Did the airframe evaporate? by Ark_Pilot ()
Members remain the original copyright holder in all their materials here at Renderosity. Use of any of their material inconsistent with the terms and conditions set forth is prohibited and is considered an infringement of the copyrights of the respective holders unless specially stated otherwise.
Thanks for viewing and comments!
Photoshop Elements 6
Image Comments (12)
bkhook () 8:46AM | Sun, 13 June 2010
I don't know. Ask the families of the 64 people who were on board flight 77 and the families of the 125 people in the pentagon who perished. This is an argument that's always going to go around.
thekingtut () 9:35AM | Sun, 13 June 2010
Why don't you watch the surveilance camera shots of the damn jet flying into the building. I bet you think that fire can't melt steel too. Troofer!
alexcoppo () 10:48AM | Sun, 13 June 2010
The airframe didn't evaporate, it made a big hole. It's the wings that, ehm, were a bit "challenged". Look for photographs on the internet and you will see that at the Pentagon, around the roundish hole there was no damage at all. The wings that cut WTC buildings like razors could not even break glasses in Washington. Add that there where nor debries on the approach to the Pentagon neither further on so we are left with a "where did I put the wings"? question. It would be hilarious were not it tragic.
zorares () 11:30AM | Sun, 13 June 2010
Well, if we're going to talk conspiracies, based on the same theories that brought down the Twin Towers, then the Government was involved in the Oil Rig explosion and sank that too. Sheesh!
T.Rex () 2:27PM | Sun, 13 June 2010
What most likely happened was the wings were pushed/folded back into the fuselage when the wing's front edges hit the Pentagon's walls. This has happened to bombers in WWII. The fuel then went into the fuselage. The resulting explosion and fire would reduce the plane to small melted fragments. One must note that most of what looks like a large, solid plane is actually empty space inside, with a very thin skin. That doesn't leave much left after a fire.
Malleus93 () 10:08PM | Sun, 13 June 2010
If some conspiracy wanted to hit the building, why NOT use an airplane (maybe remotely controlled)? Why risk using a missile, which might malfunction or leave identifiable wreckage? Silly notion.
Osper () 11:40AM | Mon, 14 June 2010
In a manner of speaking, yes! And it evaporated at the speed of Av gas exploding plus the speed of the airplane!
ranman38 () 4:49PM | Mon, 14 June 2010
good call osper. The gas is in the wings. massive explosion + massive fire = evaporation.
Hefrian_Rotter () 12:56AM | Sat, 19 June 2010
A plane went down in Libya recently, killing all but one Dutch boy aboard. Looking at the film afterwards of the debris field, there isn't much of the aluminum titanium hull and wings left--melted metal, yes. Seats, foam rubber, tires, electronic components, wiring, plastics...all up in smoke. Planes are made as light as possible in order to achieve lift. Physics and facts. da 'Rotter