9/11 Plane Engine [Mis]Identified: FBI/NTSB Failed.

I’ll skip to the good part: It’s an engine of the type used on Flight 11’s aircraft, not Flight 175’s, like the FBI said when it gave the relic on loan to the Newseum, who now displays it wrong in their FBI exhibit – and has been for years (since 2011).

N334AA (Flight 11) had 2 General Electric CF6-80A2 engines (Also 2.) and N612UA (Flight 175) had 2 Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D engines. (Also 2., 3.)

 Source, left: Photo by Ruth Ann. General Electric CF6-80C2 in the American Airlines Museum in Texas. At right, Fresh Kills Landfill, FEMA News photo from Oct. 2001. I’ve added the lines and text to indicate the 9/11 engine part – the same one in the Newseum – belonged to a CF6. With the aid of a mechanic or other qualified person, this would confirm the engine to be the type flown on N334AA, Flight 11.

In 2011 the FBI rolled out that engine part and one other for the 10^th anniversary. If you go to the Wikipedia page for Flight 175 and click on the engine photo, you’ll see the one pictured above at right hanging in a museum (Newseum’s 2011 exhibit “War on Terror: The FBI’s New Focus”) with another unidentified engine piece (Getty Images) also seen before (source) in the pile of plane parts at Fresh Kills. The museum Curator of Collections, Carrie Christoffersen, said they had “two fragments of jet engine from Flight 175 on exhibit. There’s a small piece that weighs 800 pounds [363 KG] and a larger piece that weighs 1,500 pounds [682 KG]. They are on loan to us from the FBI.”

The Washington Post also said both pieces were from “Flight 175.” (In quotes because flights don’t have engines. Planes do.) Their photo is high res, depicting the one seen above at right. Shame on the Post, though, because the caption for the photo says, “Engine parts from Flight 175, which crashed into the World Trade Center’s North Tower at 8:46 a.m. on Sept. 11, 2001. (Sarah Mercier/ Newseum)” In case you didn’t catch that, it should say Flight 11 for that time and tower of impact. (Jacqueline Trescott, “Newseum exhibit ‘War on Terror: The FBI’s New Focus’ includes artifacts from 9/11,” washingtonpost.com, 8/26/2011) [another image]

This is further proof the FBI and/or NTSB didn’t ID the parts to specific airplane. Or the info got lost in the mix over the past 15 years and no records were kept. Now we’ll have to talk to Newseum and get the placard changed for their exhibit’s display. I believe the exhibit is still in place. In 2015 it reopened with a new name, “Inside Today’s FBI: Fighting Crime in the Age of Terror.” In the FBI’s online article about the exhibit, the 9/11 artifacts were also described with the engines and landing gear coming from “Flight 175.” (FBI, “Newseum goes ‘Inside Today’s FBI,’” fbi.gov, 11/13/2015) Fail.

You may have noticed our N334AA engine is a different model (80A2) within a series (CF6) than some others we use for comparison. The 80C2 (see drawing) is a new and improved version of the 80A . It has an enlarged fan and “[a]n extra stage is added to the HP compressor, and a 5th to the LP turbine.” (Wikipedia, “General Electric CF6”) I’m no pro, but I’m pretty sure our engine part wasn’t affected much in the upgrade. It’s a “diffuser case” (with lots of stuff attached and inside – detailed [in 80A type] in an NTSB drawing here.)

This is the diffuser case for the Pratt & Whitney JT9D-7R4D, the bottom of which remained on the bottom of the Murray St. part:

Photo courtesy Fred Robel, plus.google.com, 7/13/2016: “Lowering the diffuser case onto the compressor module.
JT9D-7R4D jet engine.”

They have an engine from Flight 11 and they don’t know it!

This is an edited excerpt from my e-book “9/11 Debris: An Investigation of Ground Zero” by Matt Nelson, updated Sept. 2016, pp. 153-155. Download is free. No ads. 59.6MB

A GE CF6-80C2 being assembled. Top part matches 9/11 engine. Also the top few inches of the halves being closed. Courtesy Vimeo: vimeo.com/91615119

---

Below at left, the engine that landed on Murray St. at Church St., belonging to the second plane, which hit Tower 2. (Match Naudet video frame from “9/11” and see NIST caption.) At right, what must have been pulled from the rubble of Tower 1, before Oct. 16 when the photo was taken. (FEMA News Photo)

Source: WABC Dub1, NIST FOIA 09-42: R25, 42A0108 – G25D1 

The third engine is somewhat of a mystery, having only been photographed at Fresh Kills Landfill a few times (Ex. 1., 2., 3.) before the 2011 FBI exhibit opened for the first time with the two engine parts, not including the one from Murray St.

From a video introducing the Newseum 2011 FBI exhibit.(YouTube)

At right, photo by Fred Robel, cropped and rotated to show matching features. Engine type is known by the photographer. At left, some of the shaft base torn from the compression module, holding part of the combustor and 2-stage high pressure turbine (HPT) destroyed on 9/11 (I’m no mechanic, so correct me if I’m wrong). See a museum’s JT9D open as above.

This would indicate the 9/11 engine part is in fact from the type used on N612UA, Flight 175. Unless, of course, the GE CF6 has an identical shaft base (email matt(at)911conspiracy.tv). To me, for now, it looks like the FBI got it right! This time.

---

The NTSB was at Ground Zero in a limited capacity at first. From 9/11 to 9/26 only 3 investigators were on site. From Sept. 27 to Oct. 4 there was 24 hour support, 14 NTSB investigators among the FBI command post, 3 camera sites at Ground Zero, and Fresh Kills, working 12 hour shifts. October 4 – 17: 24-hour landfill support, 2 NTSB investigators per shift. Oct. 18 – Dec. 1^st: One NTSB investigator per day. (“NTSB FOIA Appeal 2012-00001-A Nov 10 2011”)

During this time, however, they did not create any “documents regarding the identification of aircraft parts of the four aircraft that crashed on September 11, 2001.” (May 28, 2008 FOIA application to the NTSB by Elias Davidsson) What the hell were they doing while providing “technical assistance” to the FBI?

Carol Carmody (Vice-Chair of NTSB) is quoted as saying on Feb. 27, 2002, “I realized this was not likely to be an NTSB investigation…. [I]t was obvious the disasters were not accidents.” Regardless, FBI Director Mueller called and asked for some of her people to help find the black boxes [They weren’t found.] and to “help identify aircraft parts.” (https://app.ntsb.gov/news/speeches/ carmody/cc020227.htm) Carmody left out the part where [it logically follows] he said to refrain from identifying the planes with airlines’ records of aircraft registration numbers. It wouldn’t be necessary. Or, it’d be secret. (The airlines got sued even without that confirmation, and settled out of court. Even if they could have disputed the unauthenticated plane debris, they wouldn’t dare argue with the official 9/11 narrative, especially when Congress capped the airlines’ liability and gave the industry $5 billion cash and $10 billion in loans to “help stabilize the industry” only 10 days after 9/11. [Ed Epstein, “Congress OKs $15 billion plan to aid airlines / Bill includes loan guarantees, liability limits from hijackings,” sfgate.com, 9/22/2001, and Justin Bachman, “Why Two Airlines Are Still Fighting Lawsuits,” bloomberg.com, 7/19/2013])

The NTSB’s reply to Davidsson was that “the only records that the Safety Board possesses that are within the scope of your request are photographs taken shortly after the crashes at the [WTC] and the at the Pentagon [sic], a Video Data Impact Speed Study report, and a Debris Trajectory Study report for United Airlines flight 175.” (NTSB letter to Mr. Davidsson, June 12, 2008, from Elias Davidsson, Hijacking America’s Mind on 9/11: Counterfeiting Evidence, Algora Publishing, New York, 2013, p. 65)

Like the FBI told Aidan Monaghan about his FOIA request: “The identities of the airplanes hijacked in the September 11 attacks was [sic] never in question, and, therefore, there were no records generated….” (Amend Compl. Inj. Relief #15 at 1 from “F.B.I. Counsel: No Attempt Made By F.B.I. To Formally Indentify 9/11 Plane Wreckage,” visibility911.org3/28/2008, em. added.)

“Following a certain number of flying hours or, in the case of landing gears, a certain number of takeoff and landing cycles, [certain] critical parts are required to be changed, overhauled or inspected by specialist mechanics. When these parts are installed, their serial numbers are married to the aircraft registration numbers in the aircraft records and the plans and scheduling section will notify maintenance specialists when the parts must be replaced. If the parts are not replaced within specified time or cycle limits, the airplane will normally be grounded until the maintenance action is completed. Most of these time-change parts, whether hydraulic flight surface actuators, pumps, landing gears, engines or engine components, are virtually indestructible. It would be impossible for an ordinary fire resulting from an airplane crash to destroy or obliterate all of those critical time-change parts or their serial numbers.”

– Col. George Nelson, USAF (ret.), “Aircraft Parts and the Precautionary Principle,” http://physics911.net/georgenelson/

Col. Nelson “never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft.” (Nelson, Ibid.) Either the planes’ identities were discovered after 9/11 (good or bad) and kept quiet, with the processes all undocumented at both NTSB and FBI, or the ID effort was resisted and suppressed from the beginning, deemed “unnecessary” by those in charge. Why the resistance?

The planes were murder weapons. The ballistics tests were skipped on 9/11.