Modern Uses of Thermite for Demolition and their applicability to the WTC

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Do you think that such a device is viable?

If so, do you think that a device such as this has a better chance of turning concrete to dust than say, fire?

Of course it's viable. Just not very practical when we are talking about several thousand tons. Gravity will do it for you.

But what do you think?
 

Alienentity

Active Member
Nobody's seen an LTC used on a structural steel-type column, so nobody can claim that it would be viable. It's unknown and unproven.

Viable way to crush concrete is mechanical thru gravity. Fire can't do it, neither can explosives. The idea of destroying all that concrete with LTC's is not viable.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
So you have an example of gravity doing this on such a scale? Please provide it.
Otherwise that's just another bare assertion.

Let's keep on topic please. Thermite demolition devices and their applicability. There are plenty of threads discussing gravity and suchlike.
 

Alienentity

Active Member
The first step towards linking the LTC concept with large building demolition would be to find a documented example of it.
Or at least show the requirements for cutting a large column - you'd need to know the weight of thermite required and the burn time to do the job.

Nobody has that data here so far.
 

Alienentity

Active Member
So you have an example of gravity doing this on such a scale? Please provide it.
Otherwise that's just another bare assertion.
A thermite LTC can cut a hole in concrete. So can a drill. But you don't use a drill to make sawdust anymore than you could use a thermite cutting device to render (and why would you even want to!) masses of concrete into rubble.
 

gerrycan

Banned
Banned
Let's keep on topic please. Thermite demolition devices and their applicability. There are plenty of threads discussing gravity and suchlike.

I think it was you who brought the topic of gravity into it Mick, in post #41.
LLNL have been researching the use of thermitics on behalf of the US govt for years before 911. I suggest you take a look at their work before you continue.
 

gerrycan

Banned
Banned
The first step towards linking the LTC concept with large building demolition would be to find a documented example of it.
Or at least show the requirements for cutting a large column - you'd need to know the weight of thermite required and the burn time to do the job.

Nobody has that data here so far.
1.5 - 3 lbs per cut, already mentioned on this thread. Less for bottom up made nano material.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I think it was you who brought the topic of gravity into it Mick, in post #41.
LLNL have been researching the use of thermitics on behalf of the US govt for years before 911. I suggest you take a look at their work before you continue.

Could you link me to some that they say is applicable to demolition?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
1.5 - 3 lbs per cut, already mentioned on this thread. Less for bottom up made nano material.

Wasn't that for 0.5" steel? How much for 3"? Has cutting 3" steel even been demonstrated with such a charge?

And why exactly would the "nano" material require less mass?
 

gerrycan

Banned
Banned
Could you link me to some that they say is applicable to demolition?
This demonstrates a lack of understanding of what LLNL and other chemists do. The application of the material is not their concern. The manufacture of it is.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
This demonstrates a lack of understanding of what LLNL and other chemists do. The application of the material is not their concern. The manufacture of it is.

The thread is about modern uses of thermite for demolition.
 

gerrycan

Banned
Banned
Wasn't that for 0.5" steel? How much for 3"? Has cutting 3" steel even been demonstrated with such a charge?

And why exactly would the "nano" material require less mass?

"Monomolecular materials such as TNT work fast and thus have greater power than composites, but they have only moderate energy densities-commonly half those of composites. "Greater energy densities versus greater power—that's been the traditional trade-off," says Simpson. "With our new process, however, we're mixing at molecular scales, using grains the size of tens to hundreds of molecules. That can give us the best of both worlds-higher energy densities and high power as well." ~ Randy Simpson, director of the Energetic Materials Center;
 

gerrycan

Banned
Banned
The thread is about modern uses of thermite for demolition.
Yes, and you have to manufacture the material, and then you have to configure a device to use it in. Both these things are relevant, and have been demonstrated on this thread.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Yes, and you have to manufacture the material, and then you have to configure a device to use it in. Both these things are relevant, and have been demonstrated on this thread.

But you are simply hypothesising. Has there ever been an actual use of "nano" thermite for cutting something? How thick was the steel it cut?
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Can anyone find a use of a LTC in demolishing anything? Maybe looking at the results of it's use on something else would give us a clue.
 

gerrycan

Banned
Banned
But you are simply hypothesising. Has there ever been an actual use of "nano" thermite for cutting something? How thick was the steel it cut?
Not hypothesising at all. I showed you a US govt expert saying that such nano composites are far more powerful that a standard top down composite and you have seen an example on this thread of the latter cutting steel. Are you saying that the bottom up nano material could not do what a less efficient material demonstrably can and has done?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Not hypothesising at all. I showed you a US govt expert saying that such nano composites are far more powerful that a standard top down composite and you have seen an example on this thread of the latter cutting steel. Are you saying that the bottom up nano material could not do what a less efficient demonstrably can and has done?

I think this sub-discussion deserves a separate thread. There are some fundamental questions it would be good to air.
 

Alienentity

Active Member
I've been looking to see if there are any building demolitions which have utilized LTC technology. Here is another patent application '
The page is here

If you read carefully the invention is designed for cutting efficiently by the use of casings and nozzles, and must be firmly attached by use of bolts to the material to be cut. This type of device would also require a steel column, for example, to be completely exposed so the device could clamp around it. It is clear that any structure which is to be affected would require a great deal of careful preparation, but one can imagine it would be a safe and useful tool when dismantling a large ship, for example, in a scrap yard.

As expected, a LTC is not as fast as a high-explosive cutting charge, but is safer because there is no ultra-high velocity shockwave which could endanger workers. The ultimate speed is not important for metal scrapping or dismantling, and one section of a structure can be safely addressed at a time. For this reason it is fairly obvious that this type of device has no known application in terms of replacing high explosives for large building implosions.
Taking something apart piece by piece? Yes, it's designed for that.
'
A typical building implosion requires sometimes dozens of carefully timed cutter charges in order to get
a) key structure out of the way exactly when needed
b) a desired sequence and direction of building implosion so as not to damage surrounding urban environments

There's no indication that LTC was designed for or has been used for implosions. Annoyingly when one attempts to search for such applications one just runs into dozens of 9/11 conspiracy websites postulating the use of thermite.... doh! Lots of chaff but no wheat so far..
 

Alienentity

Active Member
Further to my last post, one should also note that at the time of the 2005 application the cutting of thick steel was 'anticipated', but it seems this is a proposed use, not an actual tested practice.
It's worth keeping in mind that implosions also require 'kicker charges' to get the columns to move. Again the LTC is not designed to do this. It's certainly a very interesting an clever invention and no doubt has lots of practical uses.
 

gerrycan

Banned
Banned
fire can't do it, neither can explosives. The idea of destroying all that concrete with LTC's is not viable.
Here's one patent for a thermitic device to destroy concrete
"The present invention relates to an improvement in method and apparatus for demolishing concrete structures. In a specific aspect, the invention relates to method and apparatus for melting concrete." http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5532449/description.html
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Here's one patent for a thermitic device to destroy concrete
"The present invention relates to an improvement in method and apparatus for demolishing concrete structures. In a specific aspect, the invention relates to method and apparatus for melting concrete." http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5532449/description.html

How much concrete do you think was destroyed with thermite in the WTC? Do you think it was done with devices like this?
 

Pete Tar

Senior Member.
Which states that it is designed to minimise dust and debris.
Something definitely *not* observed at the WTC collapses.
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
TWCobra Debunked-Max Bliss implying that aluminium can be added to modern turbo-fan engine fuel. Contrails and Chemtrails 6
S Modern Man's Shrinking Brain Science and Pseudoscience 0
Hama Neggs Debunked: Chemtrails "Inserted" into Films [Footage reused in modern advertisement] Contrails and Chemtrails 19
Cairenn Claim that modern hybrid wheat is lacking in nutrition--True or bunk? Health and Quackery 29
Mick West Can We Stop Modern-Day Mad Scientists? Contrails and Chemtrails 19
Mick West Truth and lies: Conspiracy theories are running rampant thanks to modern technology General Discussion 3
Mick West UFO Billboard in Montana Uses Photo of Identified Flying Object UFOs and Aliens 4
Dan Page Claim: Mobile app uses atmospheric data to prove chemtrails vs contrails Contrails and Chemtrails 12
Steve Funk Geoengineeringwatch uses photoshopped image Contrails and Chemtrails 7
Graham2001 Aulis article uses NASA documents to cast doubt on the reality of Apollo Conspiracy Theories 26
Thomas Hughson Nestle patenting uses of Nigella sativa - Is this true? Health and Quackery 15
JRBids Weather Modification Company Uses Electromagnetic Waves to Make Rain Contrails and Chemtrails 4
Gunguy45 Debunked: Pepsi uses aborted fetus cells in their drinks Conspiracy Theories 56
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Oystein Wayne Coste's new hypothesis for WTC1+2 collapses: nano-thermite propellants! 9/11 23
Mick West TTSA Exotic Material vs. Thermite Slag UFOs and Aliens 3
Mick West Debunked: Thermite Slag on WTC beams [Oxy Cutting Slag] 9/11 2
Mick West Debunked: The WTC 9/11 Angle Cut Column. [Not Thermite, Cut Later] 9/11 141
JohnJones The Thermite Paint Theory 9/11 31
Mick West Nanothermite vs. Thermite/Thermate for Cutting Thick Steel 9/11 285
gerrycan Thermite Has Historically Been Used for Demolition (at least twice) 9/11 57
Mick West Debunked: Iron Microspheres in 9/11 WTC Dust as Evidence for Thermite 9/11 743
Pete Tar Thermite Destruction Theory 9/11 21
Related Articles























Related Articles

Top