A flat Earth thread for Tradosaurus

[ka9q]

Crank magnetism at its finest.

It really is remarkable just how often that phenomenon holds, isn't it?

[frenat]

Crank magnetism at its finest.

It really is remarkable just how often that phenomenon holds, isn't it?

Yep.  It seems to point toward a certain type of personality.

[bknight]

Before the 9/11 hijackings almost always ended landing on an airport and beginning of negotiations. During negotiations women and children would be released as sign of good will and the rest are exchanged in small groups for food and drink. So doing what hijackers told was safest bet.

During 9/11 passangers of UA 93 found out about flying into WTC and Pentagon and attacked hijackers. Plane crashed on a field without additional victims.

Post 9/11 passangers know obeying hijackers mean death. There has been several cases where drunk/mentally ill/panicked passangers have tried to open plane door and been jumped by other passangers. At least one case led to death by suffocation. Only successfull hijackings since then have been done by cockpit crew (ET 702, Germanwings 9525, possibly MH307).

This will be my only hijack of this thread, but I believe the passengers of UA 93 that fought back, knowing that they may surely die in the attack on those that had taken control of the flight are real heroes.  Sadly they died, but prevented further deaths in their sacrifice.

[DD Brock]

Agreed on both counts. 9/11 changed so many things, it's a little startling to remember the world before.

[raven]

Agreed on both counts. 9/11 changed so many things, it's a little startling to remember the world before.

It was the 21st century's Archduke Ferdinand.

[smartcooky]

I don't want to get to far off the flat earth thread but in this case you should do a search on experienced pilots who used a flight simulator to try to replicate flying into the twin towers.  Only one was able to do it and it took him a few tries.

If a pilot can land a C-130 Hercules on a carrier (begins at 1:58)......

....where he has to put his aircraft on a precise (and moving) point just a few feet across, then it doesn't take much of a pilot to hit a stationary object 208ft wide and 1368 feet tall!! FFS, an airport runway is usually only 150 ft wide, and they are MUCH harder to hit than a skyscraper.

[HeadLikeARock]

You mean you are not impressed with Dr. Judy's credentials like you are impressed with the credentials of NASA scientists and stephen hawkings?

She has impressive credentials. It's just her thought processes when it comes to analysing photos and videos that are clearly defunct. I gave three examples of where she fails in her analysis. No amount of letters after her name can undo evidencee.

Your blind defense of the globe earth and refusal to see reality is more proof that the globe earth is a religion with gravity as its god.   If the powers that be can brainwash people into thinking the globe earth is real they can brainwash people to believe 9/11 was committed by a bunch of ignorant goat herders.

It's not a blind defence, it's a defence based on evidence. The evidence supports the Earth being the same as other, observable heavenly bodies - spherical. There is a paucity of evidence for a flat earth, indeed it simply does not comport with the vast majority of the available evidence. Hence, it is a faithed-based position.

The flat-earth theory is actually quite interesting from a psychological perspective: from any other scientific angle, it stinks. I can provide better evidence that England never won the world cup in 1966.

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=113718

[DD Brock]

I don't want to get to far off the flat earth thread but in this case you should do a search on experienced pilots who used a flight simulator to try to replicate flying into the twin towers.  Only one was able to do it and it took him a few tries.

If a pilot can land a C-130 Hercules on a carrier (begins at 1:58)......

....where he has to put his aircraft on a precise (and moving) point just a few feet across, then it doesn't take much of a pilot to hit a stationary object 208ft wide and 1368 feet tall!! FFS, an airport runway is usually only 150 ft wide, and they are MUCH harder to hit than a skyscraper.

.I was just watching that video yesterday. Amazing aircraft.

Agreed on both counts. 9/11 changed so many things, it's a little startling to remember the world before.

It was the 21st century's Archduke Ferdinand.

Excellent analogy.

[smartcooky]

I was just watching that video yesterday. Amazing aircraft.

The Herky Bird is a great love of mine, I spent 15 years of my life involved with them in some form or another, from being a flight line erk, through a black box changer and second line maintenance engineer, to an NCO i/c Depot Level maintenance.

The C-130 is the DC-3 of my generation. They are probably the most versatile transport aircraft ever made... They were first flown in 1954 (that makes them a year older than me) and are still in production and still in service with many military and civilian organisations around the world. Its a huge testament to the designers that the the C-130 is still doing the jobs it was designed to do....how many other aircraft do you know of that have been in continuous production for over 60 years?

NOTE: Our Air Force have operated the C-130 since 1965, and in 2018, they will be replaced. The two frontrunners for replacing them are the A400M Airbus and C-130J Super Hercules!

[bknight]

I was just watching that video yesterday. Amazing aircraft.

The Herky Bird is a great love of mine, I spent 15 years of my life involved with them in some form or another, from being a flight line erk, through a black box changer and second line maintenance engineer, to an NCO i/c Depot Level maintenance.

The C-130 is the DC-3 of my generation. They are probably the most versatile transport aircraft ever made... They were first flown in 1954 (that makes them a year older than me) and are still in production and still in service with many military and civilian organisations around the world. Its a huge testament to the designers that the the C-130 is still doing the jobs it was designed to do....how many other aircraft do you know of that have been in continuous production for over 60 years?

NOTE: Our Air Force have operated the C-130 since 1965, and in 2018, they will be replaced. The two frontrunners for replacing them are the A400M Airbus and C-130J Super Hercules!

The B-52' s have been in service since 1955, a year later

[smartcooky]

I was just watching that video yesterday. Amazing aircraft.

The Herky Bird is a great love of mine, I spent 15 years of my life involved with them in some form or another, from being a flight line erk, through a black box changer and second line maintenance engineer, to an NCO i/c Depot Level maintenance.

The C-130 is the DC-3 of my generation. They are probably the most versatile transport aircraft ever made... They were first flown in 1954 (that makes them a year older than me) and are still in production and still in service with many military and civilian organisations around the world. Its a huge testament to the designers that the the C-130 is still doing the jobs it was designed to do....how many other aircraft do you know of that have been in continuous production for over 60 years?

NOTE: Our Air Force have operated the C-130 since 1965, and in 2018, they will be replaced. The two frontrunners for replacing them are the A400M Airbus and C-130J Super Hercules!

The B-52' s have been in service since 1955, a year later

Not still in production though...The last one was built in 1962

[DD Brock]

The C-130 is just one of those special machines that were designed with the stars perfectly aligned. Nothing else in the air has been able to do what they can do.

It may be our generation's DC-3, but I think it may have surpassed it in terms of pure functionality.

[Peter B]

The B-52' s have been in service since 1955, a year later

Not still in production though...The last one was built in 1962

So every B-52 airframe is more than 50 years old?

Which raises the question, how much of an aircraft gets changed out and replaced over the years?

[bknight]

The B-52' s have been in service since 1955, a year later

Not still in production though...The last one was built in 1962

So every B-52 airframe is more than 50 years old?

Which raises the question, how much of an aircraft gets changed out and replaced over the years?

Many were retired and the last variants were upgraded to prolong their flight life.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-52_Stratofortress
I knew a few pilots in the Viet Nam era who were not much older than their aircraft.  It still worked well even through Iraq operations.

[sts60]

Last I read, the Buff was planned to operate to around 2040.  A bomber that could theoretically be flown by a pilot and his son and his grandson and his great-granddaughter operationally.  The mind boggles.