File :-(, x, )
Shit getting blown up Anonymous
Anybody got a whole lot of those Govt. pics where they test the weapons and have high speed photography?

Pic is F-4 being rocketed into wall at ~480MPH.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
impact
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
and all gone...
>> Anonymous
This has to be fake. If a plane really did crash into something, there would be pieces left, like in the pentagon crash.

Wait a second... Oh shit.....
>> Anonymous
>>90762
nice one
>> Anonymous
a vid of an f-4 doing the same thing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5XTsQ-9vvo
>> Megaton !dusFRzvZFE
>>90816
>Here's a vid of the crash:
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T5XTsQ-9vvo

Fixed.
You did realize that these pictures and that video are one in the same, right?
>> Anonymous
>>90778
i concur.
>> Anonymous
Slightly stupid question.

Why the fuck do you need to crash an F-4 into a wall at 480 MPH? It's not like they've got airbags.
>> Anonymous
They were testing the concrete block to see if it was strong enough to withstand a direct kamikazi strike.

The block was for nuclear reactor casing/dome.

(i think)
>> Anonymous
>>90861
that sounds right, from what i remember.
>> Anonymous
Very cool, but fails for not showing what's left after the dust settles.
>> dust Anonymous
as i recall the plane is the dust. Its completly atomised from the colision.
>> Anonymous
>>90861
/k/ agrees and aproves...
>> Anonymous
>>90902
I was rather curious about what's left of the concrete block.
>> Anonymous
>>90883
nah. I want to see stuff blow up. don't care who did wtc
>> Anonymous
>>90883
A lot of dust and a concrete wall.
>> Anonymous
That's a pretty cool video and pictures. Id like to see more of this too.
>> Anonymous
>>90865

Not what it was for, but they concluded it was very similar. The concrete block wasn't anchored or anything so it DID move. It also had a ~2.5 inch depression in it.

The purpose of the test was to determine the impact force, versus time, due to the impact, of a complete F-4 Phantom — including both engines — onto a massive, essentially rigid reinforced concrete target (3.66 meters thick). Previous tests used F-4 engines at similar speeds. The test was not intended to demonstrate the performance (survivability) of any particular type of concrete structure to aircraft impact. The impact occurred at the nominal velocity of 215 meters per second (about 480 mph). The mass of the jet fuel was simulated by water; the effects of fire following such a collision was not a part of the test. The test established that the major impact force was from the engines. The test was performed by Sandia National Laboratories under terms of a contract with the Muto Institute of Structural Mechanics, Inc., of Tokyo. To view and download footage or still photos, click on the links or the images below.

Pics & Vid Below

http://www.sandia.gov/news/resources/video-gallery/index.html#rocketsled
>> Anonymous
the OP pictures look shopped, but the video doesnt lie.
>> dedla !MQbFngGEl2
>>90984
Excuse my lack of physics classes, but wouldn't the concrete block not being anchored to anything skew the test results? At least some of the impact would be put into moving the block, therefore not showing the full extent of the force's results on the concrete if the block had been secured.
>> Anonymous
>>91221
That sounds about right.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>90762
you sir, are a fucking moron

try using google sometime to actually see if there are any counter arguments, or do you rather belive every word some dropout moviemaker claims just because he dressed it up in a fancy movie with nice music

for the pentagon, try http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_757_plane_evidence.html
>> Anonymous
>>91240
1 in 4 americans believe that the bush administration somehow staged 9/11

by complete and sheer coincidence, at least 1 in 4 americans is retarded.
>> Anonymous
>>91240
You're an idiot, quit jumping to conclusions. The poster was clearly not being serious, but since you chose to act like you did, let me spell out the logic implied by the post you replied to:

1. Poster sees atomized F-4
2. Poster says that it must be fake, because the pentagon collision left debris
3. Poster remembers that the pentagon collision did not leave debris
4. Poster thus surmises that what happened to the F-4 also happened to the plane that impacted the pentagon, and that the "no debris" argument is false, hence the "oh shit".
>> Anonymous
So nothing else?