Our vision is to provide a home to sincere 9/11 researchers free from biased moderation and abusive tirades from other members.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which only gives you access to view the discussions. New registration has been suspended.
David B. Benson wrote:Much the same creasing can be observed high up (and early) on a face of WTC 2. I suspect this is a failure mode of
for which there may well be some literature about.
David B. Benson wrote:femr2 --- Fractured bolts being shot out from the spandrel connections?
femr2 wrote:David B. Benson wrote:femr2 --- Fractured bolts being shot out from the spandrel connections?
*Dustified* bolts ? If not, where cometh the dust ? (Remember scale. We are looking at 12-24ft dust ejecta for each *blip*)
We are also looking bottom-up.
I'm open to rational explanation, but bolts don't convince me I'm afraid, especially without extensive structural explanation.
Each pixel represents about 0.25 m vertically.femr2 wrote:*Dustified* bolts ? If not, where cometh the dust ?
Some sort of ejecta. Do these extend but 4--8 m from the wall? Are you stating the ejecta are 4--8 m in diameter? Once again, I'm lost.(Remember scale. We are looking at 12-24ft dust ejecta for each *blip*)
Not a problem. The load becomes increasingly eccentric and so the point of failue moves also.We are also looking bottom-up.
femr2 wrote:Trippy wrote:Here's a question for you - where is this face in relation to the face that NIST claim the collapse initiated on?
Cannot see the relevance of the question, at all. Please elaborate.
David B. Benson wrote:Your estimate?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests