NationStates Jolt Archive

Where's the hole in the building? A C130 is HUGE. It supposedly just left the airport, had technical issues, turned to land back where it left and crashed into a ten level apartment building....


No plane wreckage, no hole in the building, people look like it's a normal building fire... There should be JP5 (jet fuel) for a full load burning the HELL out of the whole neighborhood... WTH?


http://news.yahoo.com/photos/ss/events/wl/120605iranplanecrash;_ylt=AvNrXVRLKtfXtxijCgiYwt9hWscF;_ylu=X3oDMTA5bGcyMWMzBHNlYwNzc25hdg--

You would be surprised at how little is left after most air crashes.

The jet fuel burns up rather rapidly. The aircraft, if it burns, is rapidly reduced to puddles of melted aluminum. If it hits at high velocity, it is shredded into pieces about the size of your hand, and scattered over several square kilometers. If it hits slow (as this one appears to have done), the impact crushes it down to nearly nothing and burns.

Crushed into what? There's no hole...

You would be surprised at how little is left after most air crashes.

The jet fuel burns up rather rapidly. The aircraft, if it burns, is rapidly reduced to puddles of melted aluminum. If it hits at high velocity, it is shredded into pieces about the size of your hand, and scattered over several square kilometers. If it hits slow (as this one appears to have done), the impact crushes it down to nearly nothing and burns.
Yeah, but if it hits a ten story apartment building shouldn't it level the fucker? How strong do they build apartments over there?

Crushed into what? There's no hole...

They're not showing the side where it hit.

Buildings are far, far more resilient than any airplane.

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/ap/20051206/capt.vah10912061518.mideast__iran__plane_crash_vah109.jpg?x=303&y=345&sig=ZqZcBmDsf.j7d0iQSLRa2g--

"Perfect! A plane crash....i'll just make off with this little kid here..."

Weird.

It was.......get ready for it.........David Copperfield.

It was.......get ready for it......... David Copperfield.
No, it was a super secret American Death Ray... :rolleyes:

Yeah, but if it hits a ten story apartment building shouldn't it level the fucker? How strong do they build apartments over there?Nope. Hell, when 9/11 happened, the holes in the towers weren't all that big. In the early '40's, when a b-25 bomber crashed headlong into the Empire State building, there wasn't that much externally visible damage, either.

Aircraft only look huge - They're all about saving weight, that they might fly. You might be shocked at how little mass there is in a airplane, per unit volume. All that thin aluminum goes 'confetti' when they wreck.

Anyway, those pictures really haven't done a good job of profiling the building - They only show about 90 degrees of the circumfrence.

Nope. Hell, when 9/11 happened, the holes in the towers weren't all that big. In the early '40's, when a b-25 bomber crashed headlong into the Empire State building, there wasn't that much externally visible damage, either.

Aircraft only look huge - They're all about saving weight, that they might fly. You might be shocked at how little mass there is in a airplane, per unit volume. All that thin aluminum goes 'confetti' when they wreck.

Anyway, those pictures really haven't done a good job of profiling the building - They only show about 90 degrees of the circumfrence.
OK, got it.

No, it was a super secret American Death Ray... :rolleyes:
I wish we had a death ray. That would be cool.

I wish we had a death ray. That would be cool.
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/abl/overview.html

A 747-4 fully laden with fuel, passengers and cargo weighs about 350k tonnes...now you might think that is quite heavy, but if you think about how fecking huge the 747 is, how many people it is holding, how much fuel is sloshing around in the tanks and the amount of luggage, plus actual body weight its not that much...

if a 747 did go into a building it would damage it, but the plane would come of much worse! It was not the plane that caused the twin towers to tragically collapse, it was the AvJet 1 and the resulting inferno melting literally the critical supports to the building.

Planes have to weigh as little as possible to get airbourne...more weight means more thrust is necessary --> bigger engines --> more fuel consumption and greater drag --> even more fuel consumption --> More fuel consumption means bigger fuel tanks --> More weight and we start again, its a vicious circle!

http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/military/abl/overview.html


Well there you go then... The gas station attendant across the street said the tail of the plane lit on fire as it was turning and then it crashed into the 8th floor...

Now we know why... :eek:

Buildings are made to stand and airplanes are made to fly.

I suspect a bevy of conspiracy theories from those that fail to grasp this fact.

well there have been a few suggestions about blaming the US, as tey haven't been able to get spares since '79.

But ten their Antonov and Ilyushin have been a bit ropey as well, so it might ave something to do with maintainance budget.

that and of course getting shot down by an ABM CREWS, :rolleyes:

"C130 Disappears in Iranian plane crash!?!"

It's the "Faluja Triangle!" :eek:

"C130 Disappears in Iranian plane crash!?!"

It's the "Faluja Triangle!" :eek:

LOL!

This proves the scientific theory only radical Muslims can destroy buildings with airplanes. Unless of course it is a poorly buitl LEGO building, then anyone can do it.

This proves the scientific theory only radical Muslims can destroy buildings with airplanes. Unless of course it is a poorly buitl LEGO building, then anyone can do it.

Must not have been radical enough, eh?

C-130's are big, but not huge. You can barely squeeze something along the lines of 64 people in them, plus crew members.

C-130's are big, but not huge. You can barely squeeze something along the lines of 64 people in them, plus crew members.

Everyone is reporting that this one had between 90 and 106 people on board.

Everyone is reporting that this one had between 90 and 106 people on board.

Let's rephrase that: the US wouldn't pack that many people on a C-130, but other nations might.

Rather like the "bus plunge" accidents in India. You'll hear about frightful numbers of people on a bus designed for 50 or 60 people - and the news report will say 300 people killed.

It's 'supposed to be' a plane full of journalist and VIPs going to visit the military excercises in the south of Iran... I'n not claiming any of this is true myself, just saying what they are reporting.

It doesn't sound like it was supposed to be a plane full of the village riff-raff with their chickens in their laps.

It's 'supposed to be' a plane full of journalist and VIPs going to visit the military excercises in the south of Iran... I'n not claiming any of this is true myself, just saying what they are reporting.

It doesn't sound like it was supposed to be a plane full of the village riff-raff with their chickens in their laps.

Might as well be now - they're quite dead.

Clearly the crash is a conspiracy designed to allow the president of Iran to garner international support to invade America to finish off his father's work. Hmm... sounds familiar.

First, you kill off a plane full of journalists, and then you blow up their lawyer's apartment building. :eek:

*wonders if W is wishing he could do this in America?*

The rest of the journalists and lawyers will fall into line... :gundge:

Assembled shots of building and whatnot...
http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c17/Greenlander3/Iran_No_Holes.jpg

Good collection of images, Greenlander. Towards the bottom of the collage is a clear image of one of the airscrews, complete with hub gearing. That's definitive.

Good collection of images, Greenlander. Towards the bottom of the collage is a clear image of one of the airscrews, complete with hub gearing. That's definitive.


It's there... But where is there in relation to the building? Either way it's an odd crash site, that's for sure

I've just seen a report on the crash (complete with footage) on the BBC News. The plane didn't hit the building - it hit the pavement by one side of the building. To people standing on the other side of the building it would have looked like it had hit the building, hence the incorrect witness reports.

Now THAT makes more sense.... :D

The plane was taking off from nearby and never made it into the air properly. In other words, its airspeed would have been very low, and it looks like it hit the basement after flying at treetop level. In comparison, the WTC impacts were at nearly 500mph. So yeah, nothing bizarre here.