So if AA77 was going full throttle and Lloyd saw this plane clip a light pole, (So it is much less than 50 yards away!) then please explain why is car is still intact and not blown over as in like the video above demonstrates??
The 757 that passed over Washington Blvd was clocking at 540 mph. In the video you posted the plane was standing still. This is a more realistic, yet sill poor comparison.
Stundie should know that the physics involved with jet blast (ground effect, wake turbulance, whatever you want to call it) are completetly different depending on the situation.
1. When a plane is at a standstill and applying full power. This is the case stundie illustrates and the effect, is indeed rather dangerous and powerfull to anything behind it.
2. When a plane is taking off. This wake turbulance ia also powerfull but not as much as in the first case. The primary danger is to other planes that may take off right behind it as the turbulance creates vortexes in the air that can affect the lift and flying characteristics of planes attempting to depart right behind it. ATC has rules for how long a following plane must wait to depart behind a large jet. The same rules do NOT apply behind landing jets.
3. When a plane is landing or flying close to the ground at full speed. This was the case at the Pentagon. While the engines are still producing thrust and turbulance, the effect is greatly minimized and almost completely negated by the forward momentum of the plane.
The supposed "ground effect" that DRG and others espouse is nonsense. Check out this video which shows a 747 landing less than 30 feet above people and a vehicle, with zero effect on them.
1. Of course it is dangerous as the Top gear experiment shows you. The point I was making is if AA77 was going at full throttle as the commission states?? (I hope you agree because this is what they say!) And the plane was only 20-40ft above the ground, then there would cars flung all over the place as the video shows you what happens to a car from 50 yards. (Which is much more than 20-40ft!)
2. You creating Strawmen arguments. I've not argued about the dangers of planes taking off, or even landing, or turbulence.
3. Could you please explain what you mean when you say "the effect is greatly minimized and almost completely negated by the forward momentum of the plane?"
Also a plane landing is not using the full power of the jet engines, so posting a picture of a plane landing which is much slower than 500mph and of course not using full power, will not create any ground effect.
You are creating strawman arguments which have only happened inside your head.
12:55 AM Nov 25
