United Airlines Flight 175 (UA 175) on 9/11 was a Boeing 767-200ER, it would have used Pratt & Whitney engines like the JT9D series, but specifically the PW4000 series (PW4052/56) were common for that model, not the older JT9D-7R4D; the JT9D-7R4D powered earlier 747s and 767s
Posted by NightNo5882
2 Comments
CC: United Airlines Flight 175 (UA 175) on 9/11 was a Boeing 767-200ER, it would have used Pratt & Whitney engines like the JT9D series, but specifically the PW4000 series (PW4052/56) were common for that model, not the older JT9D-7R4D; the JT9D-7R4D powered earlier 747s and 767s.. so clearly NOT flight 175.
J. David Canoles, a Manager in Air-Traffic Evaluation and Investigation for the FAA, has made statements suggesting that United Airlines Flight 175 (UA175) turned in a circle around New York City. According to the letter from Daniel M. Plesse, Mr. Canoles has claimed to have radar data supporting this assertion. Here are some points to consider:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCkBEZjb75I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCkBEZjb75I)
Interesting angle on why both “planes” “flew in at an angle”: The aircraft were wider than the buildings. If they came in flat, one or both wingtips would have sheared off and went flying away intact. They couldn’t fake that easily and decided on this “angle” thing for their explosives.
Interesting addendum for flying enthusiasts: An aircraft that is banking is pulled laterally. As incredible difficult as it would be to hit a building dead center, it would be further complicated with the plane now traveling rapidly to the side. Even a moderate crosswind of a few tens of knots is problematic on a normal landing.
Even with all this, people are still certain there were planes that crashed into buildings that day.