Joined: 1:10 PM - Oct 05, 2008

4:45 AM - May 27, 2009 #11

the 1st aired copy on fox new york

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 1:15 AM - Oct 21, 2008

10:04 PM - May 27, 2009 #12

It was very telling that the Popular Mechanics "researchers" dedicated
a whole section of their book 'debunking 9/11 myths' to the In Plane Sight 'Pods',
but never even mention the flashes. Not with a 10ft pole.
Nor the national geographic or bbc programs.
Nothing on the webpage version

but what are these flashes?

175?... take it dylan:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlTYET9pYa8
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 1:15 AM - Oct 21, 2008

12:02 AM - May 28, 2009 #13

911review.com offer a reason for the flash.
Mark Ferran wrote:Analysis of Aluminum Impact Flashes in the WTC Crashes

The South Tower jetliner impact exhibited flashes that have been the subject of a great deal of well-publicized but poorly-informed speculation such as a occupies much of the film In Plane Site . In the following, Mark Ferran debunks claims and implications that the flashes were due to missile strikes or the like by pointing to a reasonable explanation.

e x c e r p t
title: WTC Aluminum Impact Flashes
authors: Mark Feram
When Aluminum metal is intensely smashed and shattered or it otherwise burns in air, it emits Bright White LIGHT.

Aluminum bullets travelling at very high fps (mph) shatter/splatter completely, and almost the entire mass bursts into burning particles, and are thus such are called "pyrophoric". Depleted Uranium "Kenetic Energy" projectiles are also notoriously pyrophoric upon their impact-disintegration. The key to producing the flash is the generation of the tiny particles of (heated) metal in air. In the case of bullets, the small projectile must itself contain all the (kenetic) energy needed to shatter/splatter itself, thus speeds of about 3,000 fps are required to impart the necessary energy to a small mass such as an aluminum bullet.

1fps. = .681mph.

1mph. = 1.46fps.

"The 'vaporific effect' refers to the flash fire observed with the impact of high velocity projectiles against metallic targets. The impact produces small, finely divided particles originating from either the projectile, the target, or both. These particles are heated by the impact forces and can burn in the presence of air (oxidizer). The result is a metal-dust-type explosion.... http://www.blazetech.com/.../vaporific_effects.html
It requires only a very small amount of burning Aluminum metal to emit a white light momentarily brighter than the Sun: "Flash powder". Aluminum or magnesium powder mixed with an oxidizer results in a "flash powder" that can be used to generate a bright flash of light and a loud bang. Flash powder can be used as a light source for night photography." http://www.vectorsite.net/ttpyro_2.html Similarly, an aluminum "cotton" fiber was used in older "flash cubes" to simulate sunlight for cameras.

A large piece of aluminum moving at a lesser speed than that speed which completely and entirely shatters/splatters the whole mass of the aluminum metal, is also likely to emit some aluminum particles and hence a flash of light, at the leading point of impact, because the whole mass of the rigid metal object contributes energy to shatter/splatter the smaller mass of aluminum at the leading point of impact.

General Partin says vonKleist omits the most obvious explanation. "It's very simple," he told The New American, "When the noses of the aircraft hit the buildings, you have a bright aluminum flash, the same as we saw at the Pentagon. That's obvious to anyone familiar with physics, chemistry, and what happens when aluminum hits a structure at a high rate of speed." And the proof of that analysis, the general points out, is in vonKleist's own video. "If you watch just a few frames after the nose flash, you'll see two smaller aluminum flashes as each engine strikes the building. That's all it is."
http://www.thenewamerican.com/artman/pu ... 1253.shtml
At this link is a video of a small "F4" aircraft on a track crashing in a test to assess the safety of a nulcear reactor. http://www.jokaroo.com/extremevideos/plane_vs_wall.html

The F4 plane apparently has a non-aluminum nose-cone, however when the first metal (aluminum?) part of the nose strikes the concrete wall, a small White Flash of light is distinctly visible in the video (see the especially the second view with the aircraft approaching from the right).

Although "aluminum flash" is easily and typically observed with small projectiles (bullets) at self-shattering/splattering speeds (e.g., above 3000 fps), if you strike a small piece of aluminum metal between two very heavy masses, (for example between an iron building and an aircraft traveling 500mph), some of the aluminum metal squashed between these rigid masses will be intensely heated and ejected as small hot particles which will ignite in the air, producing a bright flash of Light. The large masses (moving relatively towards each other) provide the additional energy necessary to shatter/splatter the smaller amount of aluminum and to produce the ejected particles that burn in air and emit white light.

Impact-flashes of aluminum aircraft are considered to be commonplace by experts like "General Partin", and given the obvious ignorance and bias of most of the writers and "scholars" among the 9-11 Historical Revisionists ... I have no reason to believe that such impact flashes are not commonplace. [To the right] are images capturing impact-flash of the second aluminum airplane that hit the iron WTC towers. Also note that the face of the WTC towers where clad with sheets of aluminum, which would also be a source of aluminum for impact-flashes.

"Nearly all metals will burn in air under certain conditions." http://www.eh.doe.gov/techstds/standard ... 1081c.html

Iron Burns, especially when it is red-hot, and evidently it can melt itself when it burns in a large enough pile furnace. Aluminum Burns with a Flash, especially when it is spattered/shattered at high speed, and thus finely divided and hot.

Mark Ferran BSEE scl JD mcl www.billstclair.com/ferran

site: www.billstclair.com/ferran
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 8:18 PM - Jan 03, 2009

12:16 AM - May 28, 2009 #14

"When the noses of the aircraft hit the buildings, you have a bright aluminum flash, the same as we saw at the Pentagon."

Bright flash at the pentagon?
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 1:08 PM - Feb 19, 2009

6:10 AM - May 28, 2009 #15

broken sticks wrote:"When the noses of the aircraft hit the buildings, you have a bright aluminum flash, the same as we saw at the Pentagon."

Bright flash at the pentagon?
:D :D :D :D :D Yes, imaginary aluminum of an imaginary plane produced an imaginary white flash.
Quote
Like
Share

Jim
Joined: 5:36 AM - Oct 06, 2008

4:16 AM - Jul 02, 2009 #16

The above explanation from 911Review.com looks like more gibbersh to put planes at the towers we know weren't there. Like the F4, 767 noses are plastic Radomes. The Flash is at the point where the noses first meets the perimeter aluminum siding. OK, if aluminum is going to achieve ignition, it would occur the along the whole wingspan, not just one spot where plastic meets siding.

I've studied all available videos I could find revealing the Flash, and what is common to all is that it is always at the dead center of the explosion at the same frames just preceding the same squib display, but the planes do not always hit at the same place and time. The flash and explosions were real, but plane images were Hollywood special effects.

What useful purpose would flashes make? They provided a very visible marker on the footage of every clip where to locate the nose of the plane at which frame, quickly and pretty accurately.

If you were a demolition "specialist," what would be the easiest way to produce the flash? A few feet of detonation cord on the exterior of the wall would do nicely, since they undoubtedly laced all the explosives on those floors with detcord and timing devices. The Flash went off as part of the fusing for the explosives.


Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 8:07 PM - Jul 01, 2009

5:11 PM - Jul 05, 2009 #17

Quote
Like
Share

Joined: 9:09 AM - Sep 27, 2008

6:11 AM - Jul 06, 2009 #18

is that a subsidiary of "complete lying idiot.com"
or is it a whole new bunch of irreconcilable bullshite?.

given up lubing the snake oil with spiel?.

just drop the valueless product and hope some poor fool buys it?


Quote
Like
Share