There's some very interesting stuff (to me) going on in the final minutes. "The efficiency of the design meant that with any major element removed the whole structure would fall." That's a strong statement and probably depends on what we mean by "major". Was the removal of the lateral support provided by a single floor "major" enough, for example? One would in any case want to explain why only the most extreme circumstances (airplane impact) could eventually remove such an element. Working through this for about 10 minutes with up-to-date modeling would be great.
I do think the technical threads on MB and other forums should be edited of noise and easier to find for newbies, but this paragraph demonstrates why i personally dont think what you are asking for would be "useful" by your criteria. I, as a normal person layman who might read the book or watch the video, think that section is fine. I get the scientific concept he is demonstrating and i dont want to watch an additional 10 mins on it. That level of explanation would turn me off to the cd conspiracy theories.
It seems to me what you are asking for in this thread, would be an extremely limited audience. You are essentially wiping out both ends of the reading or watching spectrum... the guys who want detail and minor questions like yours answered in depth on one end of the spectrum, and the general public who might read a simple overview book but would be turned off by too much detail.
To me you basically want something between the NIST report and the FAQ "for dummies" version NIST put out. ("for dummies" isnt an insult, it's a writing style where they take complicated subjects and try to write it in language people can understand without the benefit of a Professor on hand to help them when they are unsure of a section or idea). <i'm only using NIST here as an example, because they have a complicated version and an easy version. i know you dont trust them and some members disagree with some of their stuff