25 March 2010
One thing I wanted to ask-- do you think it is strange that that pipe totally
caved in the back of the truck, in the pic with the column set, but that
the far heavier columns barely dented the street and sidewalk? I know it
is hard to compare directly, but the pipe suggests incredibly force coming
down and the column set, not so much. I have no realistic idea how anyone
could have brought down the columns softly, but it's still weird.
Your point is well taken. The pipe hit relatively soft objects, the scaffolding
and the truck, while the columns hit the much harder pavement.
Whether the piping was sufficiently entangled in the panel to absorb part
of its force of impact is not clear, but it would have been minor as you
state. Unless the piping hit first, and that slowed the panel to some extent
before it hit the pavement.
On other matters, attached is a photo with numbers indicating these:
Photo cropped and reduced.
(1) There may be a piece of fuselage at the left of the photo at the back
of the car next to the church, heavy enough to cave in the car trunk.
(2) A portion of the unraveled tire appears to be at the left of the tire.
(3) and (4) There are two fire hoses in the photo, one to the left and one
to the right.
Fire hoses would have been mounted near exit stairs, so if these are from
the tower something snatched them on the way toward the panel at the south
wall. I'm not sure the wheel would have made that snatch.
However, the piping could have done that, and if that is the case the piping
could have come from the northern portion of the floor. Question then is
what snatched the piping?
The best I can think is that some portion of the landing gear assembly, a
very strong heavy piece, was the main force that launched the panel, two
wheels broke away and the rest of the assembly landed somewhere else, perhaps
fell short and was covered up by the south tower collapse.
(5) Your fuselage piece.
Fuselage piece photo provided by A.
Cryptome provided to A photos which slightly show the fuselage piece:
21 March 2010
A source of WTC graphics and photos excerpted from a variety of sources:
21 March 2010
I have been researching this issue some more and found the plan of the North
Face damages. It shows clearly that the North face had no more than a single
panel (vertically) removed during impact.
Doesn't it seem strange that if only one panel tall can get completely removed
on the side with the greatest amount of inertia, that it could happen on
the side with the least amount? Seems as though if an engine can only take
out a single panel then a tire surely can't do it. And let's not forget that
the wheels were tucked up inside the body on impact.
Too bizarre. I can only see this happening with something helping the debris
I have continued to look for more information, and have added a few items
to my report.
You are right that more than a single wheel was needed to knock out the panel
and loft it to Cedar Street. I think the kicking force was probably the left
landing gear assembly.
Three wheels (gears) have been described as coming out of the south side:
1. Cedar Street with photo.
2. West Street with photo.
3. One that landed on the roof of the Marriott Hotel, no photo, only eyewitness
reports. Like Cedar Street this would have been covered with South Tower
Released material highlights the wheel on West Street, and not so much on
the other two.
I am pretty sure the three wheels if not the tires, were recovered from the
debris, and there may be a fourth wheel plus the other 4-wheel assembly unless
completely destroyed by fire and crushing. I also think the Cedar Street
panel was recovered and is stored somewhere.
The West Street wheel was not affected by the collapse so it is somewhere,
I'd bet. A museum shows some fragments of gear but I am not clear from which
aircraft. (This comes from a Google search.)
The mystery of this topic leads me to want to file an FOIA request to NIST
for information on the matter. Before that I will see what else I can find
in released material.
That a single panel on the north side was knocked out is unexpected, as you
say. I point out that the panels were installed in a diamond pattern rather
than a rectangular grid in order to provide additional stability. Thus a
single panel, north and south side, could be dislodged without pulling the
two adjoining panels with it.
The exterior panels were designed and installed to spread the gravity and
wind loads over a single panel, an ingenious technique. It is as if the
structural design anticipated a single panel failing (or being dislodged).
I have not seen reports of that being the case, but it can be interpreted
from the pattern of failing panels in post-crash evidence.
The weakest part of the design are the connecting bolts, then the steel plate
spandrels and lastly the columns. The debris shows just that. As does the
panel on Cedar Street.
You may know that the landing gear assembly is one of the strongest parts
of an aircraft due to the forces it must bear. The supporting struts are
hardy and heavy, and the tires and wheel are also. The gear often survives
a crash because of that, although the tires often burn or are ripped away
from the metal wheel.
I think the reason the panel does not show more deformation that would have
been caused by a metal part like and engine hitting it, is that the tires
aborbed most of the shock, for they are designed to do just that.
21 March 2010
Add photos and 3-D drawings of the aircraft landing
19 March 2010
Add comments on landing gear (the parking lot is at Cedar and West Streets,
across Cedar from the 90 West Street building):
Add excerpt from NIST NCSTAR 1-2B:
of Aircraft Impacts into the World Trade Center Towers (Chapters 9-11)
(pp. 344-346) on Landing Gear Trajectory:
18 March 2010
Elsewhere the weight of the panel has been described as 6 tons, 3 times what
I stated. That the panel was not substantially deformed by its hitting the
ground, nor that there was not severe damage to the ground where it landed,
Looking more closely at two of the images
(1)(2), there is some damage to the street
paving which could indicate that the panel hit with its south end down then
fell back to the north (although the damage is so slight it does not fit
the force of a 6-ton object hitting). That would account for the panel deforming
slightly to fit the curb as it fell back, deforming the face of the column
webs and likely dislodging the wheel which would have been deeply implanted
by the force of its travel. That the wheel was not kocked completely away
from the panel indicates the fall-back was not severe.
While indicating nothing except my curiosity, here are photos taken on 17
March 2010, yeserday, of the spot where the panel hit, now excavated for
WTC new construction (first photo through a dirty window of a pedestrian
bridge, the other two through gaps in construction screening (the site
still screened from public
view as if ashamed of what happened)):
18 March 2010
Subject: Cryptome is banned as a source at Democratic Underground
A link to
was posted to Democratic Underground's September 11 sub-forum here:
Subsequent discussion brought the termination of the thread:
Lithos (1000+ posts) Wed Mar-17-10 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
Cryptome is not an allowed source due to the archiving of bigoted material.
It appears some whistleblowing is more equal than other whistleblowing...
On another forum a person jumped on my bones about the report, said I should
post it to DU where it would be well received. That other forum discusses
the premise that no planes hit WTC which I had the audacity to argue with
after seeing a link to my report. Here is the provocative forum:
WTC is a raging topic of fantastic speculation, fostered by official secrecy,
which I had lost sight of. Now I'm eager to join the fray, to be smeared,
censored, accused of formenting rebellion, working for the government, yaddah.
Will make a link to the DU locked thread to spur interest.
16 March 2010. Link to 12 large sequential photos of the area around the
wall section location with the photographer walking along West and Cedar
Streets shooting the street scenes and the burning towers. These are shown
in response to
that the wheel and panel may have been staged.
16 March 2010. Add dimensions and drawings of steel wall section and compare
to aircraft main gear tire.
See also video simulation of aircraft attack which shows debris passing out
of the north tower (about mid-way through):
12 March 2010. Add newly found text from an NIST report on the wheel punch,
and NIST images of plans and structure.
11 March 2010