Just Wondering...

a reply to: randyvs

And look at the internal structure of an aircraft. There is a keel beam under the floor that is the strongest portion of the aircraft. It's like an I-beam laying on its side forming a huge battering ram.

There is so much mass behind an aircraft no building out there will stop it.

a reply to: Gh0stwalker

And another victim of disinformation makes their presence known. Welcome to the thread

a reply to: skyeagle409

Both pics seem a lot closer to what we should've seen
at the pentagon! One building looks to be made of
brick, run down and old. And the wall of that steel
building is tin siding fastened to one eighth in. gage
steel studs. but thanks for your help.

a reply to: seagull

The Pentagon? Maybe not. So, why would they not preposition a camera or twelve to be "coincidentally" in the area to record it? Yet, oddly, there weren't any... Strange that. A seemingly omnipotent organisation, such as many OS-deniers claim did this, forgot to have a camera crew in position? Seems unlikely.

Maybe the aircraft that hit the pentagon wasn't the one it was claimed to be.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

The scientific reality is, that there is simply no proof for weakened core columns due to pre-collapse fires.

Let's take a look here.

Towers Weakened by Planes; Brought Down by Fire

WASHINGTON, D.C., MAY 1, 2002

Analysis by a team of 25 of the nation's leading structural and fire protection engineers suggests that the World Trade Center Towers could have remained standing indefinitely if fire had not overwhelmed the weakened structures, according to a report presented today at a hearing of the House Science Committee. That finding is significant, said W. Gene Corley, Ph.D., team lead for the ASCE/FEMA Building Performance Study Team, because extreme events of this type, resulting in such substantial damage, are generally not considered in building design, and the fact that these structures were able to successfully withstand such damage is noteworthy.

Only a handful of architects and engineers question the NIST Report, but they have never come up with an alternative. Although at first blush it may seem impressive that these people don't believe the NIST Report, remember that there are 123,000 members of ASCE(American Society of Civil Engineers) who do not question the NIST Report. There are also 80,000 members of AIA(American Institute of Architects) who do not question the NIST Report.

911-engineers.blogspot.com...


Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief ’s Assessment

Bearing walls and Open floor design

When the jet liners crashed into the towers based upon knowledge of the tower construction and high-rise firefighting experience the following happened: First the plane broke through the tubular steel-bearing wall. This started the building failure. Next the exploding, disintegrating, 185-ton jet plane slid across an open office floor area and severed many of the steel interior columns in the center core area. Plane parts also crashed through the plasterboard-enclosed stairways, cutting off the exits from the upper floors.

The jet collapsed the ceilings and scraped most of the spray-on fire retarding asbestos from the steel trusses. The steel truss floor supports probably started to fail quickly from the flames and thecenter steel supporting columns severed by plane parts heated by the flames began to buckle, sag, warp and fail. Then the top part of the tower crashed down on the lower portion of the structure. This pancake collapse triggered the entire cascading collapse of the 110-story structure.

vincentdunn.com...


WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory

Indications of the Imminent Collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings Disprove Explosives Theory

www.represent...Explosives.html...


NYC Police Saw Sign of Tower Collapse, Study Says (Update2)

June 18 (Bloomberg) -- Federal engineering investigators studying the destruction of the World Trade Center's twin towers on Sept. 11 said New York Police Department aviation units reported an inward bowing of the buildings' columns in the minutes before they collapsed, a signal they were about to fall.

www.bloomberg......=top_world_news


The World Trade Center's Steel Structure Was Buckling Before the Collapse

Police, Firemen and Civilians Saw Warning Signs of Collapse of the Twin Towers on September 11th 2001

www.represent...xplosives2.html...



The Structural Engineering Community Rejects the Controlled-Demolition Conspiracy Theory

The structural engineering community rejects the controlled-demolition conspiracy theory. Its consensus is that the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings was a fire-induced, gravity-driven collapse, an explanation that does not involve the use of explosives.

The American Society of Civil Engineers Structural Engineering Institute issued a statement calling for further discussion of NIST's recommendations, and Britain's Institution of Structural Engineers published a statement in May 2002 welcoming the FEMA report, noting

The structural engineering faculty at the university issued a statement which said that they "do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones". On September 22, 2005, Jones gave a seminar on his hypotheses to a group of his colleagues from the Department of Physics and Astronomy at BYU. According to Jones, all but one of his colleagues agreed after the seminar that an investigation was in order and the lone dissenter came to agreement with Jones' suggestions the next day.

Northwestern University Professor of Civil Engineering Zdeněk Bažant, who was the first to offer a published peer-reviewed theory of the collapses, wrote "a few outsiders claiming a conspiracy with planted explosives" as an exception. Bažant and Verdure trace such "strange ideas" to a "mistaken impression" that safety margins in design would make the collapses impossible. One of the effects of a more detailed modeling of the progressive collapse, they say, could be to "dispel the myth of planted explosives".

Thomas Eagar, a professor of materials science and engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, also dismissed the controlled-demolition conspiracy theory. Eagar remarked, "These people (in the 9/11 truth movement) use the 'reverse scientific method.' They determine what happened, throw out all the data that doesn't fit their conclusion, and then hail their findings as the only possible conclusion."


Civil & Structural Engineers on WTC Collapse

"The aircraft moved through the building as if it were a hot and fast lava flow," Sozen says. "Consequently, much of the fireproofing insulation was ripped off the structure. Even if all of the columns and girders had survived the impact - an unlikely event - the structure would fail as the result of a buckling of the columns. The heat from an ordinary office fire would suffice to soften and weaken the unprotected steel. Evaluation of the effects of the fire on the core column structure, with the insulation removed by the impact, showed that collapse would follow whatever the number of columns cut at the time of the impact."

911-engineers.blogspot.com...

a reply to: Zaphod58

Okay. All of them got destroyed, do you realize the odds of that? But a pristine passport was found? Amazing!

a reply to: seagull

Some were

Specific Kawanishi E7K (ALF) or Yokosuka K5Y (WILLOW) were mostly wood covered with fabric

Used as Stealth KAmikaze - attacking at low level at twilight or night

Wood/Fabric construction gave poor radar returns

a reply to: Flatcoat

Maybe the aircraft that hit the pentagon wasn't the one it was claimed to be.

It was definitely American 77. You cannot switch such aircraft and not set off alarm bells. As an airframe expert and pilot, it would take me less than 30 minutes to identify a switched aircraft which would eventually identify the people involved.

a reply to: firerescue

Indeed some were. I'd actually forgotten about those aircraft. Thanks for the reminder....

The vast majority were, however, made primarily from aluminum. Some of the older ones might have wooden props, but even those were becoming very rare.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Tell me another instance where a fire completely destroyed a building to the point where it fell down free fall?

a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

All of them? There were four that weren't recovered in NYC. They had two buildings dropped on them.

Paper debris frequently survives crashes because it is lighter.

a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

Strange things happen during explosions.

I know you're attempting to imply that it was planted...but strange, even quirky things happen during chaotic events.

You do remember seeing all the paper debris raining down over a significant portion of downtown.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Where were the tailwinds from the planes? The noise? The sound would of been very loud in a downtown area.

Look how the nose supposedly goes all the way through the tower in the videos, then the screen completely blacks out to hide it. In live video we have a 6 second delay, giving someone enough time to key in an airplane.
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

a reply to: sophie87

Its not the materials......

It the speed (velocity) at which he material is accelerated too

Basic physics F (force) = 1/2 M (Mass) x V(velocity) Square

Double velocity = quadruple force

Given enough velocity a grain of sand packs same energy as hand grenade and does equivalent damage

a reply to: randyvs

Both pics seem a lot closer to what we should've seen
at the pentagon! One building looks to be made of
brick, run down and old. And the wall of that steel
building is tin siding fastened to one eighth in. gage
steel studs. but thanks for your help.

Not long ago, a private aircraft slammed into a hangar and caught fire. The fire eventually weakened the steel structure of the hangar which collapsed around the aircraft.

A fire does not need to be hot enough to melt steel to collapse a steel frame building and here is another example.

Case Study: The Kader Toy Factory Fire

A tragic industrial fire in Thailand has focused worldwide attention on the need to adopt and enforce state-of-the-art codes and standards in industrial occupancies.

The Building’s Structural Integrity

Probably the most notable difference between the Triangle and Kader fires is the effect they had on the structural integrity of the buildings involved. Even though the Triangle fire gutted the top three floors of the ten-storey factory building, the building remained structurally intact.

The Kader buildings, on the other hand, collapsed relatively early in the fire because their structural steel supports lacked the fireproofing that would have allowed them to maintain their strength when exposed to high temperatures.

A post-fire review of the debris at the Kader site showed no indication that any of the steel members had been fireproofed.

www.ilo.org...

a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

The Kader Toy Factory in Thailand. In regards to the WTC buildings, they did not fall at freefall speed, which is evident by the fact that dust plumes and debris are outpacing the collapse of those buildings.

a reply to: sophie87

The aircraft were clearly heard as they got closer. American 11 was heard echoing as it went overhead. The buildings also played a role in bouncing the sound around.

People keep claiming that's the nose, when there's no evidence that it was. An engine was found was found outside the building that would have left a similar trail as it exited the building, pushing air and smoke in front of it.

a reply to: Zaphod58

And what about the fact none of these planes were designed to fly at that speed at that altitude. No amount of mass from a plane of any size including the space shuttle would be capable of causing any of these buildings to crash and burn into a giant ball of dust.

a reply to: Zaphod58

We've been down this road before you and I Zaph. And you
notice I rarely dance the 911 hauls. Aside from the argument
being repititious and unproductive It seems to create hard
feelings. But I know a plane is not like unto a meteor or a
battering ram. And if the physics were as you claim the planes
should've just cut right thru the steel columns and we would see
noticable damage to the integrity immediately. That isn't what
we see at all, because that isn't what happened at all. No blue flame
no melting or even weakening of the steel core columns. The OS
is bogus.

www.youtube.com...
www.ae911truth.org... architects and engineers for 911 truth

Ok I'm off this topic for now. Peace.