And I don't remember what bomber it was, but in any case a bomber of that
time would be a smaller plane that one of the jetliners today.
This may be a problem of the density vs. area of impact. A modern jetliner
might cause less damage if the load was spread out.
At this point does anyone know if it was a direct hit on the WTC?
Also has anyone done an analysis of the photos and the smoke to get an idea
if the fire was jet fuel, the building itself burning or if another
explosive was involved?
At 02:06 PM 9/11/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Two counter points:
>The bomber wasn't *trying* to hit the building. And I'd bet it wasn't
"heavy" (full of fuel).
>Ralph Lewis wrote:
>> Interesting that the Empire State Building took a direct hit of an american
>> air force bomber with a much more explosive fuel (aviation gas) than jet
>> fuel and damage was minimal. Makes you wonder about building standards and
>> building permit enforcement today.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 14:40:28 MDT