Donate to DU!
Democratic Underground Latest Threads
Latest
Greatest Threads
Greatest
Lobby
Lobby
Journals
Journals
Search
Search
Options
Options
Help
Help
Login
Login
Google

question about a "tilted" engine [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
First thread | Last thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
k-robjoe (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Wed Feb-25-04 11:12 AM
Original message
question about a "tilted" engine
Advertisements [?]
A strange thing with the plane that hit the WTC2, is that it seems like the two engines are not "in line". It seems as if the left engine is not in line with the rest of the plane. As if it is tilted a bit forwards.

Have a look at pic number four and six on this site, to see what I mean : http://wtc1.batcave.net/2.html ( I don´t agree with what the comment to pic 6 is implying.)


Here is a theory why the engine is "tilted":
"Rose also brings up an interesting point: the stills of Flight 175 also show that left engine has been somehow interfered with. The turbines should be parallel to one another and attached to the wings, below we see the left engine at a slight angle to the right turbine, and looking as if it was about to come away from the wing. According to Rose this would be necessary to counterbalance the large "bump" attached just to the right of the centre of the fuselage and to compensate for the resulting aerodynamic drag."

Does anyone know enough physics / avionics(?) to say if this makes sense?

( To view the large "bump" in question, see : http://www.amics21.com/911/flight175/third.html )
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  question about a "tilted" engine k-robjoe  Feb-25-04 11:12 AM   #0 
   I'm kind of thinking that both of those observations are related.  Old and In the Way   Feb-25-04 12:17 PM   #1 
   before?  k-robjoe   Feb-25-04 12:30 PM   #2 
      I'd say definitely afterwards.  Old and In the Way   Feb-25-04 01:28 PM   #8 
   So you take a blurry photo, photoshop it some more...  TrogL   Feb-25-04 12:33 PM   #3 
   blurry  k-robjoe   Feb-25-04 12:54 PM   #4 
   c'mon now...  CaptainClark23   Feb-25-04 01:10 PM   #7 
   It would never fly  TrogL   Feb-25-04 01:03 PM   #5 
   better  k-robjoe   Feb-25-04 01:54 PM   #9 
      Use a dictionary  TrogL   Feb-25-04 06:23 PM   #12 
         designed  k-robjoe   Feb-25-04 07:23 PM   #13 
   What you are seeing are pixillations.  TrogL   Feb-25-04 01:05 PM   #6 
   Engine pylons are extremely complicated pieces of  mn9driver   Feb-25-04 02:47 PM   #10 
      scenario  k-robjoe   Feb-25-04 05:36 PM   #11 
      Let me add  mn9driver   Feb-25-04 09:24 PM   #14 
         images  k-robjoe   Feb-26-04 05:23 AM   #15 
            A picture  LARED   Feb-26-04 05:41 AM   #16 
            Well, I don't have any video stills, but here are some photos  mn9driver   Feb-26-04 09:10 AM   #17 
            pics  k-robjoe   Feb-26-04 12:59 PM   #18 
            "Pardon my French"  demodewd   Feb-26-04 02:36 PM   #19 
            re: bright line  demodewd   Feb-26-04 03:01 PM   #20 
               Your responses remind me of a joke:  mn9driver   Feb-26-04 04:26 PM   #21 
                  And...  demodewd   Feb-26-04 05:31 PM   #22 
                     filters  demodewd   Feb-26-04 05:43 PM   #23 
                        pics  k-robjoe   Feb-26-04 06:02 PM   #24 
                        I best I can tell  LARED   Feb-26-04 06:31 PM   #25 
                        Dictionary definition of Luminosity  Mr bin   Mar-04-04 11:00 AM   #37 
                           Thanks for the definition  LARED   Mar-04-04 12:00 PM   #38 
                           Remember we are watching TV  TrogL   Mar-04-04 04:42 PM   #39 
                        Geez ...  OudeVanDagen   Feb-26-04 07:48 PM   #26 
                        My joke was funny once, but  mn9driver   Feb-26-04 08:53 PM   #27 
                           MIT  demodewd   Feb-26-04 10:38 PM   #29 
                           are you sure you wanna say  OudeVanDagen   Feb-26-04 11:06 PM   #30 
                           Just because you work from conclusions back to evidence  TrogL   Feb-27-04 04:28 PM   #36 
                           These scientific conclusions exempt us from opinion  whipzz   Mar-05-04 09:23 AM   #40 
                              Once again we see the punchline of my joke.  mn9driver   Mar-05-04 11:46 AM   #41 
            WHY, if it WAS a "replacement" would they use a non-standard aircraft?  MercutioATC   Feb-26-04 10:35 PM   #28 
               airframe  k-robjoe   Feb-27-04 03:54 AM   #31 
                  I'm not accusing you of anything, I'm just trying to caution people  MercutioATC   Feb-27-04 09:39 AM   #32 
                  no problem  k-robjoe   Feb-27-04 12:21 PM   #34 
                  Now we are back to my area of expertise.  mn9driver   Feb-27-04 09:49 AM   #33 
                     I can not argue with you on this.  k-robjoe   Feb-27-04 12:23 PM   #35 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2009 Democratic Underground, LLC