Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
If the plane hit at virtually ground level, the wings, being mostly light and not designed for that sort of stress, would have left comparitively little "inward" damage, although the wide "bloom" of smoke from the fuel can be clearly seen.
|
With my limited imagination on this, I'd have expected the wings (even in 'fold-back' mode) to have created a larger impact hole than what it did.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
It is the conspiracy theorists who claim that "tunnel" was left by the fuselage, but it's more likely that it was actually an engine (a very solid lump of metal) that actually caused it.
|
What makes you think that?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
The windows are designed to be bomb proof.
|
Granted.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Graham
I think most of them are entirely answerable.
|
Given your apparent stance on this subject I can see why you'd say that but taking the side of someone who is situated on the opposite end of the 'was it a conspiracy' spectrum could easily say they are not so easily solved.
I guess it comes down to what you believe and how you view the other side's "evidence".