IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Next to it??
The way that I recall it, they landed right on the building. The grass outside was still in good shape.

[link|http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/pentagon_20020316.html|http://www.geoffmetc...gon_20020316.html]

But agreed that Bin Laden is doing everything he can. However something as big as what he did on 9/11 can clearly be timed to a moderate extent. They timed the day to be one with symbolism for them. They could have trivially picked flights an hour later. The background research to have known that starting after trading hours would kill more people than starting before is not hard to do. Certainly it is easier than training pilots!

When they don't wait the extra hour, you have to wonder why not.

Cheers,
Ben
"good ideas and bad code build communities, the other three combinations do not"
- [link|http://archives.real-time.com/pipermail/cocoon-devel/2000-October/003023.html|Stefano Mazzocchi]
New Re: Next to it??
They did land right on the building, but not in the center ring, they landed on one of the outer ring areas, but I believe they came down on such an angle that it would be considered a "dive bomb" of sorts.

I agree though, a better "dive bomb" concept would have been the center, however, maybe they thought people could escape quicker if the outer edges weren't burning first. I'm not sure how quickly the fire would spread through the rings in such a fortified building.

Nightowl >8#
"I learned to be the door, instead of the mat!" "illegitimi nil carborundum"

Comment by Nightowl
New Check out the link Ben gave
The tops of light poles were sheared off on the freeway. The plane could not have been on a very steep approach to have done that.
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
New Re: Check out the link Ben gave
Interesting...

(I apologize that I don't have any of my 9/11 books here right now, or I would pull them out and look at other things. I lent them to church to decorate for the special 9/11 service we had, and don't have them back yet)

Well, I think what throws us is the downward angle of the damaged area into the building. Did the plane then come in more level and just collapse it? Maybe they leveled out at the last minute to be sure to have better aim? Hard to aim when dive bombing on a steep dive.

Fascinating though, and changes my concept of what I thought happened, for sure.

Nightowl >8#
"I learned to be the door, instead of the mat!" "illegitimi nil carborundum"

Comment by Nightowl
New Another set of links.
[link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=31944|#31944].

Cheers,
Scott.
New Re: Another set of links.
Thanks Scott.

It seems to indicate that it did indeed come in at an angle, but it doesn't explain if the angle was sideways (i.e. not straight at the side of the building), or downward (i.e. divebombing into the top of the building).

I wish I had my books, they have detailed diagrams of the path of the planes.Ah well, thanks though, the links helped!

I think the main thing we are indicating here though is that divebombing the towers would have been very very difficult with lots of chance for failure, whereas divebombing the Pentagon would have been easier. Whether or not they actually tried to dive bomb the Pentagon and missed hitting the center ring, or whether or not they hit where they aimed, we'll really never know.

Interestingly enough, if body count was the main issue, you would think they would have hit the towers lower, because then less people would have been able to evacuate. Just something I thought about, due to the way the fire prevented people from getting down from the upper floors.

Nightowl >8#
"I learned to be the door, instead of the mat!" "illegitimi nil carborundum"

Comment by Nightowl
New more like emulating a torpedo attack from the air
"You're just like me streak. You never left the free-fire zone.You think aspirins and meetings and cold showers are going to clean out your head. What you want is God's permission to paint the trees with the bad guys. That wont happen big mon." Clete
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
     This needs to be taken to Flame Forum -NT - (Arkadiy) - (81)
         Rot in hell, you and your kind. - (Arkadiy) - (63)
             Blow me. - (mmoffitt) - (61)
                 Go blow up the rest of them excesses - (Arkadiy) - (60)
                     Endless applause. - (bepatient)
                     My kind of language? - (mmoffitt) - (57)
                         You insist on continuing ... - (bepatient) - (56)
                             You know, ... - (mmoffitt) - (8)
                                 Oh sure I can... - (bepatient) - (7)
                                     At least the volume is coming down a little. - (mmoffitt) - (6)
                                         None so blind as they can't see. - (bepatient) - (5)
                                             You got myopia? - (mmoffitt) - (4)
                                                 Chuckle. - (bepatient) - (3)
                                                     Heh. You're just pretending to be thick, aren't you? - (mmoffitt) - (2)
                                                         I know... - (bepatient) - (1)
                                                             ICLRPD (new thread) - (Silverlock)
                             Taller in Toronto - (jake123) - (1)
                                 Nothing like that Canadian engineering ;-) -NT - (mmoffitt)
                             Actually speaker of the CN Tower indirectly... - (lister) - (41)
                                 Respectfully disagree. - (mmoffitt) - (40)
                                     Re: Respectfully disagree. - (lister) - (1)
                                         They did hit a low lying building. - (mmoffitt)
                                     Really? - (drewk) - (14)
                                         They weren't going for body count - (ben_tilly) - (13)
                                             Re: They weren't going for body count - (Nightowl)
                                             Dive-bombing is not easy with 737 - (Arkadiy) - (10)
                                                 They did it at the Pentagon - (ben_tilly) - (9)
                                                     Re: They did it at the Pentagon - (Nightowl)
                                                     If they really dive-bombed Pentagon - (Arkadiy) - (7)
                                                         Next to it?? - (ben_tilly) - (6)
                                                             Re: Next to it?? - (Nightowl) - (5)
                                                                 Check out the link Ben gave - (drewk) - (4)
                                                                     Re: Check out the link Ben gave - (Nightowl) - (2)
                                                                         Another set of links. - (Another Scott) - (1)
                                                                             Re: Another set of links. - (Nightowl)
                                                                     more like emulating a torpedo attack from the air -NT - (boxley)
                                             Re: They weren't going for body count - (deSitter)
                                     Symbolism - (jake123) - (22)
                                         That may well be the best opinion I have heard. - (mmoffitt)
                                         You make the same mistake - (Arkadiy) - (18)
                                             Hmmm - an interesting dissection. - (Ashton)
                                             The mistake is yours - (jake123) - (16)
                                                 Applause! -NT - (mmoffitt)
                                                 There you go again - (Arkadiy) - (1)
                                                     Strategically - (jake123)
                                                 Oh, and by the way - (Arkadiy) - (2)
                                                     Sure he could have - (jake123) - (1)
                                                         I am between you two on this. - (mmoffitt)
                                                 Projecting? - (screamer) - (9)
                                                     Read the history of guerilla conflicts - (jake123) - (1)
                                                         Going to give up on this one... - (screamer)
                                                     Are you forgetting Mogadishu, Somalia? - (a6l6e6x)
                                                     So then.. it's the PNAC Fundamentalists + Xian-Rightists - (Ashton) - (5)
                                                         Get over yourself, friend... - (screamer) - (4)
                                                             PS - (screamer) - (1)
                                                                 Who can resist?___"An Invitation to the Dance" - - (Ashton)
                                                             If I've offended you... - (pwhysall) - (1)
                                                                 Only once though... - (screamer)
                                         Eloquently summarized - (Ashton)
                                         It's a floor polish and a dessert topping! - (Another Scott)
                             Sorry Bill, Mike has a point - (ben_tilly) - (2)
                                 Oh You Kid___:-\ufffd_____Love. It. -NT - (Ashton)
                                 ObPlug - (deSitter)
                     Tangential flame (new thread) - (drewk)
             kudos -NT - (deSitter)
         No grey areas (or matter) to see here...move along -NT - (FuManChu) - (2)
             Unless, of course, - (bepatient) - (1)
                 Fuck you too. -NT - (mmoffitt)
         It is possible to lament the deaths of *ALL* senseless - (Ashton) - (13)
             No. - (bepatient) - (11)
                 Fair point - sorta supposing.. - (Ashton) - (5)
                     Oh it is certain... - (bepatient) - (4)
                         You don't really know - you want to Believe - (Ashton) - (1)
                             Simplistic? - (bepatient)
                         Re: Oh it is certain... - (Nightowl) - (1)
                             Interesting comparison, Owl - (Ashton)
                 No. - (Nightowl)
                 Talking about Mecca - (Arkadiy) - (2)
                     Arkadiy___you be BAAD :-\ufffd -NT - (Ashton)
                     Re: pretty much justified from Mike's point of view... - (mmoffitt)
                 Hmm idea - (deSitter)
             re: bad moffitt. - (mmoffitt)

I have neither space nor cash nor latitude to adorn my house with any more things with CPUs in them.
307 ms