• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Christopher7 said:
There's something wrong with you math. You can't have negative water pressure. There will be water at some psi coming out the other end.
Click to expand...

No **** sherlock. That was my POINT. The water would trickle out the other end.

Christopher7 said:
You ignored This:
I'm not sure how these pumps work but if gpm varies with psi, then to achieve optimum psi, bring up pressure/flow until you reach max pressure at other end.
Click to expand...

And then you run the risk of a blowout, or worse, complete failure of the pump.


Thank goodness you're not a firefighter. People would die often on your watch.

Christopher7 said:
In any case, the Harvey pumped 38 million gallons of water in 3 days.
@ 5:26 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEjRFAckjjM
[that's probably 3 point 8 and she read it wrong]
Click to expand...

Nope, 38 million sounds about right. Do the math.

8000 gpm
X60
X24
X3
___________________


I've made it very simple for you.


Christopher7 said:
If you are the professional you say you are, and you were there, then you will be able to tell us how the fire boats managed to supply sufficient water to the WTC.
Click to expand...

We didn't have sufficient water to the WTC untill about the 14th or so. There you go champ.
 
Mr. Skinny said:
This makes no sense. You say you can't flow 4000@300 then say you can flow 8000@300.
Click to expand...

Per the specs that C7 posted, the capacity is 8000 gpm at 300psi, or 4000 gpm at 150 psi.

But, it doesn't say how it's configured to get that. There really isn't enough information available to say for certain.

I may contact the owners of the Carvey on Thursday to ask them for more detailed specifications. Output sizes, may effeciency, etc.

Mr. Skinny said:
Also, your friction loss is assuming a pair of 5 inch lines flowing 4000 gpm each (to get 8000 gal total). Christopher7's imaginary setup is 5 - 5 inch lines. Not sure where he got that from though.
Click to expand...

Not too sure either. When I have more time, I will go back and double check my calculations and such.

Mr. Skinny said:
Thanks.

Is it possible that they used three of the pumps as boosters for the fourth? Wouldn't that theoretically give them an output pressure of 600 psi at the fireboat. (Yes, I know there are lots of losses to consider, etc.)
Click to expand...

Possibly, but I am not certain exactly how the setup works. That would be my assumption.

Mr. Skinny said:
And yes, I only ever ran fire pumps at 120% when doing water tests. No sense screwing up a good pump. However, in an emergency like 9/11 I might have done it for brief periods.
Click to expand...

Brief periods, sure. I've had our big ladder truck up to 160% during a mock firefighter trapped drill. I want to say that we held there for about 3-4 minutes before I wound it down to 95% capacity.

Mr. Skinny said:
See above. I'd appreciate you expanding on your "can't flow/can flow" statements.
Click to expand...

I'll work on that later for you. Cheers!
 
triforcharity said:
No **** sherlock. That was my POINT. The water would trickle out the other end.

And then you run the risk of a blowout, or worse, complete failure of the pump.

Nope, 38 million sounds about right. Do the math.

8000 gpm
X60
X24
X3

We didn't have sufficient water to the WTC untill about the 14th or so.
Click to expand...
:boggled: 38 million gallons in 3 days - insufficient?

Tell me, Mr. Fireman, how did 38 million gallons trickle out the end of a 5" line?
 
Christopher7, Clayton Moore, tempesta29, et al:

A fire didn't look hot enough to you?
A building didn't quite collapse the way you think it should?
A decision a fire chief made doesn't jibe with what you would have done if you were in their boots?

SO WHAT?

I'm sorry to say that your "gut feeling" doesn't serve you well in these areas. I realize that you are apparently all members of the first generation who never knew a world without the internet, but I have a reality check for you that is going seriously harsh your mellow: hundreds of hours spent watching YouTube videos doesn't make you an expert in anything worthwhile. For the love of sanity, stop embarrassing the human race, step back, objectively look at what's being said to you and have the courage and wisdom to admit to yourself that if some aspect of the so-called "Official Story" doesn't quite "add up" to you, maybe, just maybe it's because you don't have the requisite intelligence and/or training to do the math.
 
Christopher7 said:
:boggled: 38 million gallons in 3 days - insufficient?

Tell me, Mr. Fireman, how did 38 million gallons trickle out the end of a 5" line?
Click to expand...

How many of those lines were at the 12th floor of any building during that time?

your arguments from personal incredulity are rather amazing to watch...
 
JohnG said:
Christopher7, Clayton Moore, tempesta29, et al:

A fire didn't look hot enough to you?
A building didn't quite collapse the way you think it should?
A decision a fire chief made doesn't jibe with what you would have done if you were in their boots?

SO WHAT?

I'm sorry to say that your "gut feeling" doesn't serve you well in these areas. I realize that you are apparently all members of the first generation who never knew a world without the internet, but I have a reality check for you that is going seriously harsh your mellow: hundreds of hours spent watching YouTube videos doesn't make you an expert in anything worthwhile. For the love of sanity, stop embarrassing the human race, step back, objectively look at what's being said to you and have the courage and wisdom to admit to yourself that if some aspect of the so-called "Official Story" doesn't quite "add up" to you, maybe, just maybe it's because you don't have the requisite intelligence and/or training to do the math.
Click to expand...

Simultaneous global failure causing structural collapse doesn't occur from damage because damage is partial.

At most a partial collapse could have occurred. Like a landslide or an avalanche.
Click to expand...



Three buildings with different levels energy attacking them from different locations and directions causing all three to globally collapse.
Click to expand...


I'm old enough to understand and stand by the above.
 
Clayton Moore said:
I agree. Shame on those who forgot Lucky Larry had decided to pull it.
Click to expand...

Yes, in that famous interview, Larry Silverstein said "......................... pull it". I put a long row of "..............." before the "pull it", because those two words were uttered by Silverstein in a context. Clayton, do you know what Silverstein said, verbatim? I will quote the relevant context for you in full:

Larry Silverstein said:
I remember getting a call from the, er, fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, "We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. And they made that decision to pull and we watched the building collapse.
Click to expand...
(quoted from a CTer site: http://www.prisonplanet.com/011904wtc7.html)

I highlighted the most important words and phrases, to make it easier for you to assess whether "Larry had decided to pull it" (your claim) is a correct claim (it isn't), or whether something else is true, namely that the FDNY had decided to "pull it"!
So now you know that you made a WRONG claim when you wrote that "Larry had decided to pull it"
Agreed, Clayton Moore?


Secondly, what did they decide to pull? Again, let's read for context:
Larry Silverstein said:
fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, "We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.
Click to expand...
I highlighted for your convenience the subject of this exchange, which was the FDNY's effort to contain the fire amid the terrible loss of life already suffered when they tried to contain other fires earlier. The subject that the pronoun "it" was NOT the building, but the activity and personel that the fire department commander was in charge of.
So now you know that you make a WRONG claim when you hint that anybody "had decided to pull" the building, WTC7, as in "demolish it". It is a simple matter of English language comprehension.
Agreed, Clayton Moore?
 
Clayton Moore said:
I'm old enough to understand and stand by the above.
Click to expand...

I have asked you many times how old you are, because you really really come across like a 15-year old, that's how little you know and understand.

All your posts reflect a total lack of understanding of physics, engineering, basic human psychology, and even the English language.
None of your posts make any arguments derived from facts and any science and engineering, strung together using logic.
 
Clayton Moore said:
[snipped a moved goal post]
Click to expand...

Clayton, did you look at what "lucky Larry" really said, amd compare it to your claim that he made that decision (when in fact he said that they, the fire commander and his men, made that decision)? It would restore a little bit of your totally collapsed credibility if you could for once admit that you made a foolish, transparent, and years ago debunked error.
 
It doesn't make any difference if Clayton Moore believes something based on incorrect information that he thinks is correct, and then finds out that indeed the information IS incorrect later.

Only rational people would actually alter their beliefs when evidence arises that their beliefs are based on bogus information. That pretty much precludes most ideologues.
 
Last edited:
Clayton Moore said:
I agree. Shame on those who forgot Lucky Larry had decided to pull it.
Click to expand...
You seem to have a cognitive problem here. It has been pointed out repeatedly that NOBODY outside of FDNY had any authority to tell Daniel Nigro what to do about the situation he faced.

I don't care if was Rotten Rudy demanding that they go back into that groaning, creaking, clanging and shattering hulk of a building to preserve what little was left of the OEM site or Larry S telling them to stand aside so that they could shoot the buillding. The end result would be the same. Nigro would have given them a choice between shutting up and going away or taking an enema from a big brass nozzle with a 1 1/2 inch appeture.

Remember that Larry ended his statement with the words "and a little later in the day, wewatched it collpase.
 
Christopher7 said:
:boggled: 38 million gallons in 3 days - insufficient?
Click to expand...

Yes, considering the fires burned for 99 days afterwards.

Christopher7 said:
Tell me, Mr. Fireman, how did 38 million gallons trickle out the end of a 5" line?
Click to expand...

It didn't. We were not using 5" lines for fighting fires. Those are called supply lines. We also were not trying to fight a fire in the 12th floor of a structurally compromised building.

When I need to know how to frame in a window properly, i'll consult you. When I need to fight a huge fire, I will rely on the experts such as the FDNY.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom