9/11 QUESTION: Can a Boeing 757 with a 124FT wing span fit into a hole only 20FT wide in the Pentagon?

Question

A Boeing 757 has a 124ft wingspan, is 155ft long and 44ft high and the nose itself is 20ft high. It has two engines, both 12ft long and 9ft in diametre. The hole in the Pentagon just befor that section of it collapsed 20 minutes later was less than 20ft in diametre, not even big enough to accomodate the nose, so there should be a boeing 757 outside then? yes? no... there was no irrufutable trace of Flight 77 either outside or inside the Pentagon. There was no wreckage of any airliner found inside or outside the Pentagon, no nose, no fuselage, no wings, no tail, no landing gear, no seats, Nothing. It begs the question, why is the damage to the Pentagon totally inconsistent with a Boeing 757? Why did the FBI confiscate CCTV footage from a hotel opposite that section of the Pentagon that would have caught everything? Go on the website: hunt the boeing. Do your research. And if you still believe that a 757 crashed into the Pentagon than i can't help you.

WELL... we have all been told it was a Boeing 757, i personally belive it was a criuse missile fired from the fighter jet that did the 270 degree turn the air traffic controller's saw on their screen's.

You shoot the messenger, instead of actually listening to the message. This is ignorence. Anyone with half a brain who actually looks at the evidence will see that there was NO wreckage. Where's the 12FT long 9FT wide engines?! Where were the wings?! well.... you wont find any because there was'nt a plane. Don't take my word for it, look at the pictures, look at the video footage, there is loads of it availible on the web. Or otherwise just forget about this subject and carry on being ignorent. I give big applause for people who doubt that a plane did hit the Pentagon.

Why is everyone so strict on believing the lies? Why won't people wake up? Why is everyone being so ignorent? It's easy for you to insult me because you know i am right and you don't want to believe it, you don't face up to the fact's. Big applause to the people who have seen the light. Everyone has to learn sometime.

A Plane DID'NT hit the Pentagon. That is a fact. It does'nt matter how much you don't want to believe it. The truth cannot be wished away. THEY DID NOT FIND ANY WRECKAGE!!!! HOW MANY MORE TIMES???!!! And by the way... the whole story of a plane hitting the Pentagon was entirely made up by the American media, Pentagon officials knew it was a missile, Pentagon officials present at the time could even smell the cordite, -which has a very different smell to kerosene. My research is based on facts, you have a flawed opinion, which is based on nothing. Your just being ignorent. Wake UP.

Reply to: ''kveryeffe...'' -there are several witnesse's that actually saw a missile with wings attached to make it look like a plane, (possibly one of the latest of AMG type missile's) there are also several people who herd what sounded ''like a missile'' -How do you explane the 7ft diameter exit hole left in the 3rd ring of the Pentagon? How can a fusulage made out of Carbon Fibre penetrate three wall's of the Pentagon? Your the one who need's to get a grip on reality. ****.

Answer 1

No, a Boeing 757 with a 124 feet wing span can not fit into a hole only 20 feet, wide. My research has lead me to believe a missile fired from a Military aircraft made that hole too.

There is strong evidence to support a Douglas A-3 Skywarrior armed with a missile hit the Pentagon. One thing we can be certain about; it was not a Boeing 757, as our government claims. Listen to this retired General, He says, "The Plane does not fit the hole; so what did hit the Pentagon...?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2VoUN-7RVU&eurl=

One might expect to see three holes in the pentagon, one for the main body and two more for each engine. The engine and engine parts were found outside of the building, they never penetrated the building thus no hole was created by them. The deep 18 foot hole was most probably made by an on board missile and not the aircraft itself. A radiation expert claims high-radiation readings near the Pentagon indicates depleted uranium (DU) munitions may have been used.
http://www.rense.com/general67/radfdf.htm

Witnesses say, the U.S. military secretly had Raytheon Co. refit an A-3 Skywarrior with new jet engines, a missile, and a Global Hawk guidance system, just prior to 9/11. Coincidentally, five key executives of Raytheon Co. went missing on 9/11. The official word is they died in the hijacked planes on 9/11.
http://tomflocco.com/fs/WitnessesLink.htm

The Jet engine(s) found may be key to identifying what type of aircraft hit the Pentagon: At the very least, they help determine a Boeing 757 did not hit the Pentagon. Both the jet engine housing as well as a "front end rotor head" have been identified as belonging to a Pratt & Whitney JT8D jet engine. The P&W JT8D engine has been used on the smaller Boeing 727 as well as a retrofit for the A-3 Skywarior. Two P&W JT8D's do not provide enough thrust to get a Boeing 757 off the ground much less sufficient power to perform the military precision maneuvers the aircraft in question did.
http://www.rense.com/general63/ident.htm
http://www.karlschwarz.com/02-02-05_Schwarz.pdf

A photograph of a cracked windshield found at the crash site strongly resembles the top canopy glass found on the Skywarrior: No windows of this shape are found on a Boeing 757.
http://home.att.net/~carlson.jon/911Pentagon.htm

The landing gear is one part found in the crash site that may be linked to a Boeing 757. It could also be a part that was retrofitted on an A-3 Skywarrior, since the wheels would most likely need to be replaced with something still available.
http://www.pentagonresearch.com/084.html

A geometric analysis can show the aircraft that hit the Pentagon is under 85 feet long and therefore too small to be a Boeing 757, which is over 155 feet long. An A-3 Skywarrior is 76 feet 4 inches long. See geometric analysis: also see revision note under comments.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Avt4N5qfsIKkwbXeL7iLXmPsy6IX?qid=20061122203115AAj8XR6

Answer 2

The hole was substantially wider than 20 feet, I estimate it was at least 60 feet wide. I can email you a copy of the picture to prove it if you IM me with your email address.

Also bear in mind the aircraft did not fly directly into the Pentagon, it impacted the ground just outside and wreckage from the initial impact then went into the building. It is totally untrue to say no wreckage was found, substantial amounts were actually recovered.

Answer 3

Are you just NOW asking this question , It DOES NOT . Now a very high speed projectile ,that MIGHT explode on impact is something that fits much better into the "hole " that JUMBO jet allegedly made But it was not a air plane Matter of fact what hit it was carried by a air plane ....maybe . What i can tell you with complete confidence WE'LL NEVER GET THE TRUTH IN OUR LIFETIME

Answer 4

Answer, no it can't there are many that say the whole thing was made up by the American government. You could go on www.myspace.com/911exposed and if you eliminate the rubbish there are some interesting videos also there's

http://www.asile.org/citoyens/numero13/pentagone/erreurs_en.htm

which offers some interesting insight into the 'inside job'. there is also a video which was released which i have which documents all the mistakes that happened that day and provides a picture which does make u believe that it was all a lie...but i can't find any links on the internet or find the actual video so the last bit isn't much help, soory

Answer 5

Hey have you seen World Trade Centre the documentary?
I find It hard to believe a Boeing 757 went through the pentagon. Its a conspiracy on the US nation, but of course Bush feeds the US public crap and they eat it. Now the documentary I mentioned earlier raised so many questions, they found the US government had no answers and if they had they were completely phoney baloney.... See the World Trade Centre the documentary----I strongly recommend it.

Answer 6

Learn a little physics. It can when it disintegrates on impact.

Go throw a frog at 700 mph into a wall. Know what happens? No more frog. Just a grease spot. NOTHING left. Frog pulverizes instantly.

Same thing with a plane. Lightweight, loose material assembled together being propelled at high velocity.

Yes, since I know physics, you cannot help me. Perhaps I can help you though.



Look I know it seems impossible. I have no reason to lie. I'm telling you that a 757 will basically pulverize at that speed when hitting the ground. Don't believe what some internet site says (or me, for that matter). Call up your local university physics (or, better yet, aeronautical engineering) department. Ask for a professor. And ask him (her) your question on what happens. They'll say the same thing.

Answer 7

I didn't read your whole question, but if you are suggesting that the plane may have not been the cause of the hole in the build, than you are just another dumb idiot who knows nothing. The building in question had steel reinforced walls 8 feet thick I believe it was. Those airplane wings snapped off like skinny twigs. The rest of the plane went through like a projectile. Not very far either. Do not fail to remember that this building was designed to resist destruction. If you are suggesting that Bush (as much as I hate him) was involved or even planned the attacks of 9-11, you put way to much faith in your idiot wacko teachers and the liberal press and media.

Answer 8

Ranting leads to a dead end. It's ok to make people aware of these facts. But the main problem resides in to what extent do the people, that is to say, the true holders of the keys to power, care.

Answer 9

The list of eyewitnesses who saw the plane crash into the Pentagon all had to be briefed and all their stories had to be prefect.
a. Partial list: http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blflight77w.htm
b. Another view: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0203/S00134.htm

Get a grip on reality.

Answer 10

Still visiting those conspiracy theory websites, are you? In case you didnt know it, there are pics of airliner wreckage at the Pentagon, however your preferred crackpot websites conveniently leave those out.
After all, you cant have a conspiracy when theres evidence to the contrary, can you?