UA 93: How much of the wreckage was recovered?

[John Doe II]

On September 25, 2001 the answer by the FBI is very clear:

The FBI said yesterday that it has finished its work at the crash scene of United Flight 93 after recovering about 95 percent of the downed airliner and concluding that explosives were not responsible for bringing it down.
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010925scene0925p2.asp

The amount of recovered wreckage is as surprising as the claim that also 95% of AA 77 at the Pentagon have been recovered.

But what's about the following statement by Coroner Wallace Miller:

Miller, the director of a family-run funeral home and elected county coroner for Somerset, Pa., said only eight per cent of the wreckage was recovered. Everything else was vaporized, he said.
(Edmonton Journal, 3/28/04)

See also a reprinted article of CP:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pages/280304_crash.html

[spooked911]

1. Like most everything else about flight 93, this makes no sense

On the one hand, the bodies on the plane went deep into the ground. On the other hand, the bodies blew up into the sky and spewed body parts a few hundred feet into the trees.

Moreover, there was no recognizeable debris from a plane at the crash site. (I'm curious as to the difference between recovering 8% of the plane and 95%)

"We found remains 50 feet deep,"; he said of the massive crater the plane left on impact. The debris field spanned about 2.5 square kilometres of wooded area. Victim recovery efforts were hampered because most of the salvageable human remains were in the treetops."

Has there EVER been any comparable plane crash to this?

[Kevin Fenton]

7. Should be 95% or so.

I remember that when TWA 800 went down on 17 July 1996 off Long Island, the NTSB said they recoved 98% of the plane, a similar figure. I guess a couple of percent gets smashed up so small they can't find it.
IMHO 8% is a ridiculous figure. How can the plane have been vapourised, surely this would mean it first liquified and then vapourised, at what point does aluminium turn into gas? There's no way a jet fuel fire could do this. I don't really think the coroner understands the technical aspects of the argument very well and I wouldn't place much reliance on him.

[John Doe II]

8. The Coroner

states very clearly his figures. Moreover he stayed at the crash site till the end of 2001. Much much longer than the FBI. And I don't know if you need a lot of technical insight in order to know how much of the plane has been recovered.
And btw if you have a look at the crash site and see all the witnesses that all agree that the biggest part of the plane that was found next to the crater is big as a phone book than maybe 8% don't sound so rdiculous anymore.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[John Doe II]

11. Yes, it's hard to believe

but somehow nothing seems to remain of planes on 911 contrary to all known crashes (I'd be happy to see another example ...)
On 911 the first witnesses of UA 93's crash site all state that they wouldn't have known this was a plane crash site if they weren't told. All explanations I've seen so far speak of vaporization.

[stickdog]

16. Come on. He's the foremost expert on the crash.

He was put in charge of the entire crash site for over a full year.

Did you ever consider that the reason they didn't recover more of the plane is that the plane was blown to bits over Indian Lake and the crater represents nothing more than a missile striking the largest piece of the fuselage that fell from the sky onto land?

And that's just one possible scenario. Please remember that nobody saw a 757 hit the ground and explode.

[Kevin Fenton]

17. Coroner

I'm surprised you call the coroner the foremost expert on the crash. I guess he would be, at least, one of the foremost experts on the human remains aspects of the crash, but I'm not sure sure he knows much about the technical bits.

I very much doubt the plane was "blown to bits" as this would either require a huge bomb or an enormous missile (or lots of little missiles). AFAIK an airliner hit by a normal missile (or even two) fired from a normal fighter crashes a couple of minutes after being hit (like the Korean one the Russians shot down in the 80s). Many air-to-air missiles are simply heatseekers and would usually hit an engine, as it is the hottest part (which would explain the roving engine). Also, the debris at Indian Lake and elsewhere seems to have been small pieces, with no large chunks of plane, so I doubt the plane broke up there.

I'm sure a 757 did hit the ground and explode, even if nobody saw it. The plane's behaviour before and after hitting the ground is consistent with it having been hit by a missile (or by a bomb on board going off, but I'll ignore that because I don't think the hijackers had a real bomb). Given that the various circumstances appear to be less consistent with the idea that the plane was crashed intentionally by the hijackers (roving engine, problems with crash time, why can't the passengers get in the cockpit? comical explanation by 9/11 Commission), I think it was hit by the missile (but I wouldn't bet my house on it - actually I live in a flat, not a house, but what the hell).

I don't really have a problem with a hijacker-controlled plane being shot down (4 planes should have been shot down that day, not just one), I just think they should say so.

[DoYouEverWonder]

10. Maybe because the crash site at the strip mine

is not the same place that Flight 93 crashed. Maybe it crashed into Indian Lake?


'Crash debris found 8 miles away '

John Fleegle, an Indian Lake Marina employee, said FBI agents were skeptical of his reports about debris in the lake until they traveled to the lake shore Wednesday afternoon.

<snip>

Delasko, who ran outside moments later, said she thought someone had blown up a boat on the lake. "It just looked like confetti raining down all over the air above the lake," she said.

<snip>

By Wednesday morning, crash debris began washing ashore at the marina. Fleegle said there was something that looked like a rib bone amid pieces of seats, small chunks of melted plastic and checks.

He said FBI agents who spent the afternoon patrolling the lake in rented boats eventually carted away a large garbage bag full of debris.




http://www.flight93crash.com/MyPittsburghLIVE.htm

[philb]

19. How does official account explain this debris far from official crash site

"By Wednesday morning, crash debris began washing ashore at the marina. Fleegle said there was something that looked like a rib bone amid pieces of seats, small chunks of melted plastic and checks"


Are some really suggesting that a light breeze could have carried this to the lake from the official crash site; and the other stuff to a place even farther away across lakes and mountains?

How does the official account explain this?

[DoYouEverWonder]

2. I heard

from someone that worked at Boeing during 9-11 that they never found enough of any of the planes to be able to do their usual post crash investigations.

Odd that with four planes crashed, not even one of them left behind much debris?

[philb]

3. How do these crash sites compare to other crash sites?

What would be the reason for the big differences?

and why hasn't someone investigated the controversy over the black boxes at WTC?
Has anyone suggested a lie detector test for the 2 firemen?
surely someone would pay for it.


where was the 95% of wreckage found? there was little sign of it at the crash site;

[spooked911]

4. The two firemen who say the boxes were recovered?

I think they are hard to find and to get to talk. Although one guy did go on the Alex Jones show and talk about the black box recovery, but he wasn't one of the guys who recovered the boxes.

[DoYouEverWonder]

6. Most of the time

a fair bit of the plane is recovered and they reconstruct as much of the plane as possible. Even when the reasons for the crash are obvious, they still rebuild the plane and do a complete investigation.

None of this happened with any of the 9-11 planes. As a matter of fact the day after 9-11, Boeing stopped the investigation by their civilian unit and switched it to the one that investigates military crashes. Since then very little information has come out in regards to any of these planes.

[spooked911]

5. Very interesting. I strongly suspect that the planes were packed with

explosives. For one, to help bring destroy their targets. Two, it would help destroy any evidence in the planes!

[spooked911]

12. Amazing parallels with the Pentagon crash

both at the Pentagon and Shanksville, very little plane debris was seen and reported, and moreover the holes in the pentagon wall and ground (respectively) were smaller than one would expect for Boeing 757s.

However, for both flight 77 and flight 93, the FBI says most of the plane has been recovered.

The FBI wouldn't LIE about this would they?

[Kevin Fenton]

15. How large would you expect?

"the holes in the pentagon wall and ground (respectively) were smaller than one would expect for Boeing 757s."

How big are the holes you would expect?

[spooked911]

13. Also-- why were Navy SEALS involved in taking the flight 93 debris away?

http://www.emsmagazine.com/issues/article0017d.html

September 15, 2001—To my family and friends: Because I know all of you are curious and many of you will ask, I am preparing this document to send to you. From my brief time here, I already know that this is something that will live with me forever. I was told that a team of Navy Seals came in yesterday heavily armed and escorted a truck full of debris out of here. This is a very tense place. I can already feel the tremendous pain associated with this duty. This is why I am writing; I already know this is something I do not ever want to talk about, nor do I want to revisit these feelings.


By the way, why was it so tense there?

[thewormman]

14. Semantics

Perhaps they meant 95% of what was at the crash site had been recovered.

Not 95% of the plane?

[spooked911]

18. Possible, but the way the passage was written, it seems they mean

95% of the total airliner.