this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
431 points (98.6% liked)

HistoryPorn

4918 readers
55 users here now

If you would like to become a mod in this community, kindly PM the mod.

Relive the Past in Jaw-Dropping Detail!

HistoryPorn is for photographs (or, if it can be found, film) of the past, recent or distant! Give us a little snapshot of history!

Rules

  1. Be respectful and inclusive.
  2. No harassment, hate speech, or trolling.
  3. Engage in constructive discussions.
  4. Share relevant content.
  5. Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
  6. Use appropriate language and tone.
  7. Report violations.
  8. Foster a continuous learning environment.
  9. No genocide or atrocity denialism.

Pictures of old artifacts and museum pieces should go to History Artifacts

Illustrations and paintings should go to History Drawings

Related Communities:

Military Porn

Forgotten Weapons

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Another angle:

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

If those numbers are correct, that's 40x the energy.

[–] booly 4 points 1 month ago

40x the kinetic energy. Now consider the chemical energy stored in sufficient fuel for a coast to coast flight of that weight and speed.

[–] funkless_eck 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

rough approximation, but I did double check the numbers.

ie we don't know the exact weight of the bomber, but that's its average laden weight, could be lighter without bombs

in 2001 the second plane hit faster than the first and I believe the first is guessed from footage but the second is from the black box?