Skip to comments.
Second WTC Plane Travelling Faster
AP ^
| Saturday February 23 9:13 AM ET
Posted on 02/23/2002 10:06:14 AM PST by sixmil
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-39 next last
1
posted on
02/23/2002 10:06:14 AM PST
by
sixmil
To: sixmil
586mph=871fps; about the speed of a 45ACP round at the muzzle.
To: sheik yerbouty
I wonder how fast the notional 707 in the design requirements for the building was supposed to have been flying? I'll bet not anywhere near this fast, as they would not have been thinking about someone deliberately ramming the building at speed, but more like a plane off course upon landing or takeoff, when they would be going about 1/2 to 1/3 as fast. Since the energy involved in the collision is proportional to the square of the speed, and also to the mass/weight of the aircraft, one would think these strikes exceeded the design standard by a factor of 5 to 10, maybe more. The wonder is not that the buildings fell, but rather that they stood long enough for tens of thousands of people to get out before they fell.
3
posted on
02/23/2002 10:36:08 AM PST
by
El Gato
To: sixmil
Regading why the second tower fell first, there was some talk on FR months ago about how the tower design engineers never anticipated simultaneous fires. The fire control system in the first tower was able to, at least partially, contain the fires for a time. When the second plane hit and the sprinkler system came on there was too little water in either tower to make any difference.
To: Straight Vermonter
eerie...saved this one:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/520265/posts
To: Straight Vermonter
Ping!
Absolutely... regardless of which plane was traveling faster, the water was just not there for the second tower to keep the steal from melting quicker.
To: Straight Vermonter
The second plane also hit lower, which may have contributed, since there was a greater number of floors above pushing down on the structural steel.
To: El Gato
I wonder how fast the notional 707 in the design requirements for the building was supposed to have been flying? There is a 250 kts (288 mph) speed limit for planes flying below 10,000 feet. (Source: FARs § 91.117) Unless designers were expecting really illegal operation, they probably used 300 mph.
ML/NJ
8
posted on
02/23/2002 10:50:51 AM PST
by
ml/nj
To: Tijeras_Slim
The second plane also hit lower, which may have contributed, since there was a greater number of floors above pushing down on the structural steel
That would so clearly have been the deciding factor that I'm wondering why they are even bothering about speed.
-Eric
9
posted on
02/23/2002 10:52:05 AM PST
by
E Rocc
To: E Rocc
That's right. Write those jerks a speeding ticket, too.
Actually, not a bad idea. Could be auctioned off..
10
posted on
02/23/2002 10:54:54 AM PST
by
txhurl
To: sixmil
cAN WE FINE THEIR FAMILIES OR ESTATES FOR THEIR HAVING EXCEEDING fEDERAL REGULATIONS FOR SPEED?
11
posted on
02/23/2002 10:55:28 AM PST
by
Vinomori
To: sixmil
bump
12
posted on
02/23/2002 10:58:36 AM PST
by
VOA
To: sixmil
"The south tower was hit between the 78th and 84th floors, while the north tower was struck between the 94th and 99th floors, meaning more weight bore down on the damaged floors in the south tower... No matter how fast the planes were travelling, both buildings withstood the impacts. The weight of the structure above the melting steel on the damaged floors determined the timing of the pancaking collapse.
WTC Collapse Engineering Report (PDF Powerpoint Presentation)
To: sixmil
At this point, I'm more concerned with the assorted projectiles that enter bin Laden and his buddies - preferably slow and excruciatingly painful.
To: El Gato
By doing some quick hand calculations: a plane moving at 586 MPH has 5.5 times the kinetic energy of a plane moving at 250 MPH even though the speed of the faster plane is about 2.3 times the speed of the slower plane. (Kinetic Energy = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2)
To: sixmil
Studies show that both planes were traveling well over federal limits for altitudes below 10,000 ft.Amazing observation, I wonder if anyone actually thought that these terrorist cowards cared about federal speed limits below 10,000 ft. For that matter I'm sure the speed limit is even lower in the city..
Were these studies even needed. A speeding jumbo jet, full of highly flammable fuel crashed into a very tall structure. The structure collaspes. Killing 1000's of innocent victims.
No need to waste taxpayer money on dueling studies.
To: Straight Vermonter
There was a thread within the last month (probably week) about a couple of individuals who had been doing some plumbing/sprinkler work in the WTC the week before 9/11. Let me know if you need it; a quick search didn't turn up anything.
17
posted on
02/23/2002 11:23:17 AM PST
by
Tymesup
To: E Rocc; txculprit
The second plane also hit lower, which may have contributed, since there
was a greater number of floors above pushing down on the structural steel
That would so clearly have been the deciding factor that I'm wondering why they are even bothering about speed.
Well, I'm not an engineer, but that's certainly my take on it.
18
posted on
02/23/2002 11:24:24 AM PST
by
Amore
To: sixmil
Studies show that both planes were traveling well over the federal limits for altitudes below 10,000 feet, The Times said. That settles it. We'll have to lower the speed limit for airliners travelling below 10,000 feet over populated areas.
19
posted on
02/23/2002 11:25:25 AM PST
by
LJLucido
To: E Rocc
... I'm wondering why they are even bothering about speed. Cause people that know the math formula to do that kind of calculation like to do it to make those of us that don't "got math?" wish we would have listened during our high school math classes.
hehee
20
posted on
02/23/2002 11:30:03 AM PST
by
zeaal
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-39 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson