Those Outer WTC Columns and Plane Wings
Previously I have wondered how plane wings could slice through the outer columns of the WTC (for instance, see here, here, here and here.
I was under the impression that the columns where the "plane" impacted the south tower were constructed of 1/4 inch steel, which is fairly strong.
However, in this article, I found that the outer columns at the base of the WTC were much thicker steel than at the top, which makes a lot of sense:
These columns not only had to support much of the floor weight, but also the outer walls themselves. So naturally, they would be graded in weight, with much heavier and stronger columns (thicker steel) on the bottom and lighter columns towards the top. The columns on the bottom had 2.5 inch thick steel sides. That is SERIOUS steel.
Then I found this article on analysis of the WTC steel which says that for the south tower, the outer columns at the impact area were 1/4 inch by 13/16 inch.
I assume this means the sides of the box columns were 13/16 inch, and the front and backs of the columns were 1/4 inch. The columns were a little over three feet apart, with about two feet between columns. 13/16 inch of steel is pretty damn strong, and no wonder-- because at the 80th floor, where the south tower was hit, there was still 30 more stories of building to hold up!
This means, the 767 wings had to slice at least ten times per wing through 14 inches of 13/16 inch thick high-strength steel column plates as the plane slid smoothly, without slowing, into the tower. This apparently happened, because the videos of the second hit show this-- and we know the videos don't lie do they?
And surely the wings didn't shred as they went in, because then fuel in the wings should have spilled out and immediately ignited. But that didn't happen because the fuel only exploded on the far side of the building.
So somehow, the magical 9/11 aluminum plane wings passed through large strong steel columns.
Funny how wings typically aren't that strong in collisions.
I was under the impression that the columns where the "plane" impacted the south tower were constructed of 1/4 inch steel, which is fairly strong.
However, in this article, I found that the outer columns at the base of the WTC were much thicker steel than at the top, which makes a lot of sense:
These columns not only had to support much of the floor weight, but also the outer walls themselves. So naturally, they would be graded in weight, with much heavier and stronger columns (thicker steel) on the bottom and lighter columns towards the top. The columns on the bottom had 2.5 inch thick steel sides. That is SERIOUS steel.
Then I found this article on analysis of the WTC steel which says that for the south tower, the outer columns at the impact area were 1/4 inch by 13/16 inch.
I assume this means the sides of the box columns were 13/16 inch, and the front and backs of the columns were 1/4 inch. The columns were a little over three feet apart, with about two feet between columns. 13/16 inch of steel is pretty damn strong, and no wonder-- because at the 80th floor, where the south tower was hit, there was still 30 more stories of building to hold up!
This means, the 767 wings had to slice at least ten times per wing through 14 inches of 13/16 inch thick high-strength steel column plates as the plane slid smoothly, without slowing, into the tower. This apparently happened, because the videos of the second hit show this-- and we know the videos don't lie do they?
And surely the wings didn't shred as they went in, because then fuel in the wings should have spilled out and immediately ignited. But that didn't happen because the fuel only exploded on the far side of the building.
So somehow, the magical 9/11 aluminum plane wings passed through large strong steel columns.
Funny how wings typically aren't that strong in collisions.
5 Comments:
Don't you know spooked!??
Have you forgotten!??
Planes hijacked by SCARY Arab "Terrorists" can DO ANYTHING!!
...EVEN DEFY THE LAWS OF PHYSICS AS THEY EXIST ON EARTH.
;-)
what if he doesn't have a degree in structural engineering? does that mean that he has no right to point out the inconsistencies about flight175/south tower that seem to be patently obvious?
come on smasher, I'd like to see where the proprietor of this blog has spoken erroneously - you obviously think that he has, but you've yet to point out exactly how and where -
so far, conspiracy smasher, you have smashed nothing but your own credibility - put up or shut up!
Conspiracy Smasher said...
What university did you receive your degree in structural engineering at?
TYPICAL disinfo distraction tactic! Which has NOTHING to do with the facts at hand...
BTW, What University did you recieve your degree in English at?
hehe ;-)
I think that smasher's comment should not have been removed even though it was nonsense - the fact that it WAS nonsense and that NO-ONE has been able to explain the anomalies that you point out nor answer a single one of the questions that you pose only reinforces your position. IMO.
wait a minute...dammit - I just put a comment re: smasher's comment, as it seemed to've been removed - now it seems to be back again - never mind - my tin foil hat must be too tight!
Post a Comment
<< Home