question - plane crash in chicago and pentagon plane

[2Design]

as I look at the plane crash in chicago - I again wonder how the suppose plane that hit the pentagon made on single hole through the building - nothing about the wings or tail or other stuff - still does not add up for me?????

[NanceGreggs]

1. You're not alone ...

... that story doesn't add up for a lot of us!

[Jara sang]

2. It wasn't a plane

It was a cruise missile or small jet.

[meunier33]

3. Where is that info...

About the surplus Navy ASW jets that were being converted into target drones in secrecy in Colorado? I thought it was established from analyzing the picture of the engine in the Pentagon that one of them was used.

[SheilaT]

4. The plane in Chicago

simply slid off the end of the runway. It would not disintegrate completely going through a chain link fence. It was traveling relatively slowly -- I'm going to guess no more than 50mph and perhaps even slower -- by the time it hit the fence. The plane that hit the Pentagon was traveling at about 400-500 mph when it hit a solid masonry building.

The two accidents are entirely different.

Sliding off the end of the runway happens fairly often. The plane is trying to come to a stop but can't for some reason or another, usually icy runways. Typically these accidents cause relatively little damage, although that's not always the case.

[uppityperson]

5. Yup, ever see a magician whip a tablecloth off a table with dishes on it?

physics
:popcorn:

[andino]

6. I would like to add that the Pentagon is a bunker!

Reinforced bunker.

They built it to withstand attacks. And it did a good job of that IMO.

[2Design]

10. yes one was going slowly but when you look at the size of the plane

it just is so much bigger and wider than that hole

sorry, I just don't believe the lies, at least I call them lies. But like Howard dean, I don't always have the accepted viewpoint - but may have the accurate one.

[peacetalksforall]

7. Anyone who can do some math knows that the Pentagon incident is a

serious lie.

[LARED]

8. Can do some math?

How does math tell us it's a lie?

[peacetalksforall]

9. Height of tail, width of wing span, nose height, height of building, size

of opening in the wall, depth of damage into the building, depth of hole into the ground outside the wall, air speed, amount of debris, etc, etc. Combine that with many other funny things and their account of what happened and you have NO B757. According to their story, the Pentagon 'ate' the aircraft. They may have used one of their new toys such as a disintegrator. Or perhaps the B757 is sitting in the Pentagon basement?

[Sweet Pea]

11. What's a "disintegrator"? n/t

[peacetalksforall]

12. I was being 'creative'. But, anything is possible if you know a little

about HAARP and their ability to fly large aircraft remotely and their psy-ops.

[MercutioATC]

13. Want some explanations for theose questions? Look here: (plenty of math)

http://www.pubs.asce.org/ceonline/ceonline03/0203feat.html

[Kevin Fenton]

14. How deep was the hole?

"depth of hole into the ground outside the wall"
I've never seen a figure for this. Have you?

[petgoat]

15. How deep? Here's a wild guess.

As deep as is necessary to make the numbers jibe?

[MrSammo1]

16. The question you should really be asking is

What really happened at the Pentagon that day?

And in the days that followed?