[daviddennis]

Interesting article; thanks for posting it.

I don't think there should be any liability extended to the architects and engineers responsible for the construction of this building. Current jets are much larger than those in existance when the WTC was designed, so both the crash load and fuel are much greater hazards.

That being said, is there any way a hypothetical WTC replacement could be protected from such dangers?

D

[summer]

That being said, is there any way a hypothetical WTC replacement could be protected from such dangers?
----------
I don't know. Any architects in the FR house?

I'm glad you liked this article. I too thought it was quite interesting.

[js1138]

You could use titanium instead of steel. It would laugh off 3000 degree fires. Of course it would make a dent in the GNP to build it.

[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.