jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
What flammable coolant is being mentioned? Engine glycol/water mix coolant certainly is not flammable. Transformer oil coolant is but that not going to be in the generator rooms is it?
- Status
Redwood
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- May 9, 2012
- Messages
- 1,557
The fires would have two sources, then. There's a long line of fires stretching from WTC 5 and 6 up West Broadway that were caused by falling fiery debris. Not much of a stretch to believe it started fires in WTC 7, too. Unless, of course, they were all started by stealth Ninjas.
It was a lucky thing that no fires started in WTC 3, or the people who were trapped there would have been goners, for sure.
DGM
Skeptic not Atheist
I don't believe oil cooled transformers are allowed in buildings in NYC. I'm reasonable sure the transformer were air cooled like most interior applications.
I'm guessing he's talking about the refrigerant or the coolant used in the A/C systems. Most of these setups only use water (with some additives) that runs to chillers that are mounted on the roof. None of these are flammable.
Last edited:
To get a more objective take on the level of shaking, than what the witness accounts can give us, I have looked at the seismic data of the collapses.
According to NIST NCSTAR 1-9 Appendix B, the collapse of WTC 2 was equivalent to a magnitude 2.1 earthquake on the Richter Scale, lasting approximately 10 seconds.
WTC 7 was approximately 210 meters away from WTC 2, and outside the bathtub that surrounded the basement area of WTC 1 and WTC 2, so it did not share any floor slabs with either tower, that could transfer impact vibrations directly to the building. And unlike WTC 1 it did not sustain any direct hits from heavy debris. Nor did any heavy debris impact close to the building.
So with that in mind, I find it fair to look at what effects could be expected from a magnitude 2.1 earthquake. The expected effects can be found by looking at The Modified Mercalli (MM) Intensity Scale. A 2.1 earthquake on the Richter Scale would be a MM II quake. There are several versions of the table. Here are two descriptions.
Source: The Relationship Between Richter Magnitude and Modified Mercalli Intensity
Source: Natural Resources Canada
Even if we move up the MM scale, it is not until MM V that it is expected that practically all persons indoors will notice the shaking.
So my take from this, is that it is entirely plausible that Jennings and Hess on Floor 23 would not notice any shaking from the collapse of WTC 2. According to NIST (page 298), they were at the time of the collapse on their way to get into an elevator to go downstairs. While it is expected that Catalano down the 3rd floor, at rest talking on the phone and then taking cover on the floor, would notice, as he did.
The next question is what Jennings and Hess could possibly have heard during the collapse. Given their position on Floor 23 during the collapse, with likely several interior walls between them and the exterior, and given the distance from WTC 2, I also find it plausible that they did not notice any sound from the collapse either. I am going to cover that with some posts tomorrow.
But, for instance there are accounts from persons inside WTC 7 that did not hear the impact of Flight 11 and Flight 175. And it should be noted that the aircrafts hit the towers with more than twice the speed, that any debris falling from the top of the towers would have hit the ground with.
Last edited:
I can't help but notice that MM never actually said whether or not he believes Jennings could be wrong. The closest he's come is saying that if he was presented with acceptable evidence, he would admit it. In fact, he's doing a lot of soft-shoeing to try and put his statements in superposition; both right (in terms of what happened) wrong (in terms of when it happened) at the same time.
Imagine a wheel spinning.
Forever.
Imagine a wheel spinning.
Forever.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
And calling itself an arrow.
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2009
- Messages
- 18,903
You are all doing a fine and well-informed deconstruction of MM's timeline. Just one minor remark, and bit of advice regarding classes of evidence:
It's not "logic" that "dictates" this, it's merely "common sense". No one, not even the OEM, is compelled to employ common sense. So it might seem more plausible to think that the OEM was the last area to be ordered evacuated, but other captains have prematurely abandoned sinking ships before, so this is not good evidence. Much more helpful to point to actual evidence that the OEM was in fact evacuated later. I assume there is witness testimony to that effect. Any physical evidence or time-stamped records to back that up? Some of you will know and no doubt have presented that evidence to MM before.
I'm not aware of any physical evidence, just reliable testimony whose timeline is consistent with the claimed 9:43 evacuation order.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
My pointing out the reasonable scenario that the Office of Emergency Management would be the last to abandon WTC7 was meant to increase the plausibility of the witness statements to the effect of it being ordered evac'd at 9:44
Last edited:
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
There may be, or had been, phone records of calls placed from/incoming to the OEM. If anyone cares enough they might request that info from the telco.
I really don't care enough to do so.
Jennings statements are quite simply no where near enough to call into question what brought down WTC7 or the towers or the Pentagon or what created the crater in a field in Penn.
I really don't care enough to do so.
Jennings statements are quite simply no where near enough to call into question what brought down WTC7 or the towers or the Pentagon or what created the crater in a field in Penn.
Miragememories
Banned
It depends on the circumstances and what it was they were being asked to remember.
The NIST did not quote what was said.
The NIST 'selectively' printed summarized anecdotal evidence which they claimed was in agreement with their hypothesis.
Obviously the NIST chose to ignore Mr. Jenning's serious disagreement with them about the explosion at the 6th floor landing which he insists occurred before the collapse of the WTC twin towers
Based on Mike Catalano's testimony, over radio he okayed the evacuation of the 5th floor generators and the east penthouse.
This followed radio'd news of the 9:37 am Pentagon attack, when the 5th floor generator guys pleaded, and were cleared to evacuate, as were the men in the chiller plant.
Both evacuees were descending and somewhere in one of the the stairwells when 2 WTC collapsed.
Since Mr. Jennings states he experienced an explosion from below the 6th floor stairwell landing prior to the collapse of 2 WTC, it is possible that the 5th floor had already been evacuated at that time.
I do not suppose that the demolition of 7 WTC was prepped on 9/11.
What they said on 9/11 while still fresh in their memories;
Mr. Jennings said:
Mr. Hess said:
What they said several years later when they were well aware of the official hypothesis;
Mr. Hess said:
Mr. Jennings said:
Mr. Jennings said:
BBC Interviewer said:
Mr. Jennings said:
Mr. Hess decided to modify his memory in order to support the official position.
Mr. Jennings stood by what he remembered, in spite of whatever position he ultimately accepted.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
No. Every investigating agency attempts to determine what is most likely the case given conflicting or inconclusive evidence. That outlying testimony is weighted appropriately among its peers is not equivalent to saying it has been "ignored."
No. This is tantamount to you claiming on your own authority that you know why other people have variously testified as they have. But in fact you have no such knowledge, rendering this 30-plus page odyssey into your suppositional beliefs entirely irrelevant to the investigation.
Now that you have asserted reasons for why the evidence is the way it is, yet your conlusions to the contrary must somehow still be a going concern, you bear the burden to prove you have properly gained access to these witnesses' brains to determine what they were thinking.
Good luck.
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2009
- Messages
- 18,903
No. You quote Hess, and then misrepresent what he said in the later interview:
Hess said:
Mr. Hess still stands by the content of his memory: He still says that he experienced something that he interpreted at the time as an explosion.
His memory hasn't changed significantly.
What has changed is the interpretation of the memory. At the time, he was rather unaware of what had happened outside, and, like so many witnesses, struggled to make sense of very unusual experiences amid a dire lack of context information.
Everybody can be excused to come to wrong conclusions.
What Hess did in the meantime was to appreciate additional evidence and look for an explanation that better fit the totality of all available evidence, including his own memory of his experiences. He now finds that his experiences were consistent with the noise and shaking and visuals of another building crashing into the one he is in.
In other words: Mr Hess in the meantime has done some rational thinking.
You should try it, too!
Miragememories
Banned
On 9/11, not long after he was rescued.
Mr. Hess said:
Mr. Hess said:
On the day that it happened, Mr. Jennings and Mr. Hess did not say "I think I heard an explosion."
They both experienced an explosion and were certain enough about it that they publicly stated so.
How does one take a fresh memory and its judged meaning, and then several years later recall that old memory and re-judge it more accurately?
Unlike Mr. Jennings, clearly Mr. Hess was persuaded to think differently about what they both experienced years earlier on 9/11.
Mr. Hess conformed his interpretation to match that of the official story.
He is practising safe politics.
He doesn't just say he re-collects differently.
No, he is taking a "position". A political stance. He did not observe the collapse yet he is now firm in his belief that what happened at the 6th floor stairwell was the collapse of 1 WTC.
Why? Because he believes in the official story and for the NIST timeline to be correct, 1 WTC had to collapse when he was at the 6th floor.
Mr. Hess is quite willing to trade what he believes he experienced for that which he was told he must have experienced.
An event that occurred 30 minutes after he and Mr. Jennings, according to the NIST, were at the 23rd floor elevators.
The BBC edited out virtually all of what Mr. Hess said about his experience on the 23rd floor.
Other occupants of 7 WTC dramatically experienced both the WTC twin tower aircraft impacts and the horrendous sensations from those towers when they totally collapsed.
But, Mr. Hess and Mr. Jennings, whom the NIST said were on the 23rd floor when 2 WTC collapsed, did not notice anything.
That incredibility, is further compounded by the fiction that their hurried evacuation to the 6th floor, a descent that others performed in as little as 2 minutes, supposedly took Hess and Jennings half an hour.
Meanwhile, Mr. Jennings insists he was on the 8th floor when both of the WTC towers collapsed.
Did the NIST acknowledge this contradiction when re-counting the experiences of the two men trapped inside 7 WTC?
No.
They cherry picked only content that supported the NIST hypothesis.
Going from there was an explosion to; "My position, and I'm quite firm on it. There were no explosions.", is hardly what I would call insignificant.
This is not representative of rational thinking.
It is representative of rationalizing.
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2009
- Messages
- 18,903
But the word "explosion" is already an interpretation of the raw experience.
We have no sense that specifically senses explosions as apart from stimulus that resembles explosions without being one.
We have ears that register sounds - frequency, loudness, seqiuence. We have some We have somatosensory perceptions that register pressure, temperature, etc.
Hess did not give us a description of the sequence of sounds his ears picked up, nor a description of what the sensory nerves in his skin and elsewhere signalles. Instead he gave us a high-level interpretations of a host of sensory inputs: "Explosion".
This interpretation was right or wrong.
Neither the senses alone nor memory of sensory experiences alone is sufficient to tell if the interpretation "explosion" was or wrong.
I presume that Hess had never before experienced with his own senses an actual explosion of the kind that is able to crack steel, and that he had never before experienced with his own senses the effects of a neighboring highrise crashing into the building he is currently in.
So he had nothing to compare his sensory experiences to.
In order to come to a well-informed interpretation of what you sense, you need - well - information. What did actually happen? What would a building crashing into mine sound and feel like? What would a high-explosive demolition-type detonation sound and feel like? Is my sensory experience consistent with the former? Is it consistent with the latter?
Given that the crashing of the north tower into #7 is a 100% certain fact that no one denies, and that the presence of explosives is only just a hypothesis, what are the odds of one or the other being the source of my experiences?
I think that later in time, Hess was much more able to come to an informed explanation (opinion) than earlier, because he was in fact more informed.
He can still be wrong, of course.
But I maintain: It wasn't his memory of his experiences (the sounds he heard and the and feels he felt) that changed, but his interpretation thereof. He changed it, as more information became available.
How loud is loud
This is a continuation of my post on shaking during the collapse of WTC 2.
Much of the debate around Jennings and Hess on the 23rd floor of WTC 7, has centered around what Jennings and Hess should have experienced during the collapse of WTC 2. When reading the accounts of what other persons inside WTC 7 experienced during the collapse of WTC 2, like for instance the account of Mike Catalano down in the lobby area on the 3rd floor, it would be natural to think that Jennings and Hess should have experienced something similar. But neither Jennings nor Hess mentions that they experienced any shaking and noise while on the 23rd floor, in the interviews we have seen.
As I mentioned in my former post on shaking during the collapse, it is entirely plausible that they did not notice the building shaking while they were on their way to the elevator, given the earthquake magnitude of the collapse.
That leads us to the next question; how loud was the sound of the collapse of WTC 2 inside WTC 7. It is easy to be mislead by the witness accounts, because everyone will recognize an explosion like sound from the outside as being loud, even though it sounded no louder than the office coworker talking quietly on the telephone, in a cubicle 10 meters away from you.
If we are going look at the sound level in an objective way, we need to consider how much the sound from the collapse is attenuated while travelling through the air, what effect exterior and interior walls would have on the sound.
First sound travelling through open air looses 6 dB in measured sound pressure level for each doubling of the distance from the source:
* Sound Pressure Level Distance Calculator
If we measured the sound pressure level of a sound emitted from the south face of WTC 2 at distance of 1 meter from the wall, the level would by the time the sound reaches WTC 7 have decreased with 47 dB. The sound level of an exterior panel from WTC 2 hitting WTC 5 about 70 meters away from WTC 7 would have decreased with about 37 dB by the time it reaches the exterior wall of WTC 7(judging from a large aerial of the debris field, that would be about the closest any heavy debris from WTC 2 landed in relation to WTC 7, most of it landed well south of that distance).
Next we have to consider the effect of exterior walls and windows, together with interior walls. We can get some ballpark figures by looking at the Sound Transfer Class ratings of different building materials:
* Understandig STC
* STC Rating for Various Wall Assemblies
* Noise Isolation Provided by Windows in Residential Projects
With the basics covered, we can look at the position of Jennings and Hess inside WTC 7 compared to Mike Catalano.
Down on the 3rd floor Catalano only had exterior lobby windows between him and the collapse of WTC 2. In addition to the sound of the collapse itself, he would have heard the sound of a large amount of light debris hitting and breaking windows in the lobby area, when the dust cloud reached the lower floors of WTC 7 after the collapse.
While on the 23rd floor Jennings and Hess on their way to get into the elevator, would be high above any debris hitting the exterior. As for their position, it is reasonable to assume that they went to go down again with the freight elevator they used to get up. That would place them in the area of the northwest corner of the core, with several walls between them and the exterior of the building.
Exactly how the 23rd floor was partitioned up, I do not know. In post #2370 I wrote that the EOC was located on the north side of the building, with offices for the permanent OEM staff along the south face of the building. The exterior walls around the EOC was built with several layers of drywall and kevlar to protect against hurricanes, bomb blast and bullets. To what extent the core and the south side of the floor was included in that protection I do not know, because I found a picture of Richard Sheirer, the former director of OEM, in his southwest corner office; that shows just ordinary office windows on that side. So I will leave the effect of enhanced protection out of the equation.
The windows on Floor 23 facing WTC 2 would likely have had a STC rating of 30, like the windows down in the lobby aera. The walls around the core were made of fire-rated walls constructed of gypsum board over steel studs, they would likely have a STC rating of at least 40. Then we can add in at least one office partition with a rating about lets say 30.
It is difficult to judge how loud the collapse actually was. But if we start out with a sound pressure level of 130 dB, that is the threshold of pain, by the time that sound reaches the exterior face of WTC 7 it would be down to a level of 83 - 93 dB, then after having passed through the exterior windows and some partition walls, it looks very much like it could be down to a level where Jennings and Hess did not notice it. Or where the sound was masked out by a door slamming shut behind them, on their way to the elevator, etc.
So this is what it looks like on theoretical level, to get further we need to look at how this holds up against the events that day, as seen through witness accounts and recordings.
This is a continuation of my post on shaking during the collapse of WTC 2.
Much of the debate around Jennings and Hess on the 23rd floor of WTC 7, has centered around what Jennings and Hess should have experienced during the collapse of WTC 2. When reading the accounts of what other persons inside WTC 7 experienced during the collapse of WTC 2, like for instance the account of Mike Catalano down in the lobby area on the 3rd floor, it would be natural to think that Jennings and Hess should have experienced something similar. But neither Jennings nor Hess mentions that they experienced any shaking and noise while on the 23rd floor, in the interviews we have seen.
As I mentioned in my former post on shaking during the collapse, it is entirely plausible that they did not notice the building shaking while they were on their way to the elevator, given the earthquake magnitude of the collapse.
That leads us to the next question; how loud was the sound of the collapse of WTC 2 inside WTC 7. It is easy to be mislead by the witness accounts, because everyone will recognize an explosion like sound from the outside as being loud, even though it sounded no louder than the office coworker talking quietly on the telephone, in a cubicle 10 meters away from you.
If we are going look at the sound level in an objective way, we need to consider how much the sound from the collapse is attenuated while travelling through the air, what effect exterior and interior walls would have on the sound.
First sound travelling through open air looses 6 dB in measured sound pressure level for each doubling of the distance from the source:
* Sound Pressure Level Distance Calculator
If we measured the sound pressure level of a sound emitted from the south face of WTC 2 at distance of 1 meter from the wall, the level would by the time the sound reaches WTC 7 have decreased with 47 dB. The sound level of an exterior panel from WTC 2 hitting WTC 5 about 70 meters away from WTC 7 would have decreased with about 37 dB by the time it reaches the exterior wall of WTC 7(judging from a large aerial of the debris field, that would be about the closest any heavy debris from WTC 2 landed in relation to WTC 7, most of it landed well south of that distance).
Next we have to consider the effect of exterior walls and windows, together with interior walls. We can get some ballpark figures by looking at the Sound Transfer Class ratings of different building materials:
* Understandig STC
* STC Rating for Various Wall Assemblies
* Noise Isolation Provided by Windows in Residential Projects
With the basics covered, we can look at the position of Jennings and Hess inside WTC 7 compared to Mike Catalano.
Down on the 3rd floor Catalano only had exterior lobby windows between him and the collapse of WTC 2. In addition to the sound of the collapse itself, he would have heard the sound of a large amount of light debris hitting and breaking windows in the lobby area, when the dust cloud reached the lower floors of WTC 7 after the collapse.
While on the 23rd floor Jennings and Hess on their way to get into the elevator, would be high above any debris hitting the exterior. As for their position, it is reasonable to assume that they went to go down again with the freight elevator they used to get up. That would place them in the area of the northwest corner of the core, with several walls between them and the exterior of the building.
Exactly how the 23rd floor was partitioned up, I do not know. In post #2370 I wrote that the EOC was located on the north side of the building, with offices for the permanent OEM staff along the south face of the building. The exterior walls around the EOC was built with several layers of drywall and kevlar to protect against hurricanes, bomb blast and bullets. To what extent the core and the south side of the floor was included in that protection I do not know, because I found a picture of Richard Sheirer, the former director of OEM, in his southwest corner office; that shows just ordinary office windows on that side. So I will leave the effect of enhanced protection out of the equation.
The windows on Floor 23 facing WTC 2 would likely have had a STC rating of 30, like the windows down in the lobby aera. The walls around the core were made of fire-rated walls constructed of gypsum board over steel studs, they would likely have a STC rating of at least 40. Then we can add in at least one office partition with a rating about lets say 30.
It is difficult to judge how loud the collapse actually was. But if we start out with a sound pressure level of 130 dB, that is the threshold of pain, by the time that sound reaches the exterior face of WTC 7 it would be down to a level of 83 - 93 dB, then after having passed through the exterior windows and some partition walls, it looks very much like it could be down to a level where Jennings and Hess did not notice it. Or where the sound was masked out by a door slamming shut behind them, on their way to the elevator, etc.
So this is what it looks like on theoretical level, to get further we need to look at how this holds up against the events that day, as seen through witness accounts and recordings.
thedopefishlives
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2012
- Messages
- 1,696
MM, I am going to ask a simple question: Do you understand the difference between detonation and explosion? If so, what is it? This is relevant to your conjecture that Hess hearing "an explosion" is somehow proof of controlled demolition charges.
Noise level of aircraft impacts and collapse
Here are some video and audio recordings of what the aircraft and building collapses sounded like inside buildings around WTC 1 and WTC 2.
The first one is an audio recording of the impact of Flight 11 and Flight 175, from inside a conference room on 36th floor of One Liberty Plaza, about 150 meters away from WTC 2 and about 250 meters from WTC 1. The impact sound reaching the exterior of the building from WTC 1 would be down 52 dB, and from WTC 2 it would be down 43 dB. The impact sound from WTC 2 would be down about 47 dB when it reaches the exterior of WTC 7. And the we have to factor in a window with maybe an STC of 30.
The first part contains the sound of Flight 11 hitting WTC 1 (00:33) and the wall panel landing close to the corner of Cedar Street and West Street about 240 meters away.
The third part contains the impact of Flight 175 with WTC 2 (00:41). In this part the impact sound can be compared with people talking at 01:40.
For comparison, conventional speech measured at 1 m is about 60 dB. In my ears the sound of the impacts on the recordings does not sound any louder than the people talking in the room. And if the recorder had been positioned inside the buildings core area, how much would have been heard then?
Next is a video recorded from inside an apartment building on the southwest corner of Duane Street and Hudson Street. The camera is positioned on the south side of the building. The video contains the sound of the impact of Flight 175 and both collapses. Note that there is clear line of sight from the impact floors to the camera, even though it may not appear so at first sight, since the camera is zoomed in on WTC 1. It should also be noted that WTC 7 works as sound barrier during most of the collapse of WTC 2. The distance from the building to WTC 2 is approximately 665 meters, giving a reduction in the sound level of 57 dB. Only a 10 dB, difference compared with WTC 7 (the sound pressure level goes down 6 dB for each doubling of the distance).
Impact Flight 175: 0:08:05
Collapse WTC 2: 0:57:05
Collapse WTC 1: 1:26:29
The impact and collapse sounds can be compared to the television set and the woman talking on the telephone and to her self, at different times during the recording (though it feels like invading her privacy, it is also a valuable historic document).
To me the sound of the impact of Flight 175 is louder than the collapses. That seems reasonable given the aircraft impact speeds of ca 197 m/s and 242 m/s, compared to just 90 m/s for an object dropped from the roofline of either tower.
There are of course many accounts of people inside WTC 7 hearing the impact of Flight 11, but there are also some who did not hear it, or mistook it for something else.
And on the 9th floor:
Next is an account of Lynne Christian who walked down the east stairwell:
It should be noted that there is also accounts from persons who claim they heard the impact of Flight 175 while descending the stairwells, but that could depend on them passing through floors without internal partitioning walls, between the core area and the exterior wall, and likely the noise level in that part of the stairwell.
Given these accounts, it seems plausible that Jennings and Hess on Floor 23 did not notice the collapse noise from WTC 2.
ETA
To be continued with a finishing post on what Jennings and Hess said about their experience on Floor 23.
Here are some video and audio recordings of what the aircraft and building collapses sounded like inside buildings around WTC 1 and WTC 2.
The first one is an audio recording of the impact of Flight 11 and Flight 175, from inside a conference room on 36th floor of One Liberty Plaza, about 150 meters away from WTC 2 and about 250 meters from WTC 1. The impact sound reaching the exterior of the building from WTC 1 would be down 52 dB, and from WTC 2 it would be down 43 dB. The impact sound from WTC 2 would be down about 47 dB when it reaches the exterior of WTC 7. And the we have to factor in a window with maybe an STC of 30.
The first part contains the sound of Flight 11 hitting WTC 1 (00:33) and the wall panel landing close to the corner of Cedar Street and West Street about 240 meters away.
The third part contains the impact of Flight 175 with WTC 2 (00:41). In this part the impact sound can be compared with people talking at 01:40.
For comparison, conventional speech measured at 1 m is about 60 dB. In my ears the sound of the impacts on the recordings does not sound any louder than the people talking in the room. And if the recorder had been positioned inside the buildings core area, how much would have been heard then?
Next is a video recorded from inside an apartment building on the southwest corner of Duane Street and Hudson Street. The camera is positioned on the south side of the building. The video contains the sound of the impact of Flight 175 and both collapses. Note that there is clear line of sight from the impact floors to the camera, even though it may not appear so at first sight, since the camera is zoomed in on WTC 1. It should also be noted that WTC 7 works as sound barrier during most of the collapse of WTC 2. The distance from the building to WTC 2 is approximately 665 meters, giving a reduction in the sound level of 57 dB. Only a 10 dB, difference compared with WTC 7 (the sound pressure level goes down 6 dB for each doubling of the distance).
Impact Flight 175: 0:08:05
Collapse WTC 2: 0:57:05
Collapse WTC 1: 1:26:29
The impact and collapse sounds can be compared to the television set and the woman talking on the telephone and to her self, at different times during the recording (though it feels like invading her privacy, it is also a valuable historic document).
To me the sound of the impact of Flight 175 is louder than the collapses. That seems reasonable given the aircraft impact speeds of ca 197 m/s and 242 m/s, compared to just 90 m/s for an object dropped from the roofline of either tower.
There are of course many accounts of people inside WTC 7 hearing the impact of Flight 11, but there are also some who did not hear it, or mistook it for something else.
Source: Firefighter Timothy Brown OEM
And on the 9th floor:
Source: Four soldiers
Next is an account of Lynne Christian who walked down the east stairwell:
Source: Surviving two World Trade Center Attacks, the text story is missing this detail from the video.
It should be noted that there is also accounts from persons who claim they heard the impact of Flight 175 while descending the stairwells, but that could depend on them passing through floors without internal partitioning walls, between the core area and the exterior wall, and likely the noise level in that part of the stairwell.
Given these accounts, it seems plausible that Jennings and Hess on Floor 23 did not notice the collapse noise from WTC 2.
ETA
To be continued with a finishing post on what Jennings and Hess said about their experience on Floor 23.
Last edited:
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2009
- Messages
- 18,903
Excellent work, Norseman!
It bears noticing that before the collapse of either tower commences, there are no "sounds of explosions", and there are no "squibs" or any other visible hints for blasts. The sound level just swells from zero, and all the visuals start with the commencement of the collapse itself.
After the first collapse, the woman says "something else blew up". The reporter at 58:37: "[So far] ... we've got two explosions, to planes into the world trade center... and what we've seen, explosion (unintelligible) a part of the south tower apparently collapsed".
So here we have examples of what people call "explosions" or "blow up": That's how they describe the collapse as such, and also the plane crashes.
Although the reporter does not yet know the proximate cause of the collapse (another plane? something else?), which logically leaves open possibilities such as bombs, he does not refer to the cause as "explosion", he simply describes what he saw, and that was the collapse as such.
Another detail:
During the second collapse, at 1:26:43, while the debris plume falls under the WTC7 roofline, the core spire comes into view, amazingly unobstructed by dust, sways, and remains standing for another 17 seconds before starting to fall. That's a bit off-topic here, but
Useful video!
It bears noticing that before the collapse of either tower commences, there are no "sounds of explosions", and there are no "squibs" or any other visible hints for blasts. The sound level just swells from zero, and all the visuals start with the commencement of the collapse itself.
After the first collapse, the woman says "something else blew up". The reporter at 58:37: "[So far] ... we've got two explosions, to planes into the world trade center... and what we've seen, explosion (unintelligible) a part of the south tower apparently collapsed".
So here we have examples of what people call "explosions" or "blow up": That's how they describe the collapse as such, and also the plane crashes.
Although the reporter does not yet know the proximate cause of the collapse (another plane? something else?), which logically leaves open possibilities such as bombs, he does not refer to the cause as "explosion", he simply describes what he saw, and that was the collapse as such.
Another detail:
During the second collapse, at 1:26:43, while the debris plume falls under the WTC7 roofline, the core spire comes into view, amazingly unobstructed by dust, sways, and remains standing for another 17 seconds before starting to fall. That's a bit off-topic here, but
TJM
Potsing Whiled Runk
Just to be clear, according to AJM, AJM can make that hurried descent in as little as 2 minutes. You may now follow up with some snarky remark regarding reading comprehension and / or my education.
I'm also pretty sure there was no hurried descent either. I believe Jennings and Hess weren't aware of how dire their situation was until WTC 1 fell on them. There is no evidence of a rapid trip downstairs other than Jennings' flair for the dramatic.
No stair leaping, pole dangling, explosion surviving, etc, etc.
- Status