It's coming up to the anniversary of 9/11 (make that 8/11 for Faldage) and British TV is looking at the attacks themselves and some of the peripheral issues. Generally non-sensationalist, thoughtful and respectful.
Tonight there was a documentary on just why the towers collapsed. It appears that the structural engineer did allow for the impact of an aircraft, but not for the heat that would be generated by the nearly full fuel load on a passenger jet.
It would seem that there were several design faults in the buildings, all of which contributed to the loss of life subsequent to the impact.
Still, 20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing. A very sad event.
The film of the impacts still shocks and saddens me, even after all this time.
9/11 (make that 8/11 for Faldage)
Back when such things counted for something September was the seventh month. I was just splitting the difference. Harrumph®!
Have you been thinking up that rationale all day long, Faldage?
Twin Towers: I do not look forward to seeing any footage of the crashes again on television. I hope they won't be shown again. They are still all-too-clear in my head and probably in everybody else's.
I hope the day will have something of reverence for life, rather than re-living death, in it.
thinking up that rationale all day long
And waiting all day with baited breath for someone to give me a chance to use it.
>> 9/11 (make that 8/11 for Faldage)
Back when such things counted for something September was the seventh month. I was just splitting the difference."20/20 hindsight is a wonderful thing"
Back when such things counted for something September was the seventh month. I was just splitting the difference. ~ faldage
--> 
<--Nice move faldage,
sorta
En Passant.
Splitting hairs = Splitting differences.
Nice move faldage,
but remind me to never ask you for change for a hundred.
I think it's really time for us to give some cachet to the word tetrapyloctomy, since we have so many opportunities to apply it here.
I think it's really time for us to give some cachet to the word tetrapyloctomy, since we have so many opportunities to apply it here.
Taking a bit of a stab at the meaning of this word, but if my guess, molded by context, is anywhere near the mark, I would humbly opine that tetrapyloctomy sells this place waaaay short. Starting from dodecapyloctomy and moving upward from there would stand a chance of being more nearly accurate, it seems
And waiting all day with baited breath for someone to give me a chance to use it.
Then he took the worms right out of your mouth.
you set me up for this one, huh
Re: Tonight there was a documentary on just why the towers collapsed. It appears that the structural engineer did allow for the impact of an aircraft, but not for the heat that would be generated by the nearly full fuel load on a passenger jet
That sounds like the Nova (a US PBS show) broadcast that was presented earlier this year, along with a written report on what happened.
the same Nova show is being rebroadcast this coming week (in NY on WNET/13 on Tuesday Sept. 10) you can check the pbs web page (PBS.Org) for local listing and broadcast times.
it did an excellent analysis of why the tower fell. the same inovative engineering that provide wide open floor plans contributed to the floors failures.
No, the documentary was a BBC one.
As Helen said, it was open-plan to a fault, with lightweight floors held up on trusses. The towers collapsed because of the trusses which held the floors up being vulnerable to heat. They also, willy-nilly, provided a good deal of the buildings' rigidity. The construction method was used because it enabled the buildings to go up at the rate of nearly two floors a month.
When the fire warped and melted the floor trusses, the floors began to collapse, one on to the other, until the sheer weight of falling floors began to smash through floors unaffected by the heat. Once the floors collapsed, the buildings' rigidity was compromised and the rest of the collapse was just a matter of time, and not very much of it at that as we saw.
What they should have done - and I understand that it was accepted as best practice even at the time - was to make every tenth floor rigid, i.e. girder rather than truss-based. If they had done that, it appears, the towers wouldn't have collapsed.
I work in a building with trussed floors. Do you?
here is a fairly complete article on the engineering of the building..
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?011119fa_FACTand no, i happen to work in a building that was build to "california earthquake standards" it is reenforced, very strong... (but it did quiver when the planes hit) the explodsion was so big, our building felt it, and its about .5 to .7 miles away (almost a k)but there wasn't much between us an the twin towers.
since last year, all of the windows in the building have been coated with protective sheets that help keep the glass for shattering, and when it does break it helps it to break into crumbs (roundish fractures) not shards..
it is a handsome building. (ask Jazzo! or Rubrick!)
the documentary was a BBC oneWas it this
Horizon, Cap? -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2001/worldtradecentertrans.shtmlmake every tenth floor rigid, i.e. girder rather than truss-basedCan't find a mention of this, though, so maybe not.
I notice Leslie E.Robertson features significantly in both this program and Helen's article.
Thank you, CK, for your caring and concern about an event that happened in a country that isn't yours. I haven't posted this until now because I didn't want to break in on the humor--which was really funny. I found it interesting that the thread jumped immediately to humor and stayed that way for so long. I wonder if this is an example of us avoiding coming face to face with something that has caused, and will continue to cause, extemely strong negative feelings. I continue to hear, as I did 50 weeks ago, that so-and-so can't bear to see it again and again; and I think of all the people who HAVE to confront it again, day in and day out, one way or another. I ache for them--for all of us, really. And so on one hand, I feel that it is unfair of me to turn off the sight that brings the pain; and yet, who will it really help if I do force myself to watch it? I have no answer.
tsuwm, thank you for that article. I have seen the towers in movies, etc., and that does cause a wince. We rented the movie Collateral Damage a couple of weeks ago; it was eerie. Schwartzenegger came on in a clip at the end to say that they had decided the release of the movie would have to be postponed. I think it had been due to come out in October 2001.
That's all I can say. It's not a question so much of avoiding strong negative feelings as it is of allowing television to invade our hearts, reopening wounds that may have started to heal. We know what happened, do we need to see it again (and again and again)?
Meanwhile, I heard that choirs around the world will be doing a "rolling Mozart's Requiem" on the day, at 8:46 AM as time zones change (oy vey, the voice! I know *I can't sing in the morning....).
Can anyone outside of NY verify this? I know the local arts college here is performing it.
~~
Yikes!® A totally non-word post.
I think a post about a rolling requiem is a word post. I mean, there's all kinds of words in a requiem. And to hear about a rolling requiem, a term I've never heard before, is enlightening. What a great idea!
[Makes me wonder what kind of event could cause the chefs of the world to unite and propose a rolling rolling pin...]
Oh, thank you, you two. What a beautiful thing to do. I have sung that gorgeous work--the only Mozart piece I truly love. If I can't find a performance here, I may just put my recording of it on. After all these years, I still remember most of the Latin, of which I understood almost nothing.
Thanks, CapK.
Yes, I really don't think all the "coverage" overload is necessary. I visted our neighbor who lost her son in the towers last Thursday, and she's still not doing too well...I think all this media bombardment is getting to her, and probably having the same effect on other families and friends.
A dignified remembrance and ceremony to mark the day and moments of the events is a good thing, and should take place. But I won't be watching any wall-to-wall coverage, it's just too much. Pretty hard to avoid it all in my area, though.
Jackie, here's a web site that offers an English translation of the traditional requiem mass:
http://usrwww.mpx.com.au/~charles/Requiem/lyrics.htm
Here's one of my favorite linguists, Geoff Nunberg, on the linguistic legacy of 9/11 (particularly the word
"enormity"):
http://www-csli.stanford.edu/~nunberg/enormity.html
"More than 15,000 volunteers and musicians, representing 180 performances in 25 countries will participate in the Rolling Requiem on Wednesday, September 11, 2002." Appropriately enough, the first performances will be in Auckland and Wellington.
http://www.rollingrequiem.org/list.html
It's not a question so much of avoiding strong negative feelings as it is of allowing television to invade our hearts
Hear, hear. A good general principle, indeed - though one that is difficult to put into practice.
I think silence and/or music is just right for the event, and the Rolling Requiem is a wonderful idea.
The New England stations will be playing the Requiem and it's going to be shown on tv.
On a personal note : today I had business that took me to Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. The gate I usually use was shut tight, metal grid fences and those big cement blocks across the gate. So off to the Main Gate - where the cement blocks were placed randomly making it necessary to weave throough them caefully and slowly. At the guard post all IDs were being checked carefully and the guards were regular troops (under arms) not the usual shipyard security force.
More troops were to be seen on patrol. It really made me think about tomorrow. Then I drove by the Shipyard Fire Station. Some of the firefighters were standing outside and in the center of the front of the building was a huge poster of the firefighters raising the flag at the Twin Towers site. I just lost it. Had to pull over and pull myself together.
Strange how an unexpected thing can grab you unawares, isn't it.