• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Squib Timing

TruthSeeker1234

Banned
T
Joined
Sep 9, 2006
Messages
1,756
Consider this picture:

http://s18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/ARG/Image231.jpg

Observe that the expulsions of smoke and debris are occurring well below the main collapse front. It has been suggested by OCTs that floor assemblies are falling ahead of the main collapse. These falling floors compress the air "like a piston" or "like the plunger in a syringe". The compressed air pushes equally around the walls at that floor, and the center window, being the weakest point, breaks and allows the jet of smoke and debris to exit as we see.

Is this possible?

Note that free-falling debris has not reached the squib. Since the squib is already well outside the building, the culprit floor must have fallen some time earlier, meaning the free-falling debris would have been even higher up when the culprit floor began falling.

How could this happen? How could the floors fall faster than free-fall?
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Consider this picture:

http://s18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/ARG/Image231.jpg

Observe that the expulsions of smoke and debris are occurring well below the main collapse front. It has been suggested by OCTs that floor assemblies are falling ahead of the main collapse. These falling floors compress the air "like a piston" or "like the plunger in a syringe". The compressed air pushes equally around the walls at that floor, and the center window, being the weakest point, breaks and allows the jet of smoke and debris to exit as we see.

Is this possible?

Note that free-falling debris has not reached the squib. Since the squib is already well outside the building, the culprit floor must have fallen some time earlier, meaning the free-falling debris would have been even higher up when the culprit floor began falling.

How could this happen? How could the floors fall faster than free-fall?
Click to expand...
So much wrong in such a short post!

Air pressure changes have nothing to do w/ speed of free-fall for starters. It's almost instantaneous.

And what in the hell would be the purpose of "squibs" going off after the building is collapsing?
 
Excuse a simpleton, but isnt that "squib" pretty much the same force that blows out the windows of ships sinking - from air rushing out?

Cheers,
SLOB
 
Last edited:
TS1234, have you ever made a potato gun? Take a short length of pipe, and 2 slices of potato about 1/2" thick. Press each end of the pipe into a potato slice, so that each end is plugged w/ potato. Now take a stick and rapidly push the potato in one end, and the potato in the other end will shoot out long before the other potato makes contact w/ it. Same principal w/ the WTC "squibs".
 
I see, you guys are thinking that the air pressure changes are not confined to a single floor? That a "collapse" at floor 98 will begin increasing the air pressure throughout the tower? Or what?

I would think that the air pressure changes would be felt on a particular floor only as the ceiling on that level begins coming down.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
I see, you guys are thinking that the air pressure changes are not confined to a single floor? That a "collapse" at floor 98 will begin increasing the air pressure throughout the tower? Or what?

I would think that the air pressure changes would be felt on a particular floor only as the ceiling on that level begins coming down.
Click to expand...
Well, it seems you have something in common with our old friend Kumar; every time you say "I think" you prove that you don't.

When floors are collapsing, the expelled air moves in all directions open to it. Down elevator shafts, down stairwels, through ventilation ducts .....

So, well ahead of the collapse zone, pressure starts to build up on the floors below.

Ever noticed when you stand at a subway station? You can tell the train is coming half a minute before it arrives, by the air that starts to come out of the tunnel tube.

Hans
 
I would think that the air pressure changes would be felt on a particular floor only as the ceiling on that level begins coming down.
Click to expand...

You have to remember that there are air supply and returns to the mechanical floors there are also stairways and elevator shafts(which if damaged or doors left open would allow passage of air to other floors).

Has it been established which floors these "squibs" shown in the OP are coming from?

If they are on of adjacent to mechanical floors there is the possibility of the "squibs" being dust and whatnot being blown out of fresh air vents.
 
Last edited:
Alternatively, of course a single explosive squib located on he external face of the tower was more than enough to precipitate complete collapse of the structure.

Not.
 
uk_dave said:
Alternatively, of course a single explosive squib located on he external face of the tower was more than enough to precipitate complete collapse of the structure.

Not.
Click to expand...

There were many squibs observed at many levels on both towers. There are two visible in the one picture I posted.

Still, your point is well taken. Explaining the total amount of destruction is very difficult, even with the presence of explosives. Without explosives, it is impossible.
 
Garb said:
Nothing can fall faster than freefall.


You are acting like an idiot.
Click to expand...

Garb, my question was rhetorical. It seems to me that collapsing floors are the only thing that could even possibly explain the sudden increase in air pressure jetting out specific pairs of center windows. NIST has recently suggested that pancaking floors are the cause of the squibs.

My rhetoric was intended to point out the impossibility of floors falling ahead of the free-fall reference.
 
Still, your point is well taken. Explaining the total amount of destruction is very difficult, even with the presence of explosives. Without explosives, it is impossible.
Click to expand...

Well, considering the amount of destruction that you think is going on, no wonder you can't comprehend it.
 
Skibum said:
You have to remember that there are air supply and returns to the mechanical floors there are also stairways and elevator shafts(which if damaged or doors left open would allow passage of air to other floors).

Has it been established which floors these "squibs" shown in the OP are coming from?

If they are on of adjacent to mechanical floors there is the possibility of the "squibs" being dust and whatnot being blown out of fresh air vents.
Click to expand...

No, we are talking about the pristine, undamaged part of the building.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Garb, my question was rhetorical. It seems to me that collapsing floors are the only thing that could even possibly explain the sudden increase in air pressure jetting out specific pairs of center windows. NIST has recently suggested that pancaking floors are the cause of the squibs.

My rhetoric was intended to point out the impossibility of floors falling ahead of the free-fall reference.
Click to expand...
Your concept of how air pressure works within an enclosed system like an office building is way below par. Please do not post any more on this subject.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
It's the total amount of destruction that is observed.
Click to expand...

By you maybe. You tend to overlook all the photos of macroscopic concrete that are shown to you. Not my problem that you are forcing yourself into false beliefs.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
There were many squibs observed at many levels on both towers. There are two visible in the one picture I posted.

Still, your point is well taken. Explaining the total amount of destruction is very difficult, even with the presence of explosives. Without explosives, it is impossible.
Click to expand...

Actually, you're getting closer to the truth.

IF the only way to bring down the towers was to use explosives, and the proof that explosives were used are the 'squibs' witnessed, then the number of squibs witnessed is insufficient to bring down the tower.

Therefore explosives cannot be considered a factor.

However, if the only way to bring down the towers is by causing massive localised structural damage and introduce a widespread fire, and the proof that this mechanism was used is the evidence of a plane slamming into the tower and causing widespread fires, then the damage and fires witnessed is sufficient to bring down the tower.

Therefore impact damage and fire are the factors

QED
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
No, we are talking about the pristine, undamaged part of the building.
Click to expand...

TS have you any idea how a hydraulic ram works?

Let me explain. You have a cylinder with a ram in .The cylinder has a pressure port and a return port. When hydraulic fluid under pressure is applied to the input the ram within the cylinder moves and forces hydraulic fluid out of the output port. The cylinder, ram and ports generally have "O" seal on them, which sometimes rupture causing fluid to escape out of the enclosed system. Many hydraulic systems have on them “relieve valves" They are set so if an over pressurisation occurs they will lift and prevent damage to the system by allowing fluid to vent off.

Now please apply this very simple explanation of a hydraulic ram to what was observed when the Towers fell. A massive weight is falling and forcing the air below it to move. This air has to go somewhere, it cannot simply disappear. So the air is now moving but unlike the fluid in the hydraulic cylinder does not have an output port. It will build up until it finally hits something that was not designed to take this build up of pressure, i.e. a window. The window will act like a relieve valve and blow out.

It's a simple explanation I know and one you will likely dismiss but it is far more plausible than bombs and secret death squads.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom