|
Posted by Pierre Levesque, AIA on April 25, 2006, 10:19 pm
> "Pierre Levesque, AIA"> wrote
>> "Don"> wrote
>>> So, 2 pressurized 6000 gallon diesel fuel tanks on the 5th floor caused
>>> the blaze that caused column 79 first then columns 80 and 81 to fold
>>> like stepladders, correct? What caused the tanks to ignite?
>>
>> Ummm, ftom the heat generated from the collapse of WTC 1 a mere 60 feet
>> away??? That's right, 60 away feet from a building that was 1368 feet
>> tall...
>
> Not to pick nits here or argue, I'm just asking.
> Diesel doesn't ignite, it does its damndest to NOT ignite.
> Wasn't the fire up on the 80th floor or some such, roughly 800' away from
> the diesel tanks?
> I'll assume that the jet fuel that poured down through the building(s)
> brought flames with them as well, which then brought the heat to Bldg 7?
Actually that's most unlikely as WTC7 is north of WTC1 and the first plane
hit away from WTC7. When WTC2 was hit from the south, WTC1 sheltered WTC7
so no jet fuel could have "sprayed" WTC7 at anytime
> I'll also assume that the diesel tanks were not right up against the wall
> closest to the burning tower (60' away).
> That brings me to wondering how a fuel that is pretty non-ignitable,
> inside steel tanks, could be brought to ignition by a heat source 60+ feet
> away?
That's why nobody can confirm that the diesel fuel was ever a cause of any
fire in WTC7. ALL reports determine that the diesel fuel "could" have
contributed to the fires.
>
> Can I also assume that when column 79 buckled (stacked dominos), it then
> caused the corner of the penthouse to drop, which was the catalyst, ala
> pancake, for the rest of the building 7 collapse?
>
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap