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 2004 Report on WTC 7 - Take out columns 79,80 and/or 81 and the whole building collapses!

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 02:22 PM
link   
In the NIST 2004 " preliminary " report, page L-51, it states;


The working hypothesis, for the collapse of the 47-story WTC 7, if it holds up upon further analysis,
would suggest that it was a classic progressive collapse that included:
• An initial local failure due to fire and/or debris induced structural damage of a critical column, which supported a large span floor area of about 2,000 ft2, at the lower floors (below Floor 14) of the building,
• Vertical progression of the initial local failure up to the east penthouse bringing down the interior structure under the east penthouse, and
• Horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of Floors 5 and 7 that were much thicker and more heavily reinforced than the rest of the floors), triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, resulting in disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.


Emphasis mine, but where has this " classic progressive collapse " ever happened before or since???

I believe the correct answer to this question is in ONLY in a controlled demolition.

The most profound thing I got out of this hypothesis is the fact that if someone WANTED to initiate a total collapse one would only have to perform the following;


A vertical collapse appears to have occurred after interior columns 79, 80, and/or 81 failed.


This vertical progression causes a horizontal progression which in turn causes total collapse. No need to wire the whole building with expolsives!

According to NIST's own hypothesis, it would be this easy. If this is so then wouldn't this answer questions like;

" If this was a controlled demolition then why didn't anybody find DET cord/blasting caps/etc. during the cleanup process?"

You can read the whole report here

And for those of you that state this building didn't fall into it's own footprint;


The debris of WTC 7 was mostly contained within the original footprint of the building. From aerial photos, the debris visible on top of the pile is mostly façade structure. This failure sequence suggests that the interior of the building collapsed before the exterior.


NIST does not agree with you. . .

How can anyone state that it would have been impossible for someone to have performed a CD on this building and not get caught when NIST is directly telling you how easy it could have been done?


2PacSade-


[edit on 7-8-2007 by 2PacSade]

spelling

[edit on 7-8-2007 by 2PacSade]




posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 05:23 PM
link   
WOW! 30 views & no response. . .

Even if columns 76, 77, & 78 were breached & contributed to the failure, ( which again we're only talking about six or less columns within the whole structure ), isn't it possible that a very concentrated effort could have been orchestrated to cause the building to totally collapse? According to the NIST report this is what compromised WTC 7 & caused total failure.



Don't you think it's strange that none of these six columns fell within the " kill zone " of the falling debris from WTC 1 by NIST's own account? They go to great lengths to state many scenarios would only cause localized damage in their 2004 report. Yet they are also very specific that only a unique chain of events right up front in the progression could result in the total collapse of WTC 7 videotaped on 911.

Maybe it's early still, but the silence is deafining! No comments?

2PacSade-


bad sentence!

[edit on 7-8-2007 by 2PacSade]



posted on Aug, 7 2007 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Yeah, what is a 'classic progressive collapse'?

And you're right, evidently, according to NIST, it would have been very easy to wire this building to come down............



new topics
 
0

log in

join