Creative Speculation

johndoeX

(268 posts)

5. Exactly Beachy! (sort of)

Wed Jun 25, 2014, 11:28 PM

Jun 2014

Beachy says - "1.2Vd is good enough..."

And this is the very reason Beachy will NEVER support Seger's interpretations of 25,301, 303 and 305 for margins of safety past Vd.

Unfortunately for Beachy, the 1.2VD requirement is based on "an increase of 20 percent in equivalent airspeed at both constant Mach number and constant altitude" - FAR 25.629

Were the aircraft on 9/11 remaining at a constant airspeed and altitude while lining up with their targets?

Nope...

In fact, they were well past Vd and pulling upwards of 4 - 11g's (well past the Ultimate load requirements up to Vd).

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Balsamo Busted [View all] William Seger Jun 2014 OP

Boom delphi72 Jun 2014 #1

Unfortunately, no million-dollar prize for predicting that. (n/t) William Seger Jun 2014 #10

You believe the FAA?!?!! zappaman Jun 2014 #2

Once again Seger fails comprehension. johndoeX Jun 2014 #3

oops, another Gish Gallop from pilots for truth superbeachnut Jun 2014 #4

Exactly Beachy! (sort of) johndoeX Jun 2014 #5

pilots for truth fail to explain "constant MACH", they can't superbeachnut Jun 2014 #7

I can explain it.. and I have... johndoeX Jun 2014 #8

No explanation past messing up the FAR more, on par for pilots for truth superbeachnut Jun 2014 #9

Grade A bullshit from a B-List conspriracy huckster and fraud William Seger Jun 2014 #6

For the benefit of the bamboozled William Seger Jul 2014 #11