NIST NCSTAR 1-2 states that landing gear from Flight 11 passed through WTC 1 and exited the south side at a speed of 105 mph, coming to rest at the corner of Recter and West. (1) See the diagram at the right.
NIST NCSTAR 1-2 states that in all of its simulations ---base case, less severe impact, and more severe impact---the landing gear stopped either inside the core or just outside the north side of the core. (2)
Update: I think I made a mistake - the models appear to say the landing gear was either stopped inside the core or just outside the other side of the core. My conclusion remains the same.
In no case did the landing gear pass through the core; in no case did the landing gear continue through workstations and other obstacles on the south side of WTC1; in no case did the landing gear pass through the external columns on the south side of WTC1.
How is it that a landing gear with initial velocity of 440 mph passed through external columns on both sides, and floors and offices on both sides, and also through the most massive part of the building, the core, and still maintained any velocity, let alone 105 mph?
Again, NIST's own models say that the landing gear stopping after passing through one wall of external columns and office space, either outside the core or partly into the core. See above update, and explanation in foot note (2). There is no way that the landing gear passed through the core, and then through offices, and the external wall on the other side.
It could not have. Even the much more massive starboard engine of the modeled Flight 175, which was traveling at a higher velocity than the modeled Flight 11, did not pass through the opposite side of WTC2 in any of the simulations of NIST NCSTAR 1-2. And the trajectory of the starboard engine did not pass through the core, the most massive part of the building! (3)
This landing gear could not have passed through WTC1 at all, let alone with the residual velocity of 105 mph necessary for it to land several blocks south of WTC1. (4)
Therefore, this landing gear could not have come from Flight 11.
Why is it there, and why is the government representing this to be the landing gear of Flight 11?
Ray Ubinger, Jim Scott, and Rosalee Grable have already pointed out the absurdity of this landing gear being found where it was, let alone in virtually intact condition.
NIST has shown how absurd this is in scientific terms, yet continue with the pretense that this landing gear is from Flight 11. (5)
I infer that this landing gear was planted at this location to cover up the fact that no plane hit the North Tower.
(1) NIST NCSTAR 1-2: Baseline Structural Performance and Aircraft Impact Damage Analysis of the World Trade Center Towers, pages 272, available online at http://wtc.nist.gov/oct05NCSTAR1-2index.htm
(2) NIST NCSTAR 1-2, p. 273. Update: NIST NCSTAR 1-2, p. 273 said that in all their simulations, all the landing gear was stopped "inside, or just outside, the core." I interpreted that to mean the landing gear either did not enter the core on the north side of the North Tower, or made it part way into the core. I think instead it means that in the simulations the wheel either did not exit the core or barely exited the core. The point is still the same, I think - the wheel would have lost most of its kinetic energy by the time it left the core, so how could it penetrate the external columns on the south side of the North Tower.
(3) NIST NCSTAR 1-2, p. 284. At a later date, I will discuss the starboard engine and other debris that did not pass through WTC2.
(4) The photograph is from NIST NCSTAR 1-2, p. 273. The same photograph is published in NIST NCSTAR1-5A, "Visual Evidence, Damage Estimates, and Timeline Analysis," p. 78, available online at http://wtc.nist.gov/oct05NCSTAR1-5index.htm
(5) Even NIST obliquely recognizes that this landing gear could not have passed through the core of WTC1. NIST NCSTAR 1-5 states: "Based on where it landed, it is considered likely that the wheel that landed on the corner of Rector and West Streets also passed through the core, although this conclusion is not as well supported as for the other wheel [found closer to WTC1 embedded in a panel section of external columns]. " NIST NCSTAR 1-5A, p. 78. Given the trajectory of the modeled Flight 11 which hit the building in dead center, the only alternative to the landing gear passing through the core is that the landing gear was planted in that location.