Trying to resolve 9/11

This pic provides some perspective on the relative size & location of WTC7:



(It's the reddish-brown building immediately behind the north tower)

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

There was no flight path to WTC 7 that would make such an attack feasible. This has a long history of being debated.

Flight 23 was scheduled to leave JFK airport in New York to go to Los Angeles.. It was about to take off when the attacks were ongoing and order was received to stop the flight.

It make perfect sense the target was WTC7

Never heard of flight 23, but it sounds to me like you are jumping to conclusions, as to how that flight is relevant.

a reply to: Salander

Flight 23
Never heard it as well, curious.

a reply to: Pilgrum

(It's the reddish-brown building immediately behind the north tower)

Yes it is
North, North-East, North-West is what?

a reply to: democracydemo

WTC 7 was just over 300 ft north of WTC 1 North Tower) , AKA about 1 football field away

WTC 1 was 1362 ft high

For a perceptive Fire departments use measure of 1.5 times building height to establish collapse zone around a threatened building

The collapse area around WTC would have been over 2000 feet in all directions

Debris from WTC 1 crossed West Side Highway - 8 lane road and damaged World Finance Center 3 - a distance of 600 feet

a reply to: democracydemo

United 23 was a scheduled flight out of JFK for Los Angles

It was supposed to take off at 830 am, but was delayed

While waiting chance to take off received test message from United flight dispatcher Ed Ballinger warning of multiple hijackings and to secure cockpits

Time was 912 AM

Shortly after all traffic at New York area airports was "ground stopped " - all aircraft waiting on taxiways ordered to
return to terminals

Here things get murky - when United 23 reached terminal, group of young "middle Eastern men" bolted from plane and
disappeared . later" suspicious items" were discovered relating to them

Nobody has been able to pin down these men , why they were there and if part of the conspiracy

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: democracydemo

United 23 was a scheduled flight out of JFK for Los Angles

It was supposed to take off at 830 am, but was delayed

While waiting chance to take off received test message from United flight dispatcher Ed Ballinger warning of multiple hijackings and to secure cockpits

Time was 912 AM

Shortly after all traffic at New York area airports was "ground stopped " - all aircraft waiting on taxiways ordered to
return to terminals

Here things get murky - when United 23 reached terminal, group of young "middle Eastern men" bolted from plane and
disappeared . later" suspicious items" were discovered relating to them

Nobody has been able to pin down these men , why they were there and if part of the conspiracy

Believing the conspiracy about WTC7 it's feasible it was the target for a strike. It solves the delay and why they did not bring it down till later in the evening. If a pilot can drop flight 77 to 50 feet or less he absolutely can reach WTC7. There plenty of room to hit it on the upper floors.

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

There was no flight path to WTC 7 that would make such an attack feasible. This has a long history of being debated.

Flight 23 was scheduled to leave JFK airport in New York to go to Los Angeles.. It was about to take off when the attacks were ongoing and order was received to stop the flight.

It make perfect sense the target was WTC7

Never heard of flight 23, but it sounds to me like you are jumping to conclusions, as to how that flight is relevant.

We have three buildings that we believe are controlled explosions.
We recognize there was another airplane on its way to New York!
WTC7 was constantly the odd one out because no plane hit it. 
Just make logical sense WTC7 was the expected target for flight 23 and the 4 hijackers who disappeared.

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: Salander

Flight 23
Never heard it as well, curious.

Watch the video, this all confirmed. ABC news did a short piece about it 10 years after 9/11. The stunning part really is how did they escape after 9/11? For me flight 23 is a smoking gun there was a conspiracy.
wjla.com...

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: Salander

Flight 23
Never heard it as well, curious.

Watch the video, this all confirmed. ABC news did a short piece about it 10 years after 9/11. The stunning part really is how did they escape after 9/11? For me flight 23 is a smoking gun there was a conspiracy.
wjla.com...

That terrorists backed by middle eastern interests were plotting to hijack a jet? No crap.

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: democracydemo

United 23 was a scheduled flight out of JFK for Los Angles

It was supposed to take off at 830 am, but was delayed

While waiting chance to take off received test message from United flight dispatcher Ed Ballinger warning of multiple hijackings and to secure cockpits

Time was 912 AM

Shortly after all traffic at New York area airports was "ground stopped " - all aircraft waiting on taxiways ordered to
return to terminals

Here things get murky - when United 23 reached terminal, group of young "middle Eastern men" bolted from plane and
disappeared . later" suspicious items" were discovered relating to them

Nobody has been able to pin down these men , why they were there and if part of the conspiracy

Believing the conspiracy about WTC7 it's feasible it was the target for a strike. It solves the delay and why they did not bring it down till later in the evening. If a pilot can drop flight 77 to 50 feet or less he absolutely can reach WTC7. There plenty of room to hit it on the upper floors.

Hello. The pentagon was surrounded by parking lots and lawns. What approach would allow a jet to hit WTC 7 only 50 feet off the ground?

Again...

Hitting WTC 7 would have required a much steeper dive from a jet to be on target for a building surround in Manhattan. The pentagon is something like 26 acres in size, and the pilot almost crashed on the lawn. There was nothing really precise about the bumpy flight that almost crashed short of its large target that was probably the tallest building in a mile or two radius.

With an open lawn around the pentagon. I don’t think there was an open lawn/space for WTC 7 like the pentagon.

I think the pentagon is 900 feet long per side.

WTC 7 was 330 feet on its longest side. One side of the pentagon was almost three times wider than the longest side of WTC 7. WTC 7 140 feet wide. The USS Ronald Reagan is 1000 feet long, 252 wide, and hard as hell to land on in the open sea. Now place the Ronald Reagan in the middle of the WTC and try to dive onto its deck at full throttle.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Sorry to puncture your conspiracy delusions

WTC 7 was 47 stories, 610 feet, it is ringed by buildings of over 40-50 stories, including WTC 1 and 2 before they collapsed

Map WTC on 911

www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/WTCdamagedBuildings.gif

WFC 1 40 stories 577 feet

WFC 2 44 stories 645 feet

WFC 3 51 stories 739 feet

MILLENIUM HILTON 55 stories 588 feet

DEUTSCHE BANK 39 stories 517 feet

VERIZON 32 stories 498 feet

1 LIBERTY PLAZA 55 stories 743 feet


These building are within yards of each other - trying to fly a plane into WTC 7 would be impossible

WTC 1 was struck from 94 to 98 stories WTC 2 from 78 to 84 Both over 1000 feet above street and hundreds of feet above surrounding building

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Speaking of bursted bubbles? Or maybe more accurately, rain on your parade....

You never did answer up to...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

By knocking out the fire alarms, you affect the water sprinkler system mostly likely. The conspirators would not want this fire going out before they brought it down.

How? Your totally clueless on how a building fire sprinkler system works.

Fire Sprinklers are Simple, Reliable and Proven
Fire sprinklers are very simple.
The sprinkler is just a plug that holds back water in a pipe similar to your other plumbing pipes.
Heat from a fire will break a glass tube or melt a solder plug which releases the water.
The water comes out as a spray that covers the area immediately around the sprinkler, putting out the fire.
Only the one sprinkler closest to the fire opens. All the other sprinklers remain sealed so the water is confined to just the area of the fire.

homefiresprinkler.org...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Speaking of bursted bubbles? Or maybe more accurately, rain on your parade....

You never did answer up to...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

By knocking out the fire alarms, you affect the water sprinkler system mostly likely. The conspirators would not want this fire going out before they brought it down.

How? Your totally clueless on how a building fire sprinkler system works.

Fire Sprinklers are Simple, Reliable and Proven
Fire sprinklers are very simple.
The sprinkler is just a plug that holds back water in a pipe similar to your other plumbing pipes.
Heat from a fire will break a glass tube or melt a solder plug which releases the water.
The water comes out as a spray that covers the area immediately around the sprinkler, putting out the fire.
Only the one sprinkler closest to the fire opens. All the other sprinklers remain sealed so the water is confined to just the area of the fire.

homefiresprinkler.org...

Many building active the sprinklers when smoke and fire is detected by the fire alarms. Once the fire reaches the ceiling (where the fire alarm is) the sprinklers break, open up and release water. Not all sprinklers perform the same way. You just google and paste what you find online and then pretend you know something!
The fact is the sprinklers did not active in the lower floors that only caused by fire alarm or pump failure or the fires did not reach ceiling level ( that's damning for NIST version) if fire failed to reach the height of the ceiling (where the beams and girder are!

originally posted by: firerescue
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Sorry to puncture your conspiracy delusions

WTC 7 was 47 stories, 610 feet, it is ringed by buildings of over 40-50 stories, including WTC 1 and 2 before they collapsed

Map WTC on 911

www.oilempire.us/oil-jpg/WTCdamagedBuildings.gif

WFC 1 40 stories 577 feet

WFC 2 44 stories 645 feet

WFC 3 51 stories 739 feet

MILLENIUM HILTON 55 stories 588 feet

DEUTSCHE BANK 39 stories 517 feet

VERIZON 32 stories 498 feet

1 LIBERTY PLAZA 55 stories 743 feet


These building are within yards of each other - trying to fly a plane into WTC 7 would be impossible

WTC 1 was struck from 94 to 98 stories WTC 2 from 78 to 84 Both over 1000 feet above street and hundreds of feet above surrounding building

An airplane can make its way to WTC7 and strike it. We have an aerial view and there least three positions the plane can hit t and successfully from the air. There no buildings in the way to stop a hit. 

Impossible? I think you just want to make excuses.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: Salander

Flight 23
Never heard it as well, curious.

Watch the video, this all confirmed. ABC news did a short piece about it 10 years after 9/11. The stunning part really is how did they escape after 9/11? For me flight 23 is a smoking gun there was a conspiracy.
wjla.com...

That terrorists backed by middle eastern interests were plotting to hijack a jet? No crap.

The 4 men were traveling to hijack a plane on 9/11 and no manhunt was ever launched  by the FBI!
THE 4 men only escaped the airport, they were nevertheless still in the country.
The bought plane ticket/boarding passes and settled in the US
It fact Al Qaeda material ( possible planted) was found in baggage for flight 23.
Thinking people- seek to why these guys face were not aired on official media news and how is it we still don't who they are?
Debunkers choose to reside in a safer world and believe their government would never shelter terrorists. Maybe they watched too many Hollywood movies?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Many building active the sprinklers when smoke and fire is detected by the fire alarms.

A lie by you. I cannot sugar coat this one. Name one fire system in production for office / apartment buildings that rely on a electrical signal from a fire alarm system to actuate. Sprinklers are plug type that rely on the plug melting, and independent of the fire alarm system.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Many building active the sprinklers when smoke and fire is detected by the fire alarms.

A lie by you. I cannot sugar coat this one. Name one fire system in production for office / apartment buildings that rely on a electrical signal from a fire alarm system to actuate. Sprinklers are plug type that rely on the plug melting, and independent of the fire alarm system.

Heat activates water sprinklers. Heat sets off a fire alarm. 
Smoke alarm warning would not trigger the sprinklers because it not heat detection system. 
How would the fire department be notified if was just water pouring out?
Deluge fire sprinkler is switched on by the fire alarm system.
Yes, your info is not wrong water sprinklers can be activated first with heat, and fire alarm does not automatically have to trigger it. Buit you wrong there only one way to set of water springlers!
Either way all we know is the sprinklers seemly did not work on 9/11.
They're merely two possibilities- the fire alarm/pumps stopped working. Or the fire never reached the ceiling to trigger the water springlers?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Name one residential/apparent/office building fire water sprinkler system that doesn’t actuate by a melting plug. Otherwise your totally wrong and full of BS.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

More importantly. Prove WTC 7 had a fire sprinkler system operated by fire alarm over melting plug.