“A democracy requires free citizens who are willing to say publicly unpopular things to provoke critical debate.”
Robert Reich, Los Angeles Times, May 13, 1998, p. B13

Home » September-11 (2001) and "Terrorist" Hoax » Hardware and Physics » FLIGHT 93 (hoax exposed by Equinox)
Re: FLIGHT 93 Sun, 17 June 2012 05:21 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tufa is currently offline  Tufa
Messages: 541
Registered: November 2010
Location: Lund, SE
Expert Member
4- Black Boxes

Officials said that Flight 93's flight data recorder (FDR) and cockpit voice recorder (CVR) were recovered at Shanksville.
They said the FDR was recovered 15ft underground at 4:45 pm on 9/13 and the CVR was found 25ft underground at 8:25 pm on 9/14.

"The black boxes were 15ft and 25ft into the ground."

If Flight 93 didn't crash in Shanksville, then these black boxes must have been planted.
Some will be skeptical and will ask for evidence that the boxes were planted.

The photos of Flight 93's alleged black boxes were released in April 2006 after the Zacarias Moussaoui trial ended.

Were these photos that crucial to the prosecution's case that we had to wait four long years to see them???
The website these photos are posted at lists the "squared-shaped" box as the CVR...

and the "cylinder-shaped" one as the FDR...

However, when the NTSB released their data analysis on the FDR, they show the FDR as the squared-shaped one, not the cylinder-shaped one as the Moussaoui site has it.
(NTSB shows the squared-shaped box as the FDR.)

(Moussaoui site shows the cylinder-shaped one as the FDR.)

So either the Moussaoui site, or the NTSB have the pictures of the FDR and CVR mixed.

The day before the first black box was allegedly found, investigators and U.S. Rep. John Murtha said that one or both of the boxes might have been crushed by the impact or incinerated by the jet fuel-fed inferno.

Wait a minute?

What inferno???


And how does fire exist under a sealed crater?

The plane also supposedly crashed into dirt that was described as "soft" and "spongy".
So doesn't it seem a tad strange that they would comment that the black boxes might have been destroyed by impacting "soft soil" or burning up in a non-existent inferno?

The CVR was supposedly found 10ft deeper in the ground the day after the FDR was.
How did the CVR manage to burrow so much deeper when both boxes are located next to each other in the tail section?

So with officials saying the boxes might have been destroyed by "soft dirt" or an inferno that didn't exist and the CVR which allegedly recorded the terrorist's voices found a day later because it burrowed so much deeper, kinda makes you wonder about these "recovered" black boxes, huh?

Take a look at the black boxes themselves...
How do we know that a pair of black boxes weren't taken from a previous plane crash and those were used to stage these photos?

Now take a close look at the squared-shaped black box...

Did you notice how it was propped up nicely on a piece of metal to be level for the shot?

And notice all the wires around it too...

Kinda makes the photo look more convincing, doesn't it?!
By the way, this would be the ONLY photo from the scene that shows any wires from the alleged plane crash.
Also, did you notice that only the labeled part of the black box was photographed?

The photo wouldn't have quite the same effect if just the other half was shown...

So what happened to the rest of the built-to-last black box? Surely it didn't just disappear.
And what's with this piece of wood in the crater???

Now take a look at the cylinder-shaped black box...
How do we know it wasn't put on the ground at some other location and photographed?
Notice how it was placed by some rocks along with a small piece of twisted metal nicely tucked underneath...

Is that twisted piece of metal aluminum from a plane, or just a piece of tin?

So was it placed by some rocks with a piece of scrap metal tucked underneath too again, make the photo look more convincing?
As with the squared box, notice that only the main labeled part was photographed...

So it just a coincidence that BOTH bottom sections of the boxes are missing and only the labeled parts are photographed to make the photos look all the more dramatic?

Also, have you ever seen black boxes from a crash scene photographed like these were?

We were told that Flight 93 crashed at a whopping 580mph and burrowed down deep into "soft dirt"...

Well if that's so, then why isn't there any dirt on the black boxes after they supposedly burrowed so far through dirt?

Did you notice there is no fire damage either?

One last thing...
After the alleged FDR was sent back to the NTSB for analysis their report mentions the manufacturer of the FDR: Allied-Signal

You can also tell it's an Allied-Signal because you can still make out one of the letters on its damaged label...

The NTSB released the transcript from Flight 93's alleged CVR, but never mentioned who the manufacturer was.
United Airlines Flight 93 went into service in 1996.

The CVR from Flight 93 should be by the same maker as the FDR: Allied-Signal
  • Attachment: 1.jpg
    (Size: 23.98KB, Downloaded 2904 times)
  • Attachment: 2.jpg
    (Size: 59.80KB, Downloaded 2825 times)
  • Attachment: 3.gif
    (Size: 13.92KB, Downloaded 2744 times)
  • Attachment: 4.gif
    (Size: 14.19KB, Downloaded 2681 times)
  • Attachment: 5.jpg
    (Size: 39.28KB, Downloaded 2707 times)
  • Attachment: 6.jpg
    (Size: 59.21KB, Downloaded 2955 times)
  • Attachment: 7.jpg
    (Size: 24.76KB, Downloaded 2597 times)
  • Attachment: 8.jpg
    (Size: 61.29KB, Downloaded 2684 times)
  • Attachment: 9.gif
    (Size: 7.65KB, Downloaded 2669 times)
  • Attachment: 10.jpg
    (Size: 51.15KB, Downloaded 2572 times)
  • Attachment: 11.gif
    (Size: 141.79KB, Downloaded 2594 times)
  • Attachment: 12.gif
    (Size: 133.47KB, Downloaded 2475 times)
  • Attachment: 13.jpg
    (Size: 29.98KB, Downloaded 2541 times)
  • Attachment: 14.jpg
    (Size: 16.58KB, Downloaded 2509 times)
  • Attachment: 15.gif
    (Size: 139.69KB, Downloaded 3027 times)
  • Attachment: 16.gif
    (Size: 157.26KB, Downloaded 2543 times)
  • Attachment: honey-debris.jpg
    (Size: 51.14KB, Downloaded 2727 times)
  • Attachment: 18.jpg
    (Size: 54.26KB, Downloaded 2573 times)
  • Attachment: 19.jpg
    (Size: 69.06KB, Downloaded 2734 times)
  • Attachment: ua757diving.jpg
    (Size: 18.29KB, Downloaded 3658 times)
  • Attachment: 21.jpg
    (Size: 27.10KB, Downloaded 2515 times)
  • Attachment: 22.gif
    (Size: 28.07KB, Downloaded 2660 times)
  • Attachment: 24.gif
    (Size: 29.34KB, Downloaded 2453 times)
  • Attachment: 25.jpg
    (Size: 22.27KB, Downloaded 2496 times)
Re: FLIGHT 93 Sun, 17 June 2012 05:59 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tufa is currently offline  Tufa
Messages: 541
Registered: November 2010
Location: Lund, SE
Expert Member
5-Planted Engine
Officials told us that both engines from Flight 93 were recovered after it allegedly crashed.

(Well, sort of.)

One of the engines was photographed being recovered from the crater at the scene.

The other was reportedly found in the woods behind the crater, or in the pond.


Don't worry, that's what happens when a story doesn't add up.

Let's start with the engine allegedly found in the woods, or in the pond, or wherever it was supposedly found.

First, it was reported that a "whole engine" was found at a "considerable distance from the crash site."

(Flight 93 was equipped with two Pratt & Whitney PW2037 engines.)

One report said this massive engine was found 600 yards from the crater
And got there by "bouncing" off the ground.

Then it was changed from a whole engine, to a 1,000 pound piece of it found far from the crash and to the west of it.

They reportedly had to haul this engine out of the woods with a bulldozer.

And who was it that reportedly hauled this engine out of the woods?

You guessed it!

Jim Svonavec, whose company worked at the site and provided excavation equipment, told AFP that the recovery of the engine "at least 1,800 feet into the woods," was done solely by FBI agents using his equipment.

Then the story changes again in which now a section of the engine was found in a catchment pond just south of the crater.

This section supposedly was an engine fan.

(or was it a piece of fuselage?)

But regardless of whatever was supposedly found in the water, it was reported that they recovered whatever they did in the woods BEFORE they even searched the pond!
Four Flight 93 victims identified
Saturday, September 22, 2001

"Investigators have identified remains of four of the 44 people aboard Flight 93, the jetliner that crashed here 11 days ago, the Somerset County coroner said yesterday.

Yesterday, investigators drained a two-acre pond about 1,000 feet from the crater where the jetliner slammed into the ground, just another step in hunting airliner parts, personal belongings and remains, Miller said."

But let's skip all the major inconsistencies of where this engine was found and assume a piece of it was found in the pond.

The pond is about 300 yards south of the crater.

Remember that Flight 93 was said to have crashed at 580mph into the ground at a 40deg angle.

There appears to be markings in the crater of where the two engines from Flight 93 supposedly hit.

(I guess.)

Remember that the ground was said to be "soft & loose" and that's why, they say, most of the plane was able to burrow deep underground.

So if Flight 93 hit this "soft" ground at nearly 600mph and at a 40deg angle then why did one of its massive engines that weighs almost 10,000 lbs burrow underground and the other one just bounced off?

Also, do any of these "engine marks" in the ground even look like marks made from 10,000-pound engines plowing nearly 600mph into the ground at a 40deg angle?

But if these marks were caused by Flight 93's engines plowing into the ground, how did one not only manage to escape, but tumble so far from the crash?

But let's just assume for a second that its engine (or massive fan) did bounce off the ground after impact.

Could it have tumbled 300 yards after crashing?

Officials say so and I would actually agree.

However, what I am wondering is, whether it was an entire engine, or one of its massive fans, how in the world did it manage to tumble into the pond with this 70ft wall of trees in the way?



But if some part of an engine was found in the pond, who's to say it wasn't just planted there?

Isn't it just a little too coincidental that of all the places a piece of a plane's hot engine would be found is in the cold water of a pond?

So if the perps planted a heavy engine part in the pond, how did they get it there without being noticed?

Now that you're probably curious as to what was actually found in the pond (or woods for that matter) we can probably identify what this mystery part was by the photos taken of it at the scene:
Did you see it?


That's because officials never took any, or at least never released any.

Hmm, kinda weird they never showed us any photos of this large piece from Flight 93 that was reportedly recovered from the pond, or found in the woods.

(or was it found in the bushes???)

So what about the engine seen being excavated from the crater in that photo that wasn't released until 4 1/2 years after 9/11?

Is it from a Pratt & Whitney PW2037 engine, the kind Flight 93 had?


Kinda hard to tell since it's so smashed up.

But let's assume it is for the sake of argument.

The obvious first question about this engine is why is it only a few feet under the surface when officials said the black boxes were recovered 15ft & 25ft underground?

Also, doesn't this engine look kind of old and rusted?

Right about now it should start becoming obvious that this is a planted engine scrap.

But planted how and when?

There was a person living in a cottage right around the corner and there is a scrap yard right up the street in plain view.


How were the perps able to plant such an engine scrap without being noticed?

Seems unlikely that they dug up the field and planted it before the "crash".

So realistically, the perps would have to have planted it sometime afterwards.

But how could they have done that with so many responders stationed at the scene?

Well, it helps when the piece of debris you are planting fits neatly in the equipment you are "excavating" it with!

They just used one of their excavators at the scene and simply lowered it down for a nice little photo-op.

Didn't you notice the engine scrap was small enough to fit in the backhoe bucket?

And that no dirt is caked on it after supposedly burrowing down "soft soil" at nearly 600mph?!

And all those responders that were stationed next to the crater would have only seen the backside of the backhoe bucket.

And if it can't get more obvious the perps threw little pieces of shiny aluminum in the crater to try to make their staged photo-op look more real.

When will they learn that United Airlines planes are not silver, but dark blue and grey?

But you can't blame them for trying.

I mean, what are you supposed to do when you have to excavate a hole with no plane in it?

  • Attachment: 1-1.jpg
    (Size: 37.18KB, Downloaded 2695 times)
  • Attachment: 5-2.jpg
    (Size: 47.63KB, Downloaded 2471 times)
  • Attachment: 3-1.jpg
    (Size: 60.06KB, Downloaded 2876 times)
  • Attachment: 4-1.jpg
    (Size: 21.75KB, Downloaded 2462 times)
  • Attachment: 5-5-2.jpg
    (Size: 59.88KB, Downloaded 2481 times)
  • Attachment: 5-6-1.jpg
    (Size: 37.84KB, Downloaded 2505 times)
  • Attachment: 5-7.jpg
    (Size: 39.61KB, Downloaded 2438 times)
  • Attachment: 5-8.jpg
    (Size: 14.99KB, Downloaded 2422 times)
  • Attachment: 5-9.jpg
    (Size: 17.41KB, Downloaded 2319 times)
  • Attachment: 5-10.jpg
    (Size: 66.31KB, Downloaded 2455 times)
  • Attachment: 5-11.jpg
    (Size: 42.68KB, Downloaded 2416 times)
  • Attachment: lifting_engine_by_crane.jpg
    (Size: 0.90KB, Downloaded 2364 times)
  • Attachment: 5-13.jpg
    (Size: 8.83KB, Downloaded 2367 times)
  • Attachment: 5-14.jpg
    (Size: 40.61KB, Downloaded 2482 times)
  • Attachment: 5-15.jpg
    (Size: 64.53KB, Downloaded 2530 times)
  • Attachment: 5-16.jpg
    (Size: 53.48KB, Downloaded 2433 times)
  • Attachment: 5-17.jpg
    (Size: 15.75KB, Downloaded 2358 times)
  • Attachment: 5-18.jpg
    (Size: 44.45KB, Downloaded 2409 times)
  • Attachment: 5-20.jpg
    (Size: 42.98KB, Downloaded 2349 times)
  • Attachment: 5-19.jpg
    (Size: 25.11KB, Downloaded 2288 times)
  • Attachment: 5-21.jpg
    (Size: 43.29KB, Downloaded 2387 times)
  • Attachment: 5-22.jpg
    (Size: 20.16KB, Downloaded 2396 times)
  • Attachment: 5-23.jpg
    (Size: 54.99KB, Downloaded 2377 times)
  • Attachment: 5-24.jpg
    (Size: 30.03KB, Downloaded 2357 times)
Re: FLIGHT 93 Sun, 17 June 2012 06:47 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tufa is currently offline  Tufa
Messages: 541
Registered: November 2010
Location: Lund, SE
Expert Member
6-Vertical Stabilizer

When a plane crashes the tail section usually survives.

Sometimes fully.

Sometimes partially.

And even in very violent crashes where nothing looks to be left...

the tail still survives.

► Uncontrolled Descent and Collision With Terrain, United Airlines Flight 585
"The size of the impact crater measured approximately 39 feet by 24 feet and was about 15 feet deep. The vertical stabilizer and rudder were in the impact crater, damaged severely by impact and fire. The horizontal stabilizer was in the crater, in pieces and severely burned. The horizontal stabilizer parts were located at the top of the pile of destroyed airplane debris." NTSB

On a Boeing 757, the tail section is HUGE.

So that begs the question:
What happened to Flight 93's tail section???


Some official story-huggers think they know the answer.
They say that since Flight 93 flipped and crashed going really, really fast...

that caused the plane to plow mostly underground...
"80% of the plane was in the crater."
- UA93 Memorial ambassador

in which the tail struck the ground really, really hard, thereby causing it to shatter into a million little pieces too small to be seen from a distance.

Can you imagine what the ground that was described as:

► On Hallowed Ground
"To the casual eye, it looked like solid, consolidated ground but in reality the reclaimed expanse was loose and uncompacted. When flight 93 hit the ground..." - The Age (09/09/02)

Is a massive Boeing 757'tail shattering against the ground going to look like a fragile wine glass dropped on a hard surface?!

You would think that a huge visible mark would be left in the "loose and uncompacted" soil just like the marks the wings supposedly made...

and not some perfect imprint of itself like you see in the cartoons.
I mean that would just be ridiculous to believe!

So that begs another question:

Why IS there a "Wile E. Coyote" tail imprint in the ground?


Who would have thought that a Boeing 757's tail would leave a near-exact impression of itself after striking loose dirt so hard that it was essentially obliterated by it?

Maybe its tail acted like a Samurai sword instead and sliced cleanly through the ground like we are supposed to believe Flight 175's tail did through the South WTC Tower's steel façade?

Well apparently not because whatever made that "tail imprint" in that Shanksville field didn't even penetrate through the ground!

Well so much for the Samurai sword theory.

So how in the world could Flight 93's tail slam down so hard against loose soil that it shatters against it like a dropped wine glass, but looks as if it was just lowered down on its edge thereby leaving a faint impression of itself in the grass from its own weight

Could it be that this "tail imprint" is something else and just by chance looks like a tail imprint?
Well I suppose, but is it just another coincidence that there is another imprint in the ground that looks to have come from the left horizontal stabilizer?

Of course that begs yet another question:

Did Flight 93 suffer from "taco neck"?

Maybe Flight 93 kept spinning on its right-side as it burrowed into the ground causing the right tail to strike in the imprint created by the right wing?
Well not according to the NTSB's flight path animation as it shows Flight 93 spinning slightly back to the left before it supposedly hit.

But something else really proves that the right tail didn't strike inside the right wing's imprint.

The ground!

So we have quite a mystery here.
How can Flight 93's tail section do this:

Yet only leave this:

  • Attachment: tail.gif
    (Size: 2.40MB, Downloaded 2477 times)
  • Attachment: 6-2p.jpg
    (Size: 27.45KB, Downloaded 3156 times)
  • Attachment: 6-3.jpg
    (Size: 27.49KB, Downloaded 2293 times)
  • Attachment: tailcrash.gif
    (Size: 868.07KB, Downloaded 2341 times)
  • Attachment: 6-4.jpg
    (Size: 25.89KB, Downloaded 2867 times)
  • Attachment: 6-5.jpg
    (Size: 16.36KB, Downloaded 2440 times)
  • Attachment: 6-6.jpg
    (Size: 57.96KB, Downloaded 2626 times)
  • Attachment: 6-7.jpg
    (Size: 12.41KB, Downloaded 5043 times)
  • Attachment: UA93intocrater.gif
    (Size: 1.16MB, Downloaded 2346 times)
  • Attachment: 6-8.jpg
    (Size: 24.61KB, Downloaded 2449 times)
  • Attachment: 9.jpg
    (Size: 3.27KB, Downloaded 2182 times)
  • Attachment: 6-11.jpg
    (Size: 16.08KB, Downloaded 2288 times)
  • Attachment: 6-12.jpg
    (Size: 15.16KB, Downloaded 2196 times)
  • Attachment: roadrunner.gif
    (Size: 522.60KB, Downloaded 2234 times)
  • Attachment: 6-14.jpg
    (Size: 17.97KB, Downloaded 2189 times)
  • Attachment: 6-15.jpg
    (Size: 16.18KB, Downloaded 2159 times)
  • Attachment: 6-16.jpg
    (Size: 22.00KB, Downloaded 2429 times)
  • Attachment: 6-17.jpg
    (Size: 17.43KB, Downloaded 2180 times)
  • Attachment: 6-18.jpg
    (Size: 15.80KB, Downloaded 2155 times)
  • Attachment: 6-19.jpg
    (Size: 23.03KB, Downloaded 2343 times)
  • Attachment: 6-20.jpg
    (Size: 24.06KB, Downloaded 2495 times)
  • Attachment: 6-21.jpg
    (Size: 12.56KB, Downloaded 2182 times)
  • Attachment: 6-22.jpg
    (Size: 14.71KB, Downloaded 2138 times)
  • Attachment: 6-23.jpg
    (Size: 7.14KB, Downloaded 2146 times)
  • Attachment: 6-24.jpg
    (Size: 19.12KB, Downloaded 2101 times)
  • Attachment: 6-25.jpg
    (Size: 13.15KB, Downloaded 2182 times)
  • Attachment: 6-27.jpg
    (Size: 15.05KB, Downloaded 2124 times)
  • Attachment: 28.jpg
    (Size: 14.71KB, Downloaded 2135 times)
  • Attachment: 6-29.jpg
    (Size: 3.25KB, Downloaded 2140 times)
  • Attachment: 6-30.jpg
    (Size: 17.06KB, Downloaded 3122 times)
  • Attachment: NTSBUA93.gif
    (Size: 1.07MB, Downloaded 2354 times)
  • Attachment: 6-32.jpg
    (Size: 15.86KB, Downloaded 2139 times)
  • Attachment: 6-33.jpg
    (Size: 15.58KB, Downloaded 2201 times)
  • Attachment: 6-10.jpg
    (Size: 6.39KB, Downloaded 2200 times)

[Updated on: Sun, 17 June 2012 06:53]

Report message to a moderator

Re: FLIGHT 93 Sun, 17 June 2012 07:20 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Tufa is currently offline  Tufa
Messages: 541
Registered: November 2010
Location: Lund, SE
Expert Member

If this is true, I guess I really DON'T know much about plane crashes:

Where is all of that JET fuel burning away??
The dry grass next to the crater is left unscathed.


Here is what jet fuel does to dry grass in a smaller plane accident from the same downward trajectory-

[Updated on: Sun, 17 June 2012 07:21]

Report message to a moderator

Re: FLIGHT 93 Mon, 16 July 2012 13:45 Go to previous messageGo to previous message
Tufa is currently offline  Tufa
Messages: 541
Registered: November 2010
Location: Lund, SE
Expert Member


Previous Topic: The PLANES idiocy
Next Topic: When the "Plane" hits the Towers
Goto Forum:

[ PDF ]

Current Time: Sat Jul 20 10:07:19 W. Europe Daylight Time 2024