11 Sep
2001
11 Sep
'01
11:11 a.m.
On Tue, 2001-09-11 at 18:49, Mike Drew wrote:
Gene Buckle wrote:
> > Something else which isn't sitting right is when the first tower
collapsed,
> > it looked more like an implosion... the fire and explosion should'nt
have
> > compromised the superstructure enough to collapse, and even the weight of
> > the above floors shouldn't have caused a "house of cards" effect
like that,
> > seems more like an additional explosion may have been setoff.
> >
> Curt, 10,000lbs of jet fuel would've caused something like that.
>
I agree that the leveling of the first building was odd. I'm not an
engineer, but the destruction from the crash *appeared* to be isolated
to the upper floors. Likewise, heat is going to travel upwards and
spread the fire to the upper floors faster - which is what appears to
have happened. There floors in between the area of destruction and the
bottom floors appeared to be sound - then the building spontaneously
collapsed. Very strange.
Jeffrey H. Ingber (jhingber _at_ ix.netcom.com)
When steel gets hot it loses its strength much faster than you would think.
The effect of the large fire was identical to a demolition crew taking out
all of the columns. Once the building started to move it was all over.
The second tower hit collapsed first due to the additional weight of the
structure above.
The second tower to be hit was hit lower and also, I fear, trapped many more
people above the fire making the death toll much higher.
Nightmare....
Can I wake up now???
Mike