Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by J-Me
What about the highway it would of HAD to fly over in order to fly into the Pentagon?
Surely at 500+ - 700 (???) mph i'd have torn that a bit up?
quote:
More interesting is the flight that apparently the passengers "regained" control of and then crashed, killing all on board. Over the field in (pensylvania ) This is a small time cover up with no witnesses that basically an F16 blew out of the sky to save further attacks on american cities, at the expense of many more lives lost. Which is the classic american "hero" story to sell to the press on a day of horror to make the situation have a bright point, like always ending the news with a nice cat/dog story. Which IMO was probably a good call.
Good call? You serious? Why didnt they just shoot every plane down after the first plane hit the twin tower?
Well if it was my call i would have done.
2500 people lost their lives due to the twin towers destruction. Only killing 2-300 is quite alot less.
The mass confusion going on around the time meant that they couldnt have had much of a lcue as to what planes were "jacked and others not. So technically as soon as they did they "apparently" shot one down.
GREYCORSA: Probably the most siginificant event in history since the moon landings/jfk assasination/2nd world war, i think people are gunna still remember ponder and conversate 
Nickyboy, if your mates dad lives there he probably has the best idea, i think its highly plausable and would make perfect sense to shoot the plane down, it doesnt make sense if after regaining control of an aircraft theyd then crash it  Doenst seem logical to me. In a military situaiton i think they would have shot it down. But there we go.
|
Davidp18
Member
Registered: 18th May 04
User status: Offline
|
one arguement to the whole lunar landin was y was the flag movin as if it was windy,y wud it be windy on the moon,theres no gravity or nefin
|
Jambo
Member
Registered: 8th Sep 01
Location: Maidenhead, Drives: VXR Arctic
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Davidp18
one arguement to the whole lunar landin was y was the flag movin as if it was windy,y wud it be windy on the moon,theres no gravity or nefin
Solar wind
|
nickyboy01
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
Location: Oxford-ish
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jambo
quote:
Originally posted by J-Me
What about the highway it would of HAD to fly over in order to fly into the Pentagon?
Surely at 500+ - 700 (???) mph i'd have torn that a bit up?
quote:
More interesting is the flight that apparently the passengers "regained" control of and then crashed, killing all on board. Over the field in (pensylvania ) This is a small time cover up with no witnesses that basically an F16 blew out of the sky to save further attacks on american cities, at the expense of many more lives lost. Which is the classic american "hero" story to sell to the press on a day of horror to make the situation have a bright point, like always ending the news with a nice cat/dog story. Which IMO was probably a good call.
Good call? You serious? Why didnt they just shoot every plane down after the first plane hit the twin tower?
Well if it was my call i would have done.
2500 people lost their lives due to the twin towers destruction. Only killing 2-300 is quite alot less.
The mass confusion going on around the time meant that they couldnt have had much of a lcue as to what planes were "jacked and others not. So technically as soon as they did they "apparently" shot one down.
GREYCORSA: Probably the most siginificant event in history since the moon landings/jfk assasination/2nd world war, i think people are gunna still remember ponder and conversate
Nickyboy, if your mates dad lives there he probably has the best idea, i think its highly plausable and would make perfect sense to shoot the plane down, it doesnt make sense if after regaining control of an aircraft theyd then crash it Doenst seem logical to me. In a military situaiton i think they would have shot it down. But there we go.
Not my mates dad, My Dad lives less than 10 miles form the crash site.
If it had been shot down then wreckage would have been spread over a large area, the actually crash site is reasonably small (a few hundred yds at most) and it is less than qtr of a miles from 3 villages all of which had no wreckage except a few floating items after the impact. If it had been shot down then parts of the plane would have been found away from the crash site and they were not. They didnt regain control as such, the pilots had been incompacitated in some way (knocked out of similar) and the passengers overpowered the hijackers but never actually gained control of the plane
[Edited on 11-09-2004 by nickyboy01]
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
surely some smart arse could have flown the plane? Its not the difficult to see that the ground is approaching real fast, slam the throttles open and pull it up.
|
goldfish
Banned
Registered: 7th Feb 03
Location: we have a grass in CS he is a chav
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by nickyboy01
quote:
Originally posted by Jambo
quote:
Originally posted by J-Me
What about the highway it would of HAD to fly over in order to fly into the Pentagon?
Surely at 500+ - 700 (???) mph i'd have torn that a bit up?
quote:
More interesting is the flight that apparently the passengers "regained" control of and then crashed, killing all on board. Over the field in (pensylvania ) This is a small time cover up with no witnesses that basically an F16 blew out of the sky to save further attacks on american cities, at the expense of many more lives lost. Which is the classic american "hero" story to sell to the press on a day of horror to make the situation have a bright point, like always ending the news with a nice cat/dog story. Which IMO was probably a good call.
Good call? You serious? Why didnt they just shoot every plane down after the first plane hit the twin tower?
Well if it was my call i would have done.
2500 people lost their lives due to the twin towers destruction. Only killing 2-300 is quite alot less.
The mass confusion going on around the time meant that they couldnt have had much of a lcue as to what planes were "jacked and others not. So technically as soon as they did they "apparently" shot one down.
GREYCORSA: Probably the most siginificant event in history since the moon landings/jfk assasination/2nd world war, i think people are gunna still remember ponder and conversate
Nickyboy, if your mates dad lives there he probably has the best idea, i think its highly plausable and would make perfect sense to shoot the plane down, it doesnt make sense if after regaining control of an aircraft theyd then crash it Doenst seem logical to me. In a military situaiton i think they would have shot it down. But there we go.
Not my mates dad, My Dad lives less than 10 miles form the crash site.
If it had been shot down then wreckage would have been spread over a large area, the actually crash site is reasonably small (a few hundred yds at most) and it is less than qtr of a miles from 3 villages all of which had no wreckage except a few floating items after the impact. If it had been shot down then parts of the plane would have been found away from the crash site and they were not. They didnt regain control as such, the pilots had been incompacitated in some way (knocked out of similar) and the passengers overpowered the hijackers but never actually gained control of the plane
[Edited on 11-09-2004 by nickyboy01]
not true
|
Martyn
USER UNDER INVESTIGATION - DO NOT TRADE
Registered: 17th Oct 03
Location: Luton
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Cybermonkey24
surely some smart arse could have flown the plane? Its not the difficult to see that the ground is approaching real fast, slam the throttles open and pull it up.
exactly thats all you have to do with planes these days as its all computerised
|
Martyn
USER UNDER INVESTIGATION - DO NOT TRADE
Registered: 17th Oct 03
Location: Luton
User status: Offline
|
In my personal oppinion a plane of that size 80tones  would do double that damage easily. Fair enought it was going 530+ but still it would create more impact than that for a fact..... If you watch that video aswel you will see there are some windows still intact which seems funny dont it
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Martyn
quote:
Originally posted by Cybermonkey24
surely some smart arse could have flown the plane? Its not the difficult to see that the ground is approaching real fast, slam the throttles open and pull it up.
exactly thats all you have to do with planes these days as its all computerised
no not quite mate. they still involve very complex procedures to fly them, but its not rocket science to get them out of trouble, since most modern jets are stall-proof, the autopilot can be easily set up and armed unless that person has no thumbs.
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Martyn
In my personal oppinion a plane of that size 80tones would do double that damage easily. Fair enought it was going 530+ but still it would create more impact than that for a fact..... If you watch that video aswel you will see there are some windows still intact which seems funny dont it
its actually quite a small aircraft compared to other modern jets. 80 tonnes isnt much when its being smashed into something as big as the pentagon. and you dont want to believe anything in that bloody video, its all hokus pokus rubbish.
|
Martyn
USER UNDER INVESTIGATION - DO NOT TRADE
Registered: 17th Oct 03
Location: Luton
User status: Offline
|
true, I just want to know after such impact why are just those three windows intact just doesnt add up....
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
its probably been edited. Or, could you imagine the kind of bomb-proofing that building has? those windows are probably specially made.
|
Martyn
USER UNDER INVESTIGATION - DO NOT TRADE
Registered: 17th Oct 03
Location: Luton
User status: Offline
|
yes but again why would of all the other windows blown except them. I just watched the vid again and the bit were it shows you the impact. The plance does look like a boewing 757 do you think?
|
Bonzai
Member
Registered: 25th Mar 03
Location: Cardiff, Wales Drives: 205 GTi 1.9
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Black Corsa SRi
i did not know that! LOL nearly went working for BA down at H-Row, had alook around the hangar, very nice ! All the stageing that comes out the walls etc. Do u have that sort of stuff at cardif too? Ended up stayin at manchester though cause didnt wonna move! LOL
not been down heathrow myself, training cant get teh funds to take us apprentices down there....  they did promise us a session in the flight simulators, that seems to have turned into jelly now 
BAMC is purpose built hanger, 3 bays, each with 3 levels of permenant and moveable docking which allows safe access to 99% of the aircraft. people say its the best facility of its kind in the world. Bay 1 has 2 sets of moveable docking and the permenant docking can be adjusted to cater for either 747 and 777 aircraft. BAMC also has a machine shop, aerofoil support shop, seat shop, NDT lab, avionic stuff (doughnuts and coffee machine?  ) there is also an angine run pen and aircraft wash facility to one side of teh building and at teh other end is an airport type jetway which can be used to allow access inside teh aircraft for cabin work.
im in my last year of my apprenticeship, i think im gonna move away when i can, although cardiff is such an easy life, its tedious, boring and not well paid
|
nickyboy01
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
Location: Oxford-ish
User status: Offline
|
quote:
not true
Meaning?
|
Cybermonkey
Member
Registered: 22nd Sep 02
Location: Sydney, Australia
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Martyn
yes but again why would of all the other windows blown except them. I just watched the vid again and the bit were it shows you the impact. The plance does look like a boewing 757 do you think?
of course its a 757
|
Black Corsa SRi
Member
Registered: 25th May 02
Location: ---Stockport---- Drives: Pug 206 Roland Garros
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Martyn
quote:
Originally posted by Cybermonkey24
surely some smart arse could have flown the plane? Its not the difficult to see that the ground is approaching real fast, slam the throttles open and pull it up.
exactly thats all you have to do with planes these days as its all computerised
unless you know what your doing though mate its actually quite hard to program the autoflight computers etc, a man off the street could not do it u need training etc then obviously its fairly easy once u know what your doing
|
Black Corsa SRi
Member
Registered: 25th May 02
Location: ---Stockport---- Drives: Pug 206 Roland Garros
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bonzai
quote:
Originally posted by Black Corsa SRi
i did not know that! LOL nearly went working for BA down at H-Row, had alook around the hangar, very nice ! All the stageing that comes out the walls etc. Do u have that sort of stuff at cardif too? Ended up stayin at manchester though cause didnt wonna move! LOL
not been down heathrow myself, training cant get teh funds to take us apprentices down there.... they did promise us a session in the flight simulators, that seems to have turned into jelly now
BAMC is purpose built hanger, 3 bays, each with 3 levels of permenant and moveable docking which allows safe access to 99% of the aircraft. people say its the best facility of its kind in the world. Bay 1 has 2 sets of moveable docking and the permenant docking can be adjusted to cater for either 747 and 777 aircraft. BAMC also has a machine shop, aerofoil support shop, seat shop, NDT lab, avionic stuff (doughnuts and coffee machine? ) there is also an angine run pen and aircraft wash facility to one side of teh building and at teh other end is an airport type jetway which can be used to allow access inside teh aircraft for cabin work.
im in my last year of my apprenticeship, i think im gonna move away when i can, although cardiff is such an easy life, its tedious, boring and not well paid
nice one mate! glad u got your priorities with the donuts! LOL i just finished my apprentcesip a month or so ago. Just got my A Licence too and studying for my B2 now! Thats why i interested in the donuts! 
Sounds like a great hangar you got there, ours is the biggest at man airport but nothing compared tot he BA ones, we just have scafollding stageing etc that the scafolders build! LOL still get the job done but would be much easier with the pupose built perm stuff!
|
mk4_astra
Member
Registered: 15th Oct 03
Location: aylesbury,bucks
User status: Offline
|
even if the plane did crash into the pentagon then why werent those 2 other planes that hit the twin towers shot down when they werent supposed to be there and why was there no 1 in the control room? there was loads of other points the ch4 programme bought up and it all seems a bit fishy to me
|
Black Corsa SRi
Member
Registered: 25th May 02
Location: ---Stockport---- Drives: Pug 206 Roland Garros
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by mk4_astra
even if the plane did crash into the pentagon then why werent those 2 other planes that hit the twin towers shot down when they werent supposed to be there and why was there no 1 in the control room? there was loads of other points the ch4 programme bought up and it all seems a bit fishy to me
the two that hit the twin towers prob weren't shot down simply becuase nothing like that had ever happened before and no one was ever expecting it to they prob assumed it had gone off course or whatever due to the hijack maybe, if they even knew it had been hijacked at that point. there was no reason for them to shoot them down, there would have been public outcry your basing that coment on what we know now, not what they knew then they had no idea what was about to happen, if u remember the 1st crash was assumed an accident until the second one happened, thats whay the second happened live on TV as they were covering the 1st
|
Jamie
Member
Registered: 1st Apr 02
Location: Aberdeen
User status: Offline
|
Anyone actually got the 2nd crash on video?
|
Nath
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: MK
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Davidp18
one arguement to the whole lunar landin was y was the flag movin as if it was windy,y wud it be windy on the moon,theres no gravity or nefin
Anymore reasons why its fake? Other than the flag 
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=Solar+Wind&meta=
|
nickyboy01
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
Location: Oxford-ish
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by J-Me
Anyone actually got the 2nd crash on video?
The twin towers crash?
Both were caught on camera, one by a fireman filing a documentary and the 2nd by most newscrews
|
Jamie
Member
Registered: 1st Apr 02
Location: Aberdeen
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by nickyboy01
quote:
Originally posted by J-Me
Anyone actually got the 2nd crash on video?
The twin towers crash?
Both were caught on camera, one by a fireman filing a documentary and the 2nd by most newscrews
Yeah just want to see a video of it
|
Jamie
Member
Registered: 1st Apr 02
Location: Aberdeen
User status: Offline
|
http://911review.org/Wiki/PentagonAttack.shtml
Just found this
|
