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.
Originally posted by jfj123
Between he 24+ posts, vibrational damage of the structure, fires, etc... of course that would be alot of damage to the buildings.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
3. No according to NIST. The model for the towers state that the planes impacts and the fires did not take out enough collums to cause the collaspe.
This is the final report on the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) investigation of the collapse of the World Trade Center (WTC) towers, conducted under the National Construction Safety Team Act. This report describes how the aircraft impacts and subsequent fires led to the collapse of the towers after terrorists flew jet fuel laden commercial airliners into the buildings;
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by jfj123
Between he 24+ posts, vibrational damage of the structure, fires, etc... of course that would be alot of damage to the buildings.
So tell me was the NIST model wrong then when it stated the planes and fires did not damage enough collums to casue a collapse?
Originally posted by moonking
That's Not what I'm getting from NIST or FEMA
Originally posted by jfj123
Look at it this way. If the planes never hit the buildings, then they would still be standing there today.
Originally posted by cloakndagger
The mass of the aluminum grew because of the speed the aircraft was going.
Originally posted by cloakndagger
The mass of the aluminum grew because of the speed the aircraft was going. The faster something goes the greater the mass. It's weired but it's physics. So basically the aluminums density increased to something greater then that of the steel used in the WTC. People could not believe a piece of foam could go through the space shuttles wing but it did because of speed(velocity).
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So is NIST contridicting their earlier report?
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
No NIST along with most other reports state the buildings witstood the planes impacts and would have kept standing.
The planes impacts were not a cause of the collapse.
Originally posted by ben91069
Originally posted by cloakndagger
The mass of the aluminum grew because of the speed the aircraft was going. The faster something goes the greater the mass. It's weired but it's physics. So basically the aluminums density increased to something greater then that of the steel used in the WTC. People could not believe a piece of foam could go through the space shuttles wing but it did because of speed(velocity).
I think what you mean you are referring to is momentum, because the mass of the aircraft remained constant, and we can assume its velocity was constant at the moment of impact. You can generally figure out the total force of impact using the second law of motion, then simply figure out the total square inches of the front profile of the plane. Simplify this to one square inch and it will yield a rough average of the pressure exerted by the total mass of the plane. This is the simple version but it will get you some idea of the pressure exerted at impact.
Originally posted by canadude
I've been out of school too long, but Newtons second law of motion is:
Force = Mass x Acceleration. Since Mass is always constant, the force of impact will increase only if the plane accelerates?
Originally posted by Disclosed
Any damage caused by the plane impact, debris, or fuel, did not contribute to the collapse?
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by moonking
That's Not what I'm getting from NIST or FEMA
So is NIST contridicting their earlier report?
Originally posted by jfj123
Look at it this way. If the planes never hit the buildings, then they would still be standing there today.
No NIST along with most other reports state the buildings witstood the planes impacts and would have kept standing.
The planes impacts were not a cause of the collapse.
[edit on 25-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]
[edit on 25-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by cloakndagger
The mass of the aluminum grew because of the speed the aircraft was going.
But it is still made of aluminum and steel will shred the aluiminum.
According to all reports the builidngs witstood the impacts of the planes.
[edit on 25-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]
Originally posted by canadude
Originally posted by ben91069
Originally posted by cloakndagger
The mass of the aluminum grew because of the speed the aircraft was going. The faster something goes the greater the mass. It's weired but it's physics. So basically the aluminums density increased to something greater then that of the steel used in the WTC. People could not believe a piece of foam could go through the space shuttles wing but it did because of speed(velocity).
I've been out of school too long, but Newtons second law of motion is:
Force = Mass x Acceleration. Since Mass is always constant, the force of impact will increase only if the plane accelerates?
Possibly what the poster is referring to is
2
E=MC
Energy=Mass*speed of light - squared
So the mass of an object actually increases, the faster the object goes requiring an increase in energy to move the mass until at 99.99% the speed of light where the mass of the object becomes infinite.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Originally posted by Disclosed
Any damage caused by the plane impact, debris, or fuel, did not contribute to the collapse?
Most reports state that the buildings withstood the planes impacts and would have kept standing. Evidence also suggest the fires did not burn long enough or get hot enough to cause the collapse.
Also data from NASA showed thermal hotspots in the debris field.
Since Mass is always constant, the force of impact will increase only if the plane accelerates?
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Most reports state that the buildings withstood the planes impacts and would have kept standing. Evidence also suggest the fires did not burn long enough or get hot enough to cause the collapse.
The fires were not hot enough to melt steel and it was buring out before the towers collapsed, yet there was molten steel in the basements of the buildings and steel was kept molten in the debris for several weeks.
Also data from NASA showed thermal hotspots in the debris field.