Another inconsistency in the official flight 93 crash site

[spooked911]

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread543044/pg1

A photo taken on 9/12 shows the aftermath of something exploding in the forest and causing major damage to a section of trees, including breaking off the tops of some, and also fire damage:



Let's piece together the official story to see what supposedly caused the damaged to the forest:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_73907.html
Coroner Wally Miller explained how the cockpit broke off at impact, bouncing into a wooded area of about 60 acres. The resulting fireball scorched about eight acres of trees, he said. The remainder of the plane burrowed deep into the ground, creating a long, narrow crater.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zl8WjT4yXMw#t=1m55s
UA93 Memorial Ambassador:
"Parts of the cockpit broke off and went back into the woods, but the rest of it went straight down and the ground came in around it, so the actual hole wasn't very large. When the FBI went in for parts, body parts and what not, 35 to 40 feet down in the ground."

http://www.witf.org/lifestyle/central-pa-magazine/995-pennsylvanias-ground-zero-voices-central-pa-magazine-november-2001
According to investigators, the cockpit of the aircraft separated from the plane upon impact and flew into the trees, where it disintegrated.

http://www.post-gazette.com/localnews/20021206flight93p3.asp
A reporter for a Harrisburg public radio station, Lambert said Flight 93's impact hurled the plane's cockpit and first-class section onto the wooded land that has been in his family since 1930.



So Flight 93's cockpit section broke off from hitting the ground and was hurled into the woods where it exploded and disintegrated, causing severe damaged to the section of the forest adjacent to where UA93 supposedly crashed.


My question is, what's stored in a 757's cockpit to make it EXPLODE?


As mentioned in the official stories above, the remainder of the plane burrowed deep into the ground (see more reports saying most of UA93 buried here:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread542391/pg1)

One of the landowners even says:
The plane "went in the ground so fast it didn’t have a chance to burn," says Jim.


This means only the 757's cockpit could have caused the forest damage, but I'm unaware of anything stored in the cockpit to make it explode like a bomb and cause fire damage.


So by that, the official story conflicts with the forest damage.


(I know the story about the cockpit breaking off while the rest of the plane burrowing underground is absurd in itself -- both that most of a 757 could burrow and if most could, that the cockpit and not the tail section would be the section that managed *not* to burrow also -- and deserves its own thread, but I'm just using the official story to question the damaged forest.)

----------------------

Clearly the official flight 93 crash story is absurd, on many levels.

[SDuderstadt]

1. Jesus, Spooked...

I'm issuing you a challenge. Identify any plane crash that you accept as real and I will easily find an equal number of inconsistencies to any number you can posit for UA93.

The difference between you and me is that I understand how the world actually works and accept that ANY largescale catastrophic event will, by definition, be accompanied by anomalies, unanswered questions and conflicting accounts. The bigger difference between you and me is that I don't attempt to build some sort of movement around them and fantasize that I am sort of visionary hero in the process. Please quit embarrassing DU.

[hack89]

2. The fireball was from the crash

not specifially from the nose section.

[travis80]

3. interesting. the damaged forest always bothered me.

did official ever give an explanation to what specifically damaged the forest?

[travis80]

4. "horse drawn carriage falls off a cliff and explodes." - ROFL

hilarious response at that other forum! but it made me fully understand the point. there's nothing in the front part of the plane that could make it explode into flames, just like a horse drawn carriage.

[SDuderstadt]

5. Dude...

if a plane is traveling in excess of 500MPH, how many feet per second is that?

Duh.

[travis80]

6. are you saying that if a horse carriage was going over 500 mph

and crashed, it would explode and burst into flames?

[SDuderstadt]

7. This is stupidly pointless...

nevermind, Travis. You can't even follow simple points.

[travis80]

8. what's your point then? n/t

[SDuderstadt]

9. Dude....

there's nothing in the front part of the plane that could make it explode into flames, just like a horse drawn carriage

Do some fucking math.

A 757 is about 155 ft long. At 500 MPH, the plane is going going 733 ft/sec. That means the entire plane would penetrate the building in slightly more than 1/5 of a second. So, why would something in the "front" of the plane have to explode?

BTW, no matter what your response is, I'm not going to waste any more time on your silliness.

[BeFree]

10. Hmmm

Your assertion:"....That means the entire plane would penetrate the building.."
Another typo, or was there actually a building in that field, and you are the only one who knew?

Full quote: "Do some fucking math.

A 757 is about 155 ft long. At 500 MPH, the plane is going going 733 ft/sec. That means the entire plane would penetrate the building in slightly more than 1/5 of a second. So, why would something in the "front" of the plane have to explode?"

[travis80]

11. i think there was a building embedded in that field

and just by chance, as soon as the plane was about to hit, some open the door of the building which allowed the plane go in and mostly disappear.

or maybe the ground was made of quick sand.

[SDuderstadt]

12. Or maybe I got threads mixed up trying to post from my phone and...

my point is valid, building or not.

[travis80]

13. one more time, what's your point then? n/t

[Subdivisions]

14. Setting us kooks straight is so important that you have to do so

even when you are away from your computer? So much so that you must use your phone so that you don't miss a anything? Guarding the legacy of 9/11 is a full-time job, eh dude?

[SDuderstadt]

15. Oh, excuse me for believing....

facts, evidence and Logic are important.

[travis80]

17. 3rd time, what's your point about the speed of Flight 93? n/t

[SDuderstadt]

18. At that speed, why would something in the "front" of the plane...

have to explode? Do you know where the fuel tanks are on a 757? Use your head, dude.

I'm also going to ask one time politely to not refer to me as or imply that I am anything other than a regular member of this forum. Confine yourself to the facts and quit speculating about my "motivation".

[travis80]

19. the fuel tanks on a 757 are in the mid and wing section that reportedly buried underground

along with the rear of the plane. the investigators reportedly found the black boxes 15 and 25 feet under.

so tell me, how did the fuel explode into the forest when we are being told the section of the plane that houses the fuel buried deep down in the ground?

look at the burn pattern. there's just a little burn markings in the crater, none between the crater and the trees, and a lot of burning of the trees. the burn pattern actually fits the official story of something hitting the field, then bouncing over the little service road and into the trees where something exploded.

are you guys going to say that it was the explosives that was reportedly strapped to one of the flight 93 hijackers and that it went off and caused the explosion damage to the trees after the cockpit separated from the rear of the plane and bounced into the woods? i actually wouldn't be surprised if you did.

[travis80]

29. bump. n/t

[Name removed]

20. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

27. What's really hysterical is....

"truthers" being totally clueless as to how silly, unfounded CT's are embarrassing to the Democratic Party, liberalism and DU.

[Ghost in the Machine]

31. Sorry, but your point would not still be valid...

A building has a lot of hollow space in it... the ground, not so much.

:hi:

[SDuderstadt]

32. Oh, yes it would....

with respect to the plane exploding...

[Ghost in the Machine]

33. ok, I can agree with that... "with respect to the plane exploding"...

How's the world treating you?

[travis80]

21. any detailed theories of what caused the explosion in the woods yet skeptics?

one's that make sense and don't defy physics, logic, or the official story?

[SDuderstadt]

22. See post # 2....

duh.

[travis80]

23. so that's a no on any DETAILED theories?

i didn't ask for vague simplistic ones that leave a lot of assumption.

[SDuderstadt]

24. Why are you surprised an airliner ramming into the ground at high speed would...

explode, dude? What did you expect would happen?

[travis80]

25. i'm not surprised that a plane crash and exploded even at slower takeoff speeds

i'm just trying to figure how a plane that mostly went into the ground that didn’t have a chance to burn could cause an explosion in the forest that's on the other side of the service road. did the fireball bounce up and over the road into the trees like the cockpit was said to? you know, details. just like my post title asked for, dude.

[SDuderstadt]

26. Maybe you should study the properties of fireballs....

dude.

[travis80]

28. this is one of those examples of things you say to me

that i think the same about you.

[SDuderstadt]

30. Dude,...

please point to any flaws in my critical thinking skills, by name please.

Simple question: have you ever actually studied critical thinking?

[travis80]

34. bump for skeptics. n/t

[Kesha]

35. Let me think... there`s an explanation for everything

I´ve seen something like that before, when serving in the (then West-) German Army.

It`s called "Nuke Detonation Demonstrator". Let me quote the army manual,
ZDv 3/20 "Verwendung pyrotechnischer Artikel":

Feuerwerkskörper DM25, Darstellung Atomdetonation
Imitation der Zündung einer Atombombe; grelle Blitzwirkung und Entwicklung einer weithin sichtbaren Rauchwolke, die durch die starke Hitzeentwicklung bei der Detonation in große Höhe getragen wird; elektrische Zündung.
-----------------
Das Nettoexplosivstoffgewicht sind 50Kg, davon 48Kg Blitzknall und 2 Kg Schwarzpulver
-----------------
Bei Verwendung von einem DM25 (Simulator, Atomexplosion) ist der Gefahrenbereich 100m, bei zwei Stück ebenfalls 100m , bei drei Simulatoren 150m und schliesslich bei gleichzeitiger Zündung von 4 Stück DM25 gerade mal 400m.
-----------------
Laut Anweisung ist der DM25 in einem Erdloch zu versenken


In short:
DM25, used for imititation of a nuclear explosion, glaring flash, produces a mushroom cloud which is largely visible. Strong heat generation causes high height of the plume.
DM25 weights 50KG, consisting of 2kg gun powder and 48KG "flash/bang" powder (sorry, no translation found)
Danger zone when using 1x DM25 is 100, same for 2x DM25, 150m for 3 of them, 400m for 4x.
According to the order, DM25 has to put into a burrow.

It seems that`s all what is needed to produce the effects we`ve been shown: A shallow crater, scorched trees (because they were within the hot danger zone) and a large
mushroom cloud which is bearing a resemblance to Mrs McClatchey`s pic... please see this similiar "Simulator device" for reference (DM25 is larger, though):

[Kesha]

36. Here is the US version... SIMULATOR, ATOMIC EXPLOSION M142

Description:
http://www.uxoinfo.com/blogcfc/client/includes/uxopages/Mulvaney_Details.cfm?Ord_Id=Y32

Video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zXKRzQwuxJQ

[travis80]

37. that would mean they dropped a bomb and it bounced in the woods.

there's lots of evidence that the plume in the McClatchey photo is near the pond that around 300 yards away from the crater.

[Kesha]

38. Keep it simple

They just had to place a DM25/M142/whatever detonator device at the alleged crash site.

That`s all. Flash, heat, crater, smoke.... all you need.

Keep it simple.

[travis80]

39. my question was for skeptics

so us arguing doesn't serve a good purpose.

[Kesha]

40. Yep... I was just trying to render it more precisely

This is just a real-world explanation, easy to accomplish with available stuff.

Those whom you call skeptics may explain their 40° inverted flight crash scenario as easy as that,
incl. a nose section which decided to jump 90° to the right and then exploded, while the rest of the ship
immerged into the ground, incl. all 3 main tanks.

I`d prefer a more realistic explanation, though.

[Kesha]

41. Present facts, and the silence is deafening...

These Doofers are indeed fulfilling every criteria of a "Conspiracy Theorist".

Q.E.D.

[travis80]

42. Shanksville has a lot of smoking guns the skeptics can't counter.

For instance, this thread.

[Kesha]

43. Right. The Doofers just don`t answer

Typical for a CT.

[defendandprotect]

44. Really interesting question . . .

Also, this "story" didn't come forth, as I recall it, until long after 9/11 --

And obviously not something that Wally mentioned when he first described the scene --

or when he described what little "debris" there was as having been the results of a

junk pile having been dumped on the site!


Clearly, it is all absurd!!