SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: XenaLives who wrote (121712)9/13/2001 5:35:00 PM
From: LLCF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 436258
 
WOW, now that's astounding. Where did you hear that?

DAK



To: XenaLives who wrote (121712)9/13/2001 5:42:03 PM
From: benwood  Respond to of 436258
 
Plus the planes were banking sharply during the impact which would significant sheer stress on the remaining pillars.

Flying much lower would have been a problem in reaching the WTC without hitting some other building. Hitting it much lower might have allowed the top stick together instead of caving into the structure's central chute.



To: XenaLives who wrote (121712)9/13/2001 6:26:21 PM
From: H.Jablomey  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 436258
 
Sorry, but you heard wrong. No matter where, high or low, the planes had struck the towers, they would have succumbed. The intense heat from all of the jet fuel weakens steel no matter how high up it is. <g>
If they had struck lower, the towers would simply have FALLEN over, rather than collapsing upon themselves.