大型物件撞擊就又回到撞擊點小於757輪廓這個問題，除非不是757，但只要不是757，美國幹嘛說謊呢？ :laugh:

我不知道巡弋飛彈或是小飛機撞到電線桿會怎樣...
不過我知道說辭一定是沿途撞到的東西都是事後加工的...
:rolleyes: :laugh:

有考慮過飛機撞擊前，機翼先撞擊地面造成機身翻轉的情況？

美國政府基於各種因素，的確是有可能說謊的
但是“巡弋飛彈”這個猜測實在是太瞎了 :stupefy:

這不就證明了五角大廈的強化結構確實有發揮作用？

講白了，世貿那兩架撞下去了，五角大廈這邊還有造假的需要嗎？

監視畫面出來了，有人比對過了，也有物理上與實務上說得通的其他解釋，你還是要單方面相信其中一種解釋，那就繼續去做你的鏡花水月之夢吧。

撞到電線桿，對啊，這個部分國外也討論到爛了，結論是：physically impossible

國外關於757以時速800公里撞電線桿，卻沒事的討論

整理完整的文章

簡單說：

撞五角大廈那架757以時速800公里，貼地2公尺飛行了最起碼10公里，還撞毀了5根電線桿或燈桿，才能撞到五角大廈...

重點是，當年就有訪問過很多飛行員，都說757這種飛機以800公里飛行，別說撞到5根電線桿或燈桿，只要撞到一根，就足以切穿機體或是機翼，然後飛機因為這股力量會馬上偏轉，(別忘了，貼地2公尺喔，機翼稍微歪一點就觸地了)等著大爆炸了(別忘了那40噸航空燃油)。

美國也有颶風，燈桿或電線桿都固定的非常堅固。

所以事後造假論我早就看過啦...
這些套路早就看過了,沒有新意.
:o

而且果然這些“大師”被問到那政府花了這麼大代價又是為了什麼呢?
突然間又換了一副嘴臉就是咱們是實事求是，至於政府的動機我們哪知道.
:laugh: :rolleyes:

物理上說的通的解釋？

五角大廈有強化結構你知道，那妳知道那架757貫穿了三棟五角大廈，相當於碉堡剋星的威力嗎？


＜那架757貫穿了3棟有裝甲的五角大廈建築物＞


＜最後撞擊點的洞，最後都還有動能貫穿特別強化的鋼筋混凝土(請注意外層的磚牆內部有強化鋼筋混凝土裝甲)，總厚度達1公尺＞


＜貫穿點前，沿路的破壞並不均勻，非常怪異，離撞擊點近的柱子安好，遠的幾乎解體，最遠的洞就是上圖那個洞＞

結論，波音757改名碉堡剋星好了！

波音757表示：幹，最好我的輕鋁合金機身有這麼大的貫穿威力！

https://sites.google.com/site/wtc7l...evidencesummary

當然用屁股想也知道教徒的回應一定是現場目擊者最好糊弄/引導/收買.
136 people saw the plane approach the Pentagon, and

104 directly saw the plane hit the Pentagon.

6 were nearly hit by the plane in front of the Pentagon. Several others were within 100-200 feet of the impact.

26 mentioned that it was an American Airlines jet.

39 others mentioned that it was a large jet/commercial airliner.

2 described a smaller corporate jet. 1 described a "commuter plane" but didn't mention the size.

7 said it was a Boeing 757.

8 witnesses were pilots. One witness was an Air Traffic Controller and Pentagon tower Chief.

2 witnesses were firefighters working on their truck at the Pentagon heliport.

4 made radio calls to inform emergency services that a plane had hit the Pentagon.

10 said the plane's flaps and landing gear were not deployed (1 thought landing gear struck a light pole).

16 mentioned seeing the plane hit light poles/trees, or were next to to the poles when it happened. Another 8 mentioned the light poles being knocked down: it's unknown if they saw them hit.

42 mentioned seeing aircraft debris. 4 mentioned seeing airline seats. 3 mentioned engine parts.

2 mentioned bodies still strapped into seats.

15 mentioned smelling or contacting aviation/jet fuel.

3 had vehicles damaged by light poles or aircraft debris. Several saw other occupied vehicles damaged.

3 took photographs of the aftermath.

Many mentioned false alarm warnings of other incoming planes after the crash. One said "3-4 warnings."

And of course,

0 saw a military aircraft or missile strike the Pentagon.

0 saw a plane narrowly miss the Pentagon and fly away.

不過電線桿撞的位置不同，受力也不一樣，用車子的撞擊點來說是有問題的
如果撞在高點，那只要超過電線桿本身的結構強度就行了(電線桿斷裂)
地面固定點的受力可以無視，受力還沒傳到那邊結構就崩潰了
這就跟折筷子一樣，越短越難折
如果電線桿只是倒了，那力量還沒超過結構強度，槓桿原理就足以弄倒了

這個當年就問過機師，因為飛機是"時速800公里"，撞在電線桿/燈桿哪個位置的力量，都足以讓飛機當場墜毀。(別忘了757是在高速貼地飛行耶，機身只要歪個3度，機翼就觸地了)

那就叫留言終結者實驗一下好了...什麼？留言終結者禁止作911相關的驗證實驗！
[YOUTUBE]6GOrLY595Is[/YOUTUBE]