Planes hit lower

If the planes had hit, say, the 30th floors of the Twin Towers, would we have had 13,000 deaths instead of 3,000, with more people trapeed? Or would we have benn able to put out the fires and saved the people?
 
If the planes had hit, say, the 30th floors of the Twin Towers, would we have had 13,000 deaths instead of 3,000, with more people trapeed? Or would we have benn able to put out the fires and saved the people?

How high were the buildings directly in the flight path?
 
I urge that we all refrain from 9/11 what ifs until after today, it may be seen by some as out of really bad taste.
 

Hyperion

Banned
It probably would have killed more people, and possibly resulted in a building collapse a lot sooner.

Overall events don't change, but add another two or three thousand to the losses.
 

Hyperion

Banned
Noravea has a point. Now I feel bad about the threads I posted on.

We can still have threads on 9/11. Despite this being the 10 year anniversary, it has been 10 years.

Discussing the event and possible things that could have or should have been done differently, or other possible scenarios, for better or for worse, does not mean that we can still not honor those that died or where injured.

We have discussions on Pearl Harbor around the time of the Pearl Harbor anniversary.

We have D-Day discussions on the D-Day anniversary.

We can still have 9/11 discussions, just try not to get on any lines of discussion involving racist or genocidal remarks.
 

Hyperion

Banned
This. Remember the victims today, not contemplate what would have killed more. :(

Why should we not have discussions.

With all due respect, and as someone who has family in military and law enforcement who could die IRL if something ever happens, what is different about this from other things.

I respect those that have given their lives, and have no ill feelings for the victims or their families, but if we must not discuss this, than we must not discuss other things.

No D-Day discussions on June 6th.

No Pearl Harbor discussions on December 7th.

No discussion of the Madrid train bombings on March 11th.

No discussion of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings on August 6th and 9th respectively.

We have multiple threads about battles that kill tens of thousands. We have multiple threads that, while not intentionally genocidal, end up at some point with some level of nuclear exchange, or discussions of the aftermath of a nuclear exchange.

I respect those that where lost, and those that continue to make sacrifices, but I think if someone feels they want to discuss 9/11 or a what if scenario involving 9/11 and/or events leading up to or after the event, I see no problem with that, as long as the discussion does not start into genocidal or racist comments.

I have nothing more to add to this thread unless anyone else wants it duscussed, but if it is felt that strongly that this and other topics should not be discussed on an anniversary, perhaps this could be something to consult Ian or a moderator or administrator about for down the line.
 

HMS Erin

Banned
I see no reason to ban 9/11 WIs on 9/11. It's on everybody's mind, of course they're going to have interesting thoughts on the subject.
 
I'm not very familiar with New York's skyline, but wouldn't they have to actually go through one of the adjacent buildings to get that low?
 
Last edited:
Why should we not have discussions.

With all due respect, and as someone who has family in military and law enforcement who could die IRL if something ever happens, what is different about this from other things.

I respect those that have given their lives, and have no ill feelings for the victims or their families, but if we must not discuss this, than we must not discuss other things.

No D-Day discussions on June 6th.

No Pearl Harbor discussions on December 7th.

No discussion of the Madrid train bombings on March 11th.

No discussion of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings on August 6th and 9th respectively.

We have multiple threads about battles that kill tens of thousands. We have multiple threads that, while not intentionally genocidal, end up at some point with some level of nuclear exchange, or discussions of the aftermath of a nuclear exchange.

I respect those that where lost, and those that continue to make sacrifices, but I think if someone feels they want to discuss 9/11 or a what if scenario involving 9/11 and/or events leading up to or after the event, I see no problem with that, as long as the discussion does not start into genocidal or racist comments.

I have nothing more to add to this thread unless anyone else wants it duscussed, but if it is felt that strongly that this and other topics should not be discussed on an anniversary, perhaps this could be something to consult Ian or a moderator or administrator about for down the line.

There are only 365 days in a year and if one really cared to do the research one would find each day is an anniversary of some meaningful event to some people throughout the world.
 
The buildings would collapse a lot sooner, with greater loss of life.

Don't forget that the South Tower was hit after the North Tower, but collapsed first. Since it was struck lower down, and to a side, meaning more mass pressing on the weakened area, as well asymmetrical support following the collision.

The North Tower held up longer since it was struck much higher up, in a way that left it with near-symmetrical support and had had its central column partially re-fireproofed. All this made it somewhat stronger, though still nowhere near enough to prevent its eventual collapse.

There's my two cents.
 
Top