OT:"16-foot hole" in Pentagon
Richard Jernigan
foot hole in the Pentagon?" as though this were some sort of physical
impossibility.
First note that the exterior damage to the building was at least 65
feet wide, and 40 feet high. Just Google it, you'll get dozens of
valid hits. This corresponds to the wingspan inboard of the engines
and the height of the tail.
Secondly note that the fuselage of a 757 is only 13 feet in diameter.
Google that.
Thirdly, a little arithmetic shows that a 16-foot diameter hole, 155
feet long ('approximately the length of the aircraft') could hold the
shredded and closely packed debris from more than nineteen 757
aircraft. While simple arithmetic is beyond the abilities of some
forum members, here goes anyhow.
The maximum takeoff weight of a 757-300 is 272,500 pounds. If we knew
its density, we could use the formula
volume = weight/density
to get the volume of materials in the aircraft. Not the volume of the
aircraft, which is mostly air, but the volume of materials used to
build it. Whatever hit the Pentagon was mostly shredded and consisted
of relatively small pieces of debris after the impact.
By far the preponderance of material in the 757 is aluminum. Other
materials of significant weight are denser, like steel in the landing
gear. In the formula above, if we use the density of aluminum, we are
underestimating the total density, consequently overestimating the
volume of materials used to build the plane.
The density of aluminum is about 2.7 gram/cubic centimeter, or about
168 pounds/cubic foot. That means that all the materials in a 757
would fit into a container of capacity 1619 cubic feet.
A 16-foor diameter cylinder one foot long has a volume of 3.1416* 64 =
201 cubic feet. So the total volume of a shredded 757 would fit into a
sixteen-foot hole a little over 8 feet in length. The debris from
whatever hit the Pentagon was not nearly as tightly packed. The hole
(155 feet long) would have been only 1/19 filled by the debris from a
shredded 757, that is to say that the hole could have held the tightly
packed debris of 19 757s, but the debris from a single 757 would have
been spread out by a factor of 19.
So what's the problem with a 16-foot hole? An undamaged 757 fuselage
would have fit into it. The shredded debris from a 757 would have
filled only 1/19 of it. The exterior damage to the building is
consistent with being hit by a 757 with the wings inboard of the
engines and the tail intact, the wings and tail being sheared off
early in the plane's trajectory through the building.
But all this is obvious to anyone who can Google the weight and
dimensions of a 757 and the density of aluminum, and who has the
ability and inclination to do a little sixth-grade arithmetic.
RNJ
Richard Jernigan
Oh, and anyone who pictures a 757 plowing intact through a building
with concrete walls infilled with brick, hasn't delved closely into
the structure of modern aircraft or rockets. I have. They are
masterpieces of lightweight construction, guaranteed to be demolished
by impact with a solidly constructed building.
I would suspect that the details of such a demolition are largely
unknown. Being slammed into a concrete building is not on the list of
intended uses for modern aircraft. There are computer codes that
simulate the performance of modern aerospace structures within their
intended design limits. These codes are based on elastic deformation,
that is the structures don't get permanently bent in the simulation.
There are codes that simulate inelastic deformation. The nuclear
weapon design codes even simulate phase changes such as melting and
vaporization. But I don't believe such codes have been experimentally
validated with structures as large and complex as modern passenger
aircraft.
RNJ
RNJ
Richard Yates
"Richard Jernigan" <rnjer...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d631a4b9-5eae-4cde...@d39g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
Oh, and anyone who pictures a 757 plowing intact through a building
with concrete walls infilled with brick, hasn't delved closely into
the structure of modern aircraft or rockets. I have. They are
masterpieces of lightweight construction, guaranteed to be demolished
------------------------------------
Before the loonies jump on this last sentence, the World Trade Center
buildings were of curtain-wall construction, unlike the Pentagon, hence the
holes in them were larger (wings and tail not being sheared off).
dsi1
> The question has repeatedly been raised, "How did a 757 fit into a 16-
> foot hole in the Pentagon?" as though this were some sort of physical
> impossibility.
The small hole and lack of plane parts does seem to be
counter-intuitive. Where are the wings and tail section? How can a plane
seemingly disappear? I asked my baby brother who is a crash-scene
investigator and an aeronautical engineer, among other things, about
this. He has no problems with these "impossibilities." He said that
funny things happen in high speed crashes with solid objects. That
there's no debris recognizable as a plane is not unusual in crashes
where the momentum vectors are concentrated in such a small area. Crash
a plane into a field at a high angle of attack and you get the same
result. These are the two tenants of the 911 conspiracy theories -
without them, everything pretty much just falls apart.
Richard Jernigan
> On May 11, 7:45 pm, dsi1 <dsi1@humuhumunukunukuapua'a.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> > He said that funny things happen...
>
> Funny things also happen when powerful interests want to get around
> laws.
>
> I don't give a crap about the Pentagon crash, but I do wonder about
> "official story" apologists.
>
> Matt
I was only paid $750,000 for doing the arithmetic and posting it on
the highest visibility forum on the internet.
RNJ
Richard Jernigan
Plus my Top Secret security clearance and a variety of intel tickets
let me find out the density of aluminum. The weight of the plane was a
little harder. I had to call up my old buddy, the CEO of Boeing.
RNJ
dsi1
> On May 11, 7:45 pm, dsi1<dsi1@humuhumunukunukuapua'a.org> wrote:
>>
>> He said that funny things happen...
>
> Funny things also happen when powerful interests want to get around
> laws.
Good strategy, stay vague so the powerful interests won't be coming
after you in their big black cars in the middle of the night.
Unfortunately, I'm not a member of your secret society so I have no idea
what you're really talking about. :-)
>
> I don't give a crap about the Pentagon crash, but I do wonder about
> "official story" apologists.
>
It's not my nature to apologize for anybody. Just giving out info by one
expert. Feel free to take it or leave it. Personally, I'd trust my
brother with my life.
> Matt
dsi1
>
> apologist |əˈpäləjist|
> noun
> a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial :
> [Ex.] an enthusiastic apologist for fascism in the 1920s.
>
> ORIGIN mid 17th cent.: from French apologiste, from Greek
> apologizesthai ‘give an account’
I like to keep it simple. The only point I want to make is that anybody
that says these types of crashes are impossible is ill-informed or a
liar. If you have information contradicting this please let me know so I
can refute that or apologize for giving out bad info. Otherwise, cut the
crap with the word play. That junk goes over smashingly with the wine n'
cheese CG crowd but I don't play that game - not much anyway. :-)
Richard Yates
"Matt Faunce" <mattf...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:874e2d68-a083-4077...@l31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
From the Apple Dictionary:
apologist |əˈpäləjist|
noun
a person who offers an argument in defense of something controversial :
[Ex.] an enthusiastic apologist for fascism in the 1920s.
ORIGIN mid 17th cent.: from French apologiste, from Greek
apologizesthai ‘give an account’
-------------------
So what's with the "official story" part of your statement? Do you mean
that it is not the REAL official story, or are you quoting someone?
Richard Jernigan
>
> Matt
No. But I do receive a monthly payment from the U.S. Treasury
Department. So I work for Goldman-Sachs along with the Somali pirates.
RNJ
Tashi
> The question has repeatedly been raised, "How did a 757 fit into a 16-
> foot hole in the Pentagon?" as though this were some sort of physical
> impossibility.
>
> First note that the exterior damage to the building was at least 65
> feet wide, and 40 feet high. Just Google it, you'll get dozens of
> valid hits. This corresponds to the wingspan inboard of the engines
> and the height of the tail.
RNJ, you can do better than that can't you? First off the damage
65X40 happened 40 minutes after the impact. There is plenty of info
on this if you take the time to _actually_ dig a little beyond what
the Corporate media tell you. If you were working for me as a private
investigator, based on this crap you just posted I would have to say
"Your Fired!"
> Secondly note that the fuselage of a 757 is only 13 feet in diameter.
> Google that.
Oh so in your fucked up logic a 13 foot diameter fuselage leaves
precisely a 13 foot hole? Your a genius!
Right! The two titanium engines that supposedly where found intact
inside the Pentagon, although there is much debate as to if they are
from a 757, defied the laws of physics and folded up and were sucked
into the 16 foot hole. Sound like a miniature worm hole to me, you've
been reading too much science fiction.
One more little problem in your calculations, that you would know
about, if you took the time to do some proper investigation is
according to FDR, and credible eyewitness the jet came in at an angle
(not as in the faked Pentagon tape that shows something coming in
level with the ground).
What does this mean? It means the engines would have caused massive
damage to the foundation, and there wasn't a scratch on it. I won't
even mention that the initial impact hole was ground level, first two
stories, as the ( pentagon faked video shows) the engines would have
dug 6 feet into the ground at that level, way before it allegedly
struck the building.
So screw your bullshit razzel dazzel maths! Any ape can add and
subtract as you mentioned. First RNJ you need to get the facts
straight.
Tashi
Do you realize how pathetic you sound? Little brother, who wasn't
there only saw and heard what was on the the Corporate run media,
solves everything, and to top it off since you "trust" him with your
life, we in turn should do the same, and rest the mantle of free
society, and democracy, on his every word? Aren't you the guy who
cries foul at the internet? Yet put your particular brand of bullshit
out there? Fascinating!
John LaCroix
> Do you realize how pathetic you sound? Little brother, who wasn't
> there only saw and heard what was on the the Corporate run media,
> solves everything, and to top it off since you "trust" him with your
> life, we in turn should do the same, and rest the mantle of free
> society, and democracy, on his every word? Aren't you the guy who
> cries foul at the internet? Yet put your particular brand of bullshit
> out there? Fascinating!
You really are quite the ass-hat...keep up the good work!
Tashi
I aim to please.
Wollybird
He's a cartoon character, where pentagons are made of bamboo and
tissue paper, flimsy hollow objects hitting solid walls still make
cookie cutter cut outs, jet engines and wings are made of solid
titanium, the 150 or so people who said the saw the jet hit the
building didn't really (it was mid morning in DC,for chrissake how
could no one see it?), the debris the charred bodies don't exist,etc,
etc
dsi1
>
> Do you realize how pathetic you sound? Little brother, who wasn't
> there only saw and heard what was on the the Corporate run media,
> solves everything, and to top it off since you "trust" him with your
> life, we in turn should do the same, and rest the mantle of free
> society, and democracy, on his every word? Aren't you the guy who
> cries foul at the internet? Yet put your particular brand of bullshit
> out there? Fascinating!
>
I see you rely, yet again on the same old lame strategy of throwing all
this shit about the media and big bad corporations and all those other
fears you have into this conversation. I ain't interested in what you're
afraid of nor will I allow you redirect this conversation.
My simple point is that what you have said is untrue. If you have any
info that contradicts what I have said, call me on it. Otherwise, if you
can't focus on this one stupidly simple little idea, our little chat is
over. Have a nice day! :-)
Wollybird
You'd be a fear monger, too if you thought this guy as real:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_UA3DWy2XsK8/Swtudb9IV_I/AAAAAAAAAhs/Fb7UFEASN0U/s1600/MahakalaSm.jpg
Tashi
> On 5/12/2010 4:46 AM, Tashi wrote:
>
>
>
> > Do you realize how pathetic you sound? Little brother, who wasn't
> > there only saw and heard what was on the the Corporate run media,
> > solves everything, and to top it off since you "trust" him with your
> > life, we in turn should do the same, and rest the mantle of free
> > society, and democracy, on his every word? Aren't you the guy who
> > cries foul at the internet? Yet put your particular brand of bullshit
> > out there? Fascinating!
>
> I see you rely, yet again on the same old lame strategy of throwing all
> this shit about the media and big bad corporations
" The world watches America, and America watches TV"
Oh you must be talking about the media consultation I'm guessing?
You have to be an ostrich with it's head in the sand, to not think
that a handful of Banksters brought this economy to it's knees, and
that the Oil cabal that manipulates prices and blocks alternative
energy progress.
Believe me I'm not fear mongering. I just think it's wise not to sit
with your back to the door, and not believe everything you are told.
It's wonderful to believe the corporate media, then Dave you can quit
using your own brain.......... how nice!
>and all those other fears you have into this conversation.
Fears what fears? Are you afraid of 911, or having a discussion
about environmental catastrophes, corrupt banksters, and politicians?
I think you should move to China where people are imprisoned for this
kind of discussion.
Where absolute truth is what "Little brother" says...........
>I ain't interested in what you're afraid of nor will I allow you redirect this conversation.
Your the one who is redirecting this conversation, I think last I
heard we were talking about a sixteen foot hole.
> My simple point is that what you have said is untrue.
What that "little brother" wasn't on at the Pentagon? Just remember
thar Dave, it's just your "simple point" and nothing more.
>If you have any info that contradicts what I have said, call me on it.
You said nothing...... so there is nothing to contradict. Dave you
are letting yourself go, you have a scattered mind.
>Otherwise, if you can't focus on this one stupidly simple little idea, our little chat is
> over.
Where have I heard that before?
Have a nice day! :-)
So far so good!
dsi1
Ha ha, much fear in the boy do I sense... yes... :-)
Colorful! Wish I could hang something like that in my office. Reminds me
of my mother-in-law, except maybe a little less scary. Of course my MIL
doesn't have her head on a plate like this chap. For some reason, it
makes me happy. Guess I respond to the colors more than the thematic
elements. The pic would make my drummer friend jump for joy. She likes
color and loves skulls. I'll have to send her this link. Thanks! :-)
Tashi
Tashi
> On 5/12/2010 8:10 AM, Wollybird wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 12, 12:58 pm, dsi1<d...@spamnet.com> wrote:
> >> On 5/12/2010 4:46 AM, Tashi wrote:
>
> >>> Do you realize how pathetic you sound? Little brother, who wasn't
> >>> there only saw and heard what was on the the Corporate run media,
> >>> solves everything, and to top it off since you "trust" him with your
> >>> life, we in turn should do the same, and rest the mantle of free
> >>> society, and democracy, on his every word? Aren't you the guy who
> >>> cries foul at the internet? Yet put your particular brand of bullshit
> >>> out there? Fascinating!
>
> >> I see you rely, yet again on the same old lame strategy of throwing all
> >> this shit about the media and big bad corporations and all those other
> >> fears you have into this conversation. I ain't interested in what you're
> >> afraid of nor will I allow you redirect this conversation.
>
> >> My simple point is that what you have said is untrue. If you have any
> >> info that contradicts what I have said, call me on it. Otherwise, if you
> >> can't focus on this one stupidly simple little idea, our little chat is
> >> over. Have a nice day! :-)
>
> > You'd be a fear monger, too if you thought this guy as real:
>
> Ha ha, much fear in the boy do I sense... yes... :-)
>
> Colorful! Wish I could hang something like that in my office. Reminds me
> of my mother-in-law, except maybe a little less scary. Of course my MIL
> doesn't have her head on a plate like this chap. For some reason, it
> makes me happy. Guess I respond to the colors more than the thematic
> elements. The pic would make my drummer friend jump for joy. She likes
> color and loves skulls. I'll have to send her this link. Thanks! :-)
Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which
differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people
are even incapable of forming such opinions. Albert Einstein
Tashi
Stay away from women with adams apples..... I know this will be
difficult for you.
dsi1
> Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which
> differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people
> are even incapable of forming such opinions. Albert Einstein
As a guitar maker, you're pretty good. As a critical thinker, you suck!
How could it be anyway else? So full of fear and prejudices you are!
Even worse is that your needy ego forces you to see a world in an
unrealistic way. This is why you're still stuck in the same place - that
16' hole in the wall - that you started years ago.
I've moved on - yet, when you first brought this up, I too found it
inexplicable that a plane would cause a small hole and that a plane
could fly into a field and leave hardly a trace. I asked a qualified
expert that I trusted and he explained how this could happen. As it
goes, this has nothing to do with the media, or big business and
everything to do with elementary physics - Albert Einstein would be
flipping in his grave at how people like you will use his words.
Years from now, you'll still be stuck in that 16' hole. I can't think of
a guy more deserving of this fate. :-)
Wollybird
>
> Stay away from women with adams apples..... I know this will be
>
> - Show quoted text -
Which reminds me, I thought you were going to Thailand.
Here, your buddies at above top secret break down the mystery of a 13
foot wide plane fitting into a 16 foot hole;
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg1
Tashi
Don't bother Wolli I've heard everything.
Tashi
> On May 12, 5:35 pm, Wollybird <wollyb...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
>
> > > > etc
>
> > > Stay away from women with adams apples..... I know this will be
> > > difficult for you.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Which reminds me, I thought you were going to Thailand.
Who said I was going to Bangkok?
Wollybird
> > > Which reminds me, I thought you were going to Thailand.
>
> Who said I was going to Bangkok?
I don't know.
John LaCroix
>
> Stay away from women with adams apples.....
You were told those weren't girls....
John LaCroix
No one said Bangkok. A few discussions back you mentioned Thailand -
going to meet up with your girlfriend and build some schools or
something of that sort. Around the same time you mentioned that your
wife had moved back to Italy.