|
|
| Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower (1442049) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower |
|
|
Posted by JayZeeBMT on Thu Jun 15 17:30:06 2017, in response to Re: New York Times London Fire: At Least 6 Dead After Blaze Engulfs Apartment Tower, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Jun 15 17:03:13 2017. Most of the jet fuel was gone in "seconds", that is correct, but the rest saturated everything. The Towers were primarily office buildings, except for the tourist-trap restaurant. That meant there were all kinds of combustibles present to be ignited. Some of the fuel was splattered or sprayed onto these materials at the moment of impact, which certainly made things worse. Think about all the kinds of chemicals that got mixed together with this jet fuel: solvents, cleaning solutions, toner, plumbing fluids, hair spray and other beauty products, etc. It's all burning, too.The WTC fires were unusually hot for a poorly-ventilated high-rise fire, sufficient to weaken and deform the structural steel. Add to that that the side loads placed on both towers were far in excess of the worst the architects anticipated (a 707 flying at approach speed). I suspect the Grenfell Tower fire didn't cause a collapse because it was a concrete-over-steel building of "old-law" construction. No fancy core concepts to maximize office space there. |
|
|
|