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.
NIST Report pg. 39
In this way, the local elevators within a zone were placed on top of one another within a common shaft. Local elevators serving the lower portion of a zone were terminated to return to the space occupied by those shafts to leasable tenant space.
NIST report page 61
The elevators were equipped through normal modernization with fire service recall. Most were damaged by the aircraft impacts;
Originally posted by Valhall
No, no pwn. This isn't a pissing contest. This is (or at least it should be) an attempt to discuss the FACTS. So, no, I'm not going to accept a news article written by journalists as a superior source to the specifications and the NIST report about the configuration of the elevators in the building. The government, via FEMA and the NIST has requested (via my tax dollars and their endorsement) that I accept the NIST final report as the authoritative statement on why the towers collapsed so I'm pretty much stuck with using them for the facts of the tower configuration, else we have nothing to discuss here.
[edit on 11-7-2006 by Valhall]
Originally posted by LeftBehind
If one elevator went down that far, then more elevators also went down that far, and while the elevators did not go to the upper floors, the shafts did.
Originally posted by LeftBehind
Again, why did Rodgrizuez smell fuel if it was impossible for jet fuel to make it to the basement?
Originally posted by LeftBehind
If one elevator went down that far, then more elevators also went down that far, and while the elevators did not go to the upper floors, the shafts did.
"The other primary obstacle to be overcome in the skyscraper is the elevator system, and Yamasaki has shown himself equally imaginative here. A combination of express and local elevator banks, called a skylobby system, it is particularly efficient because it requires fewer elevator shafts—thus freeing approximately 75 percent of the total floor area for occupancy; had a conventional elevator arrangement been adopted, only approximately 50 percent would have been available. The building has three vertical zones; express elevators serve skylobbies at the forty-first and seventy-fourth floors; from these, and from the plaza level, four banks of local elevators carry passengers to each of the three zones."
Originally posted by ANOK
Have you ever been in a building like the WTC? It's obvious the shafts are not open all the way up the building.
Originally posted by LeftBehind
Originally posted by ANOK
Have you ever been in a building like the WTC? It's obvious the shafts are not open all the way up the building.
It's obvious, or you have something to back this up?
Saying something is obvious is merely an arrogant way of stating your opinion.
The NIST report clearly states that elevators were stacked in the same shafts. With all of the elevators grouped together in the core, they would have to be.
While it may be obvious to you Anok, it is still not correct.
Truth,
that image is not to be taken literally, it is merely an example of how the elevators ran in zones.
"The other primary obstacle to be overcome in the skyscraper is the elevator system, and Yamasaki has shown himself equally imaginative here. A combination of express and local elevator banks, called a skylobby system, it is particularly efficient because it requires fewer elevator shafts—thus freeing approximately 75 percent of the total floor area for occupancy; had a conventional elevator arrangement been adopted, only approximately 50 percent would have been available. The building has three vertical zones; express elevators serve skylobbies at the forty-first and seventy-fourth floors; from these, and from the plaza level, four banks of local elevators carry passengers to each of the three zones."
NIST report
NIST Report pg. 39
In this way, the local elevators within a zone were placed on top of one another within a common shaft. Local elevators serving the lower portion of a zone were terminated to return to the space occupied by those shafts to leasable tenant space.
Originally posted by LeftBehind
I already did truth.
NIST report
NIST Report pg. 39
In this way, the local elevators within a zone were placed on top of one another within a common shaft. Local elevators serving the lower portion of a zone were terminated to return to the space occupied by those shafts to leasable tenant space.
Some had shared shafts, some did not. Most of them were damaged by the impact, so most of them were affected throught the elevator shafts that ran through.
Originally posted by TruthSeekerMP
Which clearly shows there is one elevator shaft that runs the full length of both WTC 1 & 2.
Originally posted by bsbray11
The question is not how many elevators went to the lobby! It's how many went FROM THE IMPACT FLOORS, TO THE BASEMENTS.
Only one did: the main freight, 50A, and it did not collapse to the basements, and it was not rocked by an FAE, and its operator survived.
Originally posted by TruthSeekerMP
Which clearly shows there is one elevator shaft that runs the full length of both WTC 1 & 2.
This is an express elevator that went only to the lobby. The main freight isn't shown there.
Originally posted by LeftBehind
Originally posted by ANOK
Have you ever been in a building like the WTC? It's obvious the shafts are not open all the way up the building.
It's obvious, or you have something to back this up?
Saying something is obvious is merely an arrogant way of stating your opinion.
The NIST report clearly states that elevators were stacked in the same shafts. With all of the elevators grouped together in the core, they would have to be.
Originally posted by LeftBehind
Originally posted by ANOK
Have you ever been in a building like the WTC? It's obvious the shafts are not open all the way up the building.
It's obvious, or you have something to back this up?
Originally posted by bsbray11
It really can't even be debated.