Total Building Collapse from a Single Column Failure

[Africanus]

The story of Jennings and Hess is intriguing. Why would equipment explode in WTC 7 before either twin tower came down?

That didn't happen as Jennings timeline is wrong (ca. one hour deviation).

 

[JSanderO]

Anyone should be able to realize that at least half of WTC 1 fell on WTC 7. WTC 1 wreckage had long legs (as WTC 7 was 350 feet away) and it was all hot and capable of starting fires. It is a wonder only ten floors in WTC 7 had fires started in them.

Rubbish.. nothing even close to half of 1WTC fell on 7 WTC. Most of the debris from 1wtc fell quite close and only a few of the facade panels of the floors from below the second sky lobby reached over to WTC and that's a tiny fraction of the mass of 1WTC.

Come on Tony that's nonsense.

As for as what caused explosions in 7wtc.. it was the shorts caused by the plane hitting tower one.. it blew out electrical equipment in the top mech floor sub station in 1 WTC... you can see the smoke from the burning sub station transformer up at the top right after the plane hit... no way could that sort of smoke come from a fire it stories below THAT fast. It was a short and it caused an explosion.

This short (of the riser) also caused equipment to explode in the sub basement of 1WTC. This was witnessed by Rodriquez who hear an explosion an instant before he heard/felt the plane strike the building. This was because the electricity travels at the speed of light and the sound from the plane strike took almost a second to reach him in the basement. This explosion caused a lot of damage down there and started fires.

The shorts cause more damage to the con ed in 7 WTC caused them to short and overheat and who knows what happened... There WERE some reports from people who left 7WTC that they heard/felt explosions in the building early in the AM and all of them evacuated the building which is why Jennings and Hess found no main power and no one in the building or exited by the time they arrived before 10am.. perhaps 9:30... don't know the time.

It seems to me... based on the fact that con ed reported losing 13 -13KV feeders when the plane hit 1WTC that it's more than likely that there was exploding power equipment... in the con ed and this would probably set off some fires down there. Of course we don't know for sure.. but this explanation makes sense.

And it also supports the notion that the collapse was initiated from damage in the load transfer region just above con ed.... and if Jennings and Hess are to be believed they experience an explosion from the load transfer region just above and east of con ed in the building which is where the east stair was.

No need to resort to CD theories when plenty of electrical equipment WAS exploding.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Honestly it looks to me like he was just being sarcastic to "poke fun" at the facts he views as "false". There was nothing in that response that I could construe as anything else.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Rubbish.. nothing even close to half of 1WTC fell on 7 WTC. Most of the debris from 1wtc fell quite close and only a few of the facade panels of the floors from below the second sky lobby reached over to WTC and that's a tiny fraction of the mass of 1WTC.

Come on Tony that's nonsense.

As for as what caused explosions in 7wtc.. it was the shorts caused by the plane hitting tower one.. it blew out electrical equipment in the top mech floor sub station in 1 WTC... you can see the smoke from the burning sub station transformer up at the top right after the plane hit... no way could that sort of smoke come from a fire it stories below THAT fast. It was a short and it caused an explosion.

This short (of the riser) also caused equipment to explode in the sub basement of 1WTC. This was witnessed by Rodriquez who hear an explosion an instant before he heard/felt the plane strike the building. This was because the electricity travels at the speed of light and the sound from the plane strike took almost a second to reach him in the basement. This explosion caused a lot of damage down there and started fires.

The shorts cause more damage to the con ed in 7 WTC caused them to short and overheat and who knows what happened... There WERE some reports from people who left 7WTC that they heard/felt explosions in the building early in the AM and all of them evacuated the building which is why Jennings and Hess found no main power and no one in the building or exited by the time they arrived before 10am.. perhaps 9:30... don't know the time.

It seems to me... based on the fact that con ed reported losing 13 -13KV feeders when the plane hit 1WTC that it's more than likely that there was exploding power equipment... in the con ed and this would probably set off some fires down there. Of course we don't know for sure.. but this explanation makes sense.

And it also supports the notion that the collapse was initiated from damage in the load transfer region just above con ed.... and if Jennings and Hess are to be believed they experience an explosion from the load transfer region just above and east of con ed in the building which is where the east stair was.

No need to resort to CD theories when plenty of electrical equipment WAS exploding.

Electricity moves at the speed of light but the transformers you claim exploded in both WTC 1 and WTC 7 would not blow instantaneously, as it is heating of the oil in them that causes an explosion and it takes time to heat.

You might not realize it, but transformers have protection against what you are saying. They don't just short out when a path is broken. It is highly unlikely that the aircraft impacts caused transformers, in the basement of WTC 1 and in the Con Edison sub-station in WTC 7, to explode. The explosion Barry Jennings described as occurring right under the stairwell landing he was on with Michael Hess in WTC 7 also occurred about 45 minutes after the plane hit WTC 1.

Can we talk about what started the fires on floors 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19, 22, 28, and 30 in WTC 7? It certainly wasn't transformers.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

It would be interesting to hear from people here as to why they simply accept that the fires on ten floors in WTC 7 were started from debris from WTC 1.

Also, why would there be no fires in the Verizon Building or the U.S. Post Office which were on either side of WTC 7?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Can we talk about what started the fires on floors 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19, 22, 28, and 30 in WTC 7? It certainly wasn't transformers.

Sure, it was burning debris from WTC 1 and WTC 2; The same cause of the fires in WTC 5. Whether the power station or a transformer, or some other location ignited first, is of little consequence to the fact that the collapse of the towers played a central role in WTC 7 igniting, and it's active fire suppression systems being crippled, and it's internal structural ultimately becoming compromised later on.

We certainly haven't found any bomb fragments, related damage, or related hardware associated with them that would suggest otherwise.

Further debate on the particulars of the collapse mechanism generally belong in the category of egress and building design, not so much invested in doubts rooted in unproven theories.

 

[ozeco41]

It would be interesting to hear from people here as to why they simply accept that the fires on ten floors in WTC 7 were started from debris from WTC 1.

Scientific method - starting of the fires by debris is the reigning hypothesis until someone produces a better one. "Fires tend to spread" (stated more technically) is the reigning hypothesis to explain the number of floors. Both have same status as "There was no CD at WTC on 9/11" - no one has produced an hypothesis with status worthy of consideration for overturning the extant hypothesis and explanatory hypotheses.

Also, why would there be no fires in the Verizon Building or the U.S. Post Office which were on either side of WTC 7?

Technical reason - because there were no fires. Discussion process reason - no one has made a prima facie case that there should be fires.

 

[ozeco41]

....transformers have protection against what you are saying..

That is one of the missing or overlooked links in recent discussions.

....The explosion Barry Jennings described as occurring right under the stairwell landing he was on with Michael Hess in WTC 7 also occurred about 45 minutes after the plane hit WTC 1.

AFAIK no one has pointed out that if the explosions were MHI they pre-date (pre-time??) Larry's discussion of "Pull it". With consequences for any causal link Larry's comment >>> collapse due to MHI.

....Can we talk about what started the fires on floors 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19, 22, 28, and 30 in WTC 7? It certainly wasn't transformers.

Two obvious possibilties viz:
1) Fires spread esp when not fought; AND
2) Arson.

 

[LSSBB]

That is one of the missing or overlooked links in recent discussions. [qimg]http://conleys.com.au/smilies/thumbup.gif[/qimg]

AFAIK no one has pointed out that if the explosions were MHI they pre-date (pre-time??) Larry's discussion of "Pull it". With consequences for any causal link Larry's comment >>> collapse due to MHI.


Two obvious possibilties viz:
1) Fires spread esp when not fought; AND
2) Arson.

There was an earlier thread with ergo, where the Jennings time line was dissected ad nauseum.

 

[ozeco41]

There was an earlier thread with ergo, where the Jennings time line was dissected ad nauseum.

Thanks - I wont be going into any more detail after my brief comments.

BTW there were two earlier threads focussed on the Col 79 Girder walk-off - back a couple of years minimum. I haven't located them -- yet. And better suited to Tony's narrow focus than Sander's broader OP for this thread and Sander's own preferred and interesting explanations.

There is nothing new to discuss anyway on Tony's stuff. Same issue as the last two or three times going back those years - Tony focuses on details. Many debunkers are happy to fight on the details. (AKA "Whack-a-Mole") The overall assumptions and context still wrong....etc....etc

I'd find it more productive to discuss Missing Jolt and the real 1D v 3D failings which underpin that for the Twin Towers. At least that would be a real discussion topic.

 

[beachnut]

It would be interesting to hear from people here as to why they simply accept that the fires on ten floors in WTC 7 were started from debris from WTC 1.

Also, why would there be no fires in the Verizon Building or the U.S. Post Office which were on either side of WTC 7?

Cause a falling on fire building crashed into WTC 7. I suspect 911 truth does not do fire.

There goes your CD theory. 13th year of woo, 911 truth has done nothing productive except fool nuts like the Boston Bombers.

 

[JSanderO]

Electricity moves at the speed of light but the transformers you claim exploded in both WTC 1 and WTC 7 would not blow instantaneously, as it is heating of the oil in them that causes an explosion and it takes time to heat.

You might not realize it, but transformers have protection against what you are saying. They don't just short out when a path is broken. It is highly unlikely that the aircraft impacts caused transformers, in the basement of WTC 1 and in the Con Edison sub-station in WTC 7, to explode. The explosion Barry Jennings described as occurring right under the stairwell landing he was on with Michael Hess in WTC 7 also occurred about 45 minutes after the plane hit WTC 1.

Can we talk about what started the fires on floors 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19, 22, 28, and 30 in WTC 7? It certainly wasn't transformers.

Nonsense...Did you ever short out a 12v car battery? The temps rise to as high super hot and melt steel instantly.. like the screw driver you shorted the pos and neg with. If you think that the circuit protect would react fast enough you are wrong. The disconnect switches etc. are way too slow. And this is how this voltage spike or blew various components.

But you have another explanation for why the 13.8kv feeds went down at the precise moment of the plane strike. This was in a Con Ed report.

So something about the plane hitting tower 1 cause 13 massive electrical circuits to go down...

You tell us what caused that to happen.

And the explosion in the sub basement of 1WTC just happened to take place at the moment of impact of the plane... How do you explain that one? Some sort of timing homing device?????????

What reports about these "explosions" do you accept as fact? Con Ed? Jennings? Rodriguez?

 

[NoahFence]

It would be interesting to hear from people here as to why they simply accept that the fires on ten floors in WTC 7 were started from debris from WTC 1.

Also, why would there be no fires in the Verizon Building or the U.S. Post Office which were on either side of WTC 7?

Because the fires could not have started any other way.

I mean, in reality. The alternative, that it was by nefarious means by an unnamed suspect who planned it with no prior knowledge to the aircraft hijackings is so far removed from rational thought, it is impossible.

 

[Justin39640]

Nonsense...Did you ever short out a 12v car battery? The temps rise to as high super hot and melt steel instantly.. like the screw driver you shorted the pos and neg with. If you think that the circuit protect would react fast enough you are wrong. The disconnect switches etc. are way too slow. And this is how this voltage spike or blew various components.

But you have another explanation for why the 13.8kv feeds went down at the precise moment of the plane strike. This was in a Con Ed report.

So something about the plane hitting tower 1 cause 13 massive electrical circuits to go down...

You tell us what caused that to happen.

And the explosion in the sub basement of 1WTC just happened to take place at the moment of impact of the plane... How do you explain that one? Some sort of timing homing device?????????

What reports about these "explosions" do you accept as fact? Con Ed? Jennings? Rodriguez?

I always thought the "explosion" in the sub basement was actually the plane impact reverberating through the buildings steel frame. I also always thought that the Jennings/Hess testimony was pretty good evidence that 7WTC got damaged by debris from the second collapse. I'm also curious what Tony thinks lit up all the cars and trucks north of 7WTC. Spontaneous combustion?

I do agree that shorting (which is different than a failed open like Tony seems to confuse above) the 13.8Kv lines wouldn't be good for the equipment. I've seen more than enough times, when wires short, the fuse protection doesn't work and the wiring starts to glow until the circuit burns out. Depending on the power involved, that could be one hell of a burn.

I've had machines where operators had chains on the bonnet that slipped into the engine compartment and came to rest between B+ on the starter and the engine block. I got to one of those for a damage assessment just as the fire department was pulling away. You should see the fireworks when operators short the 2/0 battery cables on a 48V 1100AH EV battery (which weighs about 3000lbs).

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Nonsense...Did you ever short out a 12v car battery? The temps rise to as high super hot and melt steel instantly.. like the screw driver you shorted the pos and neg with. If you think that the circuit protect would react fast enough you are wrong. The disconnect switches etc. are way too slow. And this is how this voltage spike or blew various components.

But you have another explanation for why the 13.8kv feeds went down at the precise moment of the plane strike. This was in a Con Ed report.

So something about the plane hitting tower 1 cause 13 massive electrical circuits to go down...

You tell us what caused that to happen.

And the explosion in the sub basement of 1WTC just happened to take place at the moment of impact of the plane... How do you explain that one? Some sort of timing homing device?????????

What reports about these "explosions" do you accept as fact? Con Ed? Jennings? Rodriguez?

I think your conjecture about transformer explosions is unsupported and I don't think you have any idea what kind of protection high end large transformers would have or how fast or slow it is.

I have never seen any report that said that thirteen 13.8kV feeds went down when the first plane struck the North Tower.

All I need to know about explosions is seen on the corners of the North Tower in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8. Those focused ejections on the corners are not due to compressed air from the floors collapsing.

 

[Justin39640]

Electricity moves at the speed of light but the transformers you claim exploded in both WTC 1 and WTC 7 would not blow instantaneously, as it is heating of the oil in them that causes an explosion and it takes time to heat.

Unfortunately, the planes probably shorted the lines, not cause an open. Partial shorts cause a jump in amperage. An increase in amperage causes an increase in resistance and heat. As cables heat up, it causes more resistance. Amps, resistance and heat increases exponentially. This can happen VERY fast.

You might not realize it, but transformers have protection against what you are saying. They don't just short out when a path is broken. It is highly unlikely that the aircraft impacts caused transformers, in the basement of WTC 1 and in the Con Edison sub-station in WTC 7, to explode. The explosion Barry Jennings described as occurring right under the stairwell landing he was on with Michael Hess in WTC 7 also occurred about 45 minutes after the plane hit WTC 1.

Circuit protection isn't foolproof. Transformers blow up all the time. Jennings got his times wrong. This is obvious when he reports he seen burned out cars trucks and buses on the north side of 7WTC.

Can we talk about what started the fires on floors 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19, 22, 28, and 30 in WTC 7? It certainly wasn't transformers.

You can't say anything was certain in the chaos and utter devastation on 9/11/01. I would think that just the seismic portion of the collapse could start some serious trouble in a high voltage sub-station. You're failing again assuming a pristine electrical system and complete/instantaneous disconnects in the damage.


(nsfw, guy swearing)

 

[Spanx]

I think your conjecture about transformer explosions is unsupported and I don't think you have any idea what kind of protection high end large transformers would have or how fast or slow it is.

I have never seen any report that said that thirteen 13.8kV feeds went down when the first plane struck the North Tower.

All I need to know about explosions is seen on the corners of the North Tower in this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSApOavkHg8. Those focused ejections on the corners are not due to compressed air from the floors collapsing.

So why would they need to rig explosives to every corner on every floor ?

http://youtu.be/8g_GeQR8fJo

 

[Tony Szamboti]

So why would they need to rig explosives to every corner on every floor ?

http://youtu.be/8g_GeQR8fJo

If you want the sides of a box to fall you cut the corners.

But back to WTC 7.

I would like to see people here explain why it makes sense to them that WTC 7 would have had fires on ten different floors (7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19, 22, 28, and 30) ignited, with no fires ignited in the immediately adjacent Verizon and U.S. Post Office buildings, if the WTC 7 fires had actually been caused during the collapse of WTC 1?

A second question would be

Why would items from WTC 1 still be capable of igniting fires in WTC 7 when the tremendous amount of gypsum and concrete dust generated during its collapse would likely have extinguished the fires in WTC 1?

 

[Africanus]

A second question would be

Why would items from WTC 1 still be capable of igniting fires in WTC 7 when the tremendous amount of gypsum and concrete dust generated during its collapse would likely have extinguished the fires in WTC 1?

Because they were hot. Yes, it's as simple as that!

 

[GlennB]

I would like to see people here explain why it makes sense to them that WTC 7 would have had fires on ten different floors (7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 19, 22, 28, and 30) ignited, with no fires ignited in the immediately adjacent Verizon and U.S. Post Office buildings, if the WTC 7 fires had actually been caused during the collapse of WTC 1?

Er, that's trivial. WTC7 was struck by much more substantial WTC1 debris than those other buildings. The video record shows it clearly. And, incidentally, the other two were of RC construction with conventional windows.

Why would items from WTC 1 still be capable of igniting fires in WTC 7 when the tremendous amount of gypsum and concrete dust generated during its collapse would likely have extinguished the fires in WTC 1?

This is something you've invented. As has been pointed out before, WTC1 debris started fires further away than WTC7. Meanwhile hot debris doesn't have to be flaming to start a fire.