10 story hole in WTC 7

[Belz...]

You [all] cannot dispute the facts from the FEMA and NIST reports and you cannot deal with the fact that your hypothesis depends on office fires alone to account for the initiating event. So rather than acknowledge this, you choose to ignore it.

So, chris. Did you see that 47-storey hole ? I'd like to hear what effect you think this had on the structure.

 

[chipmunk stew]

your hypothesis depends on office fires alone to account for the initiating event.

Why is this a problem?

 

[Christopher7]

Why is this a problem?

Office fires have never caused a global collapse nor could they IMO.
There are several cases of large fires in modern steel frame high rise buildings and there was no collapse.
The Windsor Tower in Madrid is a poor comparison because it is a different design and only suffered a partial collapse of the outer, light weight columns over a period o f time.

There has been a lot of talk here and on other forums about diesel fires contributing to the collapse. As it turns out, there is no evidence of this happening.
There is still a lot of talk about debris damage and many people think that the debris damage had something to do with the collapse in spite of the fact that there was no debris damage to the area of the initiating event.

 

[MaGZ]

WTC 7 was on fire before the collapse of WTC 2

That's the north tower burning. WTC7 angles back--two thirds or so of what looks like the east wall of WTC7 is actually the north tower. 7 is reddish, the north tower is grayer.

This video does show WTC 7 on fire before the collapse of the first tower WTC 2. WTC 2 is in the background. WTC 7 is on the right and flames are seen coming out of the east side of the building. Do a zoom of the video and you will see flames coming out of WTC 7 around the 32nd floor. An errant missile strike on WTC 7 occurred at 9:03 as a fighter attempted to shoot down Flight 175 as it was crashing into WTC 2. The missile struck on the 14th floor created a large hole that was described by firemen. A fire burning several floors above the missile strike presents some problems. Perhaps a second missile hitting WTC 7 at a higher floor would be one explanation how a fire could have started on floor 32.

The east side of WTC 7 looks light because of the reflection of the sun. This video was takend between 9:03 and 9:59.

The Missiles at Ground Zero
http://www.nationalvanguard.org/printer.php?id=10058

 

[jaydeehess]

This video does show WTC 7 on fire before the collapse of the first tower WTC 2. WTC 2 is in the background. WTC 7 is on the right and flames are seen coming out of the east side of the building. Do a zoom of the video and you will see flames coming out of WTC 7 around the 32nd floor.

No, it is an optical illusion that has the east side of WTC 1 very close to being in line(parralax) with the SE corner of WTC 7 in the video.

One must ask oneself why this is only a 4 second clip of video. What is seen before and after this 4 second snippet? Does the camera move forward(towards WTC 2), or to the left, exposing the obvious nature of this smoke and flame coming from WTC 1?

Where's the rest of it MaGZ?
You are too afraid to find out aren't you?

 

[jaydeehess]

There has been a lot of talk here and on other forums about diesel fires contributing to the collapse. As it turns out, there is no evidence of this happening.
There is still a lot of talk about debris damage and many people think that the debris damage had something to do with the collapse in spite of the fact that there was no debris damage to the area of the initiating event.

Actually it seems to me it is only you on this forum who has stated that desiel fires are a cornerstone of the fire hypothesis. NIST/FEMA put this as a lesser probability. You are rewriting NIST/FEMA.

It has been pointed out many times that the severed perimeter columns would be producing a shear force on the core to the south and west which would reduce the ability of them to absorb additional damage such as fire weakening. You point out that an office fire is quite large near the area of the 'initiating event' which would qualify as additional damage. You choose to believe that the perimeter damage could not possibly cause stress to teh columns 79,80 or 81.

You know that something caused the elevators near columns 79,80 and 81 to be ejected from the shaft yet you steadfastly refuse to believe that this is any indication of forces acting upon the core columns.

 

[MaGZ]

No, it is an optical illusion that has the east side of WTC 1 very close to being in line(parralax) with the SE corner of WTC 7 in the video.

One must ask oneself why this is only a 4 second clip of video. What is seen before and after this 4 second snippet? Does the camera move forward(towards WTC 2), or to the left, exposing the obvious nature of this smoke and flame coming from WTC 1?

Where's the rest of it MaGZ?
You are too afraid to find out aren't you?

OK, I agree you are right and I am wrong on this one. However I still maintain WTC 7 was burning on floors 11 and 12 before the collapse of the Twin Towers.

http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc23.JPG

http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc38.JPG

 

[chipmunk stew]

Office fires have never caused a global collapse nor could they IMO.

False.

There are several cases of large fires in modern steel frame high rise buildings and there was no collapse.
The Windsor Tower in Madrid is a poor comparison because it is a different design and only suffered a partial collapse of the outer, light weight columns over a period o f time.

There was a hell of a lot about 9/11 that was unprecedented. Precedence is irrelevant. What is relevant is the fact that unmitigated office fires, particularly in combination with stresses introduced by blunt force damage, are perfectly capable of initiating the collapse of steel structures.

There has been a lot of talk here and on other forums about diesel fires contributing to the collapse.

False. There's been some talk about it, but most are in agreement that...

As it turns out, there is [little] evidence of this happening.

There is still a lot of talk about debris damage and many people think that the debris damage had something to do with the collapse in spite of the fact that there was no debris damage to the area of the initiating event.

The debris damage likely had no direct involvement in the initiating event, but I would expect some indirect involvement in the form of stresses introduced by shifting loads.

 

[Disbelief]

A lot of explosions going off at once or in very rapid sequence.

By very close i mean 100ths of a second, sounding like a single explosion.

My guess is, the columns under the penthouse were taken out one at a time to clear an area so the east and west walls could fall inward.
Daryl didn't have to run from the dust cloud so he was probably back around the 600' safety perimeter. He didn't hear the single devices going off one at a time but he did hear the big bang of the rest of the core columns and anything else they needed to blow.

Since you are apparently an expert at CD, let me ask a few questions that might enlighten me.

Isn't the purpose of a CD to being down columns in a specific order? Now, would explosions milliseconds apart not allow this to happen? What I am saying is, a member has to fall a certain distance before the next member blew, so would this be enough time or would they fall simultaneously, thus disrupting the CD?

Can the timers be set to an accuracy of milliseconds apart and how reliable is that setting?

Do linear cutter charges (I would assume that this is what you are saying is used) cut completely through the steel or do precuts have to be made?

 

[ellindsey]

Isn't the purpose of a CD to being down columns in a specific order? Now, would explosions milliseconds apart not allow this to happen? What I am saying is, a member has to fall a certain distance before the next member blew, so would this be enough time or would they fall simultaneously, thus disrupting the CD?

Here's a related point that occurs to me. A series of simultaneous explosions will only sound like a single explosion if they are all roughly equidistant to the observer. Cutting charges in the demolition of a large building are going to be spread over hundreds of feet. When they explode there will be a time delay between when they explode to when the observer hears them depending on the distance between the observer and the explosion.

In order for a large number of charges going off throughout a building to sound like a single explosion to an observer, the timing of those explosions will have to be not simultaneous, but timed just right so that the sound from all explosions reach the observer exactly at the same time. That timing is dependent on the exact location of the observer, and it will be impossible to time the explosions such that all observers hear them as simultaneous. A person in just the right spot might hear one explosion, but someone standing a thousand feet to the side will hear a series of explosions.

Therefore demolition charges going off in WTC7 cannot possible sound like a single explosion to all observers. Even if they were perfectly simultaneous, the limited speed of sound and the necessity of the charges being spaced throughout the building will cause it to sound like a series of closely spaced explosions rather than a single one.

 

[Christopher7]

Actually it seems to me it is only you on this forum who has stated that desiel fires are a cornerstone of the fire hypothesis. NIST/FEMA put this as a lesser probability. You are rewriting NIST/FEMA.

You are misquoting me again.
Show me where i said 'cornerstone'.
The diesel fires are an important part of the FEMA/NIST hypothesis because office fires don't burn hot enough to weaken the massive core columns.

It has been pointed out many times that the severed perimeter columns would be producing a shear force on the core to the south and west which would reduce the ability of them to absorb additional damage such as fire weakening.

The stress was primarily to the core columns closest to the severed perimeter columns and to a lesser extent to the core columns at the east end of WTC 7.
Furthermore, as you said, the shear force was to the south and west. In the NIST hypothesis, the initiating event is a core column buckling to the east and pulling the othercore columns to the east. [NIST Apx. L pg 49 & 50]

You point out that an office fire is quite large near the area of the 'initiating event' which would qualify as additional damage. You choose to believe that the perimeter damage could not possibly cause stress to teh columns 79,80 or 81.

You are misquoting me again.
I have said that the stress would be bourn by the entire building as it is essentially one piece.

You know that something caused the elevators near columns 79,80 and 81 to be ejected from the shaft yet you steadfastly refuse to believe that this is any indication of forces acting upon the core columns.

There are NO elevators anywhere near columns 79, 80 and 81.

It is not known which elevator cars were ejected or if a core column was severed in the process.

NIST Apx. L pg 51: "damage... of core framing is not known"

 

[Christopher7]

False.

There was a hell of a lot about 9/11 that was unprecedented. Precedence is irrelevant. What is relevant is the fact that unmitigated office fires, particularly in combination with stresses introduced by blunt force damage, are perfectly capable of initiating the collapse of steel structures.

[bolding mine]
Fact? The blunt force damage was far from the initiating event. It might cause a collapse in the area of the damage but not in the other end of the building.

False. There's been some talk about it, but most are in agreement that...

As it turns out, there is [little] evidence of this happening.

There is NO evidence diesel fires in the east half of WTC 7. [FEMA pg 28 & 29]

The debris damage likely had no direct involvement in the initiating event, but I would expect some indirect involvement in the form of stresses introduced by shifting loads.

The stress was pulling to the south and west. According to NIST the initiating event was a core column buckling to the east.

 

[Christopher7]

Since you are apparently an expert at CD, let me ask a few questions that might enlighten me.

Isn't the purpose of a CD to being down columns in a specific order? Now, would explosions milliseconds apart not allow this to happen? What I am saying is, a member has to fall a certain distance before the next member blew, so would this be enough time or would they fall simultaneously, thus disrupting the CD?

Can the timers be set to an accuracy of milliseconds apart and how reliable is that setting?

Do linear cutter charges (I would assume that this is what you are saying is used) cut completely through the steel or do precuts have to be made?

The sequence of demolition is tailored to the task at hand and the desired effect.
Only the people who worked out what devices would be used and the sequence would know precisely why it was done in the manner it was done.

 

[Disbelief]

The sequence of demolition is tailored to the task at hand and the desired effect.
Only the people who worked out what devices would be used and the sequence would know precisely why it was done in the manner it was done.

So, you don't know and you refuse to find out. Why don't you research and ask questions of experts instead of trying to act like you know what you are talking about concerning CDs. Find a demolition where the sequence is so close together that separate blasts are indistinguishable. Also, answer the other questions I put to you instead of cherry picking.

Because something looks like a CD doesn't mean it is. Because something sounds like a bomb, doesn't mean it is. Here is an example. I work in manufacturing and we use resistance welding to put together steel. These weld guns are cooled, some by water and some by air depending on various conditions. To change the weld caps (the part that contacts the metal) on the guns that are water cooled, the water needs to be turned off. Now, if the water is not turned back on, steam builds up in the cable. When enough pressure builds up, the cable explodes and it sounds like a shotgun going off. If I only hear it, I do not immediatley think that a gun went off, even though that is what it sounds like.

 

[Christopher7]

Here's a related point that occurs to me. A series of simultaneous explosions will only sound like a single explosion if they are all roughly equidistant to the observer.
Therefore demolition charges going off in WTC7 cannot possible sound like a single explosion to all observers. Even if they were perfectly simultaneous, the limited speed of sound and the necessity of the charges being spaced throughout the building will cause it to sound like a series of closely spaced explosions rather than a single one.

The only place where Daryl could have seen the bottom floor of WTC 7 from 600 feet away was from Greenwich street. [to the north]
The distance between the north core column row and the south core column row is about 50 feet.
The time delay from Daryl's location would be minimal.

 

[jaydeehess]

You are misquoting me again.
Show me where i said 'cornerstone'.
The diesel fires are an important part of the FEMA/NIST hypothesis because office fires don't burn hot enough to weaken the massive core columns.

"Important" differs oh so much from "cornerstone". Ok, you said "important". Except desiel fires aren't as important to the NIST hypothesis as you pretend they are and yes, office fires can and do damage even large steel columns.

The stress was primarily to the core columns closest to the severed perimeter columns and to a lesser extent to the core columns at the east end of WTC 7.

Did you miss that the shearing force would be translitted to all columns via the mechanical floors.

Furthermore, as you said, the shear force was to the south and west. In the NIST hypothesis, the initiating event is a core column buckling to the east and pulling the othercore columns to the east. [NIST Apx. L pg 49 & 50]

My point was that the force was acting in the direction of south and west, not acting upon the columns in the south and west.

You are misquoting me again.
I have said that the stress would be bourn by the entire building as it is essentially one piece.

That makes little sense. yes the stresses would be distributed by the structural members of the building but each would be taking it differently. It would not be evenly distributed throughout the entire structure. Do you or don't you believe that the loss of the perimeter columns would be adding lateral stresses to the core columns? How about collapsed flooring? How about fires on the south side on relativly less damaged floors(buckling trusses)?
How about the office fires near columns 79,80,81?

There are NO elevators anywhere near columns 79, 80 and 81.

Yes there is. There is a bank of elevators between the row of columns 76,77,78 and the row 79,80,81 IIRC

It is not known which elevator cars were ejected or if a core column was severed in the process.

NIST Apx. L pg 51: "damage... of core framing is not known

It is not definitively known if, where or how much but the very FACT that elevators that were in shafts in the core of the building were ejected from their shafts obviously suggests that there was damage to the core.

 

[jaydeehess]

The only place where Daryl could have seen the bottom floor of WTC 7 from 600 feet away was from Greenwich street. [to the north]
The distance between the north core column row and the south core column row is about 50 feet.
The time delay from Daryl's location would be minimal.

Actually sound takes about 0.05 of a second to travel 50 feet. Much longer than the supposed 0.01 of a second timing. Gee, Chris, your explosions get farther apart all the time.

 

[A W Smith]

if there are no fires on the eastern half of building 7. where is all that smoke coming from?

 

[Miragememories]

The often viewed video of the squibs moving up the side of WTC7 for instance obviously made explosive noises but I haven't heard an actual recording of them.

Wrong - if they were explosives they must have made explosive noises, if they were windows blowing out they would have made breaking glass noises. The way to tell is to check for explosive noises, and they aren't there, so we can't really resolve this one.

Can we now?

Of course squibs reveal windows blowing out. Sigh..why do I waste my time replying to such drivel.

I'll mention again but I know it won't be understood. The squibs were moving UP! Windows being blown out by air pressure from a collapsing building would have created squibs moving downward. Ponder that challenging thought for a while Dave Rogers!

MM

 

[A W Smith]

Can we now?

Of course squibs reveal windows blowing out. Sigh..why do I waste my time replying to such drivel.

I'll mention again but I know it won't be understood. The squibs were moving UP! Windows being blown out by air pressure from a collapsing building would have created squibs moving downward. Ponder that challenging thought for a while Dave Rogers!

MM

Odd that the corner of the building where... ahem "squibs" were seen was the slowest to fall.