Confessions of khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Oklahoma City, PanAm 800 and American 587

[Pirate88179]

I was correct about the top speed, I was just mistaken that he hit this speed on the deck.

I am still correct that he flew faster than the 250-300 in ground effect that was deemed "impossible" earlier in this topic.

Bill

Cangas:

Geeze, I posted this back on June 2nd.  I already admitted that I was mistaken about the speed on the deck being 1,000 mph.

What part of that do you not understand?

Bill

PS:  "Yeager" (1985)  Page 155, paragraph 4..."In all, I flew the orange beast 33 times and achieved the highest speed-1.45 Mach (957 mph)"

[Pirate88179]

Your original statement which I disagreed with, was that the first X-1 had been flown at 1,000 MPH at 10 feet or lower and that proved something about the 911 Pentagon crash. I'm not wasting time arguing anything else with somebody like you.

There are no reports available that say you are right. Except in your imaginary books that you refuse to define so that you can be checked.

If you are somehow not lying, define the book, page and quote. That is, IF you can pick back up your same hallucination. Or dream.


CANGAS 178

Try reading:

"Yeager"
By General Chuck Yeager and Leo Janos 1985

"Press On"
By General Chuck Yeager and Charles Leerhsen 1988

"Across The High Frontier" (The Story Of America's Greatest Test Pilot Chuck Yeager)
William R. Lundgren 1955

"Always Another Dawn"
A. Scott Crossfield and Clay Blair, Jr. 1987

"The Right Stuff"
Tom Wolfe 1979

"The Fastest Man Alive"
Frank K. Everest, Jr. and John Guenther 1958

There are, of course, more books dealing with this period in aviation history but reading these will give you a very good accounting from several different perspectives.  Then, you will see that what you call lies and hallucination are really facts about historical events.

Read first, post later, then you will appear to be more intelligent on this subject of which you obviously know little about.

Bill

[synchro1]

The five light poles.

[synchro1]

Pole #4 provides prooof the event was staged with that neat cut around the base.

[Pirate88179]

Pole #4 provides prooof the event was staged with that neat cut around the base.

In the first photo, I see what look like burn marks.  Are we sure this was taken right after the event?  Or, was this photo taken during the clean-up where a worker used a torch to cut this base in order to replace the damaged pole?

I am just asking as, of course, I do not know either way.

Bill