View Single Post
Old 05-04-2006, 04:17 AM   #56 (permalink)
host
Banned
 
Photo of both 737 CFM56 and 767 JTD9 available here:
http://bracebrace.skynetblogs.be/?da...=1&unit=months

In the following essay excerpt, respected 9/11 researcher Jim Hoffman validates the "Murray St." flight 175 jet engine core photos. Ironically, his essay is intent on countering Morgan Reynolds earlier supposition that the jet engine core and other aircraft debris erode the government version of the 9/11 events and the specific airliner models that flew into WTC, Shanksville, PA, and the Pentagon. I've studied the photos, (a better resolution wrecked engine photo is available
<a href="http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/photos/index.html">here</a> ) done the research, and it seems that the wrecked jet engine core is a CFM56-3...the engine that
almost all post 737-200 models use....and no 767 use. See if you don't agree!

Quote:
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/r...ml#f175_debris
A Critical Review of Morgan Reynolds'
Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse?
by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Hoffman">Jim Hoffman</a>
Version 1.1, June 26, 2005

Flight 175 Crash Debris

<b>In the case of the South Tower, an engine from UAL Flight 175 (tail number N612UA and FAA-registered as still valid!) has not been recovered despite the fact that the flight trajectory of the video plane implied that the right engine would miss the South Tower.</b>

Reynolds does not tell us why he thinks the trajectory of Flight 175 would have caused its right engine to miss the tower. In fact, several videos show the plane completely entering the southwest face of the South Tower, from wing-tip to wing-tip.
<b>Photos showing minor engine parts on the ground are <a href="http://911research.wtc7.net/planes/evidence/photos/index.html">unconvincing</a>, to put it mildly. Perhaps independent jet engine experts (retired?) can testify to the contrary.</b>

Why are these unconvincing as engine parts? One doesn't need to be a jet engine expert to see that they are the correct size to be either high-pressure turbines or compressor rotors from a 767, which have diameters of between 2.5 and 3 feet.

The photograph on the left shows a portion of Flight 175's engine at the corner of Church and Murray Streets. The idea that this assembly, which is about three feet in diameter, is too small to be from a 767 is unfounded. Boeing 767s use high-bypass turbofan engines such as General Electric CF6-80, the Pratt & Whitney PW4062, or the Rolls-Royce RB211. Such engines have a fan measuring nearly 10 feet in diameter, but their core, containing the high-pressure turbines, compressor, and combustion chamber, is about a third of that diameter.

<b>Further contradicting the official account, the beveled edge of the southeast side of the south tower was completely intact upon initial impact.</b>

How does this contradict the official account of the crash of Flight 175?
I've studied the "piping" on the upper right in both photos. If you want to take a closer look, use the links below to download the highest resolution photos. Most likely, the wrecked jet engine photographed on the corner or Murray and Church St., lower Manhattan, on 9/11/2001 is a CFM56-3, commonly used in nearly all post 737-200 Boeing models. There is no chance, IMO, that this engine wreckage came from, as the official story tells us, Flight 175, a Boeing 767-222 with JTD9 P&W jet engines.
<img src="http://scandal.atspace.com/verteng.JPG"><img src="http://scandal.atspace.com/cfm56nyc.jpg" length=60 width=360><p>
<img src="http://scandal.atspace.com/fullvert.JPG"><img src="http://scandal.atspace.com/lptshaft.jpg">

The photos of the undamaged CFM56-3 Jet Engine came from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:C...-turbofan.jpeg

The Photo of the engine shaft came from:
http://www.aeromat.fr/images/photos/...3_lptshaft.jpg

From: http://www.aeromat.fr/frameset_global.htm Click on 'Products', look for photo CFM56-3 LPT Shaft

More on this jet engine:
http://www.cfm56.com/engines/cfm56-3/index.html

Here's a wrecked 767 engine, with front fan assembly still attached:
<img src="http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/ca129/5.jpg">
That photo is from this page:
http://www.airdisaster.com/photos/ca129/5.shtml

Flight 175 Boeing 767-222 Engine Specs:
http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi-bin/v...ited+Airlines+
JT9D jet engine photo:
http://blogsimages.skynet.be/images/...9/890_JT9D.jpg
host is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360