Aluminum/magnesium Alloys Options

[Bill Duke]

Hello...First time posting on this forum. Following, you will find a post from 7/6/08's CD article about WTC 7 and the new NIST report. Since I am not a metalurgist or a chemical engineer of any sort, I yield to anyone on this site who may have an eplanation. The contention is that the 747's body parts are composed of an aluminum/magnesium alloy that under conditions of proper combustion as in the crashes at the WTC, become highly flammable and reach temps of 4000 degrees. Here's the post....any feedback will be greatly appreciated...



Hi ~GDE~. I was an aircraft crash investigaor and worked directly for the SAC IG for five years. Crash investigations are always conducted when the cause of an aircraft crash is “not known”. There were very few pieces of aircraft left to investigate at the crash site of the WTC. Just a few scraps.

In addition, video evidence of exactly how the crashes occurred was readily available and there was no doubt as to the cause of the crashes.

Another person asked about melting steel, as burning jet fuel will not melt steel. That is true\, it will cause stteel to warp or bend out of shape after an hour of fire. What is also true is, aircraft aluminum is a mixture of aluminum and MAGNESIUM and it will burn at temps approaching 4,000 degrees, which is more than hot enough to melt steel beams.

The two aircraft were almost fully loaded with tons of fuel, which exploded on impact and the resulting fires were not accessable to firemen and auto sprinkers on those floors were wiped out by the crashes and they wouldn’t have helped with a fuel and magnesium fire anyway. No firemen ever got onto the floors where the aircraft entered.

There were tons of “smushed”, into a compacted mass of burning aircraft, wedged right up into the buildings central cores. The heat would have been near 4,000 degrees at those locations. That is where the building floors were attached, and the heat went right up the center of the buildings, like giant chimneys.

There are also some other aircraft parts, such as the large landing gear wheels, which are solid magnesium, and once magnesium, or magnesium aluminum alloys are afire, they cannot be put out, except by burying them in sand or smothering with foam. Water on magnesium fires will cause it to explode.

Military aircraft generally have more magnesium than commercial airliners, but there was tons of magnesium in those 767s which struck the two towers. Later mdels ahve less magnesium. A fact which has been ignored in all of the official reports about the 9-11 disaster. It should not have been ignored.

[Bettawrekonize]

Shortly after 9/11 happened, I started looking into explaining things (and a lot of things still go unexplained). After reading about the occurring temperatures, it didn't take me very long to figure out that the symptoms were that of magnesium and, from there, it didn't take me very long to realize that airplanes often have magnesium parts. However, I still had problems buying this for a long period of time because I ran into the same problem that you guys ran into, and that is, how did the magnesium get ignited? I figured that they wouldn't put magnesium on a plane in a form that could be easily ignited because it would be too dangerous and they have no reason to, so they would tend to only have it in bulk, which is a form that's hard to ignite. Eventually, I figured out a very obvious answer.

While magnesium does burn at much higher temperatures than what would be required to melt the beams, if memory serves me correctly, magnesium in bulk requires hotter temperatures to ignite than the optimally hot temperatures of jet fuel (or than jet fuel under optimal burning conditions). It's not that much hotter, but it's enough to consider the possibility of ignition highly unlikely. I also don't really buy the notion that the jet fuel was under optimal burning conditions. However, from my understanding, magnesium in smaller amounts (not in bulk) can burn at lower temperatures. From my understanding, fuses on fireworks often have magnesium and it ignites despite the fact that your lighter or matches don't burn at jet fuel temperatures. It seems unlikely that an airplane would have magnesium parts in non - bulk for two reasons. There is no use for it and it would be too dangerous. However, if the airplane crashed and it did have magnesium parts in bulk, the impact could have fractured some of that magnesium making it easier to ignite. Once ignited, it would be easier for the fractured parts to ignite the bulk of the magnesium around it (or the bulk that the fractures are attached to, that is, the part of the bulk that is fractured might ignite and that could spread to the rest of the bulk). All of this still seems highly unlikely, but there does seem to be a lot of evidence that magnesium was involved.

http://www.conspiracycafe.net/forum/index....showtopic=20220

Yeah, the magnesium is in bulk, but when the airplane hits the twin towers, is the magnesium still in bulk after facing such impact? Maybe not so much so anymore. After receiving such impact, it might be in smaller pieces, making it easier to ignite. I still think this whole thing is unlikely, but it's the best explanation I have so far.

[dMz]

Yeah, the magnesium is in bulk, but when the airplane hits the twin towers, is the magnesium still in bulk after facing such impact? Maybe not so much so anymore. After receiving such impact, it might be in smaller pieces, making it easier to ignite. I still think this whole thing is unlikely, but it's the best explanation I have so far.

Basically, after the airplane hit the towers, the impact of the hit may have re - shaped the magnesium in such a way that would make it easier to ignite.

Interesting Betta,

The "mights" and "maybes" are a little unsourced and weak IMHO. Did you read my posts #4 and #6 on this same thread then?

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10746072

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10746075