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.

 

Jet Fuel Made the WTC Fires Cooler

page: 3
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by six
The signs outside the building dont point to the fires going out.


Well i have to disagree that the signs inside and outside do point to the fires going out.

Firemen who made it to the 78th floor of the South tower reported only small isoloted fires, no large jet fuel fires or big inferno that the official story speaks of.

There were no signs of large flames coming out the windows outside the buildings before the collapse.

Also i have to ask, what caused the molten steel in the debis fields if the fires were not hot enough or burn long enough to melt steel?

EDIT: How did oxygen get through the tons of debris to keep the fires hot enough to melt steel up to 6 weeks later?



[edit on 4-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]




posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 04:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by six
The reason for the site being so hot for so long after the collapse was the fact that the fires were still burning when the buildings collapsed. When that happened you gave the fires access to more fuel, and put a "insulating" barrier on top of what was burning.


Question:

How did the fire go from the 80th-90th floor, fall along with the 80th-90th floor (remember that this is what suppossedly crushed the rest of the building) and ended up in the bottom of the plie?

That doesn't make sense no matter which way the government wants to spin it.


six

posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 

Thats where the reading the smoke part comes in. Did you even read the link? When the plane hit, it bulldozed the contents to the center of the building. Just becasue you dont see flames , dosent mean there are none. Read the smoke.
As for oxygen to the pile. There could be several sources. First when you remove debris, you expose more and more of the pile to oxygen. Voids, spaces, "tunnels" (for lack of a better term) in the pile, sewers, subway tunnels, tunnels for utilities. Will those do for O2 supply?

78th floor was a mechanical floor, at the bottom end of the impact area. Two small fires there is not indicative of what is going on the floors above. We have covered this time and time again.

[edit on 4-12-2007 by six]

[edit on 4-12-2007 by six]


six

posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


Fire will move up wards following the heat. But if it has nowhere else to go, it will start to move downward. It will go where there is food. Think of it this way. How many houses or apartments have you seen on the news that have had a fire start in the attic by some means such as lightning. It will, of course, burn the roof off. Well after it burns the roof off, it simply wont just go out simply because the is no fuel above it. It will burn downward. It takes alot longer for fire to burn down than up. Same with the wild fires. They just dont burn the uphill side. They burn the down hill side too, just more slowly. Thats one of the places where you try and again a advantage over a wild land fire.



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by six
78th floor was a mechanical floor, at the bottom end of the impact area. Two small fires there is not indicative of what is going on the floors above. We have covered this time and time again.


But you never answer about what happened to the large amount of jet fuel that was supposed to have gone down the elevator shafts to the other floors?

Why didn't the firemen report thses big jet fuel fires that the official story keeps talking about setting the lower floors on fire?


[edit on 4-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]


six

posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


I never said that there were large jet fuel fires anywhere else. If there were, could not the fuel have bypassed the 78th floor? I know, unequivocally, that those two firefighters did not search each and every floor on their way up stairs. That would have been physically impossible for just two guys in full protective clothing with airpack.


six

posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 05:09 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 

My apologies..Double post


[edit on 4-12-2007 by six]



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 05:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by six
I never said that there were large jet fuel fires anywhere else. If there were, could not the fuel have bypassed the 78th floor?


But the official story does state that jet fuel ran down the elevator shafts and set lower floors on fire.

So please explain how several units of firemen missed the big jet fuel fires in the building?



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by six
 



I'm not talking about fire moving up or down. What I'm talking about is that the fire would have been on the top of the debris pile (relatively speaking of course). How did it burn through this large amount of insulation to get trapped by the insulation?

Or is it more feasible to consider that there were fires at the bottom to begin with?


six

posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 05:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


Two guys dont make several units. This will be a educated guess because I was not there and cannot speak for them but... They were on their way up to the floors that they knew to be on fire. They would have had no reason to search every floor. Probably would not have even suspected fire on the floors below. They were recon. Their mission was to get to the impact floors and give a report. Other units, way later in the incident, had it progressed that far, would have done the primary and secondary searches of the floors not involved. You try to save the people on the floors above the fire, because fire moves upwards, AND the people on the floor just below the fire. Those would have been the areas searched first.


six

posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


I think we are talking about the same thing..I may not have explained it very well. My apologies. With the insulating pile on the top, and debris removal going on almost from the first hours, the fires would have moved downwards seeking fuel. With the debris removal removing the fuel from the top, the fire was forced to go down. The reports state the pile was hot for 100+ days. I think it started on the impact floors and moved down. Think of the fire as a living, breathing thing that need food. Its going to go where the food is.


[edit on 4-12-2007 by six]



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
But the official story does state that jet fuel ran down the elevator shafts and set lower floors on fire.

So please explain how several units of firemen missed the big jet fuel fires in the building?


The 911 commission report points you to the answers to your questions:

www.9-11commission.gov...


31. For fire in the 77th floor elevator and damage to the 22nd floor, see Commission analysis of 911/PAPD calls; Port Authority transcripts of recorded Port Authority calls and radio channels, Sept. 11, 2001, vol. II, channel 8, p. 4 (22nd floor). For a fireball in the lobby, see PAPD interview 1,WTC Command (Oct. 14, 2003); Civilian interview 14 (Apr. 7, 2004). Burning jet fuel descended at least one elevator bank. FDNY interview 4, Chief (Jan. 8, 2004). For the roofs being engulfed and the winds, see, e.g., NYPD interview 16,Aviation (Apr. 1, 2004).



posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 06:16 PM
link   
Poorly ventilated fires actually give higher temps in the rooms involved under lab tests. So even if you're right about poor ventilation, it hurts the CT case..

www.mace.manchester.ac.uk...

Fire tests were conducted in compartments where the fire load and the natural ventilation were varied. The well ventilated compartments experienced lower temperatures and fires of shorter duration. In Figure 2 the numbers identified with each curve indicate the fire load density in kg/m2 (ie 60, 30 or 15) and the ventilation area as a proportion of the façade area (ie ½ or ¼).

And a graph to accompany that:

www.mace.manchester.ac.uk...


six

posted on Dec, 4 2007 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


Here is a idea about fires on the lower floors. If enough jet fuel flowed down the stair wells, it could have caused fires down on the lower floors. The fuel itself does not burn, the fuel vapors burn. This is true for both solids and liquids. At the fire floors and just below, the vapors were too rich too burn. Depending on how much fuel there was, would be how far down the fireball would have gone. At some point the vapors would have leaned out enough to get to the upper explosive limit, thus you would have the possibility of a huge fire ball along way from the intial fire floors, again depending on the amount of fuel that flowed downward. Now for the fire to have spread to the lower floors in this fashion, there would have to have been some sort of access to these lower floors, ie open stairwell doors, elevator doors etc. Where ever the fuel vapors had expanded too before reaching the upper explosive limit, is where the fireball would have spread too. This might be the answer to your question.

As I read this it seems a bit disjionted to me...but I think gets my point across. If not, I will fix in the morning. I have to get some sleep...lol...crappy day/night at work yesterday, no sleep today....sigh I am tired.



posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 03:23 AM
link   
reply to post by six
 


That makes sense. I have heard the "think of fire as living" before. Thanks for the info.



posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 03:54 AM
link   
one thing id like to add is that when people hear that these fires "burned" for 100+ days under the debris, that doesnt mean open flames by any means. think cigarette. smoldering really.


and has anyone done any tests like making a pile of old computer parts (monitors keyboards) carpet paper etc etc and lit them on fire and just observing what color the smoke is under various O2 conditions?

think that may provide a clue or two



posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damocles
one thing id like to add is that when people hear that these fires "burned" for 100+ days under the debris, that doesnt mean open flames by any means. think cigarette. smoldering really.


Actually, I've read several times that the hottest pockets were closed off and only flared up into flames when they were open and oxygen rushed in.


six

posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 04:38 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


That is basically a backdraft. The pockets were recieving just enough O2 to stay hot and smouldering, but not enough to out right burn. When O2 was introduced, thats when the flare ups occurred.



posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 05:04 PM
link   
I was thinking about this today.

Anyone who smokes cigarettes can verify what I'm about to say.

On windy days, your cig doesn't burn even. The side that is facing the wind actually doesn't burn at all while the side shielded from the wind burns faster and you get an uneven burn.

Just some thoughts I've been having.



posted on Dec, 5 2007 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by six
That is basically a backdraft. The pockets were recieving just enough O2 to stay hot and smouldering, but not enough to out right burn. When O2 was introduced, thats when the flare ups occurred.


But what doesn't add up is that there are also testimonies of beams being pulled out that are molten on the ends, which shouldn't happen from any fire, let alone an oxygen-starved one. And the heat in general was pretty enormous for being oxygen-starved, wasn't it? The surface temperatures in the first few days were hundreds of degrees Celsius. It makes me wonder if there wasn't another reaction going on, or if a reaction gave off unbelievable amounts of heat energy during the collapses that took forever to dissipate and aided fires and other reactions that "enjoy" lots of heat.


Just a source if anybody wants one for the molten beam being pulled up:


But by the time O'Toole started working at Ground Zero full time in January, heavy equipment was being used to haul away wreckage. Before a truck could leave to take its load to a barge, bound for the Fresh Kills landfill in Staten Island, the cargo would be placed in a "rake field" where firefighters worked like archeologists, searching for fragments of bones.

At the site, O'Toole's job has mostly involved handling logistics -- taking water to fellow workers, shuttling tools back and forth, getting more lights on rake fields. "I've done everything down here," O'Toole said. "I've been a tour guide, funeral director, counselor, exhumer."

Underground fires raged for months. O'Toole remembers in February seeing a crane lift a steel beam vertically from deep within the catacombs of Ground Zero. "It was dripping from the molten steel," he said.


That being from an article from the "Knight Ridder Newspapers" and titled "Recovery worker reflects on months spent at Ground Zero," and written by Jennifer Lin. There is a cache of it here: 911research.wtc7.net...

[edit on 5-12-2007 by bsbray11]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join