Note that air resistance goes up by the CUBE of the velocity therefore traveling at 295 mph at low altitude encounters only one eighth the resistance of the same airliner traveling at 590 mph.
Oops, you were about to have to explain why airliner designers would use engines that could produce enough thrust in the higher density air of 1000 ft. Nice dodge. psik
Oh sure, just 4 times the air density and therefore lots more drag thus greater need for thrust to compensate. And more stress on the airframe. psik
Air at <1000 ft altitude being 4 times denser than air at 35,000 ft and also the fact that air resistance goes up by the cube ( that is X^3 ) of the velocity, therefore it can be argued that it is simply not possible to fly an airliner at 590 mph <1000 ft altitude. in any event, there would be significant difficulty getting the aircraft to accelerate to 590 mph and then level off for the run at the WTC tower..... as soon as you introduce the need for a power dive to achieve the fantastic speed alleged by the official story, you introduce the need for great pilot skill, this is no longer a matter of lining up the aircraft pointed straight at the WTC and going forward, this is a matter of a calculated maneuver that involves the pilot loosing sight of the target while accelerating downward and then at the correct moment to line up on a target that the pilot has lost sight of, pull out of the dive and fly to the target. I submit that this is beyond "incredulity" it is an insult to common sense to embrace the official story.
60 MPH over normal cruise speed is NOT impossible,given the planes are aerodynamic,and the denser air adds more lift,compensating for an increase in powerwhich would negate the drag.......All of this is basic common sense,yet your incredulity won't let you see it.
Talk to any professional pilot and ask them if 590 mph at <1000 ft altitude is only 60 mph over "cruse" speed(?) Your premise is ludicrous at best.
Have you been paying attention bob?...It's been established cruise speed is 530 mph at 35,000 feet,and any pilot wouldn't go passed the safety limit on the airframe,just for the hell of it..Not if they wanted to remain a pilot.
where you not promoting the idea that 590 mph is but 60 mph over limit at <1000 ft altitude? Have you grasped nothing about the density of air and the fact that air resistance increases by the cube of the velocity?
Jet engines are finite in nature, there is a limit to how much power any engine can produce. also, are you attempting to imply that streamlining negates the effect of drag increasing by the cube of velocity?
Neglible at best,You've shown me NO reason why,given the plane was being flown by suicidal nutjobs,that the aircraft couldn't have flown that fast. NONE.
so all you have to do is push the throttle to max and point the nose of the aircraft at your target and there you go....... right?
The mainstream media ( etc...) has asserted ( and with no proof at all .... ) that suicidal hijackers took control of 4 airliners and crashed 3 of them into buildings. Where is the PROOF of the official story?
Just to address the physical evidence, people have been shown a few pictures of a few bits that were alleged to have been aircraft parts, but really exactly how much of any one of the 4 alleged airliners was recovered, and positively identified as a part of the flight that allegedly crashed at that location?
The FBI and local authorities reported more than 90% recovery of 93, including DNA and personal effects. DNA for all of the passengers of 77 was recovered ... just to site two examples.
and when the foundation for that claim of 90% of "FLT93" recovered is asked for, a pix of a bin full of rubble is produced. Ya, great "proof" oh well........
