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.
Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sciAticA errAticA who wrote (51484)5/18/2006 5:20:28 PM
From: Think4Yourself  Read Replies (5) | Respond to of 116555
 
I was watching CNBC the morning when the towers were hit. They hastily got some demolition experts on the line. The theme of the ones concerned, which was all of them, was not the steel itself. The steel was apparently encased in high strength concrete, which provided much of the building strength. The experts said that the fire combined with the impact would likely crack and pop the concrete off of the steel and that could cause a collapse of the building. In other words, it was a combination of steel and concrete which held the twin towers up. Lose one and the other isn't strong enough to do the job.

This was about 15 minutes before the first collapse.



To: sciAticA errAticA who wrote (51484)5/18/2006 9:04:04 PM
From: LLCF  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 116555
 
<There are numerous steel building fires on record, a number that began with large aircraft impacts... many that were far, far worse, hotter, and longer than the kerosene fuel fires >

Interesting... what other steel buildings have been hit by large aircraft???

DAK


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News