Slashdot Mirror
Leaked FEMA/ASCE Draft Report On WTC Collapse
securitas writes "The New York Times obtained a copy of the World Trade Center draft report by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the American Society of Civil Engineers about the engineering failures that caused the towers to collapse. Among the findings: 'Fireproofing, sprinkler systems and the water supply for hoses were all disabled and the fires generated heat equivalent to the energy output of a nuclear power plant' reports the NYT (Yahoo link). Amazingly, if it wasn't for the fire (or another secondary catastrophic force), the towers would have remained standing."
Perhaps you could take your anti-capitalist rhetoric elsewhere, comrade. If you had any decency, you'd know that in the time period the towers were designed and constructed in they were paragons of efficiency and safety. Far from cutting all costs and maintenance, the towers were meticulously designed to withstand all manner of natural forces, fires, and other disasters. They were even designed to withstand the impact of a fully loaded 707 jetliner, the largest then available. Alas, a 767 is much larger and carries more fuel. Even then, the towers would have stood had it not been for the fire, and the impact and explosion were far more than any designer could've ever dreamed would happen.
My friend, you appear to have a huge chip on your shoulder that is clouding your judgement. People died because madmen hijacked two jetliners and deliberately slammed them into skyscrapers full of thousands of innocent human beings. Corporate greed and stockholders had nothing to do with it, and it is callous, irresponsible, and shallow of you to even suggest such a thing to further your obvious hatred of corporate America.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
He stated that the airplanes could have not brought them down seeing that buildings of a lesser, equal, or greater size get the same sort of impact daily with the force of winds.
Well, this may be true, but when you consider that the airplanes *did* down the two buildings, one must realise that there is something flawed about that statement. I would accept that most skyscrapers are pummeled with the strength of an airplane crash daily, except that the force is spread across the entire structure, or at least one entire face, of the building. Consider what it might feel like if you were walking down the street and suddenly the entire energy of the ~50mph wind gusts that you normally can easily withstand were channeled at a 1cm^2 section of your chest, or even your skull. Wouldn't that at least completely knock the wind out of you? I haven't the time to properly do the math myself right now, but it may work out that such an energy release over such a small space would be enough force to pierce skin and possibly break bones.
And that is what made the difference, aside from the fire and explosions that are discussed elsewhere in the thread.
Think for a few moments before posting.
- These buildings received Certificates of Occupancy, had been tested in the prior attack, their systems and procedures were as good as any other in the world.
- There is NO evidence of cost-cutting, sub-standard materials or equipment, etc. This was a public building owned until recently by the Port Authority of NY & NJ and by all reports kept in exemplary condition.
- These were not slip-shod towers built overnight in some 3rd-world country without reviews, standards, or regular inspections.
- Aside from their unusual tube-design (which appears to have been their greatest asset) and height there is nothing special about WTC towers that would separate them from tall buildings around the world. This includes materials.
Finally, before you post realize that 3,000 humans died horribly in this disaster. Perhaps before you post your Monday-morning-quarterbacking, rumor-spreading & conspiracy theories you might show a bit of respect for those folks and the ones they left behind.A little courtesy and respect is appreciated.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
Calling the WTC's collapse an engineering failure is kind of like taking C4 to slashdot's servers and saying that the code failed somehow. You just can't reasonably have expected them to anticipate this. Expecting a building of similar requirements (e.g., height, usable space, windows, etc) to withstand both the impact of a modern airliner and the jet fuel may well be an impossible task, especially when trying to do it within any reasonable budget. Please think about what you are saying and try to be a little less arrogant. Thank You
16 days after Sept 11th, I received this in an email from my father, (who happens to be a Mechanical Engineer):
- Professor Thomas Mackin, who currently teaches Failure Mechanisms in Engineering Materials class, made this short presentation (attached) after the World Trade Tower tragedy. This presentation was made in response to the
Chancellor's request for teachers to discuss with their classes the recent events. Mackin was clearly as shaken up about the events as were the rest of us. He only had a short response to his final question: "As engineers, what can we do to prevent this from happening. - Nothing."
There was simply too much energy put into the buildings. bin Laden knew that, the engineers know that... it's a damn shame we're back to the accusations, finger-pointing, and blame-placing that so much plagues our culture.Attached was a .PDF file, "ME 346 - Engineering Analysis of Tragedy at WTC."
The engineers did their job. They did it well. World Trade Center 1 & 2 were good buildings -- I stood on top of one just over 10 years ago. I can hardly believe I never will again.
Osama bin Laden and his cronies are the ones -- the ONLY ones -- responsible for this outrage. Please, let's try to remember that.
"...America's great minds of today, teaching America's great minds of tomorrow. Poor bastards." -- A Beautiful Min
it was over six months ago and if Americans should move on - it was a terrible tragedy yes - but enough's been said about it already.
would it be ok if we try to prevent it from happening again first? like maybe by going after people who plan terrorist attacks against us... would that be ok?
I got beat up in school once - my dad told me I shouldn't harp on it for too long - I should just get over it. I remember thinking "wtf! Does he realize I have to go back to school tomorrow?" It's kinda hard to get over it when they're still out there.
should America be punished with "violence" ?? I don't that would solve anything.
Isn't there any difference at all between the two sides? Can't you think of anything??
Here is a hint:
We (America) do our best to kill only those who would harm us. We do that by spending millions of dollars on precision-guided weapons. We do it by being careful who we shoot.
Terrorists on the other hand seek out innocent bystanders. They kill children too young to know what's going on. They brutally massacre crowds of people at parties. And They do it on purpose.
If you honestly don't see the difference - then I humbly submit that you are a moron.
You've obviously never been in a combat situation.
I was in the Army. I bet that means I've been closer than you have.
Ever heard stories of vietnam, how you systematically looted, raped, murdered and destroyed whole villages?
Looting, rape, and murder happened. Do you think this is the way we wage war? Do you think american generals sit in rooms and plan to hurt civilians? They do not. The people we are fighting however do make plans to kill civilians. Once again, this is the difference between they and us.
These things happen, yes, even today. Do you want to know the number of children who will die tomorrow because of US clusterbombs?
Why wait until tomorrow. Please post a link to a story about children being killed by US cluster bombs today, or yesterday. If you cannot find such a story I will continue to believe that you are wrong.
Range attack is a very cowardly and shrewd way to fight an enemy.
Is that more or less cowardly than hiding in a cave brainwashing religious zealots into believing that if they spill the blood of innocents (even people who agree with their cause) they can be rewarded with sex in the afterlife.
Believing [snip] "We" are better than "them".
So let me get this straight - you condemn me for thinking We are better than Them then turn around and say "you're too stupid or incapable to make a better political agenda" illustrating that you think you are better than me. What a hypocrite!
What I would suggest for you is to travel to europe and live there for a couple of years.
Surprise! I lived in Germany for two years, Korea for 1 year, and Saudi Arabia for 6 mo. I've been all over the world. What, you haven't? Well then let me assure you, Europeans and Arabs are far more arrogant than Americans. That's been my experience.