View Single Post
Old 07-29-2008, 10:56 PM  
MediaGuy
Confirmed User
 
MediaGuy's Avatar
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Montrealquebecanada
Posts: 5,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moeloubani View Post
Dude, like Dirty F said, planes hit the building man. Planes! That's crazy dude, and no matter what kind of structural engineer you are, you can't build a building that can withstand a direct hit from a missile that big (yes, a plane loaded with fuel traveling that fast might as well have been a missile.)
"The building probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners,"

-Frank A. DeMartini, construction manager of the Trade Center

Quote:
Originally Posted by moeloubani View Post
What do you expect the buildings to do? Just sit there? If they wanted to use the controlled demolition thing then why not just do what happened at the first WTC attack and set off a bomb at the base of the building, where damaging enough supports is guaranteed to lead to a collapse. Furthermore, why even bother with a straight up and down demolition if you're trying to fool people. Wouldn't it make more logic to have the collapse act the same as your everyday collapse?
I don't know what the plan was. When I first saw the buildings blow up live on TV I thought that they'd build the things with explosives in them to avoid a tilted collapse, all the life and collateral destruction that would cause.

But when they started talking about pankcakes, then changed the story to fuel fires softening the metal in such a short time, I was... freaked. You'd expect gravity driven collapses to topple, create huge amounts of shattered concrete affixed to steel beams, but there was none of that.
__________________

YOU Are Industry News!
Press Releases: pr[at]payoutmag.com
Facebook: Payout Magazine! Facebook: MIKEB!
ICQ: 248843947
Skype: Mediaguy1
MediaGuy is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote