United Flight 93, What actually happened ? [somewhat edited by JT]
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: usa
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Gary Lager
1)
I almost hate to ask...why?
I almost hate to ask...why?
Moderator
SUPERMNNN,
John: Is it possible to have a copy of deleted original posts? Many replies are very helpful, especially the ones regarding the transponder and cel phone?
It would be my pleasure to do so .. but, as it involves a fair bit of edit work, it will probably be next week before I can spare the time ..
Details re the site management are available in the various FAQ areas ..
regards,
John
John: Is it possible to have a copy of deleted original posts? Many replies are very helpful, especially the ones regarding the transponder and cel phone?
It would be my pleasure to do so .. but, as it involves a fair bit of edit work, it will probably be next week before I can spare the time ..
Details re the site management are available in the various FAQ areas ..
regards,
John
Originally Posted by SUPERMNNN
Thank you Gary. Sorry, since this forum is highly sensored (worse than any forum in China), I couldn't explain why (most of the replies to this thread related to "why" was deleted.)
Pprune is a controlled and moderated forum - this means that advertising, unwarranted speculation, inappropriately morbid humour are ruthlessly deleted. Quite right too - bear in mind that you are probably only a neutral spectator in aviation, most of us "professionals" have lost friends and colleagues to it; coming from outside you may not understand the sensitivites of that. Also many of us have worked on fatal accident investigations and are very sensitive to the "proper" conduct and reporting of them.
I have never seen constructive, well reasoned discussion censored on Pprune. Moved, re-worded, merged or clarified perhaps, but never censored. I've seen a lot of stuff removed that sorely deserved it, and on one occasion banned somebody for choosing this forum to make sick jokes about a fatal accident - one of the victims of which happened to be a colleague that I'd flown with.
The other thing to bear in mind is that this is a professionals forum; whilst private pilots, spotters, historians, or even just interested passengers are very welcome here, the atmosphere has to be that of professional aviation, not the bar. (Except maybe in the "Jet Blast" forum, where most of the mods won't even go!).
If you have a problem with that, frankly you are in the wrong place.
G
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: usa
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know I'm only a contributor to this particular thread, and not acting as a moderator, but I take exception that comment.
Pprune is a controlled and moderated forum - this means that advertising, unwarranted speculation, inappropriately morbid humour are ruthlessly deleted. Quite right too - bear in mind that you are probably only a neutral spectator in aviation, most of us "professionals" have lost friends and colleagues to it; coming from outside you may not understand the sensitivities of that. Also many of us have worked on fatal accident investigations and are very sensitive to the "proper" conduct and reporting of them.
Thank you G. Yes, I am a neutral spectator in aviation, concerned, however I may not have the same sensitivity of the professionals, but do understand. I apologize if I seemed to be not sensible enough. I believe all my posts are innocently objective with good intentions.
I have never seen constructive, well reasoned discussion censored on Pprune. Moved, re-worded, merged or clarified perhaps, but never censored. I've seen a lot of stuff removed that sorely deserved it, and on one occasion banned somebody for choosing this forum to make sick jokes about a fatal accident - one of the victims of which happened to be a colleague that I'd flown with.
I have been on all kinds of forum since the internet was created, from Fermi lab; we learned how to handle professional discussions, debates disagreements, as such. In fact, the internet forums were started for scientists to exchange ideas and disagreements globally.
I don't think erasing the replies of this thread is the case of "Moved, re-worded, merged or clarified perhaps..." or "... a lot of stuff removed that sorely deserved it, and on one occasion banned somebody for choosing this forum to make sick jokes about a fatal accident - one of the victims of which happened to be a colleague that I'd flown with."
Readers of this thread can be the judge.
The other thing to bear in mind is that this is a professional’s forum; whilst private pilots, spotters, historians, or even just interested passengers are very welcome here, the atmosphere has to be that of professional aviation, not the bar. (Except maybe in the "Jet Blast" forum, where most of the mods won't even go!).
I believe all the questions I asked are tech related to the professional members of this board related to aviation. Some of them were deleted, some were not (anything regarding the transponder signal was removed).
If you have a problem with that, frankly you are in the wrong place.
No I don't have a problem with removing sick jokes, personal insults, dirty words, etc. But if this is a board open to the public, then anybody can raise a valid professional question or opinion. If anyone has problem with that, then he may not belong to a public forum. A private forum may be more appropriate.
Pprune is a controlled and moderated forum - this means that advertising, unwarranted speculation, inappropriately morbid humour are ruthlessly deleted. Quite right too - bear in mind that you are probably only a neutral spectator in aviation, most of us "professionals" have lost friends and colleagues to it; coming from outside you may not understand the sensitivities of that. Also many of us have worked on fatal accident investigations and are very sensitive to the "proper" conduct and reporting of them.
Thank you G. Yes, I am a neutral spectator in aviation, concerned, however I may not have the same sensitivity of the professionals, but do understand. I apologize if I seemed to be not sensible enough. I believe all my posts are innocently objective with good intentions.
I have never seen constructive, well reasoned discussion censored on Pprune. Moved, re-worded, merged or clarified perhaps, but never censored. I've seen a lot of stuff removed that sorely deserved it, and on one occasion banned somebody for choosing this forum to make sick jokes about a fatal accident - one of the victims of which happened to be a colleague that I'd flown with.
I have been on all kinds of forum since the internet was created, from Fermi lab; we learned how to handle professional discussions, debates disagreements, as such. In fact, the internet forums were started for scientists to exchange ideas and disagreements globally.
I don't think erasing the replies of this thread is the case of "Moved, re-worded, merged or clarified perhaps..." or "... a lot of stuff removed that sorely deserved it, and on one occasion banned somebody for choosing this forum to make sick jokes about a fatal accident - one of the victims of which happened to be a colleague that I'd flown with."
Readers of this thread can be the judge.
The other thing to bear in mind is that this is a professional’s forum; whilst private pilots, spotters, historians, or even just interested passengers are very welcome here, the atmosphere has to be that of professional aviation, not the bar. (Except maybe in the "Jet Blast" forum, where most of the mods won't even go!).
I believe all the questions I asked are tech related to the professional members of this board related to aviation. Some of them were deleted, some were not (anything regarding the transponder signal was removed).
If you have a problem with that, frankly you are in the wrong place.
No I don't have a problem with removing sick jokes, personal insults, dirty words, etc. But if this is a board open to the public, then anybody can raise a valid professional question or opinion. If anyone has problem with that, then he may not belong to a public forum. A private forum may be more appropriate.
Last edited by SUPERMNNN; 8th Aug 2006 at 14:42.
Do a Hover - it avoids G
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Chichester West Sussex UK
Age: 91
Posts: 2,206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SUPERMMM
Some of the technicalities of how aircraft are controlled by ATC and in particular how they are identified and monitored is information that could valuable to someone who wanted to disrupt the system. But perhaps that had not occurred to you?
You certainly exhibit attitude – I will give you that. To come on a professional board as an admitted outsider and then to start complaining about those who make the board available to you FOC you is pretty rich (at least to some of us)
If you are entirely genuine try logging on with your proper name and contact details and you might get a different response.
Some of the technicalities of how aircraft are controlled by ATC and in particular how they are identified and monitored is information that could valuable to someone who wanted to disrupt the system. But perhaps that had not occurred to you?
You certainly exhibit attitude – I will give you that. To come on a professional board as an admitted outsider and then to start complaining about those who make the board available to you FOC you is pretty rich (at least to some of us)
If you are entirely genuine try logging on with your proper name and contact details and you might get a different response.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Genghis the Engineer
Pprune is a controlled and moderated forum - this means that ... unwarranted speculation...are ruthlessly deleted.
By censoring, and yes it is censorship when posts are removed from this forum, it does nothing but fuel the fire of speculation, especially regarding a topic like this thread. The person that started this thread is not pushing any particular theory on the forum, he simply wanted some answers to questions that seem suspicious to him because he doesn't understand the banal technical aspects of our profession. If after he is empowered with the correct information he still believes his special little conspiracy theory, that's his problem. At least we tried to crush another hairbrained idea at its inception, and who knows, maybe we did. But most likely, he just thinks we have something to hide now.
I too, have had numerous friends, colleagues, and acquaintances killed in flying machines. This does not prevent me from speculating on the circumstances of their death or challenging those who proffer opinions I don't agree with. Stopping a conversation because it insults your sensibilities and you have the power to do so, is nothing but censorship.
Am I banned now?
Perhaps there's a difference between informed speculation and unwarranted speculation? And between rumour and gossip?
Personally I think that Pprune ceased to be a "rumour" board a long time ago, and has become something altogether more interesting - a public forum of aerospace grownups, discussing their business, often from a very informed position, for mutual benefit. The control of speculation and gossip, to me, is one of it's greatest strengths - there are plenty of uncontrolled boards elsewhere, none of which I think are a patch on this one for sheer usefulness.
G
Personally I think that Pprune ceased to be a "rumour" board a long time ago, and has become something altogether more interesting - a public forum of aerospace grownups, discussing their business, often from a very informed position, for mutual benefit. The control of speculation and gossip, to me, is one of it's greatest strengths - there are plenty of uncontrolled boards elsewhere, none of which I think are a patch on this one for sheer usefulness.
G
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Genghis the Engineer
...a public forum of aerospace grownups, discussing their business, often from a very informed position, for mutual benefit.
G
G
It just seems that this thread was not allowed to run its course. If it was so bad, why not tranfer it, in its entirety, to "Jet Blast?"
SUPERMNNN,Check this site
http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...tml?page=1&c=y
The site has an excellent debunking of several 911 myths including a clear statement from the Somerset County corner that no human remains were found in Indian lake which is only 1.5 miles from the crash site.
The original report in in Pittsburgh paper was in error. An error in a newspaper report, there is some thing for a conspiracy theory.
Also, who said the second engine was not recovered? The same source? Again check the PM link
If you really want to investigate something should you not verify that statements you are using as fact are true. You are spending a lot of effort to recreate some sort of inflight break up etc when there is actually no evidence of this at all.
You may want to check the above link re the circling jet. The pilot has being so harrassed by the conspiracy theory crowd he simply won't talk anymore.
20driver
The site has an excellent debunking of several 911 myths including a clear statement from the Somerset County corner that no human remains were found in Indian lake which is only 1.5 miles from the crash site.
The original report in in Pittsburgh paper was in error. An error in a newspaper report, there is some thing for a conspiracy theory.
Also, who said the second engine was not recovered? The same source? Again check the PM link
If you really want to investigate something should you not verify that statements you are using as fact are true. You are spending a lot of effort to recreate some sort of inflight break up etc when there is actually no evidence of this at all.
You may want to check the above link re the circling jet. The pilot has being so harrassed by the conspiracy theory crowd he simply won't talk anymore.
20driver
Originally Posted by Full of Foehn
You yourself said this forum welcomes those other than "aerospace grownups." And how did the nature of this thread fall outside of the definition you offer above? I agree that this forum is well run and very useful; however, that does not mean that the moderators are faultless in their duties, nor does it mean that they are without bias.
It just seems that this thread was not allowed to run its course. If it was so bad, why not tranfer it, in its entirety, to "Jet Blast?"
It just seems that this thread was not allowed to run its course. If it was so bad, why not tranfer it, in its entirety, to "Jet Blast?"
I should emphasise that I'm only expressing a personal opinion here - I don't moderate this bit of Pprune, merely participate.
G
The Analog Kid
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brecon Beacons National Park
Age: 57
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 20driver
http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...tml?page=1&c=y
The site has an excellent debunking of several 911 myths
The site has an excellent debunking of several 911 myths
What's my point? Carry on discussing the technical bits - it's interesting - but don't believe everything you read here, there or anywhere else
Personally I generally believe a far greater percentage of what I read here than on most other sites! Cheers,
Rich.
(Mods, if you feel this post is inappropriate, delete away - no worries.)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: usa
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 20driver
http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...tml?page=1&c=y
The site has an excellent debunking of several 911 myths including a clear statement from the Somerset County corner that no human remains were found in Indian lake which is only 1.5 miles from the crash site.
20driver
The site has an excellent debunking of several 911 myths including a clear statement from the Somerset County corner that no human remains were found in Indian lake which is only 1.5 miles from the crash site.
20driver
Engines were the reason which get me started. I don't believe the conspiracy theory. The solid reason for me to search by myself is that the engines can not be burned, can not be lost, they are big pieces of high strength alloy, each weights two tone(?). The following is from Popular Mechanics:
CLAIM: One of Flight 93's engines was found "at a considerable distance from the crash site," according to Lyle Szupinka, a state police officer on the scene who was quoted in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. Offering no evidence, a posting on Rense.com claimed: "The main body of the engine ... was found miles away from the main wreckage site with damage comparable to that which a heat-seeking missile would do to an airliner."
FACT: Experts on the scene tell PM that a fan from one of the engines was recovered in a catchment basin, downhill from the crash site. Jeff Reinbold, the National Park Service representative responsible for the Flight 93 National Memorial, confirms the direction and distance from the crash site to the basin: just over 300 yards south, which means the fan landed in the direction the jet was traveling. "It's not unusual for an engine to move or tumble across the ground," says Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 out of New York City in 1996. "When you have very high velocities, 500 mph or more," Hynes says, "you are talking about 700 to 800 ft. per second. For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards." Numerous crash analysts contacted by PM concur.
Unfortunately, the ground was soft grassy area, next to a dirt road.
http://thewebfairy.com/911/93/ (this picture is consistant with pictures released by government)
The crater shows that where the wing touched the ground was away from the dirty road. 500mph, hiting soft ground, the engine fan (note the original report was a whole engine) tumbled for 300 yards.
I suppose you all know that for a Boeing 757 -222, the engines are way ahead of the wings.
Only reason I can think of for the engine or fan to tumble is to hit something else very hard, a rock or the other part of the plane. But again with 500mph HEAD ON, a speed as fast as a .38 bullet, you have to do more explaination than: "For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards." You have to show me how could it bounce up with that kind of velocity first, preferablly a calculation.
This is the only engine (or engine fan) evidence I can find. Nobody talked about the other engine.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: usa
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps there's a difference between informed speculation and unwarranted speculation? And between rumour and gossip?
That's exactly correct! In fact, all investigations end up to the informed speculations -- the most reasonable hyposis stands. We are searching for the best possible reason, not the absolute reason. No absolute truth on this earth.
That's exactly correct! In fact, all investigations end up to the informed speculations -- the most reasonable hyposis stands. We are searching for the best possible reason, not the absolute reason. No absolute truth on this earth.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: usa
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I highly appreciate the work everyone put in here, especially the moderator.
One word of suggestion, please be careful of deleting posts. Many valued posts are the work of others who spend time and energy, sometimes intense research, to find answers, agurements and sometimes, brilliant ideas. Many scientific discoveries, inventions, designs are created right on message board, through brainstorming. All the posts have historical, personal as well as academic values. Because most of the posts are direct interaction between real people in real time, very few of us save them on hard drives since we know for sure we can find them on the board. Many years down the road, someone may think, hey I read some posts on that message board, or I posted something on that board. Let's go and find it.
I have a friend who even collected his posts on one forum and made it into a book.
Thank you again for all your time and work. It is fun to "fight" for the right answers (with an atitude sometimes), lol. Cheers.
One word of suggestion, please be careful of deleting posts. Many valued posts are the work of others who spend time and energy, sometimes intense research, to find answers, agurements and sometimes, brilliant ideas. Many scientific discoveries, inventions, designs are created right on message board, through brainstorming. All the posts have historical, personal as well as academic values. Because most of the posts are direct interaction between real people in real time, very few of us save them on hard drives since we know for sure we can find them on the board. Many years down the road, someone may think, hey I read some posts on that message board, or I posted something on that board. Let's go and find it.
I have a friend who even collected his posts on one forum and made it into a book.
Thank you again for all your time and work. It is fun to "fight" for the right answers (with an atitude sometimes), lol. Cheers.
Suppermnn
"Unfortunately, the ground was soft grassy area"
This is typical of your problem. You have measurements on how soft this area was? What is the soil strength profile here? You certainly cannot tell from a picture. (and yes, I am an expert on this subject).
A large, but not solid, collection of metal objects weighing in the hundreds of thousands of pounds impacts the ground at 500 mph and a piece weighing a few hundred pounds travels 300 feet in the direction of impact. Sorry that is just not a big deal.
20driver
This is typical of your problem. You have measurements on how soft this area was? What is the soil strength profile here? You certainly cannot tell from a picture. (and yes, I am an expert on this subject).
A large, but not solid, collection of metal objects weighing in the hundreds of thousands of pounds impacts the ground at 500 mph and a piece weighing a few hundred pounds travels 300 feet in the direction of impact. Sorry that is just not a big deal.
20driver
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: エリア88
Posts: 1,031
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you want to see the utter destruction of an aircraft hitting an immovable object such as a concrete wall, the Pentagon or even the planet commonly referred to as "Earth"?
Video
Video
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: usa
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately, the ground was soft grassy area"
This is typical of your problem. You have measurements on how soft this area was? What is the soil strength profile here? You certainly cannot tell from a picture. (and yes, I am an expert on this subject).
That's what the problem I have with the "expert" opinions on the PM article. As an expert giving opinions to popular mechanics, without pointing out at the crash site how hard was the soil, how much kinetic engergy was absorbed, and how much deflected because of the hardness of the ground, resulting to, for example a 10 yard bounc up and 300 yard traveling, it doesn't have to be acurate, but reasonable, I would buy it. Simplly saying bounce up from the ground because the speed, makes me think: hello Mr. Expert, who are you trying to fool?
A large, but not solid, collection of metal objects weighing in the hundreds of thousands of pounds impacts the ground at 500 mph and a piece weighing a few hundred pounds travels 300 feet in the direction of impact. Sorry that is just not a big deal.
The point is valid, engine core is not a solid piece, however the kinetic engergy per pound is going to be the same for a bullet or an engine.
A car has the almost same weight as an 757 engine, imagine if it travels 500mph and headon to something solid.
As an expert, you should know that the 300 feet doesn't matter, the speed on impact and the mass of the object provide the kinetic engery. By the time it hit the ground, the potential engergy has already transfered into the speed, become kinetic energy.
If the ground is solid, is the engine core designed to withstand a 500mph 2 ton kinetic engergy, without shattering into pieces? These all can be calculated with physics and engineering, I can not be convince until I see some reasonable figures. Again, it doesn't have to be rocket science accurate, but reasonable, I believe all techies accept a set of reasonable figures, alone with some educated speculations.
A fan, falling by itself, happened to hit the ground flat (the chance was very small), the larger area will create less presure (psi) on the soil, might bounce up and roll down the hill, if the soil is hard enough, but you have to do some calculation to convince me. Not "For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards." That's worse than the conspiracy theory and speculations, because it came from a so called expert. It is even scary to me. How serious are they? We are talking not about a stupid engine or a fan, many lifes were lost.
If they found a fan, where was the engine?
This is typical of your problem. You have measurements on how soft this area was? What is the soil strength profile here? You certainly cannot tell from a picture. (and yes, I am an expert on this subject).
That's what the problem I have with the "expert" opinions on the PM article. As an expert giving opinions to popular mechanics, without pointing out at the crash site how hard was the soil, how much kinetic engergy was absorbed, and how much deflected because of the hardness of the ground, resulting to, for example a 10 yard bounc up and 300 yard traveling, it doesn't have to be acurate, but reasonable, I would buy it. Simplly saying bounce up from the ground because the speed, makes me think: hello Mr. Expert, who are you trying to fool?
A large, but not solid, collection of metal objects weighing in the hundreds of thousands of pounds impacts the ground at 500 mph and a piece weighing a few hundred pounds travels 300 feet in the direction of impact. Sorry that is just not a big deal.
The point is valid, engine core is not a solid piece, however the kinetic engergy per pound is going to be the same for a bullet or an engine.
A car has the almost same weight as an 757 engine, imagine if it travels 500mph and headon to something solid.
As an expert, you should know that the 300 feet doesn't matter, the speed on impact and the mass of the object provide the kinetic engery. By the time it hit the ground, the potential engergy has already transfered into the speed, become kinetic energy.
If the ground is solid, is the engine core designed to withstand a 500mph 2 ton kinetic engergy, without shattering into pieces? These all can be calculated with physics and engineering, I can not be convince until I see some reasonable figures. Again, it doesn't have to be rocket science accurate, but reasonable, I believe all techies accept a set of reasonable figures, alone with some educated speculations.
A fan, falling by itself, happened to hit the ground flat (the chance was very small), the larger area will create less presure (psi) on the soil, might bounce up and roll down the hill, if the soil is hard enough, but you have to do some calculation to convince me. Not "For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards." That's worse than the conspiracy theory and speculations, because it came from a so called expert. It is even scary to me. How serious are they? We are talking not about a stupid engine or a fan, many lifes were lost.
If they found a fan, where was the engine?
Moderator
If I recall correctly, I have chosen to engage in slash and burn agriculture in respect of two threads. Both were started by posters whom I believe to be well-intentioned folk but who are not Industry savvy to the extent that the bulk of the readership is. My thrust is keep the threads in line with site owner dictates and the general tone of this Forum .. no more, no less.
I don't believe that anyone who reads Tech Log routinely would suggest that it is a heavily moderated (think "facilitated") forum. That is not our style here ...
Some points of note -
(a) mods are volunteers (some would claim co-optees) and, in the main, well-, even highly, placed in their respective areas within the Industry. Many of the folk who frequent this Board, particularly, are placed similarly .. Genghis and John Farley, both of whom posted above, are very pertinent examples of people who have many more runs on the career board than most folk ever aspire to ... I could cite a number of regular posters with more technical post-nominals ...
(b) as volunteers, we spend OUR time helping to keep this Board running.
(c) we are not descendents of Solomon so do not have that level of decision-making skill and finesse .. rather, we do our best and that is all that can be asked.
(d) the Board is owned privately and, at the end of the day, the owners decide who gets to play and what the rules are. The day to day application is delegated to the mods and, should anyone be aggrieved, then it is always open for you to put your case to Danny or Rob .. and, be assured, that occurs from time to time ..
(e) Tech Log, for a non-refereed place, has developed into a reasonably serious and, occasionally rigorous, discussion forum. Topics which move into significant speculation are better placed elsewhere ...
(f) I chose to leave the thread here (with significant edits) rather than move it to a more appropriate forum with redirection on. One poster opines "It just seems that this thread was not allowed to run its course. If it was so bad, why not tranfer it, in its entirety, to "Jet Blast?" ". I suggest that the thread was not bad, merely not appropriate to this Forum. If there is a groundswell, I am quite happy to refer the thread to those higher up the totem pole for a call on whether it might be better to move it elsewhere.
(g) for those who took exception to their responses being removed, the decision resided with me, and the rationale was that posts which had lost their nexus to the discussion were removed for continuity.
(h) provided that technical discussion remains on a technical engineering/operational level by all means re-introduce it .. but leave the highly speculative and imaginative dialogue elsewhere .. or it will be subject to edit. Be very aware, though, that mod work is not at all a science .. there is a need for steering a very tenuous line at times .. sometimes we do that well, other times not so well.
(i) be very aware that I, for one, do my very level best not to permit whatever my own prejudices may be interfering with mod decisions. Posts will not be edited for content just because I disagree with that content ..
(j) "rumour board" ? now in name only and long gone as a reality. PPRuNe is referred to by high levels in the Industry, Regulators and the Military. Whether individual posters like it or not, Tech Log is going to remain a reasonably focussed Forum, albeit not to the point of becoming dreary ..
I don't believe that anyone who reads Tech Log routinely would suggest that it is a heavily moderated (think "facilitated") forum. That is not our style here ...
Some points of note -
(a) mods are volunteers (some would claim co-optees) and, in the main, well-, even highly, placed in their respective areas within the Industry. Many of the folk who frequent this Board, particularly, are placed similarly .. Genghis and John Farley, both of whom posted above, are very pertinent examples of people who have many more runs on the career board than most folk ever aspire to ... I could cite a number of regular posters with more technical post-nominals ...
(b) as volunteers, we spend OUR time helping to keep this Board running.
(c) we are not descendents of Solomon so do not have that level of decision-making skill and finesse .. rather, we do our best and that is all that can be asked.
(d) the Board is owned privately and, at the end of the day, the owners decide who gets to play and what the rules are. The day to day application is delegated to the mods and, should anyone be aggrieved, then it is always open for you to put your case to Danny or Rob .. and, be assured, that occurs from time to time ..
(e) Tech Log, for a non-refereed place, has developed into a reasonably serious and, occasionally rigorous, discussion forum. Topics which move into significant speculation are better placed elsewhere ...
(f) I chose to leave the thread here (with significant edits) rather than move it to a more appropriate forum with redirection on. One poster opines "It just seems that this thread was not allowed to run its course. If it was so bad, why not tranfer it, in its entirety, to "Jet Blast?" ". I suggest that the thread was not bad, merely not appropriate to this Forum. If there is a groundswell, I am quite happy to refer the thread to those higher up the totem pole for a call on whether it might be better to move it elsewhere.
(g) for those who took exception to their responses being removed, the decision resided with me, and the rationale was that posts which had lost their nexus to the discussion were removed for continuity.
(h) provided that technical discussion remains on a technical engineering/operational level by all means re-introduce it .. but leave the highly speculative and imaginative dialogue elsewhere .. or it will be subject to edit. Be very aware, though, that mod work is not at all a science .. there is a need for steering a very tenuous line at times .. sometimes we do that well, other times not so well.
(i) be very aware that I, for one, do my very level best not to permit whatever my own prejudices may be interfering with mod decisions. Posts will not be edited for content just because I disagree with that content ..
(j) "rumour board" ? now in name only and long gone as a reality. PPRuNe is referred to by high levels in the Industry, Regulators and the Military. Whether individual posters like it or not, Tech Log is going to remain a reasonably focussed Forum, albeit not to the point of becoming dreary ..
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: usa
Posts: 77
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you John! I couldn't expect a better professional explanation. And if I could, suggest to anyone who doesn't want to know about disasters, such as flight 93, please ignore this thread and all my post.
There is a much better explanation for the engine distance, however, not tested yet. Once the plane nose dive to the ground with an angle (official version is that the plane dived from N.W. to S.E.). 757 has a very long fuselage from the wings to the nose. When nose dive, the front fuselage dived into ground absorbing kinetic energy, the tail would fly forward, due to the moment of inertia, I might be possible for the engine breaking away from the wing(which a deacceleration can be calculated by the strength of the wing, bots or anything fixed the engine to the wing, the wing to the plane) remember that the flight 93 was belley up before the dive. The broke away engine would have a speed much less than the impact speed (due to the break off), then tumble forward 300 yards. Such explanation would satisfy most people.
For jet engine, the fan is in the front of the engine, nose dive, the fan goes down first. How can it bounch and tumble 300 yards?
However my problem with this assumption is that the actuall crater at the crash site showed that the dive was from S.W. to the N.E.. The pictures government posted everywhere is upside down, i.e. North is down, South is up. Giving you a wrong impression that the plane did crash from N.W. to S.E. You can very easily veryfy this by looking at google map.
If this is the case, then the engine didn't tumble forward, but backward for 300 yards (PM said it was only a fan?). Why?
There is a much better explanation for the engine distance, however, not tested yet. Once the plane nose dive to the ground with an angle (official version is that the plane dived from N.W. to S.E.). 757 has a very long fuselage from the wings to the nose. When nose dive, the front fuselage dived into ground absorbing kinetic energy, the tail would fly forward, due to the moment of inertia, I might be possible for the engine breaking away from the wing(which a deacceleration can be calculated by the strength of the wing, bots or anything fixed the engine to the wing, the wing to the plane) remember that the flight 93 was belley up before the dive. The broke away engine would have a speed much less than the impact speed (due to the break off), then tumble forward 300 yards. Such explanation would satisfy most people.
For jet engine, the fan is in the front of the engine, nose dive, the fan goes down first. How can it bounch and tumble 300 yards?
However my problem with this assumption is that the actuall crater at the crash site showed that the dive was from S.W. to the N.E.. The pictures government posted everywhere is upside down, i.e. North is down, South is up. Giving you a wrong impression that the plane did crash from N.W. to S.E. You can very easily veryfy this by looking at google map.
If this is the case, then the engine didn't tumble forward, but backward for 300 yards (PM said it was only a fan?). Why?