[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

No place for hate apeech

America and Israel both told Qatar to allow Hamas to stay in their country

Video | Robert Kennedy brings down the house.

Owner releases video of Trump banner ripping, shooting in WNC

Cash Jordan: Looters ‘Forcibly Evict’ Millionaires… as California’s “NO ARRESTS” Policy BACKFIRES

Dallas Motel Horror: Immigrant Machete Killer Caught

America has been infiltrated and occupied Netanyahu 1980

Senior Trump Official Declares War On Far-Left NGOs Sowing Chaos Nationwide

White House Plans Security Boost On Civil Terrorism Fears

Visualizing The Number Of Farms In Each US State

Let her cry

The Secret Version of the Bible You’re Never Taught - Secret History

Rocker defames Charlie Kirk threatens free speech

Paramount Has a $1.5 Billion South Park Problem

European Warmongers Angry That Trump Did Not Buy Into the ‘Drone Attack in Poland’

Grassley Unveils Declassified Documents From FBI's Alleged 'Political Hit Job' On Trump

2 In 5 Young Adults Are Taking On Debt For Social Image, To Impress Peers, Study Finds

Visualizing Global Gold Production By Region

RFK Jr. About to DROP the Tylenol–Autism BOMBSHELL & Trump tweets cryptic vaccine message

Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March

Something BIG is happening (One Assassination Changed Everything)

The Truth About This Piece Of Sh*t

Breaking: 18,000 Epstein emails just dropped.

Memphis: FOUR CHILDREN shot inside a home (National Guard Inbound)

Elon Musk gives CHILLING WARNING after Charlie Kirk's DEATH...

ActBlue Lawyers Subpoenaed As House GOP Investigation Into Donor Fraud Intensifies

Cash Jordan: Gangs EMPTY Chicago Plaza... as Mayor's "LET THEM LOOT" Plan IMPLODES

Trump to send troops to Memphis

Who really commands China’s military? (Xi Jinping on his way out)

Ghee: Is It Better Than Butter?


9/11
See other 9/11 Articles

Title: Rumsfeld said Flight 93 shot down (video)
Source: youtube
URL Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k0v0_HDwg84&mode=related&search
Published: Oct 30, 2006
Author: Rumsfeld
Post Date: 2006-10-30 12:28:18 by RickyJ
Ping List: *9-11*     Subscribe to *9-11*
Keywords: None
Views: 1454
Comments: 47

Subscribe to *9-11*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 24.

#3. To: RickyJ (#0)

shot down

Misspoken words, nothing else.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-10-30   13:11:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Cynicom (#3) (Edited)

Misspoken words, nothing else.

"The people who shot down the plane over Pennsylvania."

Misspoken my ass! Anyone that knows anything about flight 93 knows that it did not all crash where they claim it did. It was shot down without a doubt and Rumslfeld spilled the beans inadvertently by being so careless about remembering who it was that he was addressing.

RickyJ  posted on  2006-10-30   13:17:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: RickyJ (#4)

Anyone that knows anything about flight 93

Ricky

A lot of people know a great deal about Flt 93 and none of them would agree with you.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-10-30   13:28:07 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Cynicom (#5) (Edited)

Engines don't bounce 1/2 mile away from the crash scene like the idiots in government claim it did. You are again defending the indefensible. Take a course in physics and then get back to me with your absurd theories.

RickyJ  posted on  2006-10-30   13:39:11 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: RickyJ (#6)

Take a course in physics and then get back to me with your absurd theories.

Ricky

Rudeness is never becoming...

If you reread my previous post, I advanced no "absurd" theories of any kind.

Rational and realistic thinking finds no other conclusion than that offered by many people.

Engines...I assume you do know that the engines are designed and engineered to fall off when under certain stress condidtions.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-10-30   13:51:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Cynicom (#9)

Engines...I assume you do know that the engines are designed and engineered to fall off when under certain stress condidtions.

That's news to me. It's hard for me to fathom engineers making that a design priority, particularly considering the hazard of having only one wing mounted engine drop off.

Neil McIver  posted on  2006-10-30   14:18:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: Neil McIver (#12)

That's news to me.

Here is short excerpt....

">>The usual design for a wing-mounted engine intentionally puts the weak

point in the mount at the rear of the engine. This way, if something happens that causes the mount to break, it'll break at the rear. The engine then rotates up around the front mount, breaking it too, and the residual thrust carries the engine up, over the wing, and out of harm's way. (The trajectory is also designed to avoid the horizontal stabilizers.)"

Cynicom  posted on  2006-10-30   14:37:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Cynicom (#16)

The usual design for a wing-mounted engine intentionally puts the weak point in the mount at the rear of the engine. This way, if something happens that causes the mount to break, it'll break at the rear. The engine then rotates up around the front mount, breaking it too, and the residual thrust carries the engine up, over the wing, and out of harm's way. (The trajectory is also designed to avoid the horizontal stabilizers.)"

This is not the same thing as saying that they are designed to fall off under certain stresses, as though it's better to not have an engine on the wing than to have one. This is saying that, IF "something happens that causes the mount to break" that it would break off a certain way so as to minimize damage. Any time you have something mounted with more than one mount, one will be stronger than the other. In this case, the decided it's advantageous to make the rear one weaker.

Again, I think it's generally better to have a dead wing engine stay attached to the plane than to have it drop off. The plane will be easier to control.

Neil McIver  posted on  2006-10-30   15:02:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 24.

#25. To: Neil McIver (#24)

Again, I think it's generally better to have a dead wing engine stay attached to the plane than to have it drop off. The plane will be easier to control.

The designers and engineers would not agree.

Cynicom  posted on  2006-10-30 15:05:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 24.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]