Questions About the Bay Area Fire and Overpass Collapse
More details here about the story.
The firemen DIDN'T try to combat the fire--
""With no structures or lives in jeopardy, and with 8,000 gallons of flammable fuel involved, you're basically better off letting it burn itself out," said Price."
That's a bit odd. No structure involved? Does this mean they didn't think the overpass would collapse?
They say the flames reached 3000 degrees F, though it's not at all clear how they measured that. The maximum burning temp of jet fuel is 1800 degrees F, it seems implausible that burning gasoline could get to 3000 degrees F.
The collapse occurred in less than 20 minutes after the start of the fire-- pretty fast.
Burning conditions would have been maximum-- lots of fuel and oxygen.
Importantly, the steel on highway overpasses was naked to the flames-- there was no fireproofing.
So, in summary, while a fire-induced collapse is plausible, there are some unresolved questions, such as how high the temp was and why the firemen didn't try to do more to combat the blaze (they said they didn't want to use foam because it would pollute the bay-- are you kidding me?).
The firemen DIDN'T try to combat the fire--
""With no structures or lives in jeopardy, and with 8,000 gallons of flammable fuel involved, you're basically better off letting it burn itself out," said Price."
That's a bit odd. No structure involved? Does this mean they didn't think the overpass would collapse?
They say the flames reached 3000 degrees F, though it's not at all clear how they measured that. The maximum burning temp of jet fuel is 1800 degrees F, it seems implausible that burning gasoline could get to 3000 degrees F.
The collapse occurred in less than 20 minutes after the start of the fire-- pretty fast.
Burning conditions would have been maximum-- lots of fuel and oxygen.
Importantly, the steel on highway overpasses was naked to the flames-- there was no fireproofing.
So, in summary, while a fire-induced collapse is plausible, there are some unresolved questions, such as how high the temp was and why the firemen didn't try to do more to combat the blaze (they said they didn't want to use foam because it would pollute the bay-- are you kidding me?).
posted by spooked at 11:33 AM
9 Comments:
real fires do burn hot.
pretend fires don't even burn women!
OK, time to play the conspiracy game.
Rosie's been saying "fire doesn't melt steel." That bothered me.
Now this freeway collapse is being used to debunk Rosie:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=rosie+melt+steel&btnG=Google+Search
I could see the tanker thing being staged. I could also see this tie to Rosie's statement being a natural phenomenon. The sad thing is that Rosie's statement was ill-informed.
Rosie's comment was poorly worded, but I think most of us got the point.
I'm a bit suspicious of this tanker fire and collapse, it may well have been staged to some extent.
There were conflicting reports about whether the bolts holding up the steel beam melted or gave way. I would presume the latter. I'm really not convinced of this 3000+ temp they "measured" the fire at.
that looks like a pretty lamely built fwy overpass to begin with - the fwys in L.A. would squash that poor thing.
i would imagine that if it had been officially decided that it needed to be properly rebuilt at great expense the best way to begin would be with a conveniently situated gasoline tanker truck accident where miraculously no-one is hurt.
they could have even practiced a month ago with a similar fuel truck under a different overpass.
rosie has not actually said anything of substance re: 9/11 anyway - "duh, fire doesn't melt steel! where's my donut?"
now an inconvenient fire that actually does melt steel that will now need to be replaced at great expense.
how's that for a conspiracy?
for that matter if i was the ny port authority and was saddled with 2 giant towers that would cost many many billions of dollars to dismantle properly and safely it would be much simpler to just call up my pals:
"hey larry, want to make a few bucks? hey dick, want to try out that new removal machine of yours? these sorry things have got to go! - i've got an idea: and there's a lot oil in the middle east, right? hey CNN we need your help!"
but of course that could never happen here in the ol' red white & blue land of opportunity right?
only some comical evil other guys from somewhere far away in the land of oil would have the box-cutter resources to pull off the crime of the century.
again; pretend fires don't even burn women! (see comment #1)
it's probably a good thing that the hoover dam still serves a purpose otherwise the n koreans would no doubt launch a missile right on it - of course it would then need to be rebuilt at great expense.
well what do you know!
check this out - picked up at 911blogger.com
FWY UNDER CONSTRUCTION
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/chronicle/archive/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL&o=0
""This freeway is currently being updated and upgraded to handle the stresses of earthquake force.
Take a peak to the south of the collapsed freeway.
Look at the brand new concrete supports.
Notice the modified spans. Almost 1/3 closer together.
The span that collapsed was next to be updated. When you see the rebuilt structure you will see that it will be modified in nearly the same way as the road to the south. They would install the two new supports then demolish the current one between.
The way it looks.... the fallen freeway was going to require a very specialized upgrade through that area to meet specifications. The road going under was not going to allow the same simple solution and was likely that that area would have been demolished anyway creating the same havoc to commuters. Kill two birds with one stone. It's just logistics. Good business""
~911blogger.com comment
You may be on to something, Spooky! Did you notice there were no jews on that overpass when it fell?? Nor any jewish cars?????
Coincidence?? I think not!
You're one smaht cookie!
wow outstanding usage of the old reliable "jew haters" card @ 11:18!
what a coincidence that the s.f. FWY was undergoing a construction/upgrade of the very section that was destroyed! (just like the pentagon on 9/11)
observe the newly built massive concrete supports of the lower section of FWY.
odd that the asphalt didn't melt - the stripes are still intact!
photo!
isn't asphalt a simple petroleum product? it should have burnt at a much lower temp than any steel would have failed.
it looks like it simply wilted as if it was exhausted.
is there any other example of metal burning while rubber or asphalt remained intact?
hmmm...oh ya!
oddly toasted cars in the vicinity of the wtc on 9/11!
excellent job caltrans!
Post a Comment
<< Home