It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: cestrup
a reply to: hellobruce
Really? Your tactics are too deliberate. Show me one video of a part of a jet from 9/11/01. They were all over the lawn - now show me.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: wmd_2008
I am glad your official story site was able to find something from one of those towers to spin, its funny they chose to focus on the concrete still standing. Didn't wtc have some concrete in it?
The Windsor Tower or Torre Windsor (officially known as Edificio Windsor) was a 32-storey concrete building with a reinforced concrete central core.
A typical floor was two-way spanning 280mm deep waffle slab supported by the concrete core, internal RC columns with additional 360mm deep steel I-beams and steel perimeter columns.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: wmd_2008
I never said they were designed the same, or that the concrete should have still been standing.
What I asked, Didn't wtc 7 have some concrete in it?
No sure where you get that I am comparing how they are built there.
Simply asking if the building contained similar materials as the other
If the building was just falling due to the one column failing, then would the existing concrete that was not weakened or damaged by the fire, offer some type of resistance to the building falling. If yes, then why did it not?
If no, well why would the concrete not?
Again, the NYFD said it burnt for 6 hours, but most the fires were beyond vision and there was not firefighters in the building since 11. The fires seen at the windows were not the fires that caused what we saw, I am sure you are aware of that.
So how do they know that they burned uncontrollably for 6 hours?
We can see what happened to the madrid tower, it is engulfed, no questioning that.
WTC 7 is not the case.
Perfect storm of fire that causes never seen before thermal expansion that cause the 1 column in the building that if fails will lead to a total destruction of the building, at free fall speed for 2.3 seconds and that landed almost in its own footprint.
Structural engineers do not traditionally consider fire as an actual load on the structural frame. What are we doing as an industry to allow this to happen? Seismic design relies on modelling, risk analysis and changes to the structural stiffness. Wind design relies on additional structural members and wind tunnel tests. Current fire design relies on very simple, single element tests and adding insulating material to the frame. Thermal induced forces are not calculated or designed for
You have to remember if a component of the structure is weakened that puts more load on other components.
originally posted by: cestrup
a reply to: wmd_2008
Would you care to show us steel trusses that have actually bent or "weakened" due to fire? Because I don't think any other building that is steel-framed has ever collapsed straight down to the ground, like a demolition, ever in the history of everdom. Oh, but 3 do in one day, supposedly. How many steel-framed buildings have burnt for longer than the towers? What was their outcome? And why are you so hell-bent on taking the side of authority? You do realize you could have been duped and lied to, right? There is that possibility. See, myself, I know that I can be wrong. Maybe 9/11 happened just the way they said. But I'm going to need more proof than they've given other than ridiculing anyone who dares to challenge their theories for collapse. When sane people step back and look at the events - it's rather easy to see that they don't add up.
originally posted by: Sremmos80
a reply to: wmd_2008
I wouldn't say truther logic dictates that you could take a pinto and win the daytona, but hey I am not one to crush anothers dream.
I think the better comparison would have been that they both burn in up in about the same time since they are both cars.
I know that not to be true, but you can use that next time you try that one.
I understand your point with the windsor tower, but just cause a part of that building failed due to fire, does not disprove the fact that other high rise buildings that were mainly steel
However, the Windsor Building, unlike all the buildings mentioned above, was framed in steel-reinforced concrete rather than steel. Hence it is described on a separate page, which notes differences between the response of these different types of structures to fires.
Assistant New York Fire Commissioner Stephen Gregory said: “I thought that when I looked in the direction of the Trade Center before it came down, before Number Two came down, that I saw low-level flashes. In my conversation with Lieutenant Evangelista, never mentioning this to him, he questioned me and asked if I saw low-level flashes in front of the building, and I agreed with him… I saw a flash-flash-flash, and then it looked like the building came down. … No, the lower level of the building. You know like when they demolish a building, how they blow up a building, when it falls down? That’s what I thought I saw.”
The NIST investigation of the WTC building failures was extensive, but NIST did not substantiate its conclusions experimentally. On the contrary, many of NIST’s tests contradicted its conclusions. Furthermore, there are several examples in which NIST chose to manipulate input data, and then certify its findings based upon the inevitable conclusions that derive from the manipulated input. One finds little acknowledgement on the part of NIST that uncertainties in its simulations translate into uncertainties in its findings.
The building totaled 32 story's, with 29 floors above ground and three below. A concrete core and concrete frame supported the first 16 floors.
Reinforced concrete was used in the core and under the 17th floor.
The reinforced concrete structure consists of perimeter columns connected by post-tensioned concrete “macroslabs” that are each 10 feet (3 meters) deep.
The boot-shaped high-rise has an exterior steel framework, much of which will be stripped away and rebuilt, and a concrete interior portion that can be salvaged.
The towers and building 7 were essentially bolted together like an erector set. No concrete was used to create a ridged block or protect the columns. The steel webbing was
pushed to the outer walls.
A challenge to conspiracy theorist:
1) Find a steel frame building at least 40 stories high
2) Which takes up a whole city block
3) And is a "Tube in a tube" design
4) Which came off its core columns at the bottom floors (Earthquake, fire, whatever - WTC 7)
5) Which was struck by another building or airliner and had structural damage as a result.
6) And weakened by fire for over 6 hours
7) which had trusses that were bolted on with two 5/8" bolts.
And after all seven tests are met the building didn't fall down.
Structural engineers do not traditionally consider fire as an actual load on the structural frame. What are we doing as an industry to allow this to happen? Seismic design
relies on modelling, risk analysis and changes to the structural stiffness. Wind design relies on additional structural members and wind tunnel tests. Current fire design relies on very
simple, single element tests and adding insulating material to the frame. Thermal induced forces are not calculated or designed for
The towers and building 7 were essentially bolted together like an erector set
NO building fire you can link to is the same as the events of 9/11 NONE.
originally posted by: wmd_2008
Another quick quote to SHOW what I was talking about REALLY IMPORTANT PARTS UNDERLINED FOR MEMBERS ON HERE NOT WORKING IN A TECHNICAL BASIS IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY.
Structural engineers do not traditionally consider fire as an actual load on the structural frame. What are we doing as an industry to allow this to happen? Seismic design relies on modelling, risk analysis and changes to the structural stiffness. Wind design relies on additional structural members and wind tunnel tests. Current fire design relies on very simple, single element tests and adding insulating material to the frame. Thermal induced forces are not calculated or designed for
More here if YOU can actually be bothered to read something not from a conspiracy site.
What is structural fire engineering
Arup Fire’s presentation regarding
tall buildings and the events of 9/11
It is our view that the National Institute of Standards and
Technology’s (NIST) report into the events of 9-11 is a critically
important document for tall building design worldwide.
Of course when comparing two situation/ products or senarios you HAVE to look at a like for like situation or what is the point of a comparison.
originally posted by: St Udio
originally posted by: Nochzwei
But off course the towers went to the same place as MH 370
Go Figure
the squads or cells of radical Muslim/Islamic pilots....(long since rare) are now on the ascendancy
the airlines & western economies do not want to admit that the pilots of MH370 were zealots intent on taking close to 300
Infidels to their death and the Martyrs to their glory and reward !
perhaps the 911 pilot squads are re-invigorated now... and many more such 'Mystery' flights are to follow #370