In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
quote:Originally posted by p3skyking
Since the fuel tanks would have been dry, had the wing been ripped off it would have floated, for awhile at least, long enough to be spotted by someone.
More assumptions. The wing is designed to pass through air, not water. Hitting water at speed would be little different than hitting a wall. No reason to think much of the wing would have held together.
Remember, however, that the Kualalamputiuns told us that the flight was lost over the South China Sea, and valuable days were lost looking up there. It was only days later that the fable of the satellite pings directed the search efforts to the south and west. Sufficient time, arguably, for even a relatively intact though compromise wing to sink.
This was a very well done commandeering of an airliner, and the Ayatollahs should be proud of their efforts. Start with a mis-direct, and then 500 days later hit us with another brilliant mis-direct. I guess after they pulled the wool over Kerry's and Obama's eyes, they were emboldened to go and play their second-to-the-last ace card. The final ace card will be read about for centuries.
Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.
Don, in other threads today you seem rational. How is it that in this one you seem the polar opposite?
We most emphatically do NOT "know the plane is intact." The entire scenario you describe is based entirely on evidence-free hypotheses and wild-* ideas. Somebody somewhere on the internet postulated a "what if" idea and you seem to have taken it as proved beyond a doubt. That's as nutty as the whole human-caused climate change nonsense.
quote:Originally posted by Rocky Raab
Don, in other threads today you seem rational. How is it that in this one you seem the polar opposite?
We most emphatically do NOT "know the plane is intact." The entire scenario you describe is based entirely on evidence-free hypotheses and wild-* ideas. Somebody somewhere on the internet postulated a "what if" idea and you seem to have taken it as proved beyond a doubt. That's as nutty as the whole human-caused climate change nonsense.
Rational, Rocky?
Where? I will need to see some proof.[:)]
I postulated the Iranian landing on day 1 or 2, just after seeing the potential maximum flight radius of MH370. When it was shown that the bulk of Iran, including a potential overwater approach, was possible, the scenario became obvious.
The recent finding of the planted evidence does not change anything.
Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.
quote:Originally posted by Don McManus
quote:Originally posted by p3skyking
Since the fuel tanks would have been dry, had the wing been ripped off it would have floated, for awhile at least, long enough to be spotted by someone.
More assumptions. The wing is designed to pass through air, not water. Hitting water at speed would be little different than hitting a wall. No reason to think much of the wing would have held together.
Remember, however, that the Kualalamputiuns told us that the flight was lost over the South China Sea, and valuable days were lost looking up there. It was only days later that the fable of the satellite pings directed the search efforts to the south and west. Sufficient time, arguably, for even a relatively intact though compromise wing to sink.
This was a very well done commandeering of an airliner, and the Ayatollahs should be proud of their efforts. Start with a mis-direct, and then 500 days later hit us with another brilliant mis-direct. I guess after they pulled the wool over Kerry's and Obama's eyes, they were emboldened to go and play their second-to-the-last ace card. The final ace card will be read about for centuries.
There is just so many unanswered questions here. If an impact had been strong enough to destroy the wing, surely if would have compromised the cabin and the hundreds of bags and pillows in the overhead lockers, not to mention, magazines, purses, and clothing would have been spread out over the ocean.
The flaperon could have been dropped from another aircraft or ship in an area already searched a week after the disappearance of the flight and was missed until it washed up on the beach.
A ruse is still plausible until it can be proven it's not and so far it hasn't.
I saw an expert on tv this morning, he seemed pretty well informed. He said that he could see damage on the trailing edge of the flaperon, yet the leading edge was intact.
Therefore, he said that flaperon came off in midair, and extremely high speed, more than the plane was designed for.
He said that the plane must have been in a dive at or near the sound barrier when the flaperon came off.
Comments
Since the fuel tanks would have been dry, had the wing been ripped off it would have floated, for awhile at least, long enough to be spotted by someone.
More assumptions. The wing is designed to pass through air, not water. Hitting water at speed would be little different than hitting a wall. No reason to think much of the wing would have held together.
Remember, however, that the Kualalamputiuns told us that the flight was lost over the South China Sea, and valuable days were lost looking up there. It was only days later that the fable of the satellite pings directed the search efforts to the south and west. Sufficient time, arguably, for even a relatively intact though compromise wing to sink.
This was a very well done commandeering of an airliner, and the Ayatollahs should be proud of their efforts. Start with a mis-direct, and then 500 days later hit us with another brilliant mis-direct. I guess after they pulled the wool over Kerry's and Obama's eyes, they were emboldened to go and play their second-to-the-last ace card. The final ace card will be read about for centuries.
Brad Steele
We most emphatically do NOT "know the plane is intact." The entire scenario you describe is based entirely on evidence-free hypotheses and wild-* ideas. Somebody somewhere on the internet postulated a "what if" idea and you seem to have taken it as proved beyond a doubt. That's as nutty as the whole human-caused climate change nonsense.
Don, in other threads today you seem rational. How is it that in this one you seem the polar opposite?
We most emphatically do NOT "know the plane is intact." The entire scenario you describe is based entirely on evidence-free hypotheses and wild-* ideas. Somebody somewhere on the internet postulated a "what if" idea and you seem to have taken it as proved beyond a doubt. That's as nutty as the whole human-caused climate change nonsense.
Rational, Rocky?
Where? I will need to see some proof.[:)]
I postulated the Iranian landing on day 1 or 2, just after seeing the potential maximum flight radius of MH370. When it was shown that the bulk of Iran, including a potential overwater approach, was possible, the scenario became obvious.
The recent finding of the planted evidence does not change anything.
Brad Steele
May we assume that if they find the tail numbers, bodies, and the black boxes that you'd still stick to your theory that it's all planted?
Well, okay. I retract my description of you as rational.
May we assume that if they find the tail numbers, bodies, and the black boxes that you'd still stick to your theory that it's all planted?
Of course not, Rocky. That would be ridiculous.[:)]
Brad Steele
quote:Originally posted by p3skyking
Since the fuel tanks would have been dry, had the wing been ripped off it would have floated, for awhile at least, long enough to be spotted by someone.
More assumptions. The wing is designed to pass through air, not water. Hitting water at speed would be little different than hitting a wall. No reason to think much of the wing would have held together.
Remember, however, that the Kualalamputiuns told us that the flight was lost over the South China Sea, and valuable days were lost looking up there. It was only days later that the fable of the satellite pings directed the search efforts to the south and west. Sufficient time, arguably, for even a relatively intact though compromise wing to sink.
This was a very well done commandeering of an airliner, and the Ayatollahs should be proud of their efforts. Start with a mis-direct, and then 500 days later hit us with another brilliant mis-direct. I guess after they pulled the wool over Kerry's and Obama's eyes, they were emboldened to go and play their second-to-the-last ace card. The final ace card will be read about for centuries.
There is just so many unanswered questions here. If an impact had been strong enough to destroy the wing, surely if would have compromised the cabin and the hundreds of bags and pillows in the overhead lockers, not to mention, magazines, purses, and clothing would have been spread out over the ocean.
The flaperon could have been dropped from another aircraft or ship in an area already searched a week after the disappearance of the flight and was missed until it washed up on the beach.
A ruse is still plausible until it can be proven it's not and so far it hasn't.
Therefore, he said that flaperon came off in midair, and extremely high speed, more than the plane was designed for.
He said that the plane must have been in a dive at or near the sound barrier when the flaperon came off.