Dear oh dear, Lyte you're no better at construction than you are at eyewitness testimony.
Just a word to the wise, don't mention the lack of damage to a buildings foundations again, certainly not in this context, because it really does not make you look very......bright.
For the record, the foundation of a structure provides a stable base upon which the superstructure is built.
Dmage to a foundation would normally only occur through ground movement such as earthquakes or subsidence.
A plane hitting a building is very unlikely to cause any damage to what is (probably) a mass of concrete buried in the ground.
Also, your killklown impersonation of "where's the damage from the tailplane" further indicates that you are speaking from a position of personal incredulity rather than expertise.
Something to consider with regard to aircraft:
You know that an aircraft derives lift from it's wings, right?
So effectively the wings are supporting the fuselage of the plane.
So, if you wanted to lift an aircraft with, for example, a crane, you could do so by lifting the wings.
I make these points to indicate that the wing structure is not fragile but is sturdy enough to carry the loading of the aircraft.
However, the tail is a relatively flimsy construction, and smashing the tail section into a building at high speed is likely to leave very little recogniseable tail pieces, and the tip of the tail is unlikely to cause a great deal of damage to the wall it hits.
To summarize:
Wings = strong and cause lots of damage as they disintegrate
Tail = weak and cause little damage as it disintegrates
