Page 5 of 32 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 480

Thread: 9/11 conspiracy debate

  1. #61
    Join Date
    19th August 2003 - 15:32
    Bike
    RD350 KTM790R, 2 x BMW R80G/S, XT500
    Location
    Over there somewhere...
    Posts
    3,954
    Quote Originally Posted by oneofsix View Post
    and the 747s were much bigger and carried much more gas than the 707, the 707s were the biggest around when the buildings were designed.
    The planes that hit the towers were both 767's, which are slightly heavier than 707's, but nowhere near a 747.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    19th August 2003 - 15:32
    Bike
    RD350 KTM790R, 2 x BMW R80G/S, XT500
    Location
    Over there somewhere...
    Posts
    3,954
    Quote Originally Posted by Crasherfromwayback View Post
    Which I reckon we can forgive them for...
    Oh yeah, but the heat generated pretty much fucked the structral integrity of the already damaged structure.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    21st December 2010 - 10:40
    Bike
    Kate
    Location
    Kapiti Commute
    Posts
    2,832
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar View Post
    The planes that hit the towers were both 767's, which are slightly heavier than 707's, but nowhere near a 747.
    my bad - sorry

  4. #64
    Join Date
    24th June 2004 - 17:27
    Bike
    So old you won't care
    Location
    Kapiti
    Posts
    7,880
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar View Post
    The Towers were designed to withstand a 707 hitting at cruising speed (it was a requirement due to the B25 hitting the Empire State Building during WW2).

    The problem was that 1) the planes hit the buildings with the throttles to the stops (about 20% faster), and that b) the Engineers failed to factor in the heat generated by that much burning avgas.
    Another factor was the construction. Rather than being steel reinforced concrete it was steel with fire retardant (think concrete) sprayed over it. The impact knocked a lot of that off....

  5. #65
    Join Date
    19th August 2003 - 15:32
    Bike
    RD350 KTM790R, 2 x BMW R80G/S, XT500
    Location
    Over there somewhere...
    Posts
    3,954
    Quote Originally Posted by oneofsix View Post
    my bad - sorry
    You shouldn't apologise for not being a train spotter...

  6. #66
    Join Date
    17th April 2006 - 05:39
    Bike
    Various things
    Location
    Wellington
    Posts
    14,429
    Quote Originally Posted by Oscar View Post
    Oh yeah, but the heat generated pretty much fucked the structral integrity of the already damaged structure.
    Oh for sure. But pretty hard to see that one coming!

  7. #67
    Join Date
    19th August 2003 - 15:32
    Bike
    RD350 KTM790R, 2 x BMW R80G/S, XT500
    Location
    Over there somewhere...
    Posts
    3,954
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul in NZ View Post
    Another factor was the construction. Rather than being steel reinforced concrete it was steel with fire retardant (think concrete) sprayed over it. The impact knocked a lot of that off....
    I seem to recall there was some problem with the way the floors were attached to the central core as well.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    3rd May 2005 - 10:28
    Bike
    Goose
    Location
    Wellington
    Posts
    7,719
    I am loving the tag; Trump to ask for DNA cert!!
    "Some people are like clouds, once they fuck off, it's a great day!"

  9. #69
    Join Date
    8th November 2004 - 11:00
    Bike
    GSXR 750 the wanton hussy
    Location
    Not in Napier now
    Posts
    12,765
    Think, too, that the planes were tilted on final approach to ensure impact damage to maximum number of floors at once.
    Do you realise how many holes there could be if people would just take the time to take the dirt out of them?

  10. #70
    Join Date
    17th June 2010 - 16:44
    Bike
    bandit
    Location
    Bay of Plenty
    Posts
    2,885
    Quote Originally Posted by mashman View Post
    Granted many collapsing floors add extra weight, but how much more? Enough to allow the building to drop like it was on rails? I just can't see that happening, unless it was an utter fluke.

    You?
    OK ... the building has an exoskeleton - the rails running up the building which are clearly visible in the pictures. The floors are supported on beams bolted (yes, bolted) to the exoskeleton.

    The New York Fire Brigade warned about this type of structure before 9/11 - as they believed the floors would collapse in much the way it actually did.

    As the planes added weight to the floors and the heat melted the supporting beams the floors collapsed onto each other - adding weight and casuing more to collapse - so the building came down.

    Now, the floor beams are inside the exoskelaton, which is strong enough to keep the flooring material inside the exoskelaton as it falls - hence the building falls straight down inside the exoskeleton, which collapses after the floor fall past it as it is no longer strong enough to stand upright.

    Not hard to explain at all ...
    "So if you meet me, have some sympathy, have some courtesy, have some taste ..."

  11. #71
    Join Date
    5th November 2007 - 15:56
    Bike
    Triumph's answer to the GN250
    Location
    Christchurch
    Posts
    1,037
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Banditbandit View Post
    OK ... the building has an exoskeleton - the rails running up the building which are clearly visible in the pictures. The floors are supported on beams bolted (yes, bolted) to the exoskeleton.

    The New York Fire Brigade warned about this type of structure before 9/11 - as they believed the floors would collapse in much the way it actually did.

    As the planes added weight to the floors and the heat melted the supporting beams the floors collapsed onto each other - adding weight and casuing more to collapse - so the building came down.

    Now, the floor beams are inside the exoskelaton, which is strong enough to keep the flooring material inside the exoskelaton as it falls - hence the building falls straight down inside the exoskeleton, which collapses after the floor fall past it as it is no longer strong enough to stand upright.

    Not hard to explain at all ...
    I still blame Katman
    Don't blame me, I voted Green.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    21st August 2004 - 12:00
    Bike
    2017 Suzuki Dl1000
    Location
    Picton
    Posts
    5,177
    Quote Originally Posted by avgas View Post
    When did you get your ICI explosives and demolitions tickets???
    DoL course 1973
    Time to ride

  13. #73
    Join Date
    16th September 2004 - 16:48
    Bike
    PopTart Katoona
    Location
    CT, USA
    Posts
    6,542
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Jantar View Post
    DoL course 1973
    Not MoW? 10char
    Reactor Online. Sensors Online. Weapons Online. All Systems Nominal.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    7th September 2009 - 09:47
    Bike
    Yo momma
    Location
    Podunk USA
    Posts
    4,561
    Quote Originally Posted by gpxchick View Post
    who plantd the bombs in those 3 buildings that day? Lest we forget 9/11 had an inside hand involved. Buildings don't fall at freefall speed without having the path cleared below the falling matter. Fullstop.
    dickhead!!!

  15. #75
    Join Date
    21st August 2004 - 12:00
    Bike
    2017 Suzuki Dl1000
    Location
    Picton
    Posts
    5,177
    Quote Originally Posted by avgas View Post
    Not MoW? 10char
    No, the instructor may have been MoW, but the course was organised through the DoL after one of their inspectors didn't like us carrying gelignite, diesel and detonators in the same vehicle.
    Time to ride

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •