What caused the damage to columns 145 through 152?

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 12:50 PM
link   
What caused the damage to columns 145 through 152?


Source


Source

The columns were made of ¼ inch steel, and you can see how each column has two protruding edges. Something travelling from the left has clipped these columns.

Below is a highlighted close-up; note the dents on the left side of the columns, progressively getting more pronounced as you move right.

Whatever it was that caused this damage twisted and bent columns 145 and 146 to the right.



Something traveling left to right must have caused this damage:



 
 



Originally posted by AboveTopSecret.com
For now, new "TV Fakery" or "No Planes" threads based on the work of this group will be deleted. Please use the existing thread indicated above to add any new material to the discussion. Repeated attempts to start new threads may result in account termination. If we see an improvement in tone, and an effort for collaboration, this restriction will likely be lifted. It's up to them.


www.abovetopsecret.com...

edit on Thu Dec 8 2011 by DontTreadOnMe because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 12:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by septic

Something traveling left to right must have caused this damage:





That would be the wing of N612UA...... Silly.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Just a hunch....


The wing of the plane.....
edit on 6-11-2011 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

That would be the wing of N612UA...... Silly.

N612UA's right wing caused that???



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by ATH911

Originally posted by waypastvne

That would be the wing of N612UA...... Silly.

N612UA's right wing caused that???


N612UA's port wing caused that.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by waypastvne

N612UA's port wing caused that.

Who'd the plane's left wing cause that if the OP is right that something traveling left to right must have caused that damage?



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:20 PM
link   
The left wing hit the tower, then disappeared through steel via osmosis.
No wing debris fell on to the ground that I heard of, and the 2nd plane did the same thing, aluminum piercing through steel and concrete.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:25 PM
link   
I apologise for the above mistakes.I just realised this is the north tower , so it was N334AA that did that damage.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:29 PM
link   
The planes did not hit either building exactly straight on. It wouldn't take much of an angle at all to cause certain areas to look like they were hit like these images show.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
Just a hunch....


The wing of the plane.....
edit on 6-11-2011 by gimme_some_truth because: (no reason given)


The plane wing would have struck in a wedge-motion, therefore a real wing would have struck the right side of the columns first.





It would be much easier to defeat columns like this if they were struck from the side, not straight-on:



What dented these columns?




posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:51 PM
link   
This looks nothing like a full size passenger airplane.




posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:53 PM
link   
from what i see on the pictures it looks like the damage in question was caused by the portside wingtip.
The image suggests that the columns not sheered off in this section.

I would like to disagree in the statement that the wing must have travelled from left to right to cause this damage.

From what i would expect if a wing hits those beams with such a speed is, that they start disintegrating and build up momentum in a way that sections of the wing start to wriggle around the columns into the gaps and exert force to the beams in the way depictured in the photo.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
The left wing hit the tower, then disappeared through steel via osmosis.
No wing debris fell on to the ground that I heard of, and the 2nd plane did the same thing, aluminum piercing through steel and concrete.


The wing shredded through the windows. That was not a solid wall, don't ya know?



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by JibbyJedi
 


Looks to me like a composite of the "before impact" sequence layered over the "during impact" sequence. Mask out the missiles and draw in a fuzzy jet.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by septic
 


Those exterior items that the red arrows point to are more-so exterior panels to support the perimeter edges of the corrugated metal decking with concrete. The real question is the core columns...


edit on 6-11-2011 by rstregooski because: beer



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by septic
reply to post by JibbyJedi
 


Looks to me like a composite of the "before impact" sequence layered over the "during impact" sequence. Mask out the missiles and draw in a fuzzy jet.



Missiles, or remote control craft. Some videos show what looks like detonations going off after impact, like charges that were set.

I just found this one in my searches, not sure which I like more, the music or the information presented, good enough to post here though...



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
reply to post by JibbyJedi
 


Did you remember that the Madrid building was built after NIST gave its recommendations on how to stop a fire-caused collapse from happening? Or how the building was designed differently? Or how it still suffered local collapses?

Oh, wait. I forgot. You guys only know what's convenient to your theories. My bad.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Varemia
 


Everyone who watched those towers come down didn't expect them to fall like that. No one knew what to think.... then the media told everyone what to think and believe. For many people, that is still good enough for them.

The fireball is consistent with a large amount of fuel burning off, but the wings going into those towers like a hot knife through butter is strange, compared to the "round hole" at the Pentagon. I'd expect a round hole similar in the towers, or the Pentagon to have a hole with 2 more punch holes from the engines.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
reply to post by Varemia
 


Everyone who watched those towers come down didn't expect them to fall like that. No one knew what to think.... then the media told everyone what to think and believe. For many people, that is still good enough for them.

The fireball is consistent with a large amount of fuel burning off, but the wings going into those towers like a hot knife through butter is strange, compared to the "round hole" at the Pentagon. I'd expect a round hole similar in the towers, or the Pentagon to have a hole with 2 more punch holes from the engines.


You know, I expect certain things sometimes too, but then it turns out I'm wrong, because the expectation is based on occurrences of a completely different caliber. There has never been an instance of a plane like a 767 hitting a building like the towers at 500 mph. Same story for the Pentagon, except the difference is caused by different materials and such. Think about it. Concrete/masonry/limestone vs spaced steel columns built to create a lightweight framework that can resist wind and hold together the core and such.

I mean, at this point I feel like we're not even arguing over anything important here. We're just trying to get you guys to get your facts and understandings of physics corrected.



posted on Nov, 6 2011 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by rstregooski
 





The real question is the core columns...


The question of this thread regards the damage to the perimeter.





top topics
 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join