The main theses of the authors are as follows. The design of the “twin towers” was developed taking into account the possibility of an accidental collision of an aircraft with a building, since there was already such a case in New York: in 1945, a bomber, lost in thick fog, crashed into the Empire State Building. The design was calculated so that the towers could withstand the hit of the heaviest aircraft at that time – the Boeing 707. On September 11, 2011, two Boeing 767s crashed into the towers. flies faster.
Further in the film, it is stated that the Boeing 767 is smaller than the 707, and shows from nowhere the data taken from which it turns out that the maximum take-off weight of the Boeing 767 is only 300,000 pounds (136,078 kg), less than that of the Boeing 707 (333,600 pounds). In fact, one of the planes that crashed into the towers is the Boeing 767-223ER (maximum takeoff weight 395,000 pounds), the second is the Boeing 767-222 (315,000 pounds). Thus, only one of the two aircraft was lighter than the one for which the building structures were designed. But at the same time, the authors immediately forget that the engineers took into account the possibility not of a terrorist attack (in the 1960s it could hardly have occurred to anyone), but of an accidental collision in the fog; in this situation, the plane trying to find the airport would be flying at a low speed.
The next thought of the authors: although the capacity of the fuel tanks of the Boeing 767 is greater than that of the 707, the plane is always fueled with as much fuel as is necessary for the flight. But they again forget to add that the engineers who designed the towers had in mind the possibility of a catastrophe when a landing plane crashes into them, losing orientation in the fog; otherwise he would not have been at such a low altitude. That is, most of its fuel should be depleted by this time. And both hijacked planes were flying Boston – Los Angeles. Looking at the map of the United States, it’s not hard to see that most of the fuel was still in their tanks.
But the authors are trying with all their might to get away from this simple explanation. They included in the film an excerpt from one of the building’s designers, who admits that the possibility of spraying a large amount of burning jet fuel was not taken into account in the design. They consider this explanation to be false:
– To assume the possibility of a collision with an aircraft, but not to think about the amount of fuel on board – how can you imagine that?
Just imagine: when designing the towers, they counted on an accident, but not on a terrorist attack, and they had in mind the situation with an aircraft going to land – at low speed and with almost empty fuel tanks.
Further in the film, they say that the towers could withstand even multiple collisions with jet liners, because their structure resembled a mosquito net with extremely dense weaving. On a collision, the plane would simply pierce this mesh without damaging the rest of the building. In addition, the buildings were designed to withstand hurricane winds of up to 225 km / h, creating a load tens of times greater than the weight of the aircraft. This does not take into account this: each tower kept on 236 steel columns that made up its walls, and 49 columns in the central part. Having broken through the “mosquito net”, the planes damaged the inner columns, as a result of which the entire weight of the buildings fell on the columns of the outer perimeter. In hurricanes for which the structures were designed, this effect is impossible.
Several times the filmmakers claim that according to the official version, the steel columns began to melt as a result of the fire. They then note that the steel melts at 1510 ° C, a temperature that can only be achieved in a blast furnace or with a powerful explosive such as termite. But not a single serious source explained the destruction of the towers by metal melting. In order for the steel columns to stop supporting the weight of the building, melting is not needed, it is enough that they soften and become plastic under the influence of temperature. This is the basis, in particular, of the metal forging technology. And forging or stamping steel possible at a temperature of 800 ° C, which achieved when burning aviation kerosene. The refractory coating of the columns, which could have kept them from heating, was partially peeled off by the debris of the aircraft.
Further, the authors ask the question: why did the south tower fall before the north one, although the plane crashed into it later? But there is also an answer to this question: the plane’s impact on the northern tower fell higher and, therefore, the weight of the unburned part of the building above the zone of initial destruction, which fell on the columns softened by combustion, was less. In addition, the north tower was hit on floors where fire protection was partially improved.
It also seems suspicious to them that the towers have settled, as is usually the case when buildings are demolished with the help of directional explosions, and their debris has not been scattered over a considerable distance. But since the destruction occurred due to the fact that the columns that softened during the fire could no longer support the weight of the buildings, the floors fell one after another, there was no serious deviation from the vertical axis.
Another question that concerns the authors of the film: why did not only the “twin towers” collapse, but also the 47-storey building in the WTC complex, into which the planes did not fall? But reason 7 WTC building collapse – fire caused by falling debris and lack of water in the fire extinguishing system. The water was supposed to come from the city water supply, but it was destroyed when the “twins” fell. The authors find it odd that firefighters and BBC journalists “knew from somewhere in advance” about his impending fall. But the New York Fire Department recalled the fire brigades when they realized that it was impossible to save the building and the collapse was inevitable. After that, it stood for about two hours.
Thus, all the “oddities” that occupy the authors are quite understandable without involving a conspiracy theory about mined towers. It makes no sense to consider their stories about the interest of the tenant of the towers Larry Silverstein, who received multibillion-dollar insurance, about the strange noises coming from the floors closed for refurbishment that someone from the workers in the towers heard, and about the lost documents stored in the destroyed buildings. But why Channel One decided to mark the anniversary of the tragedy by showing a long-standing rude fake is worth thinking about.