Currently civil engineers are still debating about the cause of the collapse of the WTC, I dont think at that very moment the firefighters would know of anything.
Debating? This was case-closed long ago, fren. I've seen numerous in-depth videos with supporting materials. I've also seen documentation of mysterious crews in the facility in the 2-3 week period before the collapse. That was a controlled demolition -- no doubt about it. And yes, I'm an architect with vast experience.
The only engineers who are still "debating" this are all shills. Do a little digging on line and you'll find plenty of evidence to support my conclusion.
And that's what happens. The stupidity of those who were and are still selling this yarn is only exceeded by how stupid these sick morons think WE are. Of course, many normies ARE, but many more of us are quite the opposite.
Planes are primarily made of aluminum, which would fold up like a tin can - if it wasn't shredded by the fuel explosion, which it would be. The impact would likely dent a few adjacent steel columns and the explosion would blow partitions, office furniture and other loose objects through metal stud and drywall walls, but as numerous structural engineers have stated the fuel fire would not have melted steel and the impact damage would not have triggered a collapse. Even if upper floors collapsed due to column damage at the point of impact, they would have tilted toward the point if column failure and most definitely NOT result in the perfect packing of the entire structure. The odds of the same exact thing happening to the second tower, due to a different impact location (and presumably velocity and trajectory angle) have got to be extremely high - if not incalcuable.
The simulations of the kinetic process of the airplane colliding with the building resembles cheese going through a slicer. The airplane penetrates most of the building---but the steel columns slice it lengthwise.
The fuel in the fire was essentially kerosene, which has an adiabatic flame temperature of 2,093 C. Iron (steel) has a melting point of 1,538 C. Aluminum has a melting point of 660 C. So, it is credible that the steel may have melted. It is certain that the aluminum would have melted. The flame temperature of burning aluminum vapor (which would evaporate from hot molten aluminum) is 3,732 C (in pure oxygen, lower when in air). If aluminum had been burning, not only would the temperature have been high enough to produce molten steel, it would also produce quantities of aluminum oxide. (In other words, what unwitting people will mistake for "thermite" in the wreckage.)
I suggest the structural engineers are not combustion engineers, or strength of materials engineers. Steel loses a great deal of strength as the temperature gets into the thousands of degrees. As I have elaborated elsewhere in this thread, when the load-bearing strength of the floor column array reduces to the load limit, it only takes one column failure to initiate a chain reaction of column failures, to occur within a few tens of milliseconds. The upper 12 stories would have had no time to tilt as they fell. The collapse proceeded at a steady acceleration of 0.7 g, which meant that the crushed structure was opposing the oncoming load to the extent of 0.3 g.
What happened on 9/11 had nothing to do with "odds." It was possible and it happened. Post-facto expectations to the contrary are only signs of ignorance.
A diagonal break is what happens in shear failure under compression.
I don't know what you mean by "pools of thermite." Thermite (a mixture of aluminum powder and iron oxide) is too exothermic to survive a fire without chemically reacting. The result of the thermite reaction is aluminum oxide and molten iron. Guess what? You get the same thing when an aluminum airplane burns up in an iron structure. Burning aluminum is one of the hottest flames available. The solid propellant in the large solid booster rockets used on the space shuttle were about 30% aluminum in composition.
The poster meant there were pools of molten iron found in the basement…caused by a massive amount of thermite on the steel. An airplane wouldn’t cause that.
WTC7 had sudden global collapse with free fall acceleration for around 2 seconds, something that’s not possible without controlled demolition
It’s also worth noting The Reported airspeed of United flight 175 was 510 knots near sea level. At 22,000 ft the equivalent speed/stress is 722 knots or mach 1.19.
IOW the airframe would receive the same amount of stress going an airspeed of 510 knots at sea level as it would going mach 1.2 at 22,000 feet. The plane would break apart before it would reach these speeds.
At sea level These planes would become incontrollable at around 380 knots airspeed and start to break apart after around 420ish knots (see below V-G diagram). Because of this fact commercial pilots with thousands of hrs say 510 knots at sea level is impossible especially with a mostly level flight path. Even the concord jet can’t go 510 knots at sea level. But some dudes who trained on a single engine cessna going 60 knots pulled this feat off hitting a 200 ft wide target going an impossible speed? It’s absurd.
I guess boeing built 757 and 767’s capable of supersonic flights at altitude and still controllable enough to hit a 208 ft wide target with a 25 foot margin of error on either side?? That’s amazing!!
The chief result of burning aluminum in the presence of iron is to melt the iron. That is the whole chemistry of thermite, and burning aluminum is what was going on with those airplanes.
What happened at the floor that the airplane crashed into, and which was the firebox for the combustion, was a progressive reduction in the yield strength of the steel columns. When they reached the critical condition of having no structural margin remaining, all it would take is the failure of one column to throw all its load on the remaining columns. Which would overload the remaining columns and cause additional failures, thus entailing a chain reaction that would fail all columns. The load failures propagated at the speed of sound in steel, which is about 5 kilometers/second, essentially instantaneous. You can see this ripple effect in the buildings that have fallen in the Turkey earthquake. When all the upper stories have no resistance to falling, a free fall of 2 seconds is about 64 feet, which would be the thickness of the affected floors.
The World Land Speed Record by custom automobile is 760 mph (660 knots). The drag coefficient at subsonic conditions is significantly lower than the drag coefficient at supersonic conditions, so your speed comparison is faulty. Passenger airlines have been recorded in flight at supersonic conditions in flight accidents that caused permanent deflection of the wing structure but the airplane survived and landed. The fact remains that the aircraft collided with the Towers at the speeds estimated, as established by photographic evidence.
As for training, it turns out a 200-foot wide building is hard to miss. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Are you going to say that "because it couldn't have happened, it didn't happen"?
wow, your a 911 conspiracy theorist that believes every structural support member gave way at just the right time to implode onto itself at free fall speed, especially Building 7?
aluminum, jet fuel, people, rubber tires, cans of gasoline, you name it, can't decimate a metal frame structure like that.
it honestly requires the most outlandish of conspiracy theories to believe these buildings could have collapsed in the manner they did as the result of just 2 planes
Right the mainstream narrative is the conspiracy theron. Its common knowledge that 9/11 was an attack on us by lizard people. For thd normies or young people out there assplain this then = 3 buildings, 2 planes. Thermite found on site, burning a month later. Obvious missile hit pentagon in the exact area " closed for construction ", Operation Vigilant Guardian, "flight 93 not one drop of blood found in piles of debree, also no jet. Larry Silverjew gets insurance on buildings in July specifically for acts of terrorism, NORAD holds exercises for weird terrorism that day, dude supposedly on flight 93 called his mom and said " hi mom, its Joe Blow. As if anyone ever called their mom and used their full name. Gold under the towers gone , building 7 financial records, found ' hijackers passport in rubble... this is what I can remember of the top of my head. These lizards are devil worshippers into numerology and weird shit. 9/11 = emergency. Hindsight is 2020. Etc.
As it turns out, I am not a 9/11 conspiracy theorist, though I will agree there was a plot to create the event. Mostly, I am a bullshit debunker.
See my above post. The structural failure was a column collapse chain reaction, propagating at the speed of sound in the structure (5,000 to 5,900 meters/second). To propagate a strain wave 200 feet (61 meters) would take 0.012 second.
Burning jet fuel and burning aluminum can create temperatures to both melt and weaken structural steel below its rated strength. All it takes is gravity to finish the job (as happened).
There is nothing "outlandish" in what happened. Anyone with a background in structural engineering will find it not only plausible, but inevitable. Interestingly, it seems to be only the ignorant who find the events incredible.
Currently civil engineers are still debating about the cause of the collapse of the WTC, I dont think at that very moment the firefighters would know of anything.
Debating? This was case-closed long ago, fren. I've seen numerous in-depth videos with supporting materials. I've also seen documentation of mysterious crews in the facility in the 2-3 week period before the collapse. That was a controlled demolition -- no doubt about it. And yes, I'm an architect with vast experience.
The only engineers who are still "debating" this are all shills. Do a little digging on line and you'll find plenty of evidence to support my conclusion.
Happy research!
Israeli "Art Project"....yeah, that's the ticket.
More like a magic act of genocide. Now you see it - now you don 't . . .
Israeli "art students" .. Full access pass?
Question, if it were only the planes that hit, what kind of damage would have happened? Without the controlled demolition part.
I thought I had read that buildings were engineered to withstand a planet crash.
They were. A building in Philly got hit by plane in 1973. It burned for a little while, then was put out.
And that's what happens. The stupidity of those who were and are still selling this yarn is only exceeded by how stupid these sick morons think WE are. Of course, many normies ARE, but many more of us are quite the opposite.
WWG1WGA
Not quite -- unless it's a very small planet. Kek
Planes are primarily made of aluminum, which would fold up like a tin can - if it wasn't shredded by the fuel explosion, which it would be. The impact would likely dent a few adjacent steel columns and the explosion would blow partitions, office furniture and other loose objects through metal stud and drywall walls, but as numerous structural engineers have stated the fuel fire would not have melted steel and the impact damage would not have triggered a collapse. Even if upper floors collapsed due to column damage at the point of impact, they would have tilted toward the point if column failure and most definitely NOT result in the perfect packing of the entire structure. The odds of the same exact thing happening to the second tower, due to a different impact location (and presumably velocity and trajectory angle) have got to be extremely high - if not incalcuable.
Just my 17 cents, fren . . .
The simulations of the kinetic process of the airplane colliding with the building resembles cheese going through a slicer. The airplane penetrates most of the building---but the steel columns slice it lengthwise.
The fuel in the fire was essentially kerosene, which has an adiabatic flame temperature of 2,093 C. Iron (steel) has a melting point of 1,538 C. Aluminum has a melting point of 660 C. So, it is credible that the steel may have melted. It is certain that the aluminum would have melted. The flame temperature of burning aluminum vapor (which would evaporate from hot molten aluminum) is 3,732 C (in pure oxygen, lower when in air). If aluminum had been burning, not only would the temperature have been high enough to produce molten steel, it would also produce quantities of aluminum oxide. (In other words, what unwitting people will mistake for "thermite" in the wreckage.)
I suggest the structural engineers are not combustion engineers, or strength of materials engineers. Steel loses a great deal of strength as the temperature gets into the thousands of degrees. As I have elaborated elsewhere in this thread, when the load-bearing strength of the floor column array reduces to the load limit, it only takes one column failure to initiate a chain reaction of column failures, to occur within a few tens of milliseconds. The upper 12 stories would have had no time to tilt as they fell. The collapse proceeded at a steady acceleration of 0.7 g, which meant that the crushed structure was opposing the oncoming load to the extent of 0.3 g.
What happened on 9/11 had nothing to do with "odds." It was possible and it happened. Post-facto expectations to the contrary are only signs of ignorance.
A diagonal break is what happens in shear failure under compression.
I don't know what you mean by "pools of thermite." Thermite (a mixture of aluminum powder and iron oxide) is too exothermic to survive a fire without chemically reacting. The result of the thermite reaction is aluminum oxide and molten iron. Guess what? You get the same thing when an aluminum airplane burns up in an iron structure. Burning aluminum is one of the hottest flames available. The solid propellant in the large solid booster rockets used on the space shuttle were about 30% aluminum in composition.
The poster meant there were pools of molten iron found in the basement…caused by a massive amount of thermite on the steel. An airplane wouldn’t cause that.
WTC7 had sudden global collapse with free fall acceleration for around 2 seconds, something that’s not possible without controlled demolition
It’s also worth noting The Reported airspeed of United flight 175 was 510 knots near sea level. At 22,000 ft the equivalent speed/stress is 722 knots or mach 1.19.
IOW the airframe would receive the same amount of stress going an airspeed of 510 knots at sea level as it would going mach 1.2 at 22,000 feet. The plane would break apart before it would reach these speeds.
At sea level These planes would become incontrollable at around 380 knots airspeed and start to break apart after around 420ish knots (see below V-G diagram). Because of this fact commercial pilots with thousands of hrs say 510 knots at sea level is impossible especially with a mostly level flight path. Even the concord jet can’t go 510 knots at sea level. But some dudes who trained on a single engine cessna going 60 knots pulled this feat off hitting a 200 ft wide target going an impossible speed? It’s absurd.
I guess boeing built 757 and 767’s capable of supersonic flights at altitude and still controllable enough to hit a 208 ft wide target with a 25 foot margin of error on either side?? That’s amazing!!
https://i.imgur.com/wMoFVbr.png
The chief result of burning aluminum in the presence of iron is to melt the iron. That is the whole chemistry of thermite, and burning aluminum is what was going on with those airplanes.
What happened at the floor that the airplane crashed into, and which was the firebox for the combustion, was a progressive reduction in the yield strength of the steel columns. When they reached the critical condition of having no structural margin remaining, all it would take is the failure of one column to throw all its load on the remaining columns. Which would overload the remaining columns and cause additional failures, thus entailing a chain reaction that would fail all columns. The load failures propagated at the speed of sound in steel, which is about 5 kilometers/second, essentially instantaneous. You can see this ripple effect in the buildings that have fallen in the Turkey earthquake. When all the upper stories have no resistance to falling, a free fall of 2 seconds is about 64 feet, which would be the thickness of the affected floors.
The World Land Speed Record by custom automobile is 760 mph (660 knots). The drag coefficient at subsonic conditions is significantly lower than the drag coefficient at supersonic conditions, so your speed comparison is faulty. Passenger airlines have been recorded in flight at supersonic conditions in flight accidents that caused permanent deflection of the wing structure but the airplane survived and landed. The fact remains that the aircraft collided with the Towers at the speeds estimated, as established by photographic evidence.
It was a possible speed because IT HAPPENED. Reality trumps back-of-envelope finger exercises. Land Speed Record drivers can control up to 660 knots. The speed of sound at sea level is 643 knots, so 510 knots is Mach 0.79, which should be within the aircraft's control envelope. Don't take my word for it; see what the experts have to say: https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/15407/can-a-boeing-767-200-fly-at-510-knots-at-a-height-of-400-metres
As for training, it turns out a 200-foot wide building is hard to miss. But the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Are you going to say that "because it couldn't have happened, it didn't happen"?
wow, your a 911 conspiracy theorist that believes every structural support member gave way at just the right time to implode onto itself at free fall speed, especially Building 7?
aluminum, jet fuel, people, rubber tires, cans of gasoline, you name it, can't decimate a metal frame structure like that.
it honestly requires the most outlandish of conspiracy theories to believe these buildings could have collapsed in the manner they did as the result of just 2 planes
Right the mainstream narrative is the conspiracy theron. Its common knowledge that 9/11 was an attack on us by lizard people. For thd normies or young people out there assplain this then = 3 buildings, 2 planes. Thermite found on site, burning a month later. Obvious missile hit pentagon in the exact area " closed for construction ", Operation Vigilant Guardian, "flight 93 not one drop of blood found in piles of debree, also no jet. Larry Silverjew gets insurance on buildings in July specifically for acts of terrorism, NORAD holds exercises for weird terrorism that day, dude supposedly on flight 93 called his mom and said " hi mom, its Joe Blow. As if anyone ever called their mom and used their full name. Gold under the towers gone , building 7 financial records, found ' hijackers passport in rubble... this is what I can remember of the top of my head. These lizards are devil worshippers into numerology and weird shit. 9/11 = emergency. Hindsight is 2020. Etc.
32fps... start there when researching free fall
As it turns out, I am not a 9/11 conspiracy theorist, though I will agree there was a plot to create the event. Mostly, I am a bullshit debunker.
See my above post. The structural failure was a column collapse chain reaction, propagating at the speed of sound in the structure (5,000 to 5,900 meters/second). To propagate a strain wave 200 feet (61 meters) would take 0.012 second.
Burning jet fuel and burning aluminum can create temperatures to both melt and weaken structural steel below its rated strength. All it takes is gravity to finish the job (as happened).
There is nothing "outlandish" in what happened. Anyone with a background in structural engineering will find it not only plausible, but inevitable. Interestingly, it seems to be only the ignorant who find the events incredible.
You're hilarious tell me more
I did. See above.
Actually, a University of Alaska study (https://www.adn.com/opinions/2017/09/09/uaf-study-challenges-theories-on-why-third-world-trade-center-building-collapsed-on-sept-11/) came to conclusions about the WTC collapse. Interesting read.