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.
NARRATOR: Before signing off on the design, Robertson and his team performed one last unprecedented safety check.
Leslie Robertson: One of my jobs was to look at all of the possible events that might take place in a highrise building. And of course there had been in New York two incidences of aircraft impact, the most famous one of course being on the Empire State Building. Now, we were looking at an aircraft not unlike the Mitchell bomber that ran into the Empire State Building. We were looking at aircraft that was lost in the fog, trying to land. It was a low-flying, slow-flying 707, which was the largest aircraft of its time. And so we made calculations, not anywhere near the level of sophistication that we could today. But inside of our ability, we made calculations of what happened when the airplane goes in and it takes out a huge section of the outside wall of the building. And we concluded that it would stand. It would suffer but it would stand. And the outside wall would have a big hole in it, and the building would be in place. What we didn't look at is what happens to all that fuel. And perhaps we could be faulted for that, for not doing so. But for whatever reason we didn't look at that question of what would happen to the fuel.
We were looking at aircraft that was lost in the fog, trying to land.
Originally posted by CaptainLazy
Nice find Howard. Kind of quietens the people who claim the towers would take 'multiple' collisions.
Originally posted by CaptainLazy
Kind of quietens the people who claim the towers would take 'multiple' collisions.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
The construction manager said that in his opinion the towers would be strong enough to take several impacts of 707s. He thought that the buildings were the strongest every built and that even multiple impacts wouldn't bring them down. That's where that claim comes from.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Originally posted by CaptainLazy
Kind of quietens the people who claim the towers would take 'multiple' collisions.
Don't mistake lack of debate for acquiescence. I see bsbray has already stated what I was thinking.
Originally posted by chissler
We were looking at aircraft that was lost in the fog, trying to land.
Not an airplane that was cruising at a smooth 500mph aiming straight at the towers filled with a full tank of fuel.
I am very open-minded on 9/11, I can understand the force of the impact was deffinately enough to cripple the building. This alone does not conclude anything in my mind, but it does leave me tangled in this web.
Ed: 600mph for the second tower.
[edit on 23-5-2006 by chissler]
I can understand the force of the impact was deffinately enough to cripple the building.
Originally posted by HowardRoark
I don't think that it burned up all that quickly.