Did a plane really hit the pentagon?

[Aeson]

Well, the point is just to debate whether there are missing frames or not. If there are missing frames, what point does not including ones of the plane achieve? A 1 fps camera almost certainly would miss the plane. Judging by the frames of the explosion though, it wasn't 1 fps. Not 30 fps either, but they could have very easily just taken every 3rd frame or something like that.

[Kilroy_Alpha]

To everybody who's wondering where the debris, like huge wings and the fuselage and all the seats are, THINK. It's like an aluminum can hitting a brick wall at 600 mph. Usually, when you see an airplane in flight, it's not going at max speed or even it's cruising speed, it's getting ready to land. That's about 100 mph, I believe. Not to mention the fact that the Pentagon, while an office building, is still built pretty tough. Take these two into account and you begin to realize why there is no way there could have been anything bigger than a meter across left after the plane hit.

As for the "OMG THE DAMAGE SITE ISN'T WIDE ENOUGH! IT'S A CONSPIRACY!!!WTF???!?!?" rants: the wings didn't go through the THICK CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION of the Pentagon.

[Kilroy_Alpha]

Re: Re: Re: Where's the black box?

Originally posted by Jack_www


There is a very good reason for that. Today cars and planes are designed to crush when they hit something. The goal of this is to extend the time of the impact so that the force that is exereted on the people in the plane is not smaller and thus people will be able to survive the crash. If they made planes and cars like black boxes the cars and planes would come out of the crash in pretty good shape, but the people inside would not be so lucky. It all comes down to impluse. What this is the average force that is necassary to stop something over a given period of time. Say it takes 2000 lb of force to stop a car going at a certain speed. Let say it takes the car 2 seconds to stop, then that means 1000 lbs of force has to be exerted on the car each second untill it stops. But if you increase the time it takes the car to stop to lets say 5 seconds then the force that needs to be exerted on the car each second is 400 lb a second. Much smaller. Imagine if you were in the car, and it stop in 2 second, how much of a force would be exerted on you. I dont think a 1000lb of force bieing applied to your body would be very good for you. So that is why the dont have planes like black boxes, so that the time of impact and be lengthen and thus give the people inside a greator chance of living through the crash.

THA ****?

PLANES DO NOT HAVE CRUMPLE ZONES.

Have you ever seen the debris left over after a plane hits the ground at cruising speed, head on? There isn't anything left. No engineer in the world is so hopelessly optimistic as to introduce crumple zones into aircraft when they would, in fact, save ZERO lives. Really, the addition of crumple zones in an aircraft would make the plane less safe, as it would just be one more thing that could go wrong.

[Tingkai]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Where's the black box?

Originally posted by Kilroy_Alpha


THA ****?

PLANES DO NOT HAVE CRUMPLE ZONES.

Have you ever seen the debris left over after a plane hits the ground at cruising speed, head on? There isn't anything left. No engineer in the world is so hopelessly optimistic as to introduce crumple zones into aircraft when they would, in fact, save ZERO lives. Really, the addition of crumple zones in an aircraft would make the plane less safe, as it would just be one more thing that could go wrong.

I'm not sure about crumple zones, but passenger a/c are designed in some respect for crashes. IIRC, wings were redesigned after tests discovered that a major cause for damage was the fuel tanks exploding.

Passengers are more likely to survive a hard landing now then they would have 30 years ago.

But of course, there's not much chance of anything survivng when a plane goes into a building at 500 mph.