Demolition in Turkey Goes Wrong

Run time: 00:20 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxHo5OpxlrY   Posted on YouTube: August 02, 2009 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: August 03, 2009 By DU Member: Control-Z Views on DU: 1855

 
Oh, man. Just saw this on MSNBC.

I doubt the company will get another contract after this one.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

that was amazing. And amazing no one got hurt.

so explain again why the twin towers fell into their own footprint?


Oh, never mind...

taller vehicles on a windy pass have no problem with high winds, while those small sporty vehicles, that are low to the ground, have a tendency to get blown over?

Edit: My apologies if you forget the sarcasm thingy.

Or any other lateral force. The amount of lateral torque applied to each of the towers by the impact of the aircraft was certainly significant at 7.7 million foot-tons, but had little to do with the collapse. In fact, the energy of the impacts exceeded the designed tolerance of wind load for the buildings by quite almost half a million foot-tons. Simple luck they didn't topple on impact. Something larger than a 757 at those speeds, might well have done them in immediately.

But the buildings survived long enough for many to reach safety. We should be thankful.

tall versus low to the ground. Not a thing to do with wind. (I just love the deliberately obtuse.) The building in this video was also not knocked over by lateral force. But it toppled. Tall things tend to topple. Just an observation.

'Simple luck they didn't topple on impact.' Simple luck x 2! What are the odds? But this is not a 911 thread. Let's not not turn it into one.

the buildings were built much stouter than the standards they were required to meet. It's difficult to estimate exactly the minimum amount of force would have required to topple them. We only know they resisted more than they were required by building code to resist.

Very tall buidlings don't generally topple. That building in the video had a 'wedge' removed, much like a logger removing a section of a tree. A tree is a solid object, and does not collapse. The building was not large and heavy enough to collapse under it's own weight, so with the wedge removed, it rolled. It didn't even collapse under its own weight after coming to rest on it's top.

Once floors started collapsing on the twin towers, there was not enough strength to hold it together, for a 'stump/tree' like toppling. Nothing strong enough for the upper floors to rest against, and tip. It simply crushed the floor below the collapse point, ejected some concrete as pulverized dust, addded mass to the falling wreckage, and proceeded on to crush the next floor, and the next and so on.

If that building in Turkey were significantly larger, say a factor of 3, you would have seen a completely different collapse. (And probably a loss of many lives, and significant property damage.) It would never have been able to roll onto it's roof.

To use rational thought and reason with folks who lack in both areas!

far more intelligent and educated than you who are still trying to figure it out. I have very limited knowledge to back up my own beliefs, I'll admit. I've only read the theories and opinions. Some make more sense than others (to me). Since there is no answer, and since the very brightest are still trying to figure it all out, your opinion doesn't impress me any more than the next guy's.

I like proof. Something I'm pretty sure we'll never have.

And I should not have made assumptions. When you become recognized for solving the dilemma and finding the truth, please get back to me. I will be more than happy to applaud your achievement. (I'm quite serious.)

Just like religion, people ignore reason and evidence! And in the case of the twin towers the scientific data that is available clearly showing what happened. Folks want there to be a more complex and evil reason other than religion to be the cause of 9/11. This 9/11 crap is like a left wing "birther" movement! Regardless of the facts they will continue to say it was an inside job!

Yet they ignore things like recently the fuel tanker catching fire under a concrete bridge and the heat eventually causing the concrete and steel bridge collapsing.

because things like this are incredibly hard to visualize. People see a small building like this one behave in a very odd fashion, and without understanding the mass or design differences, wonder why something like the twin towers couldn't do something similar.

I tried guesstimating what 7.7 million foot tons of torque would look like, and I just can't do it. How big of a cruise ship, hitting how big an iceberg at what speed? Don't know, can't visualize any impact of that scale.

The twin towers are massively outsized exaggerations. We don't have a larger frame of reference for a building collapse. We don't have a large skyscraper hit by anything moving bigger or faster than the 757's on 9/11. In fact, the only real example I can think of, the Bomber that hit the Empire State Building had less than 10% of the mass, or fuel, and less than half the velocity.

There's just no frame of reference to visualize in a non-technical way. I can totally forgive that, if people are approaching it in an honest, answer-seeking fashion. Some people are. I think it's wortwhile to discuss, and not chalk everyone up as truthers, until they show that they are not looking for understanding.

If that's not the one you offer, you're not an expert and you don't know anything.

I lack a formal education in physics but I do my share of reading and "truth seeking". My experience in trying to talk to folks who simply want there to be a "US Government Connection" ends in frustration. I even try the route that a case "could" be argued that the Bush Admin. "may" have known about the attack but decided to let what happens happen in order to push the agenda of The Project for a New American Century...Considering many of these NeoCons held very high positions in the Cheney/Bush Admin. However, NO! There were remote driven planes and bombs on every floor! Of course, none of these folks can even begin to explain the enormous amount of planning and co-conspirators it would have taken to pull something like this off.

So, like I said before I applaud your effort as I know first hand how much hair one must be willing to pull out of one's own head to go down that road!

but know better.

seems to be standard protocol around here.

:sarcasm:

I was thinking the same thing but I really wanted to give this video a chance. It is so cool to watch.

built one hell of a tough structure! Hope no one was hurt.

The frame integrity is preserved even as it lands upside down. The stresses and weight should have crumpled it. Too many explosives and you can cause more damage to surrounding area. This was in urban area so they probably went minimal or some charges didn't detonate. Maybe this was designed to withstand earthquake in area?

For anyone in building, civil engineering and architecture trades this will probably become a classic. Wonder how a Modern building would handle it.

Great OT post!