WTC1/WTC2 perimeter columns vs. plane impact, math discussion...

I am quite amazed at the level of understanding being portrayed here by some.

I would like genericBob to explain what directional force was be applied, and by what in order to make the tail snap off to the side. The plane sheared the perimeter columns within .38 seconds!

 

Honestly,sometimes I believe they think the towers were armor plated,and the planes should have shattered in pieces..

 

the denial is strong with this one....

 

http://youtu.be/XNJu-JofS5A

no shattering here!

 

The falsehoods, outright lies, and other 'errors' presented to us by our representatives, are quite strong as well. Let's see the evidence and let the chips fall where they may, then go from there.

 

Done and done.

Only 'truthers' keep trying to present speculation as evidence.

 

Stndown. Do you agree with genericBob that the wing hit the building first based on the trajectory shown in the picture above?

 

I haven't given any consideration to that point of view so, I have no answer for you at this time. I agree with him that the whole 9/11 fiasco was something other than what was presented to the public.

- - - Updated - - -

Truth need not be continually modified, if it is the truth at the outset. Wouldn't you agree?

 

It's not a point of view Stndown. He stated something as fact. He said the port side wing hit the building first. According to the image I posted, did the port side wing hit first? Yes or no?

 

I don't know. Did it?

 

You can see the graphic, can't you?

 

of course they are dear.....

 

I'd say fantasy as evidence...but that's just me

 

According to the image? It entered at an angle, is what I think he's stating, and according to that image, yes, it did. Did it not?

 

have fun:

http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfiles/Chapter IV Aircraft Impact.pdf

Another approach is to analyse the deflection of the south tower caused by the impact. The 70th floor of the south tower was caught on a video camera at the time of impact and the building deflection and oscillation was recorded. The building deflected 12 inches at the 70th floor and the tower oscillated for four minutes. Building survivors confirmed this oscillation.

So this could provide estimated of the mass of the building that had to move because of the impact. There is a graph in the NIST report and the slope at the time of impact would show how fast the building moved.

psik

 

You mean to tell me you think, looking at that image, that the wing was the first to hit the perimeter columns? Ahead of the fuselage?!

Please tell me you're kidding...

 

This whole argument is a tangent in an attempt to divert attention away
from the fact that the forces involved in the alleged aircraft penetration
of the tower wall would have destroyed the aircraft before it had a chance
to completely penetrate.

My intent, even if my writing skills are lacking here
was to express that the port side wing contacted the wall
before the starboard side wing. NOW DO YOU GET IT?

 

That's insane and I'll prove why.

How long was the fuselage of the plane in contact/applying forces upon the perimeter columns BEFORE they sheared apart? You obviously have no clue about how to determine impact forces to figure out if something will shear or not.

 

According to the video record, the alleged "FLT175" did not slow down at all in the process of penetrating the wall. This is really insane because either the WTC wall was made of paper, or the aircraft was specially modified to function as a hardened steel punch. what? In regards to the penetration of the wall, the distance between the nose of the aircraft and the port side wing root would be certainly space enough to observe deceleration but failing that, when the wing contacted the wall, it would have to break more box columns and that would require an expenditure of energy, how is that done without slowing down the "aircraft".?

 

Let me put it another way.

From the moment the nose of the plane touched the perimeter columns to the moment the end of the tail entered, at what point along that length of the jet, as it passed into the horizontal plane of the perimeter columns, do you think the perimeter columns were totally sheared?

 

Please tell me why anyone should see a slowdown of the aircraft when total penetration occurred in .38 secs like you stated? How much, in your estimation should the plane have slowed down in that .38 seconds?

 

There is virtually no resistance to the lateral loading caused by the floor decks and associated joists, especially considering the diaphram that would offer the resistance depends on the columns that failed.

 

"virtually no resistance" to what?
we are talking about an alleged aircraft crashing into the WTC tower
and having to overcome resistance not only from the box columns that
make up the wall, but the interior structure, not to mention the energy
required to shred the aircraft, and with all of this, the alleged airliner
penetrates nose to tail and disappears in less than 0.380 sec.
heavy woo, or?

 

That's not what I said. I said the plane was at an angle (according to the referenced image). What's your point here?

 

Right there. "Interior structure". The interior structure offers very little resistance to lateral loading.

Not sure I understand the problem here.

Are you saying that the airliner doesn't have the mass or velocity to penetrate the outside perimeter frame? Or are you saying that the frame should have withstood the impact?

Why is it not conceivable that the plane penetrated the frame, both by bending and sheer, and disintegrated upon impact as it pushed through the structure?