Believed to Be Safe, the Towers Proved Vulnerable to the Intense Heat of a Jet Fuel Fire [NYT]

The NY Times | 9/12/01 | James Glanz

[Howlin]

HalfIrish, I sincerely wish YOU'd learn how FR operates. I just received an email from the Admin Moderator saying you have been suspended for awhile. I hope and pray this suspension by FR of YOU sends a clearer message to YOU than I was able to send to YOU. When you return to FR, just DON'T WRITE TO ME. PERIOD.

With all due respect, YOU flagged him to this thread. I can see it with my own eyes.

I cannot believe you had him banned...........how childish of you. Do what the rest of us do when somebody is bugging us, BE A BIG GIRL AND IGNORE THEM.

Now, you may proceed to have ME banned if you'd like.

[Jean S]

Please ban me too.

[Rome2000]

No fire protection system is capable of operating after being attacked by what essentially is a jet fuel missile traveling at 350 Knots.

The fire sprinkler system on those floors ceased to exist after the initial explosions.

Gravity tanks on the roof and fire pumps sending water to no longer existing sprinkler systems contributed to the weight on the beams, whose 2-3 hour rated fireproofing was obviously not up to the initial 2000 degree heat.

I imagine the fire burned less hot after the first 15 minutes though.

It is horrible and unfortunate that nobody had the foresight to tell rescue personnel about the possibility of a collapse within 90 minutes of impact.

[Howlin]

I guess you and me and HalfIrish can go hang out at democrats.com.

[Jean S]

I guess you and me and HalfIrish can go hang out at democrats.com.

We need to invite big ern. He's on her banishment list too.

[Jean S]

HalfIrish, I sincerely wish YOU'd learn how FR operates. I just received an email from the Admin Moderator saying you have been suspended for awhile.

I don't know what strings you pulled to get HalfIrish banned but this makes me sick.

[Rome2000]

From NFPA.org following the 94 incident:

During the explosion and fire and the prolonged evacuation, six people died and 1042 people were injured, though there was a real potential for many more deaths and severe injuries. Many of the injured occupants suffered from smoke inhalation but, remarkably, none died from the exposure. This occurred primarily because there was a limited amount of combustibles that were initially ignited, and because of the basement floor collapse, there was limited fire spread to adjacent materials. Because of the limited burning there was a significant dilution of the products of combustion as they moved through this massive building complex. Had there been a more continuous burning or less dilution of the smoke, it is likely that the loss of life in this tragedy would have been far greater than the six casualties who were directly exposed to the force of the explosion.

The facts of the World Trade Center incident and the lessons learned should serve as an impetus for the fire safety community to re-examine the current design philosophies and future directions for high-rise fire technology. Prior to the incident there was no attempt to treat "mega-high-rises" such as the World Trade Center differently from other high-rise buildings with regard to reliability of fire protection system design. However, since such mega-high-rises can simultaneously expose tens of thousands of people to life-threatening conditions from a "single event," more reliable performance of fire protection components may be appropriate. Further warranting consideration is where the structures contain critical, private enterprises or government agencies, as was the case in the World Trade Center. Although fire protection designers normally would include a "single event" scenario in their performance criteria of fire protection systems, this single event at the World Trade Center complex has initiated an active discussion as to what a "single event" scenario should include.

The NFPA believes fire protection designers and code officials should perhaps broaden their responsibilities to include security issues or other such subtle changes in our society in achieving dependable and reliable fire protection system performance for such critical occupancies.

The complexity of this incident also demonstrates the importance of compliance with fundamental fire protection requirements for high-rise buildings. The growing inventory of high-rise buildings in this country should be reviewed to ensure that minimum levels of fire protection are present. Further, recent fatal high-rise building fires have demonstrated the importance of inspection and maintenance of these systems. One of the more recent high-rise fires resulted in three fire fighters losing their lives, further underscoring the importance of fire safety requirements for these buildings. Finally, owners, insurers, security, fire protection professionals, and code developers may want to re-examine fire protection designs in high-rise structures, especially where those structures accommodate large numbers of people and the economic impact is great, to ensure that the protection systems achieve a high degree of reliability during a "single event" occurrence. The NFPA's Life Safety Code® addresses occupant safety in both new and existing buildings; an important consideration in fundamental fire safety principles in the built environment.

[Jim Robinson]

The ban has been lifted. Now please, all of you knock off the silly feuding. And, Summer, if you do not want to read what these people write, do not read it. But, whatever you do, quit hitting the abuse button! Some rookie moderator is liable to take you serious by accident (grin). You're driving the moderators to drink.

[summer]

And, Summer, if you do not want to read what these people write, do not read it. But, whatever you do, quit hitting the abuse button! Some rookie moderator is liable to take you serious by accident (grin). You're driving the moderators to drink.
-------------------

Jim,

Thank you for taking the time to respond. Your reply made me smile.

But, please note this one fact -- and, if you would be so kind, publicly just answer one question for me:

(1) One fact: I was here for 15 (fifteen) months and NEVER once hit the abuse button. Now, I have publicly posted on FR my letter to the Greens asking them to get a candidate into the FL governor's race, and, I am writing editorials showing the cracks in the Dem Party base -- and, NOW: I am under attack from people who I believe act like terrorists toward me because they WON'T respect my polite request to NOT write to me anymore.

(2) One question: Do I stop writing my editorials because of these terrorists? (Why are these posters being allowed to personally attack me on FR when personal attacks ARE prohibited on FR?)

Thanks, Jim.

Sincerely,
summer :)

[summer]

It is horrible and unfortunate that nobody had the foresight to tell rescue personnel about the possibility of a collapse within 90 minutes of impact.

-------------------------------------------

Thank you for bringing up that point.

[Howlin]

*Rolling my eyes*

[summer]

rockfish, you lost me on your post #60. I'm sorry, but I didn't understand it.

[Jim Robinson]

Terrorists? I don't think so. In this league you might receive some bumps and jabs and/or an elbow or two, but unless they gouge your eyes out or something serious like kicking you in a sore knee, there's no real harm done and no foul. We're not gonna ban our posters for a few misplaced bumps. Now, after saying all that, we would appreciate it if y'all would knock off the feuding. Thanks

[habs4ever]

Under the circumstances, calling these posters terrorists is a little much, don't you think?

[summer]

If you knew what they put me through recently, I would say I am being accurate from my perspective.

[Jean S]

Understood. Thanks Jim.

[habs4ever]

Whatever...but after yesterday, try to use a better choice of word.Save the word terrorist for the real thing.

[summer]

Jim,

I will do my part, and try to take the advice of just ignoring them.

But, I must tell you, it is not easy for me writing what I am trying to write in my editorials supporting Jeb Bush and going against the party that I voted for my entire life.

Consequently, if what I perceive as their continued harassment of me does not stop, then, I just have to stop writing these editorials, and leave FR for good.

So much for my attempt at being politically active and aware.

But, I guess, that's just the way it goes. IMO, terrorists really DO hurt people and democracy, as we all have seen in recent days.

Thanks for taking the time to respond again.

Sincerely,
summmer :)

[summer]

It's the real thing, if you were on my end and knew more about me. Thanks for your concern.

[summer]

And, BTW Jim, I didn't want to mention this -- but I feel I have a right to stick up for myself, fight what I perceive as terorist attacks, AND to feel PROUD of the hard work I AM doing on my editorial series about Jeb Bush -- and, I very much appreciate that you and your site publicly recognized me for my hard work, by awardinig me your highest honor, the FR Eagle's Up Award.

Anyone other than Jim Robinson who is reading this and would like to find out how Jim Rohbinson's site honored my effort and writing, can click on my screen name and read the article about the "essay" winners.

Thanks again, Jim. I was truly stunned when you did that.

BTW, I sent that to Gov. Jeb Bush, and he wrote me back a really nice email and said: "WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

No kidding. :)