Page 98 of 101 FirstFirst ... 488896979899100 ... LastLast
Results 971 to 980 of 1006

Thread: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

  1. #971
    Guru
    SanderO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    NYC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    2,609

    Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

    Quote Originally Posted by gerrycan View Post

    No it didn't. It plunged WITH the core, not through it. And that's not just semantic pedantics - that is the core whole issue (pun entirely intended).

    No!

    The antenna went down into the core BEFORE the top "block" moved at all. Look at the videos. First the antenna and then the whole top drops as the antenna drops further/faster and tips over clearly "freed" from the hat truss.


    Post an image of the hat truss please
    Nothing is as it appears.

  2. #972
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,531

    Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

    Quote Originally Posted by SanderO View Post
    No!

    The antenna went down into the core BEFORE the top "block" moved at all. Look at the videos. First the antenna and then the whole top drops as the antenna drops further/faster and tips over clearly "freed" from the hat truss.


    Post an image of the hat truss please
    We're getting to the crux of the matter now.......

    Yes, the antenna moved down, independently (initially) of the perimeter modules. I have said this for years, and have made several videos about it illustrating the fact, so we concur entirely on that. Happy to link you to the videos if you want me to.

    The reality that alludes you however is that if the central core column group all failed, that wouldn't move the antenna ie would not cause it to descend. It would still be attached to the main beef of the core via the hat truss which we already established was what took the load of it. This is why I wanted you to examine the truss more closely.

    If you look at the N face of the N tower @ impact (around flr 96) as this is happening, there is no movement in the perimeter panels opposite CC 501 or 508, but the perimeter descends between them pushing the outer panels out to the side (not down) which leads to the inescapable conclusion that the main failure happens between CC 501 and the core centre, similarly for 508. The severance occurs to the inside of the transfer truss (floor truss) on the short span sides, and only to the inside of the long span floor trusses opposite the corner cores 501 and 508. (meaning that those opposite CC 503 - 506 are descending independently of those outside of that region)

    The antenna moving first is crucial but must be understood in context of that which supported it, and that support did not come from the few weak cores that you previously attributed that support to. It came rather from the main cores particularly around the edges of the core structure.

  3. #973
    Guru
    SanderO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    NYC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    2,609

    Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

    Quote Originally Posted by gerrycan View Post
    We're getting to the crux of the matter now.......

    Yes, the antenna moved down, independently (initially) of the perimeter modules. I have said this for years, and have made several videos about it illustrating the fact, so we concur entirely on that. Happy to link you to the videos if you want me to.

    The reality that alludes you however is that if the central core column group all failed, that wouldn't move the antenna ie would not cause it to descend. It would still be attached to the main beef of the core via the hat truss which we already established was what took the load of it. This is why I wanted you to examine the truss more closely.

    If you look at the N face of the N tower @ impact (around flr 96) as this is happening, there is no movement in the perimeter panels opposite CC 501 or 508, but the perimeter descends between them pushing the outer panels out to the side (not down) which leads to the inescapable conclusion that the main failure happens between CC 501 and the core centre, similarly for 508. The severance occurs to the inside of the transfer truss (floor truss) on the short span sides, and only to the inside of the long span floor trusses opposite the corner cores 501 and 508. (meaning that those opposite CC 503 - 506 are descending independently of those outside of that region)

    The antenna moving first is crucial but must be understood in context of that which supported it, and that support did not come from the few weak cores that you previously attributed that support to. It came rather from the main cores particularly around the edges of the core structure.
    The 4 corner columns of the core were the last standing, the strongest. The hat truss did not span from facade to facade... it was support ON the core columns and every support column was crucial to its integrity. As the core columns failed one by one "radiating" from the initial plane damage... they hat truss came apart. It was not like a truss bridge spanning over an opening... but it was a series of diagonal member knitting the core columns running though it together. If the columns beneath its chords failed... the chords themselves would fail and with it the center of the hat truss structure collapsed.
    Last edited by SanderO; 01-07-19 at 07:26 PM.
    Nothing is as it appears.

  4. #974
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,531

    Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

    Quote Originally Posted by SanderO View Post
    The hat truss did not span from facade to facade...
    Of course it did. That is how an outrigger truss works.

    hattruss.jpg

    You have the structural drawings there for it now. What is it you do for a living Sander ?

  5. #975
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,531

    Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

    Here's another clearer diagram of the truss for you.........
    hat truss ABA.jpg

  6. #976
    Guru
    SanderO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    NYC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    2,609

    Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

    Quote Originally Posted by gerrycan View Post
    Here's another clearer diagram of the truss for you.........
    hat truss ABA.jpg
    It did not SPAN across the footprint. The hat truss was SUPPORTED on the CORE It was more like a 4 D T and it was NOT like bridge span. The 16 points where the diagonal out riggers connected to the perimeter panels was mostly to tie the core to the perimeter and there was little axial forces transferred to the perimeter.

    The diagram attached as you are well aware is a truss spanning an unsupported region. The this was not the case for the twin tower hat trusses. It relied on the core for the vast percentage of its axial support.

    You don't see the core columns in there?
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Nothing is as it appears.

  7. #977
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,531

    Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

    Quote Originally Posted by SanderO View Post
    It did not SPAN across the footprint. The hat truss was SUPPORTED on the CORE It was more like a 4 D T and it was NOT like bridge span. The 16 points where the diagonal out riggers connected to the perimeter panels was mostly to tie the core to the perimeter and there was little axial forces transferred to the perimeter.

    The diagram attached as you are well aware is a truss spanning an unsupported region. The this was not the case for the twin tower hat trusses. It relied on the core for the vast percentage of its axial support.

    You don't see the core columns in there?
    Yes I see core columns there. I see 35 columns above the 110th storey. I also see the interface for the antenna which below you give the impression of relying on 4 relatively weak core columns to remain upright.

    Quote Originally Posted by SanderO View Post
    One column was omitted in row 8 under the foot print of the the antenna which has a 25'x25' "bearing/end plate" to resist wind loads. The antenna end plate is shown as a dotted hatched area in the attached graphic and you can see only 4 columns are below / inside the hatched area. And there size is smallest of all the core columns. The red hatched represent the main truss chords, Blue hatched steel column braces/floor beams.
    It would be nonsensical to put a load like that, especially given it's potential to become eccentric on just those columns. For that reason an interface was designed in order to spread that load. That interface does not depend soley on the 4 columns that you reference above, and a quick look through the drawings that I have provided you with would make that clear, but for some reason you would rather go with figures that you drew 8 years ago rather than the actual structural drawings for the part of the building we are discussing.

    Personally, I will trust the structural drawings. You should let me know why it is you prefer your 8 year old diagrams that are a best guess from architectural drawings instead and could not have been informed by the structurals.

    EDIT - I will add a question here for you. Which of the core columns do you think would have to fail in order for the antenna to begin to drop. List them for me, by their number. I will go and get you the details of them and post them right here for you.
    Last edited by gerrycan; 01-12-19 at 10:42 AM.

  8. #978
    Guru
    SanderO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    NYC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    2,609

    Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

    The antenna load was distributed to more than the 4 columns beneath it..... But it is my belief that the columns beneath it did fail and with them the hat truss was weakened in the center and that's where it failed and the antenna dropped.

    Obviously for the antenna to drop the support beneath it failed to hold it up. And it did drop before any other movement up there.
    Nothing is as it appears.

  9. #979
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:30 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,531

    Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

    Quote Originally Posted by SanderO View Post
    The antenna load was distributed to more than the 4 columns beneath it.....
    Glad we cleared that up.

    Quote Originally Posted by SanderO View Post
    But it is my belief that the columns beneath it did fail and with them the hat truss was weakened in the center and that's where it failed and the antenna dropped.
    Obviously at some point they failed, they all did. So do we now agree that the hat truss dropping was a first outward sign of failure further down in the building that initiated in the core column area and did not extend to the perimeter.

    Quote Originally Posted by SanderO View Post
    Obviously for the antenna to drop the support beneath it failed to hold it up. And it did drop before any other movement up there.
    Which indicates a severance of the hat truss connections to the perimeter, otherwise there would have been distortion in the perimeter as the hat truss failed and the antenna began it's descent. Those connections, both diagonal and horizontal were substantial and would have pulled the perimeter had they not been severed. We can argue about what exactly would cause that severance, but there can be no argument that the connection remained viable as no movement in the perimeter was observed.

  10. #980
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    01-13-19 @ 07:50 AM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    34,815

    Re: Evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.[W:57]

    Have the CT'ers got to miniature black holes or miniature dark matter bombs being the reason for collapse yet?
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

Page 98 of 101 FirstFirst ... 488896979899100 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •