Supporting Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About USMC850T

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender

Previous Fields

  • Location
    Rochester NY

USMC850T's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)



  1. .38 special? it look photoshopped in
  2. Pretty common, they do it in indy lights and a number of other series.
  3. What team is running that s60? Is atspeed back???
  4. QUOTE (matt b @ Mar 10 2009, 06:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>This the Seattle one ? Could use better paint, but looks like a sound base. No this one is from TX. Shipped to NY on a pallet the seller built for $325 with residential liftgate pickup and delivery. It will get painted don't worry! Just a few other things to get to first.
  5. New autoX car for next year. Body is a little bit rough, and I can't stand the paint job but it should be a rocket once I get it completed.
  6. I used to work there when I was in school ~2004-2006 or so. Really badly fucked up company, it's too bad a whole lot of rank and file sales associates have no job because of the blundering management.
  7. I work 3rd floor at the edge of the glass. Rochester Police Department, crime analyst. Sweet job, had an internship that helped. My degree is in poly sci and intel analysis. Polysci or CJ will help you get one of these jobs.
  8. keep in mind when the car is off your brakes are only power assisted for a short period of time.
  9. Aviation experts understand the ground effect, as do I. You, however, still do not. If you fast forward this video ( ) which I've already posted to around 25 seconds, you will see the airbus go by at 500 mph, 30 or so feet above the ground. Did the ground effect keep pushing that plane up and up in the air making it unstable? NO - because it's just one of many forces acting on an aircraft in flight, which is in turn balanced by another force. You know T-5, the magnitude of the lift force exerted on the plane is astronomical compared to the magnitude of what the ground effect would be doing at that altitude. Maybe you should tell your conspiracy theory buddies that LIFT is the reason a 757 couldn't have crashed into the pentagon The whole argument I've seen you put up is based on your misunderstandings and manipulations of facts, not actual facts. These aviation experts understand what they're talking about, and would probably tell you the exact same thing I've tried to convey. What these conspiracy theory groups have done is take FACTS and manipulate them, or just through plain misunderstanding (like you and your aviation "knowledge"), and spin so they fit into some convoluted conspiracy.
  10. You assume experienced commercial airline pilots with 20+ years experienced didn't adjust for barimetric pressure, they did. Again, watch Pilots for 9/11 Truth Pandora's Black Box and they'll explain. Better yet contact them via their website, they'll explain. Experienced pilots were not flying the plane into the side of the pentagon, terrorists were. I would be willing to guess that from the point where the plane was hijacked, which could have been in a totally different weather area, no adjustment was made. You are insane, a 757 in tests by Boeing has been proven to not be able to fly very well at 500+ MPH below 50 feet. It is called turbulence / air pressure. It might have somewhat flown at best but would have been difficult to control especially for an alleged terrorist that couldn't even fly a Cesna by all accounts of his instructors. I'm not insane, you just have no idea what you're talking about, and are simply repeating something you read somewhere and believed. Tests by boeing show it not being able to fly very well at 50 feet??? It's called turbulence / air pressure????? Don't think so. A 757 would not be any harder to fly down low than any other aircraft. Also, flying in close proximity to the ground, it is quite turbulent. This is something that affects all aircraft. A big airliner like a 757 is going to be affected by this to a much smaller degree than small aircraft, and in no way is this turbulence insurmountable, or tantamount proof that the government conspired to shoot missiles into the pentagon. For your own information, the ground effect is a phenomenon which acts as a kind of pillow, or cushion, between an aircraft and the ground. It's also something that an aircraft needs to be very close to the ground to notice, especially aircraft with high gross weights relative to their wing area (also known as high wing loading). An aircraft as heavy as a 757 (with a lot of fuel on board) traveling at 500 mph has a fuck-ton of energy, and is going to be relatively unaffected by the ground effect at 50 feet, since it would an extremely weak force relative to the momentum of the aircraft. uh, again, you don't think experienced professionals know this. this is not what they were seeing. Well then, I'm not quite sure what they would have been seeing (and I know you don't know what they saw that made them things this way), cause having some experience with this, when I think of the way a military jet would appear on a radar screen, I would think about high speeds, and abrupt turns. Again it's conceivable for a terrorist fly a plane, fly slowly and smoothly like a commercial pilot is supposed to. In fact, they would probably leave the throttle to the stop and make hard turns rather than flying with the finesse that a seasoned airline pilot would. Again if you cannot tell me why this unnamed ATC thought flight 77 was a military plane, you cannot really disprove anything i've said. uh, a plane as large and as close as the 757 would have been, there would have been some frame showing this. flying that low it would have just about covered the entire view of the overpass. you're assuming the highway department has some nice high quality cameras setup shooting 29.97fps mpeg video, when in actuality, they are low quality, low FPS cameras. The whole 9/11 conspiracy is incredibly thin. For instance: -the ATC saying that flight 77 appeared to be making military maneuvers, therefore it must have been a military aircraft with rockets -the ground effect and turbulence prove beyond a doubt that a plane cannot possibly fly as low as 50 feet and remain in control (your fact-packed video claimed "a 757 flying this low would likely flip due to the ground effect" - which is a statement clearly crafted by some shit-for brains tin hat wearing moron whom cannot possibly have any aviation experience, and most certainly not basing that statement on FACTS 850 T-5 : please watch this video. It was crafted by the government to make us believe that jets can in fact fly low and remain in control: and here's another with a 757 low pass followed by a military like steep climb
  11. 1. Experienced Air traffic controllers saw what they said resembled Military Aircraft maneuvers, NOT those of a 757 and said they all thought it was a military fighter plane. Air Traffic Controllers like Sybil Edmonds have been threatened and gagged from speaking out. Airliners are capable of turing at several G's. Also, there is an FAA regulation "speed limit" of 250mph under 10,000ft in effect for noise control. This might make anything making abrupt turns and traveling in excess of this speed limit seem like a military aircraft. 2. Blackbox Altitude analyzed by Pilots for 9/11 turth (founded by a pilot with 20 + years experience), at the time of impact was 479 feet, not low enough to impact light poles and obviously not low enough to hit the building where it supposedly hit. They requested further information and the NTSB declined stating "what you have is what you have". Blackboxes read absolute altitudes, based off sea level. They are also linked to the instruments, which often times have corrections for barimetric pressure. Do you think terrorists were worried about compensating for pressure changes as they were flying? 3. There is also DOT footage for the nearby highway that would have clearly shown the supposed 757 that hit, Govt. won't release it. A nearby highway camera shooting at 2-3HZ should be pretty effective at capturing a nice image of a 500mph airliner, shouldn't it!. 4. Ground effects, (AKA the laws of physics and commercial aircraft design), make it impossible for a 757 to fly over 500MPH a couple feet off the ground as claimed, even any experienced aviation expert agrees. Again, watch the video about it. The ground effect doesn't have a goddamn thing to do with flying jets within feet of the ground. The person who made this video, and yourself, have no idea what the ground effect is, and what it does to a jet. 5. Look at the video, in the link. If you can see you'll see something being shot from a jet and a streak, which is what was likely a missile. Watch the video again, without the mushrooms. All I see is a fucking blob on a security camera video. Luckily, that blob was outlined into the shape of a fighter jet and missile, so that I would infer that there was some massive government conspiracy behind the 757 crash at the pentagon. 6. Commercial aviation experts have studied the size and type of plane the wreckage came from, these are people who have experience studying crash photos. the size of the wreckage is inconsistant for a Boeing 757 Not sure how many crash photos they had to study showing a 757 impacting a very, very heavily fortified structure. Also not sure who has qualified them as "Comercial aviation experts" but whatever. I mean come on, get real. Even if this was somehow not true, we have missile defense systems that could have taken an approaching 757 out. These systems were designed to intercept faster moving fighter jets and incoming missiles so explain why they weren't used? Let me guess, you are one of those nuts that claim "We just didn't have anything like that". Prior to that day, terrorism of this manner was based on the threat of actual violence, rather than the random application of violence, as we saw on 9/11. This is why if you tried to convince anyone on september 10th that shooting down a hijacked airliner was a reasonable thing to do they would probably have punched you. Today, there might be some weight to that argument. Also, I'm not that familiar with the actual flight path of the aircraft. Presumably if it was headed straight for the pentagon for quite some time, they would have had some warning. This is where the above argument may have been hastily discussed. Also, keep in mind, if the jet was below a certain altitude, it would not be visible on radar.
  12. Which is certainly a gross generalization. The north of Iraq, which is kurdish, could not be any happier that we are there and that we deposed saddam. The south is quite similar in their disposition towards americans and their presence. Both areas are pretty quiet, and it bugs me that the media chooses to completely ignore the success we have had in both regions. As a side note, while there certainly are Iraqi's who don't want us there, I'd be confident to say that there are waaaaay more americans who don't want us there than Iraqis who feel the same way. (by Americans, i mean the smelly protester move on dot org kind)
  13. "Never talk when you can nod, and never nod when you can wink, and never write an e-mail because it's death. You're giving prosecutors all the evidence we need," - Client number 9.