The argument about the aircraft being made of aluminium, and how that shouldn't have penetrated the steel structured building seems a bit wonky: a moderately powered lead round being fired from your average assault rifle can go straight through an aluminium car, and lead is way softer than aluminium.
Well this only seems wonkey because this is apples to oranges comparison. All of a bullets force is concentrated into one point, its designed to do that. Also the aluminum it's piercing is very thin material.
A plane is not designed to impart all of its force on one specific point. The steel framework of the tower is more of a mesh design too. I think a more accurate comparison would be chainmail vs a sword, but in this case the sword isnt even a sword.
Decades ago, a group of Libyan terrorists blew up an airliner while it was in the air over Lockerbie (UK). Large pieces of that smashed into the ground, and through loads of houses, and still remained fairly intact.
Interesting, then, how they never found anything large in the rubble of 9-11.
Well this only seems wonkey because this is apples to oranges comparison. All of a bullets force is concentrated into one point, its designed to do that. Also the aluminum it's piercing is very thin material.
A plane is not designed to impart all of its force on one specific point. The steel framework of the tower is more of a mesh design too. I think a more accurate comparison would be chainmail vs a sword, but in this case the sword isnt even a sword.
Interesting, then, how they never found anything large in the rubble of 9-11.
Falling burning skyscrapers do that.you should get out of Langley more.
Thats what I've heard.
And on top of that, the steel was coated in asbestos. iirc Asbestos is an amazing fire retardant.