Started By
Message
locked post

Why didn't the Hard Rock building collapse like WTC building 7?

Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:19 am
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
133470 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:19 am
I thought buildings were supposed to always pancake when they collapse.

WTC 7 building collapse:


Hard Rock building collapse:
Posted by Mickey Goldmill
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2010
25918 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:20 am to
For starters, it was still under construction....
Posted by VoxDawg
Glory, Glory
Member since Sep 2012
70604 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:20 am to
Terminal velocity, baw.
Posted by jrodLSUke
Premium
Member since Jan 2011
24614 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:20 am to
Completely different causes of loss. Different construction also.
Posted by The Boat
Member since Oct 2008
172265 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:20 am to
The hard rock didn’t get hit by two 1,400 foot buildings and burn for 8 hours.
Posted by tigeraddict
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2007
13410 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:21 am to
it did pancake. look at the video. it pancaked all the way down to the concrete parking garage structure.

Posted by Sid in Lakeshore
Member since Oct 2008
41956 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:21 am to
quote:

I thought buildings were supposed to always pancake when they collapse.


And that makes you a moron.
Posted by bayouvette
Raceland
Member since Oct 2005
5299 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:21 am to
top 7 shitty stories not finished collapses on itself.

Strong solid foundation took it like a champ.
Posted by 0
Member since Aug 2011
17107 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:22 am to
Different impact forces
Less combustible materials
Posted by TrueTiger
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
76954 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:22 am to
No jet fuel to melt the steel.
Posted by Bard
Definitely NOT an admin
Member since Oct 2008
55653 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:22 am to
Because only a small portion of its exterior structural integrity failed.
Posted by jchamil
Member since Nov 2009
18048 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:22 am to
The only real difference seems to be the crane that fell at the Hard Rock
Posted by Dale51
Member since Oct 2016
32378 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:22 am to
Different construction.
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
133470 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:22 am to
quote:

Completely different causes of loss.


WTC7 collapse was so symmetric for such a random event. Weird.
Posted by Hopeful Doc
Member since Sep 2010
15388 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:22 am to
quote:

I thought buildings were supposed to always pancake when they collapse.


What gave you that idea?


Partial structural failure and catastrophic structural failure don't act the same.
Posted by frankthetank
Member since Oct 2007
2425 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:23 am to
Posted by Ace Midnight
Between sanity and madness
Member since Dec 2006
92593 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:23 am to
:notthisshitagain:
Posted by Revelator
Member since Nov 2008
61027 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:24 am to
I’ve seen multiple reports that the construction company cut corners and didn’t have enough steel beams close enough together to support the weight of the concrete floors.
Posted by GumboPot
Member since Mar 2009
133470 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:24 am to
quote:

The hard rock didn’t get hit by two 1,400 foot buildings and burn for 8 hours.



Agree 100%.

It's amazing how all the column beams in WTC7 failed simultaneously. Amazing equal distribution of heat. Almost like the heat was aimed.
Posted by LNCHBOX
70448
Member since Jun 2009
86882 posts
Posted on 10/17/19 at 9:25 am to
Thanks for the reminder that there are some truly stupid people that post here
Jump to page
Page 1 2 3 4 5 ... 12
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 12Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram