Does the math and physics
add up? Part I
(Pilot's Views on Flight 77)
Mark Johnson firstname.lastname@example.org
Does the math and physics add up?
Thu Mar 7 16:27:13 2002
----- Original Message -----
From: Deleted for Privacy
To: Deleted for Privacy
Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Does the math and physics add up?]
Al, I flew the Boeing 747 JUMBO Jet., but not this 757. I retired before this
came into service. But, from what I see( or don't see) looking at
these pictures; its hard to pick out aircraft parts. The wingtips
alone would have sheared off and bounced back into the street,
the engines (2) would have penetrated deeper into the wall and
framing structure further than any other part making a
definite hole. The belly of the aircraft contains, fuel
tanks, baggage, mail bags, and cargo; none of this type debris
can be seen. Assuming 8600 gallons of kerosene fuel @ specific
gravity of approx 6.9 lbs/gal (temperature considered) weight of
the fuel would be close to 60,000 lbs and would splatter
everywhere. Where are the seats, those with passengers buckled
in would be ripped our of the floor, for that matter, where are
the passengers? I have never seen an aircraft accident where the
aircraft evaporated upon impact, water, land or buildings. If
these pictures were taken within 3 days after 9/11, there would
have been definite remains of parts. I don't see any. However,
digital computer photos can be doctored up to suit any lawyers
cause. From the photos shown, there ain't no fly in this pudding.
Big Al wrote:
Erk, you flew this type plane I'm sure when flying for Pam
Am all those years. What's your take on this? Should there be any
parts of the plane left? Why does it not show any plane parts at all?
Dewey, you are a pilot also, what is your take on this?
Has he a valid concern that no plane parts are left.
Subject: Does the math and physics add up?
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2002 10:12:00 -0600
From: "Mark Johnson"
To: Deleted for privacy
I am sending this to some of you just that there are question, and others of you
who I know are pilots and engineers. I don't have answers at this point, but I do
have questions. This is not my original thought, but I am following up with this
because I wanted to see the evidence myself before I asked questions after hearing
others discussing it. If the plane below was on its way from the East Coast to the
West Coast it had to be about 3/4 full which means approximately 8600 gallons of
fuel. How are the walls in picture one still white and not covered in sut/smoke
stains after 8600 gallons. Not just the interior, but look at the front wall face in
picture one. Granted, the top is smoldering.
you can see the rest of the pictures of 9/11 here at
If you'll look at the picture on Question 5 of the French article, you can see where both the wings and the engines did damage. (This is the over lay pic). The hole in the building is nearly exactly as large as the width from engine to engine (outboards). The scenario would be played out (hypothetically of course) with the craft hitting the building almost in a level attitude. The front of the fuselage would impact the 1st floor, and at 250 mph, would penetrate the building. However, at that attitude, the plane is already loosing it's momentum. As the fuselage enters the structure, energy is traded and the impacting parts cause damage and disintegrate. The fuselage continues to penetrate along a limited line of destruction, and also weakens the surrounding structures. Next comes the engines, impacting within several micro seconds from each other. Assuming the plane's form has not been changed by the previous moments of the impact (proven theory in many high velocity missile tests, especially the ones that used a winged air breathing design), the engines impact the side of the entry point, leaving a momentary gap between where the engines and fuselage impacted. Engines continue in, but since they have less linear mass behind them, disintegrate quickly and completely. However the damage was done and the intervening space collapsed on itself. The wings impacted the building and seem to have disintegrated into sections and entered the building at a very low angel of attack. I've not seen a close-up picture of the the areas' I'd need to look at when determining this, but it appears, from a distance, to be the path.
Remember, in an airplane crash, there are no bodies and no plane. Only pieces, usually quite small of each. Remember the Value Jet flight into the swamp? No piece bigger then a door was found intact. Though the Value Jet flew straight down into a flexible surface, this jet flew straight in to a vertical and solid but flexible series of walls. Though the actual angles are different, the actual angle of impact was nearly identical (approx 90 degrees), and the effective mechanics and results very similar. (Note: Most folks are used to seeing the remains of a crash of a plane that struck the ground or trees at a very low angel of attack. Should this plane have hit the ground and the pentagon wasn't there, it could have been a survivable crash as the plain would have parted out and some would have had a good chance to survive. Here, the plane did part out, but all in the same spot and on top of itself.)
Lack of penetration... other then sounding like a personal problem, much can be contributed, in my opinion to three factors. First, the pentagon was well built in the first place, and the impacted section, recently reinforced against bomb attack. Second, the a plane is not the most impressive missile when used against a fairly solid target. (The WTC succeeded so well because the structure's construction was box and rafter, not solid.) This is why it looses so spectacularly when a plane in flight collides with the surface. It's really no more then a tube, filled with pressurized gas with fuel, engines and payload. The average passenger train car is more sturdy in a longitudal collision! Third and finally, when in level flight, the plane looses some of the momentum that gravity give it in a dive. Had the pilot entered the building from the top floor and angled to the rear of the innermost ring, much more damage would have been done. Thank god the guy didn't either have the training or the sand to do it the other way!
Lack of burning... It is possible, though uncommon for a fire to blow itself out, either in it's entirety or partially. The construction of the pentagon during it's reinforcement program includes resealing the walls and structure w/plastic fireproofing. In the WTC, the structure was stripped the impact wave, then destroyed by the heat and fire. At the pentagon, there was an environment that was open to the air, a funnel opening that has been known to blow a fire out (this has been noted in office and wild fires in mountainous areas (I've witnessed and experienced the later). Obviously fire started and continued in several areas, but note those areas were primarily and most stubbornly in the attack or closed areas.
This scenario explains the wedge appearance of the damage from the air, and the damage to the building exterior along a thin horizontal line.
By the way... a graveled or dirt surface provides a safer environment for heavy lift and construction equipment.
Given what I know, what I've experienced, seen and been trained on; and they eye witness accounts I do believe there was a plane that impacted on this date and time. Incidentally, if this wasn't a plane, how does the flight that went down in PA fit into a conspiracy plan? Remember, we have witnesses on the plane, and ground on that one. I also don't recall seeing much large wreckage from that one, but I could be mistaken. Again, it depends how it hit. If it went in at a shallow or moderate angle, I just have forgotten about the wreckage. If it went in at around 90 degrees from ground, were talking a big hole in the ground and not much more.
Sorry for the long reply,
Mark Johnson -- email@example.com
<Back to Flight 77 Page
American Patriot Friends Network
"... a network of net workers..."
APFN IS NOT A BUSINESS
APFN IS SUPPORTED BY "FREE WILL" GIFT/DONATIONS
Without Justice, there is JUST_US!
APFN Message Board
APFN Contents Page
APFN Home Page