|
Okay, onewolf. I’ll start with your first post on 10/14.
Yes this crash is very much different than other crashes in the fact that this crash was supposedly much faster than the average crash. This fact was released to us by the official representative of the crash back in late 2001, after much speculation from the news networks. The supposed speed was in excess of 300 mph (not 500+ mph). Unfortunatally, as I have stated before, this speed is almost impossible at that altitude. I don’t put any stock in what people said they heard. Most of my conclusions are drawn from the pictures, facts about planes, and general or specific physics and engineering. I could care less if people said it sounded like a missle or santa clause.
Second post on 10/14
Yes, a plane that went into the wet, soft ground was difficult to retreive parts from. Give me a break. There is no logical comparison between these two crashes.
I am not the self appointed leader of anything. I just give a shit. If you care to look back, I already addressed your questions.
|