Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackCrayon
oh man. you're quoting newton? i don't study this bullshit like some people. it was just a passing comment. a plane SMASHES into one side of a building, so you would assume that side should be much weaker than the other, yet the whole thing goes as if all four sides were hit. just my 'simple' thinking. sorry.
|
Scroll back through this thread and read my comments regarding tube-frame construction.
The outer walls, even more so due to, as a cost saving measure, the core
not being encased in concrete, was the strongest part of the structure.
Furthermore, the outer walls, unlike other parts of the structures, were extremely over-engineered with much redundancy able to withstand the loss of many of the columns, such as what occurred when the planes hit them.
In short, from an engineering aspect, it's
not surprising that WTC 1&2, in particular, collapsed straight down.
People with all these theories should research the basics of how the buildings were constructed and their various failure modes ... in that context, much of what seems inexplicable, is very explainable - no need for complex theories or aliens
Ron