Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Probably The worst Towers Ever Constructed

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Nelson Rockefeller was elected governor of New York in 1959. Along with his brother David, they were the driving force in planning and funding the build of the Towers.

The project managers Austin Tobin and Guy Tozzoli fired the original architects and replaced them with Minoru Yamasaki from Japan.

When the bids for the steel where put out to tender only two firms submitted tenders for the work, they were U.S. Steel: $122 million Bethlehem Steel: $118 million, both bids where claimed to be expensive.
The 2nd round of tenders began and only 1 small firm submitted a further tender.

The name of the firm was The Karl Koch Erecting Company their bid of $20 million was accepted.

You have to ask how is it possible that a small Bronx family run business can outbid Big Steel to the tune of 100 million without cutting corners.

It has been said that Rockefeller knew that the Twin Towers would have a very short life span so why go crazy with small details like structural integrity.

I challenge anybody to the following.

In this thread www.abovetopsecret.com... bsbray provides a graphic showing the sides of the external columns to be in places 2.5 inches thick, the columns in that graphic show the column is made up of 4 seperate plates.

Find an external column (14x14aprox) made with 4 plates of steel with the sides being 2.5 inches thick.

For over a week(off/on) i have tried to find one, all i can find is this.

I find the external columns are made of 2 plates of steel, 1 plate has been folded during fabrication to form a [ section, the other plate has been fixed (weld) across the open end of the [ section thus forming the box section.
My estamate for the thickness for the steel used is around 6mm.

Goodluck if you accept the challenge.





8661





[edit on 25-3-2007 by Rotator]

[edit on 25-3-2007 by Rotator]




posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 11:42 AM
link   
It is interesting to note that, besides the WTC, The Karl Koch Erecting Company has built several US government buildings.


In addition to the World Trade Center, his "little company that could" constructed some of the nation’s most notable edifices, including the US Senate Chambers Building of the Capital, US Supreme Court, Library of 85 Congress, US Department of Commerce...

www.ruskinmoscou.com...



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 11:52 AM
link   
And guess who cleaned up the WTC afterwards.


One of Koch Skanska's (then Karl Koch Erecting) contracts was the construction of the World Trade Center's steel frames in 1967–1971. Koch Skanska also participated in the clearing of its debris in 2001.

en.allexperts.com...



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 12:50 PM
link   
INWT, great find! Oh well, it's probably just a coincidence....NOT!!!
Was this guy any relation to former NY mayor, Ed Koch? Anyone know?



Originally posted by In nothing we trust
And guess who cleaned up the WTC afterwards.


One of Koch Skanska's (then Karl Koch Erecting) contracts was the construction of the World Trade Center's steel frames in 1967–1971. Koch Skanska also participated in the clearing of its debris in 2001.

en.allexperts.com...



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Rotator,

There's an enormous elephant lurking in the premise of your post. You forgot to mention the core of the towers. I'm sure it was an oversight.


The external columns were not the primary load-bearing structure of the towers; the 47 columns of the central core was.

The external columns provide stability and flexion, but do little to hold up the actual structure. This is why the pancake theory is laughable; you'd still have the massive core left standing like a spindle and a stack of old LPs.

BTW, here's what the core looked like:

files.abovetopsecret.com...

Construction plans have purposely been withheld from the public so that the the misconception has arisen that the exterior columns actually bore the weight of the structures. Not so:


The core columns were steel box-columns that were continuous for their entire height, going from their bedrock anchors in the sub-basements to near the towers' tops, where they transitioned to H-beams. Apparently the box columns, more than 1000 feet long, were built as the towers rose by welding together sections several stories tall. The sections were fabricated by mills in Japan that were uniquely equipped to produce the large pieces. 2

Some of the core columns apparently had outside dimensions of 36 inches by 16 inches. Others had larger dimensions, measuring 52 inches by 22 inches. 3 The core columns were oriented so that their longer dimensions were perpendicular to the core structures' longer, 133-foot-wide sides. Construction photographs found at the Skyscraper Museum in New York City indicate that the outermost rows of core columns on the cores' longer sides were of the larger dimensions. Both the FEMA's World Trade Center Building Performance Study and the NIST's Draft Report on the Twin Towers fail to disclose the dimensions of the core columns, and the NIST Report implies that only the four core columns on each core's corners had larger dimensions.

Like the perimeter columns -- and like steel columns in all tall buildings -- the thickness of the steel in the core columns tapered from bottom to top. Near the bottoms of the towers the steel was four inches thick, whereas near the tops it may have been as little as 1/4th inch thick. The top figure in the illustration to the right is a cross-section of one of the smaller core columns from about half-way up a tower, where the steel was about two inches thick. The bottom figure shows the base of one of the larger core columns, where the steel was five inches thick. The bases of the columns also had slabs of steel running through their centers, making them almost solid.


More about the core they want you to forget here.

Mod Edit: Image Size – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 25/3/2007 by Mirthful Me]

[edit on 25-3-2007 by gottago]

[edit on 25-3-2007 by gottago]



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 02:27 PM
link   
gottago read www.abovetopsecret.com... and you will see why i have no need to enter the core. You will also find out the outer columns carried a great load.

The outer tube was the worst outer tube ever constructed, add that to the inner tube (core) and you have probably the the worst towers ever constructed.

[edit on 25-3-2007 by Rotator]



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rotator

The outer tube was the worst outer tube ever constructed, add that to the inner tube (core) and you have probably the the worst towers ever constructed.

[edit on 25-3-2007 by Rotator]

Yup, its amazing they stood as many years as they did huh?

Surprising they withstood the 1975 fire that consumed the 11th floor.
Surprising they withstood the addition of a 360 foot television tower in '78.
Surprising they withstood the '96 bombings without simply crumbling to the basement like you would expect from 'probably the worst towers ever constructed'.



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11Bravo
Yup, its amazing they stood as many years as they did huh?

Surprising they withstood the 1975 fire that consumed the 11th floor.
Surprising they withstood the addition of a 360 foot television tower in '78.
Surprising they withstood the '96 bombings without simply crumbling to the basement like you would expect from 'probably the worst towers ever constructed'.


I'm surprised they didn't crumble thier own weight sooner. The slightest wind should have toppled those buildings much earlier. Look how they just came apart at the seams in record time.

Definatly poor construction practices.

[edit on 25-3-2007 by In nothing we trust]



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by In nothing we trust
I'm surprised they didn't crumble thier own weight sooner. The slightest wind should have toppled those buildings much earlier. Look how they just fell apart at the seams in record time.
[edit on 25-3-2007 by In nothing we trust]


Nothing compared to the hot air the towers have had to endure 'post mortem'



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 06:43 PM
link   
So, is the conspiracy now that the towers were poorly built?



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by esdad71
So, is the conspiracy now that the towers were poorly built?


Defective manufacuring practices, shoddy workmanship, terrible design and poorly engineered.


The whole damn thing just fell apart like a house of cards in a windstorm.

Even the penatgons one reinforced wall, that flight 77 penatrated, demonstarted how ineffective blast shielding actually works. Flight 77 almost destroyed the entire wedge that the accounting dept, that was investigating trillions of dollars in lost penatgon funds, was located in. Definatly poor construction practices there as well.

[edit on 25-3-2007 by In nothing we trust]



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rotator
When the bids for the steel where put out to tender only two firms submitted tenders for the work, they were U.S. Steel: $122 million Bethlehem Steel: $118 million, both bids where claimed to be expensive.
The 2nd round of tenders began and only 1 small firm submitted a further tender.

The name of the firm was The Karl Koch Erecting Company their bid of $20 million was accepted.


Forgive me if I am wrong here, but both Bethlehem and US are steel mills and Koch Erecting is merely a company that builds the framework of the structures. So you have two quotes for the steel suppliers close to each other and one for the actual building. I don't think anyone could sell that much steel for roughly 20% of the cost unless they were paying the owners to build it for them.



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 07:20 PM
link   
"Probably the worst towers ever constructed"...

That has to be one of the most retarded comments about the WTC i have EVER heard.

The outside columns did not take the majority of the load. they were likened to a mosquito net, where you could poke many holes in it, and have no real impact on the functioning of the whole. The core columns on the other hand, took the majority of the load.



Look at the size of the core. It practically IS the tower by itself! And to think, fire and a plane impact managed to damage the core so badly it collapsed completely to the ground...twice!



posted on Mar, 25 2007 @ 08:18 PM
link   
Yeah.

Now The Rockefeller Bankerfamily provides new Information for Debunking 911 "Conspiracy" theories by the explanation of cheap metal construction?

Lmao. How ironic



posted on Mar, 26 2007 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rotator
The project managers Austin Tobin and Guy Tozzoli fired the original architects and replaced them with Minoru Yamasaki from Japan.



I don't understand why you mention this.....

Minoru Yamasaki, is an architect.
[layman]He designs the clothing for the body.[/layman]

Leslie E. Roberston, is the structural engineer for the WTC's.
[layman] He designs the bones of the body.[/layman]

en.wikipedia.org...



[edit on 26-3-2007 by Hidden Truth]



posted on Mar, 26 2007 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by In nothing we trust
I'm surprised they didn't crumble thier own weight sooner. The slightest wind should have toppled those buildings much earlier.


this is some of the most ridiculous piece of misleading speculation I have read on here in a long, long time. 'The slightest wind'? Do you realize the daily wind shear forces exerted on these buildings?

This kind of crap makes me want to



posted on Mar, 26 2007 @ 07:56 AM
link   
I’m with you on this one Pootie, what a load of.......





posted on Mar, 26 2007 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pootie

Originally posted by In nothing we trust
I'm surprised they didn't crumble thier own weight sooner. The slightest wind should have toppled those buildings much earlier.


this is some of the most ridiculous piece of misleading speculation I have read on here in a long, long time. 'The slightest wind'? Do you realize the daily wind shear forces exerted on these buildings?

I believe INWT is joking, as am I.
Calling the WTC 'probably the worst towers ever constructed' appears to be a futile attempt at dismissing serious questions surrounding the bizzare collapse of the two tallest buildings in America.



posted on Mar, 26 2007 @ 09:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by 11Bravo
I believe INWT is joking, as am I.


My bad... somtimes it is hard for me to pick up on sarcasm on in text. Sorry bro.



posted on Mar, 26 2007 @ 09:18 AM
link   
11Bravo's right, that was sarcasm. The best way to dismiss such nonsense.

A modest proposal: since this thread has such a preposterous, ill-founded proposition as its basis, instead of continuing the turkey shoot, how about letting this be the last post?

RIP






top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join