Holes shaped like planes?

Discussion in '9/11' started by Vlad Ivx, Dec 29, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. EggKiller

    EggKiller Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Messages:
    6,643
    Likes Received:
    473
    Trophy Points:
    83
    That would depend entirely on what the target is comprised of Bob.

    Also the meplat or lack of one. Size of cavity for hollow,point.
     
  2. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Also, were is that data about what sort of hollow
    point routinely penetrates steel?

    Case N point, how about that 870 f/s hollow point
    striking a steel target and BTW: the projectile
    would be made of aluminum..... now what?
     
  3. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    88,460
    Likes Received:
    20,870
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A hollow point is built to penetrate then open up and dumping all it's energy inside, just like the airliner did.

    Not sure what firing into water means unless you think the airliners crashed into water towers.

    BTW, those airliners were like big badass very heavy bullets. Flt 175 was going bout 865 f/s.
     
  4. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There are very specific design limits for hollow points
    if a round designed to penetrate animal flesh where to
    strike a tree, what do you think would happen?

    In the case of high speed ammo fired into water,
    the result was the violent destruction of the projectile.
    there is a result to see from resistance, and the idea
    that the alleged "FLT175" would penetrate the wall
    before mushrooming out, is ludicrous.
     
  5. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    88,460
    Likes Received:
    20,870
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You assume that the aircraft did not shred on impact. It did like a cheese grater through the grid of the outer wall but it was going as fast as a bullet so all you saw was the same thing you saw when the F4 crashed into the cement wall, no buckling, no deformation, nothing like that. You still can't put two and two together, can you.
     
  6. EggKiller

    EggKiller Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Messages:
    6,643
    Likes Received:
    473
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Well you never answered my meplat question Bob. How thick is this steel? I have no experience with aluminum projectiles as their lightweight would create a horrible ballistic coefficient requiring an exaggerated rifling twist in order to stabilize them.

    As I said during the first or second hollow point go around comparing bullets of any type penetrating steel plate to planes breaking steel beams is only similar in vague references.
    With that in mind at 870 fps most bullets will not penetrate a steel plate of any considerable thickness. That being said if you wish to scale things as a plane to a beam it would easily sheer it off. Just depends on how honest you wish to be with yourself.
    You can get a ping pong ball to penetrate a 1/2" steel plate if you can get it going fast enough. Off the top of my head I have no idea if we have achieved that capability. I doubt it. Rail guns are about the fastest man can launch things now.
     
  7. EggKiller

    EggKiller Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Messages:
    6,643
    Likes Received:
    473
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Generally speaking the highest speed bullets are designed to break up on impact. I didn't see the myth busters you speak of but it's a given they were using high velocity ammo designed for frangibility. It's designed to explode violently on smaller vermin like prairie dogs etc.
    Any decent large game hunting bullet should not break up significantly with water. It will mushroom as designed but it shouldn't break up. Varmint bullets will break up after striking anything of substance. You shouldn't believe that means they will not penetrate a steel plate, they will. It just means the dust coming out the other side will be much finer.
     
  8. EggKiller

    EggKiller Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Messages:
    6,643
    Likes Received:
    473
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Yes, that is exactly what will happen.
     
  9. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Just one itty bitty fly in the ointment
    the F4 experiment was conducted
    with the aircraft striking the target
    perpendicular to the surface of the target,
    however in the case of "FLT11" & "FLT175"
    the airliners could not possibly have been
    perpendicular to the surface of the wall and
    most certainly were not. Therefore the forces
    acting on the airliner would be asymmetrical.
    The result as observed in the case of the F4
    only applies when the aircraft strikes the wall
    perpendicular.

    Also did anyone notice in the pictures of the WTC
    towers being constructed, that there were steel
    plates welded to the box columns? the "cheese
    grater" theory doesn't work because there was
    steel between the box columns. not to mention
    the 4" thick steel reinforced concrete decks.....

    9/11/2001 is a fairy tale,
    once upon a time there were 19 radical Arabs
    who hated America soooo much ...........
     
  10. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,358
    Likes Received:
    86
    Trophy Points:
    48
    And yet there are truther engineers who understand structural engineer FAR MORE than you do who cannot produce any calculations, models, or FEAs to refute what NIST and others are saying.

    All you have is your logic and probability claims which mean absolutely nothing.
     
  11. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Riddle me this: why should anyone accept the "cheese grater"
    theory about how "FLT175" penetrated the wall of the tower, when
    the box columns had steel plate welded in place between the columns?

    For any sentient being, the logic & probability should be sufficient,
    however for people attempting to support the claim that suicidal
    Arabs hijacked airliners ....... ( etc .... ) obviously its illogical so
    there you are.
     
  12. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,358
    Likes Received:
    86
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Right.

    The probability of any of your truther engineers coming up with anything resembling math and engineering to refute NIST is quite low.
     
  13. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I notice that you did not answer the bit about
    the steel plates welded to the box columns in
    the WTC wall(s) ...... problem is, there isn't
    a proper explanation for how you get an airliner
    to do what was alleged to have been done by
    either "FLT11" or "FLT175"
     
  14. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    88,460
    Likes Received:
    20,870
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yet an F4 reacted exactly the same way when it hit an unpenetrable cement wall.
     
  15. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There is NO "exactly the same way"
    The F4 didn't penetrate its target
    and also the F4 was lined up totally
    perpendicular to the wall whereas
    the "FLT11" & "FLT175" alleged airliners
    were said to have struck the wall at an angle
    that is off perpendicular. nobody has as yet
    even attempted to address the vector forces
    that would have to be present when the airliner
    ( or alleged airliner .... ) struck the wall.
     
  16. EggKiller

    EggKiller Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2012
    Messages:
    6,643
    Likes Received:
    473
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Your thinking of the wall as a one dimensional flat surface.
    No offense Bob but I'm done waltzing in circles. You seem to have a skewed grasp of reality and most people find that annoying, me included. Enjoy.
     
  17. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    A flat surface would have to be a TWO DIMENSIONAL object,
    and really, on the subject of "most people" may I ask the readers
    of this forum, if anyone else finds what I post "annoying"
    Please express yourself, I can handle it.
     
  18. Gamolon

    Gamolon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2013
    Messages:
    2,358
    Likes Received:
    86
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Go learn about vectors, forces, loads, and material properties and then we'll talk. Once again, you are arguing points that you have no understanding of. That is quite clear.
     
  19. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    A 150 ft long lever is at 11 deg to the plane of the wall and
    the whole system is experiencing a 26 g deceleration, and
    given that the lever weighs 80 tons, how much force can you
    expect in a direction that is not perfectly forward but tends to
    rotate said lever. We have a problem here! and the label
    "incredulity" gets thrown around like people are supposed to
    be able to justify every nit in mass quantities of numbers when
    in fact, a basic understanding of what is going on is more than
    adequate.
     
  20. Hoosier8

    Hoosier8 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2012
    Messages:
    88,460
    Likes Received:
    20,870
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Show your math.
     
  21. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I would like to point out
    that there were steel plates welded to the box columns,
    thus preventing the cheese grater effect.
    So with that option gone, what is the real explanation
    for the holes shaped like planes?
     
  22. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Please provide a source for your claim of steel plates being welded to box columns.
     
  23. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    excuse me, have you been paying any attention at all
    this form has seen the presentation of the pix done during
    construction of the towers and the box columns were assembled
    in sets of three with steel plate welded to the columns to hold them together. don't tell me you haven't seen the pix.
     
  24. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I simply asked for a source. You can't provide one.

    Yep, I'm done. Enjoy your day.
     
  25. genericBob

    genericBob New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2014
    Messages:
    2,831
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    either you ( & many others ) have slept through the past
    few weeks of postings here or you KNOW about the pix
    of the construction of the WTC towers and what these pix
    show, you are avoiding answering up to the question, that
    is: knowing that the wall was not only box columns but also
    contained steel plate between the columns, this then negates
    the "cheese grater" theory about how the alleged airliner penetrated
    the wall.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page