Wtc 7 And Sandero, NIST v speculation Options

[onesliceshort]

1. Witnesses, both aural and visual, described explosions within and without WTC7.

I agree there were explosions.. but not bombs... I assert the witness can't identify what the explosions were..not that they didn't hear them.

Nice wordplay changing cutter charges/controlled explosives for "bombs".

No witnesses to this huge explosion 9/11 - Location update

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bSiHIxMMD8

WTC7 Sound evidence for explosions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERhoNYj9_fg

WTC7 Strange occurrence within the last 20 minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=biIIqKybSZE

WTC7 collapse with explosion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-ftINnhT0Y

Michael Hess WTC7 explosion witness

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUfiLbXMa64

WTC7 explosion witness Barry Jennings

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbbZE7c3a8Q

WTC Complex explosion witnesses (Aidan Monaghan)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8XBxw7k8rk
(last video explosions caught just before collapse of WTC2)

118 firefighters describe explosive events

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCw6Ps1ekMY

The firefighters testimonies to explosions in the twin towers

http://www.journalof911studies.com/article...TradeCenter.pdf

Then there's this:

Truck bomb claims and arrest reports pre media sanitization (05:00)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8efGoRSLUG8

As above with NYPD radio transmissions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3aKj6uJ5Mt4

So you say that the explosions were heard but you can definitively say that they weren't "bombs"? How so?

[SanderO]

I can so so because and explosion from a bomb and an exploding transformer, for example, would be indistinguishable by probably 99.9% of the people.

I've heard one "terrorist bomb" in my entire life and no bombs in warfare or in the military as I have not served. I have heard bombs in the movies and on TV and pyrotechnics on 4th of July. I would say as rule witness testimony and especially audio is unreliable. Please consider as well that the mindset of people that day is we were *under attack* and so the first on hearing an explosion is ... bomb.

The bomb I heard was extremely loud and was at the Federal Bldg in 1977... FALN I think. I've heard a pole mounted transformer explode a few blocks from my home. It was extremely loud.. but not the same as the FALN bomb... but also in different acoustic environment. When the Con Ed transformer exploded by first thought was a bomb.

I've heard Graham MacQueen's presentation live. Good research but he made no attempt to identify what building components could explode. In a sense this is the same sort of case as NIST makes when it said they didn't have to look for explosive residue and didn't find any. If you don't look you can't find. I've not heard one truther acknowledge that buildings burning cause things inside to explode, that transformers can explode.. batteries can explode... all gas tanks can explode.. all caused by fire. There were many things which likely exploded that morning.

Yes or no?

Let's summarize:

Witnesses are unfamiliar with live explosions... any kind
Witnesses were in a... we are under attack mode... frame of mind.
Fire will cause things to explode in a building on fire extinguishers, tanks, pipes with water in them.... and so forth
truck bombs arrests are irrelevant to what sounds at B7

[elreb]

Ask CIT

[onesliceshort]

Witnesses are unfamiliar with live explosions... any kind
Witnesses were in a... we are under attack mode... frame of mind.
Fire will cause things to explode in a building on fire extinguishers, tanks, pipes with water in them.... and so forth
truck bombs arrests are irrelevant to what sounds at B7

1. 118 of those witnesses were firefighters. They specifically said the words "explosions" and "bomb".

2. "Under attack mode" - irrelevant as to the definitive statement you make that they weren't bombs.

3. Of course I'm not saying that every single loud bang heard was due to explosives, I didn't post many videos claiming so because thry sounded like tyres and windows exploding. But you're claiming that every single explosion heard was not due to explosives. How so?

4. Truck bombs arrests are irrelevant?? We're debating whether there were explosives used in Manhattan, but the quickly buried story on the "van full of explosives" in Manhattan has no bearing on deciding one way or the other if those sounds were from explosives? How so?

[kawika]

From the reports that I have read and available to all readers…the fuel system was bullet proof.

I [elreb] have personally heard the "pop" sound of a fuse blowing from a transformer.

It does indeed sound like an explosion.

I [elreb] have also been next to a tree stuck by lightning. {Holy Shit}

As a former Marine Corp Sergeant, I also know what explosives sound like.

I do not believe in magic…humans blew WTC7 up!

Why do transformers have fuses on them? To protect against surges from damaging the transformer?

What happens when the fuse blows, does the transformer blow up? Catch fire?

I see not a single piece of evidence that such a thing happened at WTC7. And I cannot figure why they would permit a building to be constructed on top of such a hazard.

[elreb]

What happens when the fuse blows, does the transformer blow up? Catch fire?

Ask CIT

[onesliceshort]

2. Steel structures cannot fall due to "office fires"

No they don't... we agree. Not hot enough. Office fires did not cause the steel to weaken..

Agreed. I cut the rest because that's covered in the OP.

And even if there was extra heat these videos debunk the expansion theory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGe0E9cjUbI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvRKZO5o_dA

SanderO did you ever explain how your theory will help us koolaiders?

Set the scene..

SanderO: Okay you guys, I believe that you're lying about the fuel fires and that this would have added to the heat that would have caused "expansion" and collapse. What have you got to say for yourselves?

NIST: Thanks!

[SanderO]

OSS,

I am interested in getting to the truth about what happened. I can't, nor can anyone else, know what the source of an explosion that someone heard that morning was... not even 150 fire fighters. This is pretty subjective...

I heard an explosion
I heard a bomb
I heard an explosion and it sounded like a bomb (going off)

There are things which explode in burning buildings which are not bombs
transformers DO explode (i provided some videos of this)
transformers in the sub stations of the WTC have exploded from fire in 1992
massive transformers in sub stations are cooled /insulated by flammable oil which when heated releases explosive gas
Con ed reported it lost 13kv feeders to B7's sub station at 8:46 when the plane hit tower 1
Jennings and Hess reported a massive explosion below them when they were in the stairs before 10 am
Massive explosion enough to rip the emergency stair apart and make it impassable seems destructive enough to break sched 40 piping carry diesel fuel.
All power was off in B7 when Hess and Jennings arrived at 23rd floor EMC (can we assume there was some power and light in the EMC as it was windowless (???) and they observed no one there and coffee in cups and so forth.
Were the stairs lit by back up battery power so they could descend from 23 to 6,7 or 8?

What can we stipulate as possible or probable related to the observations and the building and equipment:

explosions were heard
origin / type of explosions is indeterminate
explosion below flr 8 stair blew it apart before 10 am
schedule 40 piping can break from from mechanical impact of sufficient force (no such thing as bullet proof piping)
lift pumps in the lower part of B7 supplied diesel from the 20,000 gal tanks to the day tanks on demand (float or pressure switch)
Diesel tanks are not indestructible and would not survive intact the collapse of a skyscraper upon them
recovery of lost fuel from a broken tank would be difficult and indeterminate unless there was pooling of unburnt fuel
there was thick black smoke seen coming from floors 6&7 south and east sides (lee sides)
fires were un-fought from 8:46 until 5:20 collapse
steel is weakened by heat
there was no direct load path from core columns above floor 7 to the foundations
7 OEM generators and day tank
6 Switchgear, storage
5 Switchgear, generators, transformers
4 Upper level of 3rd floor, switchgear
3 Lobby, SSB Conference Center, rentable space, manage
2 Open to first floor lobby, transformer vault upper level, upper level switchgear
1 Lobby, loading docks, existing Con Ed transformer vaults, fuel storage, lower level switchgear
much of core above floor 7 was supported on 3 transfer trusses

8 perimeter columns on the north side were supported on cantilever girders from bearing on the north core columns on one side
a collapse or destruction of the transfer trusses would cause the core columns above to drop 8 stories with no resistance
9. the east penthouse was above the 2 transfer trusses on the east side of the core
10 the east penthouse descended through the entire visible height (20+ stories) before naked observation of the roof line descent (at FF) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bx2Kx2AkXEg
11 the building swayed east and west beginning 60 seconds before the east penthouse drops - (this suggests that there was load redistribution taking place in remaining columns

"The 275-gallon tank associated with the American Express generator was located at the west end of the 8th floor. If full, the 275 gallons represent a potential of about 600 MegaJoules , which would be enough to cause a serious fire that could spread to other fuels (in truth, one gallon of fuel oil would be enough to cause a serious fire that could spread to other fuels) but not felt to be enough to threaten the stability of the building's structural elements. " that's just 1 gallon to spreead the fire to other fuel sources.. tanks and pipes.

For a discussion of the motion of B7 go here:

http://the911forum.freeforums.org/wtc-7-tr...a-t353-150.html

You'll learn that there was a period of traces on points of the facade which exceeded G. The meaning if obvious... for that period the motion was not falling but something else of some force added to the force of gravity.

B7 collapsed from a core failure... not all 81 columns simultaneously.

[kawika]

All power was off in B7 when Hess and Jennings arrived at 23rd floor EMC (can we assume there was some power and light in the EMC as it was windowless (???) and they observed no one there and coffee in cups and so forth.

Sorry, no. Power was on when they arrived BY ELEVATOR just after 9:03 am

Power cut off (for whatever reason) at 10 am when the South Tower collapsed. Generators kicked on. This was reported by a WTC7 building engineer who was on the third floor lobby at that time. But he doesn't say how long they stayed running because he evacuated up Greenwich Street as the North tower fell.

explosion below flr 8 stair blew it apart before 10 am

Sorry, no. It was floor six (6). Jennings is very explicit about this.

Diesel tanks are not indestructible and would not survive intact the collapse of a skyscraper upon them

Sorry, no. The above ground tanks were steel. The underground tanks were fiberglass, tops were six feet below grade, completely surrounded by pea gravel. The loading dock floor above them was 28" thick and it was UNDAMAGED.

Which skyscraper are you referring to? WTC7 or WTC1? If WTC7 how does their crushing have anything to do with contributing to the collapse, or fire that supposedly contributed?

there was thick black smoke seen coming from floors 6&7 south and east sides (lee sides)

Sorry, no. Fire was coming from 8 and above. No indication of fire on 6 or 7 in the video I provided. Fire on 7 was long burnt out. Absolutely no indication of any fire on 6. Please stop regurgitating this nonsense to support the truss cook theory.

The dark smoke (in the shadow of the building) was coming from floor 8. No fuel on 8 to contribute to your diesel fire. More likely carpet and furniture, computers and others burning inefficiently.

[elreb]

massive transformers in sub stations are cooled /insulated by flammable oil which when heated releases explosive gas

Ask CIT

[SanderO]

Sorry, no. Power was on when they arrived BY ELEVATOR just after 9:03 am

Power cut off (for whatever reason) at 10 am when the South Tower collapsed. Generators kicked on. This was reported by a WTC7 building engineer who was on the third floor lobby at that time. But he doesn't say how long they stayed running because he evacuated up Greenwich Street as the North tower fell.

According the interview I heard of Hess and Jennings... they walked down the stairs from the 23rd floor because there was no power and it was before tower 1 collapsed. I was not there... that is what they said... they were.


Sorry, no. It was floor six (6). Jennings is very explicit about this.

Sorry no ... there is 2 different stories here... one that the had past the 8th floor meaning they were on the landing above the 7th and the explosion occurred and they managed to get up to 8. Frankly Kawika, you are nit picking proving nothing.

There was a massive explosion below the east stair which was most likely from the mech floor or the sub station below... you haven't offered an explanation of that explosion... but I have suggested possible causes.

Why are you denying what appears to be circumstantial evidence that something exploded in the mech floor or the sub station. Or are you saying that the explosion was part of the controlled demolition which eventually would take out 81 columns simultaneously so the top would drop at ff for 8 floors.

Go read the WTC 7 thread at the 911 Free Forum and argue with people who are far more conversant with what happened there than me.

Sorry, no. The above ground tanks were steel. The underground tanks were fiberglass, tops were six feet below grade, completely surrounded by pea gravel. The loading dock floor above them was 28" thick and it was UNDAMAGED.

Which skyscraper are you referring to? WTC7 or WTC1? If WTC7 how does their crushing have anything to do with contributing to the collapse, or fire that supposedly contributed?

My hunch is that the tanks did not survive with 40,000 tons of steel coming down on the,

Sorry, no. Fire was coming from 8 and above. No indication of fire on 6 or 7 in the video I provided. Fire on 7 was long burnt out. Absolutely no indication of any fire on 6. Please stop regurgitating this nonsense to support the truss cook theory.

The dark smoke (in the shadow of the building) was coming from floor 8. No fuel on 8 to contribute to your diesel fire. More likely carpet and furniture, computers and others burning inefficiently.

Sorry no... count the floors it was 6&7 in the video.

[SanderO]

Can we accept that transformer do explode and cause fires????

I was wrong ... it "caught fire" after it exploded... Note it was one of those pesky 13KV transformers... the and Con Ed reported loosing 8 that morning... being at 8:46.... They just went off line quietly I suppose...

"Published: July 24, 1992 An air-conditioning transformer five stories below the World Trade Center caught fire after an explosion last night, the authorities said. Six people were injured, none of them seriously, but the 110-story twin towers did not have to be evacuated, the authorities said. The fire was first reported at 10:02 P.M. in a 13,000-volt transformer in the Trade Center's refrigeration plant, which provides air conditioning and ventilation for the complex, the Fire Department and the Port Authority said. The electrical fire, which went to three alarms, was brought under control at 11:24 P.M., said a Fire Department official, Lieutenant Erick Weekes."

[kawika]

Sorry no... count the floors it was 6&7 in the video.

At mark 6:09, count up from the double high windows, which are floors 3 and 4, the Hess window issuing smoke is floor 8, skip 3 no fires, to 12 which is burned out, 13 is still going.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dRKCSmnR3ow

I think your misunderstanding of the floor numbers stems from your insistence that the substation is six stories tall. It is only three.

I am quite sure of the above arrangement.

I know this is easy to confuse. Even NIST can't see that a floor that had no fire at 4:30 (floor 12) could not contribute to a magical expansion and walk-off of a critical girder (#2001).

[elreb]

Can we accept that transformer do explode and cause fires????

The statement = “air-conditioning transformer five stories below the World Trade Center caught fire after an explosion last night”…

It did not say the transformer exploded…only that it caught on fire…after an explosion...[Caused by ?]

Yes, transformers can explode and most commonly when stuck by lightning.

On rare occasions, catastrophic failure can result from an internal short causing the mineral oil to expand from overheating. We are talking about 740 degrees F.

[onesliceshort]

Sorry, no. Power was on when they arrived BY ELEVATOR just after 9:03 am

Power cut off (for whatever reason) at 10 am when the South Tower collapsed. Generators kicked on. This was reported by a WTC7 building engineer who was on the third floor lobby at that time. But he doesn't say how long they stayed running because he evacuated up Greenwich Street as the North tower fell.





Sorry, no. It was floor six (6). Jennings is very explicit about this.





Sorry, no. The above ground tanks were steel. The underground tanks were fiberglass, tops were six feet below grade, completely surrounded by pea gravel. The loading dock floor above them was 28" thick and it was UNDAMAGED.

Which skyscraper are you referring to? WTC7 or WTC1? If WTC7 how does their crushing have anything to do with contributing to the collapse, or fire that supposedly contributed?



Sorry, no. Fire was coming from 8 and above. No indication of fire on 6 or 7 in the video I provided. Fire on 7 was long burnt out. Absolutely no indication of any fire on 6. Please stop regurgitating this nonsense to support the truss cook theory.

The dark smoke (in the shadow of the building) was coming from floor 8. No fuel on 8 to contribute to your diesel fire. More likely carpet and furniture, computers and others burning inefficiently.

Bump.

SanderO, Kawika has raised very damaging verifiable evidence that counters your theory. I'd have thought a more detailed point by point rebuttal of the issues he raised were in order.

You're the one who looks down your nose at researchers here but I only see other people backing up their claims.

Come on man, pull the finger out.

[SanderO]

Elreb...

I am not an electrical engineer... I found this:

Why Do Transformers Explode?

"Transformers explode when an electric power line running to a transformer suddenly transmits far too much electricity for the circuits within the transformer to process. The most common way that this can happen is during a lightning strike. There are automatic shutoffs within the transformer when too much power reaches it. They turn off within 60 milliseconds of having detected an energy spike; unfortunately, this is about 5 times too slow to do any good. The extra electricity heats up and melts the circuit. The circuits are made to be heat resistant and are kept cool by several gallons of refined mineral oil in a closed chamber. Despite this, the circuit becomes red hot and fails in a shower of electrical sparks, superheating and igniting the mineral oil. The mineral oil combusts explosively, causing a loud bang and sending metal shrapnel that was once the transformer scything everywhere."rt


Too much electricity or perhaps a short circuit?

The electrical system had many transformer of different size to change the voltage for the various demands... But as you know some machinery requires not only a different voltage, but a specific amperage. Large compressor motors and so forth would require lots of amps and the transformer supply the electricity apparently exploded in 92.

I believe there were also transformer explosions at the top of tower 1. A guess because of the timing of the tell tale black smoke and it being 15 floors above the plane impact location. It appears almost immediately after the plane hit as captured on the few cams pointing up there.

My hunch is that the plane shorted out the main feeds to the sub station on floor 108/109.. and this went down to the main branch and feeds/transformers in the sub basement. There were I believe 8 sub stations which stepped down the voltage on 4 mech floors with 2 an each side of the core.

I don't KNOW that there were shorts, arching, power surges or explosions. But I would think this is likely. Or I think it is unlikely that there would be no shorts, arcing and explosions coming from the electrical system when the building has just had a jet line slice into it likely including part of the core which contain the risers.

I suspect there were also gas risers and these could explode as well.

To dismiss all explosions as coming from building systems is silly. Even the deputy fire commission said he didn't know what caused the explosions. How can one know for sure unless you are close enough to see it and then you won't be alive to tell what it was. If you do a bit of googling you can learn that power transformer can and do explode:

"Power Transformers – Transformers are large, box-shaped structures connected to multiple wires and are usually the largest single item in a substation. Transformers are usually located on one side of a substation, and the connection to switchgear is by bare conductors. Because of the large quantity of oil, it is essential to take precaution against fire hazards. Hence, a transformer is usually located around a sump used to collect excess oil."

So you have B7 with some sort of explosion before 10 am... unknown cause... and fires must have started.. consuming transformer oil... probably diesel... And you guys are trying to say that you believe the sub station was just purring along kicking out power till con ed cut it at 4pm?

Well you can go on believing that. I won't disabuse you of that belief. The building was burning for 8 hrs... and we don't have many vids of the south side.. or none inside as far as I've seen and none of that intact sub station that Kawika claims exist.

I don't have the time to scour the web for evidence. I proposed a plausible explanation which fits the observables... some of which are apparently disputed by Kawika. I don't know why this is so threatening and every single aspect of this theory is disputed even when the structural engineer of the building made a similar claim... WHICH IS NOT WHAT NIST SAID. This is not a NIST explanation.

The problem here appears to be that only CD is acceptable... placed explosives to the truth movement. Even if the twins were CD and someone triggered the events which took down B7 ...that is unacceptable. It's all or nothing. If your not with us, your against us.

I am interested in what happened.... and trying to find out.

[onesliceshort]

You haven't time to look for the "evidence" but you'll knock the evidence that Kawika just supplied?

You've got time to write a load of condascending drivel. You could have used that time to google something SanderO. Apart from that Popular Mechanics piece.

[elreb]

RE = SO

I also am not an Electrical Engineer. I was a 2861 in the Marine Corp [Radio technician]. After that, I was a Union Pipefitter as I went thru college.

In your statement, which collaborates my statement = “The most common way that this can happen is during a lightning strike”.

In most cases, an explosion fuse will contain a short. If this system fails, the mineral oil could reach its boiling point at approximately 740 degree F.

It is the pressure of the expanding oil that erupts the transformer housing and if a high temperature is maintained and exposed to oxygen…it will indeed burn. [Think of cooking fried chicken]

For the record, I only limit my discussion to WTC7 and Con-Edison. They had few problems for over 35 years until 911!

If I had a question, I would wonder what or who caused the fires in a super protected government building? My father was a “Safety Engineer” for the US government for 25 years and stuff like this never happens.

[onesliceshort]

Kawika, was there ever a project to document the WTC7 fires caught on camera/video with times, placement, testimonies, etc?

[kawika]

Kawika, was there ever a project to document the WTC7 fires caught on camera/video with times, placement, testimonies, etc?

NIST does a fire timeline. We are working on a timeline video relating to the magic girder walk.

NIST did an analysis of imagery. It was a special database called Cumulus which allowed them to assign attributes to the images and video clips. Then they could sort accordingly. The problem is, NIST appears to have only received a fraction of the available footage, so their analysis is wanting.

All references below are to NCSTAR 1-9, Vol 1.

Floor 12 fire

The fire on floor 12 was first recorded at about 2:08, along the southeast face. The photos continued until about 2:28.

There was a gap of available photos until about 2:57pm when the fire on floor 12 appeared near column 45 of the North face. (figure 5-119, PDF page 250). NIST theorized that the fire bypassed the NE corner, following an interior corridor to reach the offices on the north face. (PDF page 249)

At about 3:05 a helicopter took a photo of floor 12 fires near column 44, showing that the fire was moving to the east (PDF page 252)

By 3:10pm the fire was past the NE corner, evident on the east face. (PDF page 253)

On PDF page 253, NIST says the fires on floor 12 in the areas near column 44 lasted 15 minutes.

Conclusion: Fire on floor 12 had consumed all fuel in the NE corner by 3:30pm. This is confirmed by the Vince Dementri video tape taken at about 4:40 pm which shows the fire on floor 12 had burned out.

VIDEO

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=679xhTZZyog

At mark 2:10, window falling out was ID’d by NIST as 2:15-2:30PM NCSTAR1-9, Vol 1, Page 201, PDF page 245. (figure 5-116)



This post has been edited by kawika: Apr 29 2012, 12:41 PM