Car disentigrates against bridge

page: 5
7
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 06:55 AM
link   
reply to post by 4hero
 


The floor supports were open web bar joist truss to reduce weight

Next time in BIG BOX store ( Walmart/Best Buys, etc) look at ceiling - if not covered will see bar joists
supporting roof

Problem was that these truss are difficult to fireproof do to all the angles (also had problem with fireproofing
sticking to the steel). Also the impact knocked off much of the fireproofing in the impact zone

Because of the thinner steel used in the truss vs solid girders they will heat up faster and begin to sag or
deform pulling floor down .

The floors provide lateral stability to the building - once compromised the building becomes unstable




posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 07:36 AM
link   
reply to post by 4hero
 





Even the building I live in has more CCTV cameras than the Pentagon! C'mon, there would have been more CCTV footage. Even frames from the footage that exists has been removed! Pull the other one dude!


Have you even looked at any of the specs for the building? I would guess you answer is no.
If it were your job to install the security cameras how would you do it? Given the specs below.

200 acres of lawn
16 Parking lots covering 67 acres
29 acres for the building alone
5.1 Acres for central Courtyard
131 Stairways
19 Escalators
13 Elevators
284 Restrooms
691 Water fountains
672 Fire Hose Cabinets
3,705,793 Sq feet of offices
17.5 Miles of Corridors
It has a river port and lagoon
Over 20 Fast Food operations like McDonalds etc.

Do you really want to point cameras up at the sky? When was the last time passenger airlines was used as a weapon??



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
Do you really want to point cameras up at the sky? When was the last time passenger airlines was used as a weapon??


Why would they need to be pointed at the sky?

The plane came in low and most cameras have a wide angle lens, that can see sky and ground.

Do you deny these are cameras?





What about this one?



Do you not think they would have easily caught the 'plane'? Without being pointed at they sky lol?

edit on 4/5/2012 by ANOK because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 02:38 PM
link   
1 Were they functional on 911? We don't know and I doubt they would admit if they had a fair number bad cameras.

2 Were all the cameras recorded? I doubt it. What was the normal method in 2001? Slow frame rate video tape?

If they had one camera every 100 feet for the entire 17.5 miles of corridors that would be 924 cameras. Even if they had 4 cameras per VCR we are talking a massive number of machines, especially if we assume cameras covered more than just the corridors.

I doubt that every exterior camera was recorded. Maybe now with the advent of digital storage but not back then.
Unless the exterior cameras were pointing at grass instead of the walkways and window areas they would never see the incoming plane.

If they did fabricate the whole thing. The would have produced one decent camera footage at the Pentagon. Especially if they fabricated video in NYC.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by samkent
 


Oh yes first the denial, and now the excuses.

Typical.

I guess they didn't bother replacing light bulbs that burned out either, no maintenance going on at that building.


Just face it, there were cameras, and they would have seen the 'plane'.



posted on Apr, 5 2012 @ 08:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ANOK
 


What is the frame rate of said cameras? Where are they pointing? Were they fixed or able to be directed?

If for some unknown reason they point out to the highway or lawn, I'd be interested in learning a reason for that. If they are directed more towards the building access areas, how many frames would a plane be in going the reported speed estimates, which should be fairly accurate when one want the greatest effect on impact.

Putting the research into the hands of who you are debating doesn't give you the information to counter with or verify. Most 9/11 debates are actually truthers asking questions for their adversary to research for them and in the same brush-off stance find another adolescent counter, or move the goal posts.

Why don't you tell us what your research uncovers instead, the sources for that information or this is just a he-said-she-said silly argument.

If you want to know details why leave it up to someone else to furnish them for you. If you simply want to appeal to emotional pedestrian reactions, leave stones unturned, and have your viewers decide it sounds like an Ancient Aliens TV show, and accomplishes nothing.

That's my take on most truther argument's logic base. In essence, appeal to ignorance.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by 4hero

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by 4hero
 





You only have to look at the damage caused in this aircrash to realise no plane hit the pentagon.

Another no plane er.
Go talk to the eyewitnesses.

You would think that after 10 years the truthers would be able to prove this one single item in their web of conspiracy.

They stand a better chance of disproving pi.


I am not discounting the WTC planes, but you tell me this, one of the most secure buildings in the world, supposedly, and yet no CCTV footage of a plane hitting the pentagon? Why is that? Please do explain.

Also, if you look at the damage and debris in the amsterdam crash video i posted, the pentagon had nothing on that scale, less debris and less damage.. Please do reply with some answers....



There are over 300 cameras at the Pentagon perimiter security as well as a large number of interior cameras managed by the police force and military. How do I know? Worked there for a short time.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by 4hero
 





Even the building I live in has more CCTV cameras than the Pentagon! C'mon, there would have been more CCTV footage. Even frames from the footage that exists has been removed! Pull the other one dude!


Have you even looked at any of the specs for the building? I would guess you answer is no.
If it were your job to install the security cameras how would you do it? Given the specs below.

200 acres of lawn
16 Parking lots covering 67 acres
29 acres for the building alone
5.1 Acres for central Courtyard
131 Stairways
19 Escalators
13 Elevators
284 Restrooms
691 Water fountains
672 Fire Hose Cabinets
3,705,793 Sq feet of offices
17.5 Miles of Corridors
It has a river port and lagoon
Over 20 Fast Food operations like McDonalds etc.

Do you really want to point cameras up at the sky? When was the last time passenger airlines was used as a weapon??


That is why there are over 300 cameras. I can bet a billion dollars if I had it at least 3 to 4 cameras were targeting the wall where the plane hit. Construction was not yet complete on that area of the wall and they would have been watching it like a hawk. I can also say that cameras were also pointed at the lawn and generators outside the strike zone.

I was standing in the perimiter parking at the Pentagon lot outside my car on a hot summer day waiting for a co-worker. Even I, who worked in the command center and similar like it before 9-11 didnt know of this camera pointed at me. Not only had they been watching me the whole time but they knew what I was holding in my hand at the time. They informed the police to respond and take my information, question me. This was before 9-11. There security has tripled since then.

We are not even talking about the traffic cameras and other assorted building cameras in the area that would have cought an aircraft on a low altitute path.



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by takaris7
 





There are over 300 cameras at the Pentagon perimiter security as well as a large number of interior cameras managed by the police force and military. How do I know? Worked there for a short time.

But were they ALL recorded?



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by takaris7
 





There are over 300 cameras at the Pentagon perimiter security as well as a large number of interior cameras managed by the police force and military. How do I know? Worked there for a short time.

But were they ALL recorded?



I can say this...If they were not recorded then they would have been useless. Not enough manpower to watch all the cameras and if no one was watching them then they were just there for show. They had advanced security equipment for the time and they took their job seriously.

The cameras I knew about were all recorded. Some on a 24 hour loop, some shorter. They were the primary cameras for the police/security ... then there were the DoD and military cameras. (I have no idea about them). You never knew who was watching you.

edit on 16-4-2012 by takaris7 because: spelling



posted on Apr, 16 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by takaris7
 

Not that I doubt you but I have a few questions.
Did you ever see the recording equipment? Or did they just tell you they all were recorded. Putting the thought in the back of your mind can be just as good as the actual recording.
Was the recordings 30 frames per second or 1 frame every few seconds? A couple of seconds between frames can miss the plane.
Were the cameras you knew about fixed or adjustible?
If the cameras were fixed or just left stationary viewing the doors and windows, you won't see the plane.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by takaris7
 

Not that I doubt you but I have a few questions.
Did you ever see the recording equipment? Or did they just tell you they all were recorded. Putting the thought in the back of your mind can be just as good as the actual recording.
Was the recordings 30 frames per second or 1 frame every few seconds? A couple of seconds between frames can miss the plane.
Were the cameras you knew about fixed or adjustible?
If the cameras were fixed or just left stationary viewing the doors and windows, you won't see the plane.



1. Yes, I saw the actually recording equipment set up on server bays.
2. They seem to be recording. Some were VHS and Disk combinations. Early "Tivo" technology. I did not do a review of the equipment at the time I was there. I do not think they had a reason to lie at the time.
3. Yes, The frame rates were low on a lot of the cameras to conserve space. I cannot vouch for all the cameras and recording equipment. I do believe though a lot of the DoD/Military cameras were state of the art for the time but again I cannot vouch for the cameras that were not in police control.
4. 90% percent of the peremiter cameras were adjustible during that time. Fixed cameras were usually door entrances, parking lots .. ect. Pretty standard industry wide. There were a number of cameras with wide views overseeing large areas of the compound.

I believe there were enough cameras to catch something other that what you have seen so far. Roof cameras, Inner tier cameras, Courtyard cameras, Cameras watching the construction equipment (which I know was there), hallway cameras ect.

We will never see them,





top topics
 
7
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join