Huntley Hotel Fire in Santa Monica vs. WTC2 "Molten Metal"

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member

Attachments

  • #Huntley Hotel in Santa Monica burning https---t.co-qEVLqUb3t4.mp4
    3.3 MB · Views: 884

Oystein

Senior Member
I am glad you are calling this "embers" - I have for a long time said that there is no evidence the glowing flow was even liquid, and suggested it was embers, or ashes, and no one ever seemed to pick up that suggestion. I always found it to be the most plausible and likely explanation.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Similar flows of embers are see in other building fires. Of course it's hard to find one that's as big as the WTC fires. Also lighting is a factor, daylight comparisons would be preferred.
20171210-170542-4txk1.jpg Source 2:54

20171210-170843-gglcw.jpg
 

John85

Member
A minor fire, quite small, but interesting from the perspective of 9/11 in that it was high-rise building that was dripping orange embers

There is no direct relevance to WTC 2 because NIST claims that it was molten metal that flowed out the building (with embers riding on it), rather than falling embers.

21. Why does NIST state that a yellow stream of molten metal seen in some photographs pouring down the side of WTC2 was aluminum from the crashed plane, even though aluminum burns with a white glow?

NIST reported (NIST NCSTAR 1-5A) that just before 9:52 a.m., a bright spot appeared at the top of a window on the 80th floor of WTC 2, four windows removed from the east edge on the north face, followed by the flow of a glowing liquid. This flow lasted approximately four seconds before subsiding. Many such liquid flows were observed from near this location in the seven minutes leading up to the collapse of this tower. There is no evidence of similar molten liquid pouring out from another location in WTC 2 or from anywhere within WTC 1.

Photographs, as well as NIST simulations of the aircraft impact, show large piles of debris in the 80th and 81st floors of WTC 2 near the site where the glowing liquid eventually appeared. Much of this debris came from the aircraft itself and from the office furnishings that the aircraft pushed forward as it tunneled to this far end of the building. Large fires developed on these piles shortly after the aircraft impact and continued to burn in the area until the tower collapsed.

NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius (900 degrees Fahrenheit) and 640 degrees Celsius (1,200 degrees Fahrenheit)—depending on the particular alloy—well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius or 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.

Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface.
Content from External Source
https://www.nist.gov/el/faqs-nist-wtc-towers-investigation
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
There is no direct relevance to WTC 2 because NIST claims that it was molten metal that flowed out the building (with embers riding on it), rather than falling embers.
So? That’s still falling embers, just with some aluminum.
 

Latest posts

Top