every few months. That makes lots of pictures we can compare Shanksville to. After all a drone could have been crashed in Shanksville. Or shot down by USAF. In any case, comparison with all previous accidents will help understand what happened. Several websites offer pictures of crash sites.

Let's try to find as many pictures as possible, and compare them to Shanksville. It would be nice if someone could host all pictures on their website.

I suggest to go from 2006 to 1908, starting with the Pulkovo crash in Donetsk, and taking only large planes into account. For example only those that are 30 tons and over when empty (B757 is 58 tons when empty). I will mention only fatal accidents. When we have enough data we could gather it all in a table :

2006, August 22nd - TU154 - 54tons empty - fatalities : 171 - picture - Comment : an engine can be seen, in one piece. May the victims rest in peace.

2006, July 9th : A A310 (empyt: 80 tons) exploded after landing - fatalities: 127 - http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/f-ogyp/photo.shtml - Comment : the aircraft is in one piece. May the victims rest in peace.

2005, october 4th : AN12 (~30 tons) bad landing - fatalities : 2 - picture - The plane is mostly intact. May the victims rest in peace.

2005, september 5th : B737 crashed shortly after landing in Indonesia - fatalities: 101 - picture - very large pieces are found. May the victims rest in peace.

2005, august 23rd : B737 crashed due to turbulence, in Peru - fatalities: 40- picture - the picture shows a seemingly intact pair of wheels. May the victims rest in peace.

2005, august 16th - MD-82 (35 tons) crashed due to engine failure in Venezuela - fatalities : 160(all) - picture - most of the tail of the aircraft is in one piece. May the victims rest in peace.

2005 august 14th - B737 crashed in Greece after the pilots lost consciousness (air conditionning problem) - fatalities: 121 -
picture - the tail is in one piece. May the victims rest in peace.

2005 April 20th - B707 (~60 tons) crashed in Iran - fatalities : 3 - pictture - Most of the aircraft is in one piece. May the victims rest in peace.

2005, february 3rd - A310 crashed in the mountain near Kabul - fatalities : 104(all) - Very large pieces of the tail and the fuselage are seen on the snow. May the victims rest in peace.

That's just one year, 98 to go. Does anyone else think what I'm trying to do makes sense ? Let's gather more info. It's quite sickening to see all these crashes, but the truth about 911 must prevail. So far, absolutely nothing looks anything like Shanksville.

nicolas - August 27, 2006 03:01 PM (GMT)
Thank you kimmy, but discussing what the federal agents where doing is not what I intended to do. It is another intereesting, major topic. What I intend to do is browse through decades of civil aviation fatal accidents and try to find if there is any crash that looks anything like Shanksville.
What happened on 911 is so complex (it was intended to be) that we should try to understand it bit by bit.

It can't be a sound evidence in itself, but if among hundreds of crashes none looks anything like Shanksville, it can only make uncomfortable the skeptics.

I want to do that because someone on the forum pretends that there is nothing wrong with the crash site (dump site?).

Oh, and kimmy... I'm not the one you should try to convince. People who know the 911 CR is bullshit should investigate to get closer to the truth and be more convincing. There are hundreds of things to investigate, so let's all do our bit of homework. [salute]

nicolas - August 27, 2006 03:19 PM (GMT)
2004

November 30th - MD-82, bad landing in Indonesia - fatalities : 26 - picture - most of the aircraft is in one piece. May the victims rest in peace.

October 14th - B747 crashed shortly after takeoff in Canada - fatalities: 7 (all) - http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/9g-mkj/photo.shtml - a very large part of the fuselage can be seen. May the victims rest in peace.

The january 3rd crash of a B737 in Egypt ( http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/su-zcf/2.shtml ) doesn't compare because the plane crashed in the sea.

nicolas - August 27, 2006 03:38 PM (GMT)
2003
July 8th: B737 crashed in Sudan - fatalities 116(all but a 2 year old boy) - picture - very large part of the fuselage in one piece. May the victims rest in peace.

March 6th - B737 crashed in Algeria - fatalities 102 (all but one) - picture - cockpit and part of the fuselage in one piece. May the victims rest in peace.

January 8th -Avro RJ100 (weight?) crashed in Turkey, bad landing, fog - picture - fatalities : 75 - A very large part of the aircraft (and an engine?) can be seen. May the victims rest in peace.

Still nothing with any ressemblance with Shanksville.
It will be useful to see if other crashes of large planes occured in 2003-2006, on other websites.

nicolas - August 27, 2006 04:51 PM (GMT)
2002
July 2002 - IL-86 (164 tons) crashed in Moscow after takeoff - fatalities: 14 - picture - A very large piece of the rear end of the aircraft can be seen. May the victims rest in peace.

July 4th - B707 crashed in Central Africa shortly after takeoff - fatalities: 23 - picture - The picture shows a large part of the fuselage. May the victims rest in peace.

July 1st - TU154 and B757 crashed in Germany after collision - fatalities:71 (all) - picture - Large and very large pieces can be seen from both aircrafts. May the victims rest in peace.

May 25th - B747 crashed in Taiwan straight. picture
Debris (magazines etc.) scattered over 80 miles - No distress call, clear weather. Explosion ? A picture shows a very large piece of the cockpit. Fatalities: 225(all). May the victims rest in peace.

May 7th -B737 crashed in Tunisia. Poor weather, landing gear malfunction - fatalities: 14picture - Most of the aircraft is in one piece. May the victims rest in peace.

May 4th - BAC one eleven (weight?) crashed in Nigeria - fatalities: 75 passengers + 73 on ground - picture - Many large parts (engines etc.). May the victims rest in peace.

April 15th - B767 crashed in China - fatalities: 128 - picture - very large parts can be seen on the pictures. May the victims rest in peace.

Interruption from this sickening body count : http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/0410lax/photo.shtml . Don't forget the brakes !! :D

Back to the graveyards...
January 28th: B727 crashed in Columbia - fatalities: 91(all) - picture - Most of the fuselage is in one piece. May the victims rest in peace.

January 16th: B737 crashed in an emergency landing in Indonesia - picture - One flight attendant was killed - most of the aircraft is in one piece. May the victim rest in peace.


First result: another crash where debris were found very far from crash site. The cause of the crash is also unknown.

kimmy - August 28, 2006 03:40 AM (GMT)
Keep it up.

You are rapidly approaching the conclusion that Flight 93 could not have crashed and it could not have been shot down by non-nuclear ordnance.

Why would it have to be nuclear?

Nothing on this planet has the capability to annihilate an aircraft in flight. Except.

user posted image
An atomic weapon.


Even there they recovered tons of tower scraps and parts of the grounding wires.

Plus if Flight 57 and Flight 93 both vanished on impact it would be the largest miracle in recorded history since the Resurrection of Christ.

nicolas - August 28, 2006 09:48 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (kimmy @ Aug 28 2006, 03:40 AM)
Keep it up.

You are rapidly approaching the conclusion that Flight 93 could not have crashed and it could not have been shot down by non-nuclear ordnance.

Why would it have to be nuclear?

Nothing on this planet has the capability to annihilate an aircraft in flight. Except.

An atomic weapon.


Even there they recovered tons of tower scraps and parts of the grounding wires.

Plus if Flight 57 and Flight 93 both vanished on impact it would be the largest miracle in recorded history since the Resurrection of Christ.

If you say so.

Rei Murasame - August 28, 2006 11:18 AM (GMT)
I do wonder at the actual usefulness of comparing flights in which the pilot did not intend to crash the plane, to ones where the pilot did intend to destroy the aircraft.

As far as we know (unless the transcript from Flight 93's back box recording is fake?), the hijackers were challenged by the passengers (some of who used the plane's Airfone system to inform their families of the crisis), and the hijacker who was in control of the plane (Sayeed?) opted to fly the plane into the ground rather than risk it being taken back.

The effect of this on the aircraft would be profoundly different had it not been deliberately flown into the ground. Imagine Flight 93, flying at probably 500+ kmph, diving to the ground at an acute angle, and it becomes more understandable as to how the debris managed to get so far away from the point of impact. The stuff was practically all over the place, I heard they were finding bone fragments for weeks afterwards.

This is completely different from the attitude that a normal commercial pilot would take, which would be to try to somehow minimise the damage (albeit unsucessfully, since it may still be a total fatality) - and this would result in less destruction to the fuselage itself, and can be found in most of the normal commerical flight crashes that were linked to above.

What am I saying? I'm saying it's not quite sensible to compare the results of those crashes you showed, to the results of Sayeed's suicide dive - because while all are fatalities, Flight 93 is unique in that it was deliberate, and as such it would have a unique result, which can't be compared to any other.

This could even be replicated (well, not really, but I'm just giving an example) by taking a plane made of Lego, and destroying it in two different fashions. A few years ago I did this, because I was a bored kid, and because of something to do with japanese kamikaze pilots, and this is what happened. (humour me here)

Scenario #1:
I stand atop a chair, and 'drop' the plane as if I were a person in distress, trying to preserve the plane. Basically, I try to get it to land on its underside, with a somewhat gentle descent, with a 'low' speed. It of course hits the livingroom floor and breaks apart anyway, my imaginary passengers would be very dead.

I bring my mum in, she asks me why I threw a lego plane across the room. There is enough left of it for her to have identified it as such. (why she humoured my morbid insanity is beyond me... lol)

Scenario #2:
I stand atop the same chair, with the now rebuilt 'lego plane'. I now suicide the plane into the floor instead, throwing it to have its nose strike the floor at high speed at about 30 degrees elevation from the surface. It literally disintegrates, and explodes out all over the room, leaving surprisingly little wreckage at the actual point of impact.

I bring my mum in, and she asks me why I've spread the lego pieces all over the place. She is unaware that there was even a 2nd test, because the plane has been deconstructed that point where finding 3 peices attached to each other is a challenge. And, remarkably, pieces of it were even found in other rooms of the house, and behind large objects. A few lone pieces even made their way across the livingroom, down the hallway, and into a bedroom some 50ft away from the point of impact.

So using this loose and informal demostration, I'd say that normal crashes fit under Scenario 1, but Flight 93 is Scenario 2, which is why they found pieces of plane, personal effects, bone fragments, and engine parts so far away from the point of impact.

dubitandumest - September 4, 2006 08:22 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (kimmy @ Aug 27 2006, 02:42 PM)
I did this once a while back.


OK I think we need high standards when arguing. We are up against scrupulous and mighty people who are deceiving the public where they can. And the only weapon we have is our curiosity - and in the end, I hope, the thruth.
So: when were these photos shot? By whom? Are they brought into the right time order?
As far as I found out the photos of the men in white and yellow overalls were made by a photographer working for reuters. The BBC-website dates the photos from Sept. 12. But maybe that is wrong. The best would be to trace that photographer and ask him. Unfortunately he himself has no address when you google him. Who can help? Maybe an honest and dedicated reuters´collegue (there should still be some around)?

kimmy - September 4, 2006 08:32 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (dubitandumest @ Sep 4 2006, 08:22 PM)
QUOTE (kimmy @ Aug 27 2006, 02:42 PM)
I did this once a while back.


OK I think we need high standards when arguing. We are up against scrupulous and mighty people who are deceiving the public where they can. And the only weapon we have is our curiosity - and in the end, I hope, the thruth.
So: when were these photos shot? By whom? Are they brought into the right time order?
As far as I found out the photos of the men in white and yellow overalls were made by a photographer working for reuters. The BBC-website dates the photos from Sept. 12. But maybe that is wrong. The best would be to trace that photographer and ask him. Unfortunately he himself has no address when you google him. Who can help? Maybe an honest and dedicated reuters´collegue (there should still be some around)?

You cannot unburn a forest. Or un set something on fire.

Two facts remain.

1)The mayor (Ernie Stuhl) and his pals showed up to a crater emitting no smoke and trees unburned.

2) The news arrived to a burning forest and smoking hole.


These pictures agree with the facts, and physics. Therefore no one would need to create them as they exist.






* Hosted for free by InvisionFree