Second hit footage showing no plane

[chek]

I´m not aware of anything shot from inside the building. Are you aware of anything that shows or reports a crash as we know it, with pieces of the plane breaking off and falling down the outside of the building (as has happened with other plane crashes)?

What other plane crashes Madge?
There has never been (and let's hope there never is again) any comparison, so please explain what you would 'expect' and your reasons for 'expecting' it.
Or are you another one relying on your intuition for visualising something way outside our everyday experience?

[marky 54]

I´m not aware of anything shot from inside the building. Are you aware of anything that shows or reports a crash as we know it, with pieces of the plane breaking off and falling down the outside of the building (as has happened with other plane crashes)?

there are a few angles that show debris falling down after the impact of the crash.

but i aint going all out to provide you with a link to the one angle i know of the top of my head and waste my time trying to sway people from their beliefs who have no intrest in what is right infront of them.

there are two things you need to decide for yourself first.

1. how big would the debris be after that impact.....sorry crash, do you expect to find a intact wing section?.

2. will you decide they are pieces of building and not plane regardless of the fact they could well be pieces of the plane AND building also.

3. also why does the debris coming through the otherside match where debris are found in the street, you should know this by now so i don't assume you need a link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AtjiNaC ... ed&search=

luckily i found one example in 20 seconds.

can you say with any degree of certainty that the debris being thrown back the way the plane entered are not bits of plane as well as cladding etc?

[gruts]

I´m not aware of anything shot from inside the building. Are you aware of anything that shows or reports a crash as we know it, with pieces of the plane breaking off and falling down the outside of the building (as has happened with other plane crashes)?

What other plane crashes Madge?
There has never been (and let's hope there never is again) any comparison, so please explain what you would 'expect' and your reasons for 'expecting' it.
Or are you another one relying on your intuition for visualising something way outside our everyday experience?

I found the following interesting account - and picture - of a hole left in the side of the USS Hinsdale by a Japanese kamikaze plane in 1945, by googling on "kamikaze".

maybe there are other examples....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Hinsdale_%28APA-120%29

"As she steamed toward the transport area through the pre-dawn blackness, marines already on deck and ready to disembark, Hinsdale's lookouts spotted an enemy plane skimming low over the water. With only a few seconds warning, Hinsdale could not evade the kamikaze; at 0600 the suicide plane crashed into her port side just above the water line and ripped into the engine room. Three explosions rocked the troop-laden transport as the kamikaze's bombs exploded deep inside her and tore the engine room apart—only one member of the watch survived death by scalding steam from the exploding boilers."



I'm assuming that the ship's hull was made of steel....

so - Madge, Sid, Andrew - according to your "understanding" of physics (and newton's laws in particular), it should be impossible for the plane to have done what it did.

if you're right, the crash should have wrecked the plane, bits would have fallen off the plane and fallen down the outside of the ship.

so why didn't that happen?

[chek]

Good find Gruts - very roadrunner

I was blinkered by looking for a hollow column grid structure which further reduces the density of the impacted area considerably, compared to a WWII carriers steel plate hull.

[gruts]

well according to the wikipedia page there were well over 2000 kamikaze attacks on US shipping during ww2, so there are probably other examples of planes crashing into and penetrating steel ships....

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

the photo I posted is at the bottom of this page and also here:

http://ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/ships/A ... sdale.html

[plane son on 911]

I´m not aware of anything shot from inside the building. Are you aware of anything that shows or reports a crash as we know it, with pieces of the plane breaking off and falling down the outside of the building (as has happened with other plane crashes)?

What other plane crashes Madge?
There has never been (and let's hope there never is again) any comparison, so please explain what you would 'expect' and your reasons for 'expecting' it.
Or are you another one relying on your intuition for visualising something way outside our everyday experience?

I found the following interesting account - and picture - of a hole left in the side of the USS Hinsdale by a Japanese kamikaze plane in 1945, by googling on "kamikaze".

maybe there are other examples....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Hinsdale_%28APA-120%29

"As she steamed toward the transport area through the pre-dawn blackness, marines already on deck and ready to disembark, Hinsdale's lookouts spotted an enemy plane skimming low over the water. With only a few seconds warning, Hinsdale could not evade the kamikaze; at 0600 the suicide plane crashed into her port side just above the water line and ripped into the engine room. Three explosions rocked the troop-laden transport as the kamikaze's bombs exploded deep inside her and tore the engine room apart—only one member of the watch survived death by scalding steam from the exploding boilers."



I'm assuming that the ship's hull was made of steel....

so - Madge, Sid, Andrew - according to your "understanding" of physics (and newton's laws in particular), it should be impossible for the plane to have done what it did.

if you're right, the crash should have wrecked the plane, bits would have fallen off the plane and fallen down the outside of the ship.

so why didn't that happen?

Please note the lack of a plane shaped hole in the boat.

If the plane was a single engined plane (the engine being the heaviest bit) that hole looks just right

[gruts]

you haven't explained how this little plane crashed through the steel hull of this ship and ended up in the engine room.

can you do that?

[John White]

you haven't explained how this little plane crashed through the steel hull of this ship and ended up in the engine room.

can you do that?

Even more so: why if it could'nt do that, the Japanese Pilot's would have commited suicide just to bounce off the hull and go splat...

"No planes" theory certainly doesnt fly in the WWII Pacific Theatre...

[plane son on 911]

What planet are you lot on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The densest part of a plane could cut through a steel hull, similarly if there had been real planes on 911 the engines may well have penetrated the building.

The bulk of the wings, fuselage and tail would bounce off, which is what appears to have happened with the kamikaze plane (given the size of thw hole)

[gruts]

What planet are you lot on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The densest part of a plane could cut through a steel hull, similarly if there had been real planes on 911 the engines may well have penetrated the building.

The bulk of the wings, fuselage and tail would bounce off, which is what appears to have happened with the kamikaze plane (given the size of thw hole)

lol - I'm not sure if you're completely blind, completely thick or just taking the piss, but let's go through it again....

in the case of the planes that hit the wtc - we have a 150 ton object travelling at 500 mph which crashes into a steel frame consisting of multiple linked sections.

the huge force that the plane exerted smashed through the links joining the individual sections together.

I can't believe that anyone possessing a modicum of common sense would think that was impossible, but apparently you do. how you could still do so after seeing what the kamikaze plane did to the ship's hull is even more bizarre.

in the case of the kamikaze plane hitting the USS Hinsdale - we have a much lighter object travelling at a lower speed crashing into solid steel.

nevertheless, the fuselage and at least one engine penetrated the hull and ended up inside the ship. that is crystal clear if you look at the photo.

why didn't the plane crumple up and slide down into the sea, as you "no planes" people have claimed it would?

[marky 54]

What planet are you lot on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The densest part of a plane could cut through a steel hull, similarly if there had been real planes on 911 the engines may well have penetrated the building.

The bulk of the wings, fuselage and tail would bounce off, which is what appears to have happened with the kamikaze plane (given the size of thw hole)

i see now, you think the largest hole is an engine?

i have to wonder how big you think a fighter plane is, to me it looks like the big hole is where the fuselage entered, followed by two wing imprints either side and a small hole under one wing where a engine was likely attached.

[gruts]

i see now, you think the largest hole is an engine?

lol - so I assume the plane was mainly flying underwater....

[John White]

What planet are you lot on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The densest part of a plane could cut through a steel hull, similarly if there had been real planes on 911 the engines may well have penetrated the building.

You know, its interesting that, what with an engine being clearly observable departing the other side of WTC2 on a trajectory that matches, oddly enough, precisely with where a jolly big chunk of engine hits the deck in NYC....

Earth. Solidly. Btw

[marky 54]

i see now, you think the largest hole is an engine?

lol - so I assume the plane was mainly flying underwater....

if it keeps their arguement alive it would'nt suprise me if thats what they think.

i think it is clear by now for anyone with any kind of logic that planes could easily enter the towers given their size and speed.

good find by the way gruts it demonstrates what alot of us have been trying to say for a long time.

[sidlittle]

What planet are you lot on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The densest part of a plane could cut through a steel hull, similarly if there had been real planes on 911 the engines may well have penetrated the building.

You know, its interesting that, what with an engine being clearly observable departing the other side of WTC2 on a trajectory that matches, oddly enough, precisely with where a jolly big chunk of engine hits the deck in NYC....

Earth. Solidly. Btw

except it looks nothing like an engine, is far too big, doesn't align with the supposed exit hole that you believe is located on the corner edge and conveniently landed under a canopy.






With regards to the kamikaze picture (not directed at you JW), are we to just assume the entire plane is inside the ship and the picture was taken immediately after the event?

cheers

[gruts]

With regards to the kamikaze picture (not directed at you JW), are we to just assume the entire plane is inside the ship and the picture was taken immediately after the event?

cheers

hi sid - you don't have to assume anything - just read....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Hinsdale_%28APA-120%29

"As she steamed toward the transport area through the pre-dawn blackness, marines already on deck and ready to disembark, Hinsdale's lookouts spotted an enemy plane skimming low over the water. With only a few seconds warning, Hinsdale could not evade the kamikaze; at 0600 the suicide plane crashed into her port side just above the water line and ripped into the engine room. Three explosions rocked the troop-laden transport as the kamikaze's bombs exploded deep inside her and tore the engine room apart—only one member of the watch survived death by scalding steam from the exploding boilers."

[gruts]

nice to see you back by the way - can you answer my question yet?

(third time of asking)

I think the point Andrew was making gruts, is that it matters not whether it was the plane or the tower that was traveling at 500mph and lets not start kidding ourselves we are talking about a Jenga tower now.

I don't think Andrew understands that a moving object has more energy than a stationary one....

I guess the towers are a feat of engineering, too strong to collapse when debating with the OCT's yet when NPT's turn up , you can blow them over?

who said anything about blowing them over?

The outer steel frame was a mesh capable of supporting its own weight and resisting a distributed wind load.

However, if you apply a massive force to a single point in that mesh - which is composed of small segments partly welded, partly bolted together - how is it supposed to resist?

The buildings were designed to cope with plane impacts - I'm sure you've also seen the video of one of the designers saying that the hole in the building would be like a pencil hole in a mosquito net - and because the steel of the perimeter and core were interlinked horizontally as well as vertically, the load could easily be redistributed.

see here for a good desciption of the perimeter structure:

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/arch/perimeter.html

"The perimeter wall structures were assembled from pre-fabricated units consisting of 3 column sections and 3 spandrel plate sections welded together. Adjacent units were bolted together: column sections were bolted to adjacent columns above and below, and spandrel plate sections were mated with adjacent sections on either side with numerous bolts."

Are you seriously claiming that the links between the individual sections of the steel frame could withstand the force of a 150 ton plane travellng at 500 mph?

if so, please explain how.

[scar]

except it looks nothing like an engine, is far too big, doesn't align with the supposed exit hole that you believe is located on the corner edge and conveniently landed under a canopy.

I have to say its always looked like the nose of the plane to me, not an engine.
And that is surely not possible. Its one of several 'anomalies' that dont make sense and yet its been captured from several angles.

hmmm.

[John White]

Trouble is, discussing it is rather like playing ping pong:
"nose!"/"engine!""nose!"/"engine!""nose!"/"engine!" etc

For what its worth, it looks nose shaped, until one realises one is looking at a very fast moving fire, not the exterior of anything definate, and the "nose like" nature of its shape is mostly the result of it being too luminescant for video to capture it properly. Its certainly big, solid, heavy and matches the right hand engine's entry path on the other side, and yes, there was a large chunk of engine in the street on its same exit trajectory. It breaks into three parts on the way down to. It also can't be the nose becuase the nose would definately have hit the central columns, and would have been shredded upon them like the bulk of the fuselage of the plane: which is a bit obvious, but also worth saying