A wakeup call for non-violent
New Blog! www.crookedshepherds.wordpress.com
New pentagon overflight evidence: www.thepentacon.com
The Five-Sided Fantasy Island
An analysis of the Pentagon crash on 9-11
By Richard Stanley & Jerry Russell version 2.0 (3/12/2004) Page 3 of 5
Aluminum FoiledMany investigators have noted that there is no evidence of the appropriate quantities of aircraft debris inside the Pentagon, where most of the plane should have come to rest according to the official story. Only a few pieces have been photographed, and these photographs for the most part are lacking in context allowing one to consider if the parts were truly part of the 9/11 event or not. Sarah Roberts claimed that most of the debris from inside the Pentagon was removed quickly, before photographs could be taken. Of course, normally one would expect this type of material to be saved for a proper forensic investigation. The lack of which leads to justifiable speculation, just as happened with the rush to sell off the WTC steel, and the rush to remove JFK from Parkland Hospital in Dallas before the lawful autopsy by competent doctors could be performed.
Semi-official sources have speculated that perhaps fire consumed the aircraft, in some cases vaporizing the aluminum and then sometime later modified to simply melting the aluminum -- yet this seems highly unlikely, according to an analysis by Kee Dewdney and Gerry Longspaugh.
Jean-Pierre Desmoulins has claimed that the aluminum could have been reacted away in an exothermic (self sustaining) reaction with fire sprinkler water coming in contact with the aluminum already heated by the burning jet fuel. However, this is countered by the unlikelihood of this reaction to occur in total (or even to a significant fraction) to sheet aluminum as the thin material will pull away from the high temperatures. This is a common occurrence when trying to weld on the edge of thin sheets of metal if the parameters are not controlled precisely and heat sink clamps are not provided.
In sheet or block forms,
aluminum will not normally propagate or sustain combustion. http://www.meridianeng.com/aluminum.html
Sarah Roberts collected eyewitness testimony (some of it second-hand, and/or from unnamed sources) as well as several photographs of the interior of the Pentagon following 9-11. From these photographs, only a small amount of aircraft debris can be confirmed, and even less of this was specifically identifiable as the remnants of a Boeing 757.
Engine debris allegedly from Pentagon, showing combustion chamber housing (Source: Sarah Roberts)
Engine compressor or turbine disc (Source: http://www.photolibrary.fema.gov/photolibrary/index.jsp, Photo #4414)
The plane debris observed in the various photographs does indeed comport with that of a 757, at least to the limited degree with which they can be compared to actual 757 parts or the manufacturer's detail drawings, as shown above. The engine compressor or turbine disk appears to be approximately the correct diameter to have been used in a Rolls Royce RB211-535E4B engine, as used in American Airlines 757 aircraft. The fragment of the high pressure combustor casing also comports with the string of fuel inlet nozzle holes, the mounting bosses of which have the correct number of screw holes (6). The combustor is definitely not from a Pratt and Whitney PW2037, which is the other make of 757 engine used in the airline industry, nor is it from a General Electric CF6-80C2.
Some observers have claimed that these engine parts are too small to have come from a 757. The confusion is because the RB-211 engine configuration is dominated by the large turbofan at the front of the engine, which is what people expect a 757 engine should look like. However, because the RB-211 is a "high bypass" engine, the high-pressure compressor, combustion chamber and turbine are all much smaller than the turbofan, as shown in the small overview figure at the top left of the drawing. It is perfectly reasonable to ask what happened to the turbofan -- but the compressor disk and the combustor case do look like 757 parts.
The question remaining here from the extremely limited amount of crudely identifiable 757 parts is what can be derived from this evidence? There were two engines on the plane, there should be many more turbine disks, blade and vane fragments, and casing fragments. There should be 9 more wheel hubs to be accounted for, as well as more landing gear parts. There should also be heavy tungsten (not Depleted Uranium) counterweight ballasts to have survived. (These counterweights are used to balance the ailerons, flaps and tail control surfaces, to prevent flutter.) Depleted Uranium is used as ballast on 747s, L1011s, and DC10s, not 757s or 767s.
So in light of all the other anomalies, one must ask whether the parts were from a 757, or were they planted as fake evidence, perhaps having been from an earlier 757 crash? Or perhaps some of the pictures were taken directly from other crashes (although this would not account for the turbine rotor, which does appear in context. Eyewitness Lagasse also reported that one engine was seen being removed from the Pentagon.) As Gerard Holmgren has noted, all of the parts shown in photographs released by the Pentagon are small, portable chunks.
With regards to the missile theory: The engine parts might comport with the Rolls-Royce turbofan engine in a British Harrier jump-jet, but probably not with a Global Hawk or other missile. The wheel and landing gear parts do not look like they came from a fighter plane or missile. After a diligent search, we have been unable to find any photographs of parts which are clearly from a fighter jet or missile, rather than from a Boeing 757.
References for page 3:
http://www.nfpa.org/NFPAJournal/OnlineExclusive/Exclusive_11_01_01/exclusive_11.01.01.asp Not much aircraft debris inside Pentagon
http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2001/t09122001_t0912asd.html Also reports very little debris inside Pentagon
http://www.rense.com/general32/phot.htm Sarah Roberts review of debris
http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jpdesm/pentagon/pages-en/dam-alum.html Desmoulins aluminum-water reaction hypothesis
Boeing 757-200 information
wingspan - 124' 10", fuselage width - 12' 4", fuselage height - 13' 2"
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_05/textonly/ps02txt.html - Onboard loadable software, can you say a 'hack-a-pilot'?
C-32A - military version of Boeing 757 (fleet of 4, stationed at Andrews AFB)
Rolls Royce RB211-535E4B
http://www.aa.com/content/aboutAA/ourPlanes/boeing757.jhtml - Rolls Royce RB211 used by American Airlines
http://www.eng.uct.ac.za/~victor/electric/GasTurbine.htm Very nice RB211 cutaway drawing at bottom of page
Aircraft maintenance drawings
Pratt and Whitney - 757's also use P&W PW2037 engines
These maintenance drawings were provided to us by Joe Hryczyk, Licensed Airframe & Powerplant Mechanic, who also requested that we post the following message:
Counterweight info http://www.antenna.nl/wise/uranium/ruxcw.html
Arlington County After Report with Pentagon Floor Plan and damage zone in next to last pages
The damage mapping was supposedly compiled by the FBI. From the ground floor drawing one can see the other two C ring holes are just service doors.