Creative Speculation

OnTheOtherHand

(7,621 posts)

3. there is also a flight path study for 93

Thu Jan 12, 2012, 04:41 PM

Jan 2012

antitsa complained that the Specialist's Factual Report was tough sledding -- and it is.

The Flight Path Study can be obtained via this link.

From approximately 10:00 to 10:02 there were four distinct control column
inputs that caused the airplane to pitch nose-up (climb) and nose-down (dive)
aggressively. During this time the airplane climbed to about 10,000 feet while
turning to the right. The airplane then pitched nose-down and rolled to the right
in response to flight control inputs, and impacted the ground at about 490 knots
(563 mph) in a 40 degree nose-down, inverted attitude. The time of impact was
10:03:11.

antitsa's questions aren't very clear, so it's hard to know how to address them.

ETA: As slipperyslope points out, the NTSB didn't do a regular accident report. "The airplane then pitched nose-down and rolled to the right in response to flight control inputs" provides a clue about the apparent cause of the crash.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

53 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

This message was self-deleted by its author [View all] antitsa Jan 2012 OP

I read this and had to think for a minute... Ohio Joe Jan 2012 #1

There were no NTSB crash reports for the 9/11 flights SlipperySlope Jan 2012 #2

The reports look pretty comprehensive to me Ohio Joe Jan 2012 #4

I didn't speculate about whether it was "reasonable", just affirmed there was no NTSB report SlipperySlope Jan 2012 #5

Giving it a quick look over... Ohio Joe Jan 2012 #7

No problem SlipperySlope Jan 2012 #8

there is also a flight path study for 93 OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #3

You're about halfway there. Which part struck first? What happened afterward? nt antitsa Jan 2012 #6

halfway where? OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #9

Halfway to what I'm asking for. =) antitsa Jan 2012 #10

"Why? Odd question to ask in the conspiracy section." OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #11

Yes, what happened to it after it allegedly hit. antitsa Jan 2012 #12

OK, then, your "allegedly" sounds like a "I've already made up my mind, thanks" kinda "allegedly" OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #14

Sounds like you're not too confident about the official story. lol nt antitsa Jan 2012 #15

way to miss the point OnTheOtherHand Jan 2012 #17

What happened to it after? jberryhill Jan 2012 #13

I don't want to guess on the story you support. Just tell me what happened. nt antitsa Jan 2012 #16

"the story you support" jberryhill Jan 2012 #18

If you don't know the details, just say so. No shame in that. nt antitsa Jan 2012 #20

Okay, so we agree on the overall synopsis jberryhill Jan 2012 #23

"beyond that, there are likely many details." <-- That's what I'm asking for. antitsa Jan 2012 #26

"afterwards"? zappaman Jan 2012 #29

Please don't troll my thread. Thanks. nt antitsa Jan 2012 #30

not trolling zappaman Jan 2012 #31

Please don't troll my thread. Thanks. nt antitsa Jan 2012 #32

not trolling zappaman Jan 2012 #33

Don't you love that "my thread" stuff jberryhill Jan 2012 #35

why can't you tell us what happened to the plane "afterward"? zappaman Jan 2012 #37

A "million pieces"? jberryhill Jan 2012 #49

I din't count them myself zappaman Jan 2012 #52

Please don't troll your own subthread jberryhill Jan 2012 #53

the plane was in the air zappaman Jan 2012 #27

Please don't troll my thread. Thanks. nt antitsa Jan 2012 #28

not trolling zappaman Jan 2012 #34

Game is at 21, right? jberryhill Jan 2012 #36

maybe the poster should ask the NTSB zappaman Jan 2012 #38

Mods, can you ban zappaman & jberryhill from this thread, please? antitsa Jan 2012 #39

Please don't troll my thread. Thanks. nt zappaman Jan 2012 #40

uhhh..I think you are mistaken in your location. dixiegrrrrl Jan 2012 #44

Thank you Dixiegrrrrl zappaman Jan 2012 #46

Can you be more specific about what is a "provocative message"? jberryhill Jan 2012 #47

Hmmmmmm zappaman Jan 2012 #48

mi enlace es su enlace jberryhill Jan 2012 #50

Hold on, let me consult my expert... dixiegrrrrl Jan 2012 #51

Welcome to DU jberryhill Jan 2012 #45

Waht happened was dixiegrrrrl Jan 2012 #19

Please don't troll my thread. Thanks. nt antitsa Jan 2012 #21

When did it become "my thread"? jberryhill Jan 2012 #22

Author: antitsa antitsa Jan 2012 #24

Just sweatin' bullets here, I assure you jberryhill Jan 2012 #25

Seems to me she answered you fine zappaman Jan 2012 #43

found something called "wikipedia" zappaman Jan 2012 #41

what do you mean by "supposedly"? zappaman Jan 2012 #42