Soarer Central: Subject: Where is the plane??????

Soarer Central Off-Topic Subject: Where is the plane??????

Thread	Last Poster	Posts	Pages
Archive through May 19, 2006	Dan McColl	25	1
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page

Author

Message

Nephtali Nani
Tinkerer
victoria
TT & V8

Posts: 47
Reg: 04-2006

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Friday, May 19, 2006 - 10:57 pm, by: Nephtali Nani (Nassy)

Dan, At the end of the day, You can see something aint right regardless.
The plane did not Vaporizer within seconds of impact

Ben Socratous
TryHard
SA
Iv'e got less interior that all of you!!!

Posts: 331
Reg: 07-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Friday, May 19, 2006 - 10:58 pm, by: Ben Socratous (Socrates)

Shane McInnes wrote on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 07:38 pm:
They found a engine Turbine which by experts said was not from a 747

Blown ct12a perhaps?

Nephtali Nani wrote on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 08:22 pm:
You would need a perfect mixture of fuel and air to melt Aluminium, Something like a blue flame. not an orange & sooty flame

Air fuel bomb maybe?

We should all blame john howard, it was probably the AWB kickbacks that funded their pilot training anyway

Think I might pass on the cruise tomorrow and head for the hills before the goons knock on my door... All governments are corrupt to some degree, maybe we should start our own country, we could call it Soartpoia and make the act of putting ricey shopping trolley handles on bootlids a capital offence? Just think of the possibilities, no import duties/regulations to worry about! We could enjoy the finest cars Japan has to offer, trade coffee with Colombia, etc...

Nephtali Nani
Tinkerer
victoria
TT & V8

Posts: 48
Reg: 04-2006

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Friday, May 19, 2006 - 11:01 pm, by: Nephtali Nani (Nassy)

Ben Socratous wrote on Friday, May 19, 2006 - 10:58 pm:
Blown ct12a perhaps

It's solved

Ben Socratous
TryHard
SA
Iv'e got less interior that all of you!!!

Posts: 332
Reg: 07-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Friday, May 19, 2006 - 11:15 pm, by: Ben Socratous (Socrates)

Still, even if it was a blue fireball, as it was only an initial blast followed by collateral fire, that would not be long enough to make a plane of that size disappear! They reckon that the magnetic poles are on the move, maybe the Bermuda Triangle is too?

Next thing you know the Potempkin will be in the middle of the MCG, the statue of christ will be chatting up the statue of liberty, opec will pay us to use petrol and bush and howard will be going 69 (or has that already happened?)

Adam Barry
TryHard
WA
UZZ30

Posts: 272
Reg: 08-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 02:33 am, by: Adam Barry (Acdchook)

Why does everyone always think there must be a conspiracy when there almost certainly isn't one? It is not uncommon for high-speed aircraft impacts to result in the entire aircraft to break up into very small pieces of debris, with the largest being less than a metre square. And upon hitting a solid structure such as a building at anything near Vmax, as I imagine anyone deliberately trying to fly into the Pentagon would have done, the effect would have been much like cheese through a grater - there would be no large pieces remaining, and what pieces were left would have been well and truly buried within the structure of the building. The engines would have survived intact for a greater distance than the rest of the aircraft, punching relatively neat holes in the structure deeper than the initial damage zone. All the pictures I have seen of the damage to the Pentagon look consistent with a large non-explosive impact from the outside of the building - any blast from an explosive device would have thrown large amounts of debris out away from the impact site, whereas all the pictures seem to show a localised debris field. Very consistent with a large aircraft impacting the building at very high speed.

Miles Baker
TryHard
Vic
V8

Posts: 275
Reg: 08-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 03:04 am, by: Miles Baker (Milesb)

Exactly. If that is all the damage a missile does to a building, they need to build better bombs.

There is video of two planes hitting the WTC. All of the debris is absorbed. There are no wings or plane parts "on the lawn".

Dave Hart
DieHard
Waikato
UZZ32

Posts: 644
Reg: 08-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 07:36 am, by: Dave Hart (Davyboy)

If that 747 didn't hit the pentagon, where is it and all the people on it?

David Vaughan
Goo Roo
ACT
V8 manual

Posts: 2021
Reg: 07-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 10:56 am, by: David Vaughan (Davidv)

I know that febrile believers will not pay real attention but I will respond to a couple of the comments anyway.

"The aircraft parts found on the lawn are not from a 747"
That is good. No-one to my knowledge has ever claimed that it was a 747. Where is your reference for the part being a military component?

Dan answered the next two but I have a couple of additional comments.
"Orange flames will not melt aluminium or vaporizer [sic] aluminium within seconds"
I specifically excluded vapourisation because it is unnecessary to the plane's apparent disappearance. Adam gave a complete explanation later.

"and to burn all the wings right up to the tips?"
Who claimed that, Perry? I contrasted bits of plane within the building with the loonies' expectation of an aeroplane on the grass. Adam also made this clear.

"If that 757 didn't hit the pentagon, where is it and all the people on it?"
Ah, Dave, I was saving up that question but you got in before me

I expect the hypothesis will be something like:
- a giant conspiracy in which their hundreds of friends and relatives were paid off (and have not yet had a better offer from Oprah); or
- the plane was stolen and dropped in the sea while all passengers were individually killed; or
- they are being being held in the desert and offered bit parts in a future fake landing on mars.

Hey, I have a great idea. If the conspirators needed to dispose of the flight and its passengers without people asking questions, would it not be simplest just to crash the plane into the Pentagon?

Perry Morgan
Goo Roo
Qld
UZZ32 ( V8 )

Posts: 1158
Reg: 07-2005

Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!)

Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 12:27 pm, by: Perry Morgan (Uzz32)

David Vaughan wrote on Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 10:56 am:
"and to burn all the wings right up to the tips?"
Who claimed that, Perry? I contrasted bits of plane within the building with the loonies' expectation of an aeroplane on the grass. Adam also made this clear.

I never said anyone claimed it, and my comment had nothing to do with your comments either. It was a mere observation on the few pics I have seen (I tend not to glue myself to the news when things like this happen).
I have had a bit to do with metallurgy and just find it odd in this circumstance that the conditions were right to dispose of the lot so cleanly. I mean hell, when I was melting alloy for casting I would have love to just piff some avgas at it randomly and have the whole lot melt evenly, rather than have to kiln it for so long. The avgas would have sped up production time heaps.
I don't believe in the conspiracy at all, just pointing out some odd occurrences and unlike some here I am not getting pissed off at people for questioning things.