Flight 93 crash hole too small for a Boeing 757

[killtown]

The wing span of a Boeing 757:

► Boeing 757 Specifications

Dimensions - Feet

Wing Span - 124.10

Tail Height - 44.6

Source: Boeing

The dimensions of the crater Flight 93 supposedly made while crashing at a "near 90-deg angle" going 580 mph:

► Crews Begin Investigation Into Somerset County 757 Crash
"The plane then made a sharp, 90-degree downward turn and crashed.
Officials said that they believed that the plane took a dip and nose-dived into an abandoned strip mine.
WTAE-TV's Michelle Wright toured the crash scene and said that a crater of about 30 to 40 feet long, 15 to 20 feet wide and 18 feet deep was created by the crash." - The Pittsburgh Channel (09/11/01)

► Cell calls from planes reveal horror
"At 10 a.m., the plane suddenly went down, crashing into rural western Pennsylvania, where it created a crater 30 feet across and 20 feet deep, and scattered debris for half a mile." - MSNBC (09/12/01)

757 wing span = 124 ft


Crater length = 30-40 ft





Oh, and the entire plane supposedly swallowed up by the ground:

► Small town shoulders a nation's grief
"The site had been mined for coal, then refilled with dirt. It was still soft when Flight 93 crashed, and firefighters said the Boeing 757 tunneled right in.
They had to dig 15 feet to find it." - St. Petersburg Times (09/10/03)

So, how could a plane with a 124 ft wing span crashing "near 90-deg" only cause a 40 ft wide hole in the "soft dirt"?


(And where did the tail section go???)




Maybe this eyewitness at the scene knows:

FOX News reporter: It looks like there's nothing there, except for a hole in the ground.

Photographer Chris Konicki: Ah, basically that's right. The only thing you can see from where we where, ah, was a big gouge in the earth and some broken trees. We could see some people working, walking around in the area, but from where we could see it, there wasn't much left.

Reporter: Any large pieces of debris at all?

Konicki: Na, there was nothing, nothing that you could distinguish that a plane had crashed there.

Reporter: Smoke? Fire?

Konicki: Nothing. It was absolutely quite. It was, uh, actually very quiet. Um, nothing going on down there. No smoke. No fire. Just a couple of people walking around. They looked like part of the NTSB crew walking around, looking at the pieces..."

- FOX News (09/11/01)

See video clip here.

You got NeoCon'd on 9/11!


Let's Roll!


The non-plane crash at Shanksville

[killtown]

1. Great pic showing scale (and phoniness) of the crater

Where did all that jet fuel go???

[DoYouEverWonder]

3. Nice hazmat suits

Wonder why they needed those?

[killtown]

4. Probably to help clean up the fire bombs they dropped

to make it look like a plane crashed there.

[KJF]

2. Well, nobody else seems interested...

... so I might as well have a go.

"a crater of about 30 to 40 feet long, 15 to 20 feet wide and 18 feet deep"
This refers to the central impact crater made by the fuselage, for which it is plenty big enough. Add in the "trenches" made by the wings and you get about 80 feet, add in the shallow impressions and you get the rest.

btw, if it were a real event, in your humble opinion which other plane crash should most closely resemble that of United 93?

[killtown]

5. kay, say it's 80 feet across where the wings impacted

you're still short 44 ft of wings!

The Colorado one of the 737 that did a nose dive also and, coincidentally, crated the EXACT same size crater (is that where the 9/11 perps got the idea of the crater size?). But one "small" difference, there were large pieces of the fuselage left and wing debris OUTSIDE the crater.

The Shanksville crash is fake. Wake up to the reality.

[KJF]

7. Three parts

The crash site has three parts:
(1) The fuselage impact crater, let's say it's 30 feet by 20 feet;
(2) The wing trenches, let's say they're 25 feet long each;
(3) The wingtip and tail imprints, which account for the rest of the plane.

The inner parts of the wings were heavier and thus created trenches, whereas the outer parts of the wings were lighter and only made imprints.

Here's a photo showing the three different elements:
fficial%26sa%3DG" target="_blank">http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://nineeleve...
Which way up was the plane when it crashed?

Compare this to the ValuJet crash site:
fficial%26sa%3DG" target="_blank">http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cnn.c...

[Andre II]

8. Valu Jet

There was plenty of more debris left of the ValuJet:
http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/vj592/photo.shtml

Btw: What happened to the tail section? It is even longer than 40 feet.

If you believe the plane crashed at an angle of 90°: At what altitude was it necessarily flying in order to manage this turn?

[KJF]

10. ValuJet

Debris
(1) How much debris are you saying is in the picture?
(2) How do I know it's really from the crash?
(3) Why are there no long sections? The biggest part was allegedly 8 feet long. Either the ValuJet crash site is faked as well or such crashes are not necessarily associated with large segments.
This is a good quote about ValuJet:
"There's no airplane left"
http://www.cnn.com/US/9605/21/valujet.pm/index.html

Tail section
40 feet? I assume that must be a typo on your part.

Angle
Who said 90 degrees? Surely, you're not suggesting the plane/hologram would have had to stop in midair to turn round.

If blood is usually found at such crash sites, then how do you account for the lack of blood found at the ValuJet crash site?
"Blood tests have also been impossible because the body parts recovered have not contained blood."
http://www.cnn.com/US/9606/06/newsbriefs/index.html
It must be those pesky vampires again.

If large human remains are usually found at such crash sites, how do you account for the very small size of human remains there?
"the largest human, piece of human remain they've discovered so far is a knee."
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/transportation/may96/val...
Sound familiar?

[Andre II]

11. ValuJet

Thanks for your links from the ValuJet. Interesting and I've to work on them.

(2) How do I know it's really from the crash?
Well it is the very same site that hosts your photo. It's a well known database for airplane crashes.

This is a good quote about ValuJet:
"There's no airplane left"
http://www.cnn.com/US/9605/21/valujet.pm/index.html

I don't know if it is comparable.
The crater is under water:




The tail of an Boeing 757 is 44 feet and 6 inches. How does it fit into your crater?

Angle:
You've stated in another thread "There was a big airplane-shaped hole"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Explain me how a hole can be "airplane-shaped" if it wasn't caused by a plane crashing at 90°.

[KJF]

12. Divers

Divers searched the crash site and found no large pieces of wreckage. If
there had been large pieces of wreckage, the divers would have found them.
The two crashes were similar (medium-haul aircraft, angle) and produced
similar results in terms of wreckage, crater size, human remains and blood
contained therein. If the amount of composition of wreckage, crater size,
amount and composition of human remains and blood contained therein are
indications that United 93's crash site was faked, then that means the
ValuJet crash site was faked too. Do you think the ValuJet crash site was
faked?

The tail of a Boeing is most certainly not 44 feet and 6 inches, as can
clearly be seen from this diagram:

44 feet and 6 inches is the distance from the top of the tail to the
ground when the plane is standing on its wheels. The tail itself is only
20-25 feet. If a 20 foot house stands on top of a 100 foot hill, is the
height of the house 20 feet or 120 feet? A tail-shaped impression can be
seen to the north of the crater. I would suggest the tail-shaped
impression was made by the tail.

A plane crashing at an angle of 1 degree would clearly not leave such
marks on the ground. However, I see no reason to believe the angle was
exactly 90 degrees. If it had been so, then why would there be a debris
"fan" to the south? Any relatively steep (i.e. over 45 degrees) angle
would do.

[Andre II]

13. Tail

If we discuss how big the size of the crater should be caused by an airplane then certainly we do not so much have to take into consideration the size of the tail alone as you propose but the height of the plane. The height of the plane standing would be indictated by the given 44 ft. Yet I agree that for a plane crashing we need to substract the height of the wheels.

If you estimated the plane crashed at 45° then please explain to me the absence of any skid marks and tell me from which direction the plane crashed. A plane crashing at 45° in the ground should clearly leave traces that allows to conclude the direction from where the plane came. And talking about the size of the crater. You are awara that a crater caused by a plane crashing at 45° as by far bigger than a crater caused by a plane hitting at exactly 90°?

Concerinng the ValuJet. I really doubt that you con compare this crashes in view of human remains and blood contained therein as one plane crashed into the ground and the coroner there remarked the absence of any drop of blood quickly after the crash whereas the ValuJet crashed into water. How long did it take to find the human remains? In how far don't we have to take into consideration the bacteria in the water and the reactionwith human remains and blood?

[oblivious]

6. Reminds me of this picture of a Chinese military jet crash.

I posted this a couple of days ago, but there's a news blackout so no more info available. How does the plane disappear in a hole only 3 sq metres?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


The plane crash tore open a crater measuring about 3 square metres.

[Andre II]

9. Eyewitnesses

here the estimation of the crater and the gouge by the first eyewitnesses.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...