So many people always use the "they were full of fuel and that melted the beams" narrative!
However the reality is that passenger jets don't go around flying everywhere with a full tank of gas! Each flight will have it's predicated fuel usage calculated, included within is the amount for a diversion in case of weather, and a minimum amount required on landing.
So fuelled for a flight from Boston to LA, and taking into account the amount burnt during the flight towards the WTC it would be substantially lower than "full fuel tanks" - probably around 50% - 55% full would be a best guess.
And no, it won't burn hot enough to melt steel beams, in fact when you see the images of the fireball it is quite clear pretty much all of it was burnt off very quickly, and no where near enough left to travel down the elevator shafts of the entire building and then melt beams.
So many people always use the "they were full of fuel and that melted the beams" narrative!
However the reality is that passenger jets don't go around flying everywhere with a full tank of gas! Each flight will have it's predicated fuel usage calculated, included within is the amount for a diversion in case of weather, and a minimum amount required on landing.
So fuelled for a flight from Boston to LA, and taking into account the amount burnt during the flight towards the WTC it would be substantially lower than "full fuel tanks" - probably around 50% - 55% full would be a best guess.
And no, it won't burn hot enough to melt steel beams, in fact when you see the images of the fireball it is quite clear pretty much all of it was burnt off very quickly, and no where near enough left to travel down the elevator shafts of the entire building and then melt beams.