Quote:
Originally Posted by Regorium
I'm just wondering what you think "should've" happened?
I only have a very rudimentary understanding of materials and structures (much less one as complex as the WTC), but it really feels to me it fell exactly the way it was supposed to when it gets hit by an airliner that is not big enough to shear it completely, but is big enough to weaken supports to just past their breaking points.
|
I am no way an expert, nor do I pretend to be. But to answer the question what I think "shoud've" happened. To start, Neither of the planes hit straight on and they hit near the tops of the buildings. I would think that if anything, the top of the building would tip to one side either breaking off or causing the rest of the building to tilt to one side while collapsing. I guess my idea of this comes from something as simple as jenga or a tree being chopped. take out one side of it, it falls to the side. Although I do understand that the engineering of two of the largest buildings in the world and jenga are very different.
Furthermore. How does a fire on the 93rd floor cause building to completely collapse in on itself within an hour and thirteen minutes? I would think that this would require serious structural problems throughout the whole building below the 93rd floor. You would think if the buildings were desinged/able to withstand a plane flying into it at 500 mph it could handle a fire on 6 of it's floors and not weaken it's structural strength throughout the building.
Again, not and engineer/expert. I just find it odd that two almost identical buildings are hit by different planes in different parts of the buildings and yet they both fall perfectly straight down.