The Basement Explosions

(Note: this is all about the explosions reported as the plane hit the North Tower (WTC 1), not about the basement explosions reported later just before the collapse of the tower).

Loose Change claims that the explosions, which occured in the basement levels of WTC 1, were not the result of a jet-fuel-fireball:
ht
"However, the World Trade Center's core and elevator shafts were hermetically sealed, AKA, air-tight. The fire could not possibly have had enough oxygen to travel 1,300 feet down, retaining enough energy to destroy the bottom 8 floors of the building."

Not only website like Screw Loose Change disagree with this claim.
WTC7.net, a Website which actually debunks the official version regarding the WTC, contradicts the statement made by Loose Change:

A fuel air explosion (FAE) is caused by ignition of a vapour cloud of fuel. In order for the right conditions to exist for a fuel air explosion, there must be the right amount of fuel and the right amount of air. There is a minimum percentage and maximum percentage of fuel/air ratio to achieve such conditions, these are called the lower explosive limit and the upper explosive limit. For jet fuel A, the lower explosive limit is 0.7%, the upper explosive limit is 5%, therefore in order for a fuel air explosion to have occurred in the WTC elevator shafts, there had to have been a mixture of no less then 0.7% fuel, and no more than 5% fuel to air ratio. Any ratio outside of these limits and a fuel air mixture would not ignite. The mistake made in the WTC7.net quote is, they discount the fact that the jet fuel that spilled down elevator shafts could still ignite. The lower and upper explosive limits of jet fuel do not determine whether fuel will burn, rather, they just determine the conditions required for a flammable fuel air mixture. The fuel certainly could ignite, and there are many examples of witnesses describing fireballs in elevator shafts immediately after the strikes on the WTC on the upper levels.
See also.

So this reduces the probability of unignited jet-fuel spilling down shafts, but WCT7.net is still right on the fact, that jet-fuel could have spilled down shafts before igniation. But it's misleading in giving a higher amount of presumabely unignited jet-fuel.

However, is Loose Change wrong and debunked? Let's check the facts.

First we have to look into the elevator-system of the Twin Towers to get an understanding of the situation.

This is confirmed by the blueprint of the WTC, as we can see here that there were only three continuing elevator shafts.

Freight elevators Car 50 and Car 6 (dual use), and express elevator Car 7. Here you can see their locations, on the opposite side of the impact (note that elevator Car 6 is labelled as express):

So we conclude from all of the above only one elevator per building had access from the sixth basement level to the 108th floor, and this was Car 50. These would be the “main” freight elevators in each tower.

And we have two elevators serving only particulary floors, beginning from basement level 1, Car 6 and 7. Though their lowest elevator opening was in basement level 1, their shafts went as deep as basement level 4.

This is established due to the blueprints which have been made available through an anonymous source in March 2007. If we look into the blueprints of the core of the sublevels 3-5, we could see that the shafts of Car 6 and 7 ended in sublevel 3, and that the shaft of Car 50 ended not before sublevel 5 (note that the blueprints label the basement floors otherwise than NIST. Service level – B1(NIST), Sub level 1 – B2 (NIST), Sub level 2 – B3 (NIST), Sub level 3 – B4 (NIST), Sub level 4 – B5 (NIST), Sub level 5 – B6 (NIST)).


Above Car 50 in sublevel 5 (B6), and 4 (B5):



Car 6, 7 and 50 in sublevel 3 (Basement 4):


One point should be adressed: due to misleading phrasing in NIST-reports (though NIST makes this false statement so often, that I have problems in believing that this isn't done deliberateley), many people think that there were more than three continuing shafts. Read again from the above NIST-quote:

And here are more:

This gives the impression that different elevators shared the same shaft, because they were stacked on top of each other to save floor space. Though it does not even seem to be technically possible, people often bring this point in to prove that there were more than three continuing shafts.

To make an end to this false assumptions, we only have to look at the floor plans.

The key point to observe from what NIST says is, “providing additional transport without increasing floor space”. The elevators were stacked, as in, local elevators would keep the in the same path throughout the building. For example, as per the NIST report, below shows the variations in floor plans as each bank of local elevators terminate, giving the higher levels more floor space.

All four banks occupying floor space.

Bank A terminates, giving these levels more floor space.

Bank B terminates, giving these levels more floor space.

Bank C terminates, giving these levels more floor space.

Here is the 42nd floor upper mechanical room, bank D terminates to allow for the motor to be intalled over the shaft.

Here is the bank D elevator elevation drawing. Note that the shaft terminates and does not continue past the mechanical room. If we look at the top of the drawing we can see that the mechanical room is sealed by the 43rd floor. The drawing shows above this area on the 43rd floor are toilets and a new zone 2 elevator shaft pit. Hence the elevators are stacked.

Here we have the 43rd floor showing the postion of the toilets and the new zone 2 elevator shaft pits.

Here is the 44th floor lobby starting off again. Notice the local elevators are in the same positions, hence they are “stacked”.

So now we have established that there were three shafts which continously run from the impact area of WTC 1 (floors 93-98) down to basement levels. Accordings to NIST:

Here the NIST is wrong on two points. First, as we will see later, Car 50 did not fall all the way to the pit in the sub-basement level. NIST repeatedly made this false statement:

Second, Car 7 was also in the impact zone and therefore could have fallen all the way down. In theory. In practice, also Car 7 could not have fallen all the way down, like all other elevators. Due to the safety standards, falling elevators would have been stopped by emergency brakes. See this short article from "How stuff works":
What if you were on an elevator and the cable broke.
So keep this in mind whenever NIST or some eyewitness states that elevators crashed down to the pits, that this is a misinterpretation of what really happened. So in fact, it's not that falling elevators were misinterpreted as explosions, but explosions were misinterpreted as falling elevators. Often this misinterpretation is accompanied by the phrase "what I found out later", or something similiar, of which we will see some examples in the further examination.

Before we look closer into the damage in the basement levels let's see what witnesses have to tell about their experience in Car 50, the main freight elevator.
Arturo Griffith, operated WTC1 elevator Car 50:

Though the door to Mr. Griffith’s elevator was knocked out when the safety brakes caught the free-falling elevator, there was no Fuel-Air-Explosion (FAE) down this elevator shaft. From this testimony we can rule out the shaft of Car 50 as the possible way for the jet-fuel to cause the reported damage in the basement, as the blast pressure had to go right through the elevator used by Grififth and a co-worker. And they certainly wouldn't have survived it when the pressure from the fireball travelling trough the shaft of Car 50 would be the same force that - as we will see later - caused walls to cave-in, blew out windows, threw people against walls, blew someone’s tongue out of their mouth. From the USA Today article we could not conclude on which floor the elevator stopped. From a CNN report we can assume that it was in a lower level:

Note that he reports three explosions. The first caused the elevator to fall, the second pushed the doors inside and therefore was originating from outside the elevator shaft. And the third pushed him against a wall. From another article we finally could learn on which exact location the elevator stopped:

Note that here it is reported that a fireball came down the shaft after the explosions damaged the elevator and injured Griffith. So this fireball could not be the cause for the explosions and the damage in the basement. This is important as several witnesses describe a fireball coming down and the odor of kerosine. In the official version, these distinguished events are mixed together to deny the possibility of additional explosives.

And regarding elevators 6 and 7, according to NIST they were inoperable on 9/11:

From this statement we can conclude that the elevator cars were parked in Basement 1, where they had their lowest elevator openings. This is also confirmed by NIST:

The damage in the basement

Now we look closer into the damage of the basemen, at first at some Port Authority Transcripts.

It's the talk of a big explosions. open water lines and smoke are mentioned, but no fires or odor of kerosine. Some say that the mentioning of Car 50 is evidence that the explosion emerged from their. But Car 50 is here mentioned as a reference point to where the caller is standing, "across the hall from the 50-car". From this we could not conclude from where exactly the explosion emerged, as their is no direct eyewitness, only that the Turner Construction area, right outside Car 50, was affected.

Again no fires mentioned, but as PAPD Officer 33 states, there was also a cave-in at the platform of the PATH (Port Authority Trans-Hudson) plaza. The platform is in Basement 5, and it's quite a distance from the WTC elevators to the Plaza PATH. See here the location of the PATH tunnel and the subway:




Here's the blueprint of the foundation of Basement 5. The red box in WTC 1 refers to the shafts of Car 6 and 7, which ended in Basement 4.In the center of WTC1 you can see Car 50. The red lines refer to the PATH, on the right side of WTC1 you can see the platforms.

And Basement 5:

Watch this live-report of an eyewitness-account about the subway-explosion: (LC 40min22sec)

The subway is outside the WTC Twin Tower foundation, on the eastern side. Therefore, the fireball (regardless of which elevator shaft) had to travel over 200 feet to impact the subway. And of course to impact all walls between.

Here are two other witness-accounts related to the subway: Download hereand here.

Note that 'plant' refers to the refrigeration plant, outside WTC 1 foundation to the south (see foundation blueprint above).

Construction worker Phillip Morelli was on the fourth basement level under WTC1 when it was impacted:

Note that Morelli experienced two explosions from the basement levels of WTC1, and he mentioned no fires. Note also that he experienced the same when supposedly the South Tower was hit. Here's another testimony from an eyewitness, Jose Sanchez, maintenance worker, located in Basement 4:

Note that the fireball went through the shaft of Car 50 after the first explosion. This is consistent with the testimony of Arturo Griffith who reported a fireball after the explosion(s) occured. More important, this fireball knocked him to the floor and burned his hair. Could this be the same fireball that caused cave-ins, causing walls to "hit someone in the face"?

Sanchez is another example of how people and elevator shafts survived the fire and overpressure nearest the explosion zone, but garages, offices, machine shops, PATH Level Plaza were damaged or destroyed farthest away from the - official - explosion zone.

Another eyewitness account from Basement 4:

The refrigeration plant was outside the tower's foundation and adjacent to it on the south-site (see B5 foundation blueprint above, it gives also the exatct location of the plant for B4). For the door to be exploded off its hinges the blast had to destroy at least three walls before.

Blue marked are elevators 6 and 7, red marked are the walls and the green one is the door McCabe is talking of.

McCabe doesn't mention fire or the odor of kerosine, but if you read the full source, you will find also this:

"I later on found out the reason there was an explosion was the jet fuel filled the elevator shaft and seconds later a spark triggered an explosion."

Another one who "later found out", as if he researched it. He didn't witness jet fuel filling an elevator shaft. He didn't witness jet-fuel exploding,related effects like fire or smellodor of the jet-fuel. Assumable he didn't find out himself, he was told by someone else, or just made this explanation due to all the public accounts and reports, telling us the jet-fuel-caused-the-basement-damage-myth.

Compare this picture from the WTC 93 attack, showing a destroyed parking wall, with the following account, by WTC Stationary engineer, Mike Pecoraro:

When the lights flickered Pecaro and his co-worker were in Basement 6, and after the room filled in with white smoke they decided to leave upstairs.

From the statement, that "they decided to ascend two more levels to the building’s lobby", we can conclude that Level C refers to Basement 2. This is also established when it's said that they ascended on floor above, where they found an Elevator Operator and a female Carpenter. The Elevator Operator is Arthuro Griffith, the femal carpenter is Marlene Cruz (watch her testimony here, or download it here).
So these witnesse are corroborating each other in their testimonies.

Note that when Pecaro speaks of "gone walls" in the parking area and the "gone machine shop", that he doesn't mention fire.

So we have blown walls in the Basement level 5 ("platform of PATH plaza cave-in"), Basement 4 ("walls hitting the face"), and 2 ("walls of parking garage gone", "machine-shop gone"), and also blast damage in Basement level 1 ("steel and concrete fire door that weighed about 300 pounds, wrinkled up").

According to the official version of events, the same jet fuel fireball that created the mentioned massive basement damage, would also leave elevator car(s) occupying the same shaft(s) this fireball supposedly travelled through, practically unscathed by comparison.

As the shaft of Car 50 could not be the source of this damage (of course the blast, which caused walls turn to rubble in basement levels, would have killed Arturo Griffith and Marlene Cruz), the two remaining shafts would be Car 6 and 7. But as these shafts didn't run lower than Basement 4, a jet-fuel explosion in these shafts would have had to blow off the walls and the bottom of these shafts to cause a cave-in in Basement 5.

Before we see that this is physically implausible, let's have a look into other eyewitness accounts. Starting with Bobby Hall, who was in Basement 1 or 2 (50 feet underground):

Note first, that what "they found out later" is a misinterpretation. Car 50 wasn't falling from the 88th floor, and Hall couldn't have been thrown against a wall due to a falling elevator. Also, I don't think that he and his colleagues researched what happened, so actually they didn't find out later, they were told.

Note secondly, that he doesn't mention fire or a fireball, but a hot wind, blowing him back.

William Rodriguez, janitor in the Twin Towers, who is also interviewed in Loose Change:

From the above testimony from Rodriguez, we can establish that Rodriguez was on Basement 1, and that the explosions came from below him, as he assumes, from Basement 2 or 3.

Rodriguez' testimony is corroborated by Felipe David:

and by Kenneth Joahannemann (watch here) and by Anthony Saltalamacia (watch here).
Another eyewitness, Salvatore Giambanco, was in a completely different location than Rodriguez and David, on the opposite side of Basement 1 by another elevator:

Another one who was later told. It's apparant how often witnesses of the basement explosions "find out" later explanations of what they experienced, fitting perfect with the official account.

No wonder, as they have been told. Incidentally, from the very beginning they have been told. By Secret Service members. But more on that later. Giambanco also stated this:

"We heard the explosion and the smoke all of a sudden came from all over. There was an incredible force of wind that also swept everything away. I remember hearing a scream of a woman, but I couldn't see her. I had just gotten off the elevator and I was standing by it with another man but didn't know his name."

Corroborating Bobby Hall, who also mentioned the "incredible force of the wind", just in different words, but was told that this wind was the effect of an elevator falling 90 levels. Hall and Giambanco both mentioned no fire or fireball. Then what caused this wind?



Another witness had this to say:

"The last stretch of floors went by rather quickly; 3rd... 2rd... 1st... Basement. We ended up in some weird storage closet with two WTC workers. "You went too far! The exits are on the 1st Floor," one of them yelled from behind the disheveled pipes and disarray. I noticed that the walls down here were heavily damaged. It was dark, damp, and it looked like the building really took quite a structural blow. It was pretty tough to backtrack against the steady flow of people coming down the stairs, but we managed to get back out to the ground level. "

Unfortunately, we don't know the name of this man, as this was only posted in a internet forum, and therefore should be taken with a grant of salt. However, his whole report seems to be accurate and not in contradiction to what other people reported.

In the Lobby

The situation in the lobby is the most complicated regarding the basement explosions. There are a lot of conflicting statements making it hard to figure out what happened. To get a full understanding it might be better to read the 'About explosions' section first, despite you are aware of the difference between detonation and deflagration.

For reference:


We start with the account by FDNY Lieutenant William Walsh for the WTC Task Force:

According to his testimony the only damaged elevators were in the center of the core. From the figure ("Passenger and Freight Elevators in Tower") we could see that the only elevator in the center which would reach until the impact zone was Car 50.

If we look at the footage from the lobby, which is provided in the documentary by the Naudet-brothers, we could not see any signs of fire and soot - besides in the center of the core. Though there were reports of a fireball blowing through the lobby, this fireball had not ignited any of the visible contents of the lobby. We see broken windows, removed marble panels and fine dust. The damage looks very similar to the damage caused by the bomb from 1993, which was placed in a van in Basement 2.

Blown out windows in the lobby from the WTC 93 bombing:


Blown out windows in the lobby on 9/11:


This picture shows a blown out window from the west front of the building.


Again we see blown out windows of the west front, from the view of the fire command post.


View to the west, note the fire command post in the upper right corner, on the left side is the north elevator bank. Note the construction fence in front of the elevators 22 and 23.




On the right side you can see the north elevator bank, people are going to the west side of the building. Note the fine dust.


To the right again the north elevator bank.

Note that the pictures above confirm the testimony of Lt. Walsh, that the elevators on the north side were intact (not intact in the meaning of operable). Unfortunately, we have no pictures of the south elevator bank to confirm his testimony, but at least his testimony was accurate about the situation on the north bank, and as we will see soon, most probable he was also correct about the south side.

Marble panels blown off the walls in the lobby, here on the west- wall of the core, to the right is the west entrance to the core's elevators:




From the same point of view, but in north-direction where the FDNY command post is. Note that the ground is covered with a layer of fine dust.



Point of view from the FDNY command post to the south, note the fine dust in the background.



Same, only closer and later.

Note that on all pictures we don't see any signs of burning or soot. But if the blast pressure of a fireball blow out the windows on the westfront of the building, and the marble panels from the core-walls, we'd expect to see such signs there. Even the plants in the area weren't singed. From the documentary of the Naudet-brothers we can see no indication that the blown windows and panels were the product of a fireball.

Another explanation sometimes given for the observed damage, is that the plane impact and the subsequent shaking of the building caused this damage. But this explanation doesn't sem to fit also. Why would a shaking tower only cause windows to break in the lobby level, and not in higher regions which are more stressed by swaying? And why should the windows only been blown out on a particular site of the building?

It should be noted that the towers were build with enough flexibility to sway. Wind forces were absorbed by the outer skeleton of the building, dumpsters would have reduced effects on the buildings core. Now let's compare the swaying of the towers on 9/11 with other events caused the towers to sway.

According to this report the towers swayed as much as 20 inches at their tops. This is confirmed by a NIST-figure of WTC 2 impact, which is even under 20 inches:


(
NIST - PDF)

This is about the half the towers experienced in strong wind storms. (Source)

And according to NIST about one third the towers were designed for:

So even in storms which resulted in twice the number of sway-range, windows did not break. So I think we can rule out the plane-impact explanation. Besides the windows, if the removed marble panels were result of the impact one might expect to observe this phenomena also on the north-site of the core, where the plane hit and the columns experienced the most stress. And not to forget the seismic data, registering a 0.9 magnitude on the Richter-scale, which is very low and not even considered as earthquake.

So this was caused by an explosion, not by the plane impact. But again, for that we would expect to see signs of soot and charring in the damaged area if this was the result of blast-pressure from a fireball. Look also at this corroborating account:

As no fireball is mentioned, we can assume from this that the fireball and the shattering of the glass were indeed two different events.

But there was smoke and soot in the Lobby, as it is reported by Mike Pecoraro:

Now this contradicts the pictures we've just seen. The whole Lobby wasn't sooted and full of smoke. From Lt. Walsh's testimony we could conclude that the origin of the smoke was in the center of the lobby, and it's safe to say that Pecoraro mixed it with the 'whole lobby'. Which wouldn't be very surprising as he entered the lobby in the center from Stairway B, where the origin of the smoke was. So Pecoraro does not contradict Walsh's account. Here's a picture of the core, looking from east to west. On the right (north) side are the elevator banks A-D. On the left are express elevators, beginning with elevator 5. Then comes 6 and 7:


Unfortunately the picture is of bad quality, but it seems that beginning from the location of elevator 5 the ceiling and walls are charred. Note that no removed marble panels are visible.

However, from the Naudet-brother documentary it is evident that, until the collapse of the South Tower, there was no fire, smoke and soot in the west and north area of the lobby. Only fine dust was visible. We have no footage of the south area of the lobby, but Welsh's account indicates that this was also the case for the south side

It's often said that Pecoraro's testimony proves that the damage is consistent with a jet-fuel explosion and not with explosives, as they wouldn't produce soot and burnt people.

But this argumentation is wrong, as it excludes the possibility of both events to have happened seperately. As we've already seen there is evidence of a fire-ball, but there's also evidence that this fireball occured after the initial basement explosion.

Furthermore, soot and black smoke would not be inconsistent with an explosive device, proven by the WTC 93 bombing:

According to the USFA-TR-076/February 93, besides others, the bombing resulted in the following:

- severe smoke and soot conditions throughout the towers (p.91)

From the same report:

Now we have all signs of a deflagration in the WTC 93 bombing, and even someone mentioned that "it felt like an airplane hit the building", certainly no one would have argued that there was no bomb.

When no one took this as evidence that there was no detonation device in the WTC 93 bombing, then why should we take the same observations as evidence that there was no detonation device in the basement on 9/11?. To exclude a detonation because there are also signs of a deflagration is illogical. Instead, it's logical to include a deflagration if there are signs of a deflagration. Same for detonations. (See "About explosions" section for more on that) .

Other firefighter accounts corroborate that all effects of a deflagration were found inside the core center, which would match with the location of the only possible shafts for the jet-fuel to spill down (6,7 and 50).

Compared to the floorplans, the only doors which would have been within visual, would have been 17,49,50,6,7 and maybe 48 and 5. It would not be unusual to see the doors missing off 50,6 and 7, also 17 and 49 could have easily been out of sight.

So this matches the official account.

Here we have for the first time explicitly mentioned elevators 6 and 7. This is of course again in line with the official version. But from that we couldn't conclude if the blown out doors were on the south side, or the center side, of the elevator bank, which would be helpful to corrobate Walsh's account.

But it would be amazing, if the doors of elevators 6 and 7 were only blown on one side, and not on both.

However, it seems that the most damage was not in those shafts :

These could not have been elevators 6 and 7 (which were out of service, and its cars were in B1), and not elevator 50. And why did they come down when their cables were not in the impact zone? How could they have been "blown out of their shafts", "crashed out of shaft", when even elevator 6, 7 and 50 were not blown out, though the only possible source for the explosion?

Firefighter Blaich corroborates Moribito's account regarding elevator cars been blown out. Unfortunately, we have not footage of the south side bank, banks A-D, only of the north side bank and a blurry view inside the core corridor. So we don't know the exact location of the blown out elevators, but we can conclude that these were not some which shafts reach into impact zone. If the blown out elevators would be that of 6 and 7, we could assume that Parente would have mentioned that and not only talked of blown out doors.

It's safe to say that "all the elevators were crashed down" is an exaggeration. And note that "chopped off legs" indicates a shock wave, in line with a detonation, not a deflagration (see explosion-section).

Note that between the plane impact and the situation of the burning man on West Street is a timespan of several minutes. If this man did not burn for several minutes, which is unlikely, than this further indicates that there was a later explosion which set people on fire.

Note also that he described a man pushed against the wall with his tongue on the floor. Hard to imagine the result of the same fuel fireball that Griffith witnessed, where Cruz was pulled from the car just seconds before a fireball engulfed it. Why wasn't Cruz and her rescuers blasted against the wall?

This again indicates that there were different explosions which caused different effects, at different times. Effects in line with a detonation and effects in line with a deflagration.

Please watch also this interview (at 6:45) by Firefighter John Schroeder, which corroborates that the lobby-fireball occured later then the first basement-explosion(s).

Why does firefighter Green still thinking that a bomb went off? Because what he describes matches with effects caused by a detonation. Even the ceiling over the pile of burned bodies wasn't charred. Though they were burnt so badly that a firefighter didn't recognize them as human bodies, the ceiling above wasn't charred. His account seems to match the observation that both events, a deflagration and a detonation, took place.

Finally, maybe the most important account regarding the lobby is this:

The revolving door is just across the south side of elevators 6 and 7. If they were the origin of the blast, then why didn't he see a fireball emerging from there, then why is the glass still intact? But the glass on the westfront is broken. And the marble panels on the west-wall of the core removed.

This proves that the shafts of 6 and 7 weren't the origin of the damage in the lobby. We have already ruled out elevator 50 for the basement damage. So what's left? A good question. Another good question: Why did Mark Roberts, who published a paper in an attempt to debunk sceptics of the official version, cut out the bolded part of the statement? Of all lobby-accounts the most incriminating part for the official version.

What is he hiding from us? And why is he hiding from us? And why has never footage been released showing the south side of the lobby, which certainly exists, or should we believe that despite all the footage of the lobby, nobody made even one picture of the zone, which according to the official version, should have been the most damaged one?

To understand the importance of the difference of both forms of explosions, deflagration and detonation, we will now look into it in more detail.

About explosions

The explosion at the South Tower, consuming an est. 1,000-3,000 gal of jet-fuel, is often referred to as 'tremendous'.




But tremendous was its psychological impact rather than its impact on the building. From the FEMA:

So this fireball didn't create a shock wave. This isn't surprising as a jet-fuel explosion usually produces no shock wave, as it is a deflagration, not a detonation (but deflagrations are also explosions, it seems that FEMA here equates explosions with detonations).

An explosion is a sudden increase in volume and release of energy in a violent manner, usually with the generation of high temperatures and the release of gases. An explosion causes pressure waves in the local medium in which it occurs. Explosions are categorized as deflagrations if these waves are subsonic and detonations if they are superonic. The supersonic waves are the ones which are called shock waves.

Detonation is a process of supersonic combustion in which a shock wave is propagated forward due to energy release in a reaction zone behind it. In a detonation, the shock compresses the material thus increasing the temperature to the point of ignition. The ignited material burns behind the shock and releases energy that supports the shock propagation. This self-sustained detontion wave is different from a deflagration that propagates at a subsonic speed (i.e., slower than the sound speed of the explosive material itself), and without a shock or any significant pressure change. Because detonations generate high pressures, they are usually much more destructive than deflagrations.

In engineering terms, deflagrations are easier to control than detonations. Consequently, they are better suited when the goal is to move an object (a bullet in a gun, or a piston in an engine) with the force of the expanding gas. Typical examples of deflagrations are combustion of a gas-air mixture in a gas stove or a fuel-air mixture in an internal combustion engine, or a rapid burning of a gunpowder in a firearm. A detonation would result in the destruction of a gun, or the piston of an engine.

Flame speed of a deflagration is subsonic, with flame speed increasing in restricted areas and decreasing in open areas. Significantly, a detonation is supersonic, and will proceed through almost all of the available flammable vapor at the detonation reaction rate. This creates far more severe peak over-pressures and much higher amounts of blast energy. The speed of the flame front movement is directly proportional to the amount of blast over-pressure. A wide spectrum of flame speeds may result from flame acceleration under various conditions. High flame front speeds and resulting high blast over pressures are seen in accidental vapor cloud explosions where there is a significant amount of confinement and congestion that limits flame front expansion and increases flame turbulence.

Many parameters contribute to the potential damage from a vapor cloud explosion, including the mass and type of material released, the strength of ignition source, the nature of the release event, and turbulence induced in the cloud.

Therefore Fuel-Air-Explosions (FAE) could produce a high overpressure and are used as military weapons to destroy soft targets. However, these weapons are not one-to-one assignable to a scenario of a jet-fuel explosion. They have a high strength of ignition as detonators are used to bring them to explosion. And materials are used which have a higher ratio of lower and upper explosion limits. For example the 550-pound CBU-72 cluster bomb uses Ethylene Oxide, which has a ratio from 3 to 100% (compared to .7 to 5.0% from jet-fuel). But even military Fuel-Air-Explosions have limited effects, and the CBU ist described as "primarily useful as a psychological weapon" (Source) Another FAE-bomb, the BLU-95 is described as "Unfortunately the overpressures generated were not high enough to reliably detonate mines and had little effect on wire obstacles." (Source)

Even with this FAE-bombs it wouldn't be possible to destroy and reduce concrete walls to rubble over several levels of floors, over hundreds of feet. Furthermore, as we already know, only two elevator shafts, Car 6 and 7, could have been the possible way for the jet-fuel to get down to the basement and causing the observed damage. Of course such a shaft would be an area that limits flame front expansion and increases flame turbulence, thus increases blast pressure. Let's assume that the jet-fuel ran down shaft 6 and/or 7, and let's assume that this jet-fuel was within the ratio of fuel vapor to air to be explosive. And let's assume that the amount of jet-fuel was significant high (which is unlikely, see "Further indications"). Given this scenario, an explosion in a shaft would result in a high blast pressure. But which way would the pressure follow? The way of least or the way of most resistance? The least resistance of course would be the airspace within the shaft, so the flame front would expand throughout the shaft. Then the path of least resistance (as the shaft-space is not large enough for the expanding blast) would have been the area of the damage zone, as there assumable would be a lot of openings in the shaft due to the forces of the plane impact. If the flame front did not expend to this area, i.e. was emerging from the bottom and didn't come donwards, the way of least resistence inside the shaft would have been through the elevator door-openings. The path of more resistance would be the shaft walls. The path of maximum resistance would be the bottom of the shaft.

It's also important to note, that when one considers the 'jet-fuel collected at the bottom and then ignited' theory, to consider also, that there were accounts of broken water lines, sprinklers etc.. We should also assume that around the impact zone, all kinds of water services were severed and were gushing with water. This would have only dilluted and fuel that fell to the bottom of those lift shafts. When people imagine a nice clean lift shaft with clean jet fuel falling to the bottom of it, they are not being realistic.

Take this into consideration, from a website dealing with deflagration reducing risk:

And now watch this short clip, but before that, think of which path the overpressure will take: Watch here (wmv) (And here's how they reduced the risk.)

Back to the WTC. Which path would the overpressure generated by the fireball take? Of course through the openings and not through the walls and in particular not through the bottom. And this is exactly what NIST states about the shafts of Car 6 and 7:

So the pressure blow out the doors from the openings in basement level 1 and the lobby, hence the pressure in the shaft would reduce. But for the official version to be true, the blast had to take the path of maximum resistance through the bottom of the shaft in Basement 4 (after it had already blown out elevator openings three and four levels above aka pressure reduced), and then blowing walls in at least basement levels 5, 4 and 2. And leaving the elevator-cars burned, but not destroyed. It seems that this is not unlikely, but impossible.

And because this seems to be physical impossible, despite the fact that NIST goes in a lot of details in their 10,000-page report, they never adress the damage in the basement levels other then in vague descriptions. And making the false statement that the main freight elevator (Car 50) went down to the bottom of the shaft, to make even the vague descriptions believable.

For comparison, let's look at the South Tower after the impact explosion:



We can see exterior damage to the impacted region of WTC2, right next to where the fireball emerged. Note that the aluminum panels have been dislodged in some places, but otherwise the structure is still intact where the plane has not physically knocked steel columns out. There is no evidence of great overpressures from the fireball itself.

Now this tremendous jet-fuel explosion failed to remove this aluminum cladding, but later managed to destroy machine rooms, steel fire doors and cause cave-ins, and at the same time leaving the shafts it - officially - emerged from intact, is beyond me. But I#m not a Bush-Scientist, so that could be the reason for my failure to understand.

When talking about jet-fuel, please consider also this:

The basement explosions are causing so much confusion because they include characteristics of both, deflagration and detonation. The initial explosion(s) in the basement was (were) a detonation (s), including shockwave resulting in caved-in walls and blown people, and fine dust. And later there was one or more explosion (s), at least in the shaft of Car 50, and maybe in the shafts of Car 6 and 7, but this time it was a deflagration, resulting in burned people, soot and the odor of kerosine.

To the end of the explosive-section, here's a long quote, which is worth a reading:

I could have made the explosion-section very short, as all of this is already in Loose Change 2nd Edition (Go to: 26:22).

But -according to the official version - the fireball not only destroyed walls in the basement levels, on it's way down it also destroyed parts of the 22nd floor, making the official account even more implausible. We have to look at this closely to understand a possible motive to set up additional explosives in the moment of plane impact.

The 22nd floor

The question raises: why should bombs be installed in the basement levels? Though it would make sense in a demolition to set up explosives in the basement levels, where the columns are connected to the ground, would it make sense to initiate them an hour before the actual demolition? One might argue that they used the opportunity to do that. But would it make really sense in a top-to-bottom "collapse" to demolish the columns in the basement an hour before the actual collapse, taking the risk something happens to be observed matching better with a demolition but a structural collapse? Let's not forget that in a demolition which should be carried out in secret, every action like this results in a higher risk for the whole operation to demolish the building. Instead of contributing to a Secret Controlled Demolition (SCD), basement-explosions an hour before collapse seem to be a risk for the whole operation to be carried out in secret. So what would be the motive if the basement-explosions would only add higher risk to the success ot the operation? Actually, quite the opposite is true. The basement explosions did not raise, but lower the risk for the whole operation to be successfull. We will see that the basement explosions were necessary part in an attempt to bring down the Twins in secret.

To understand the situation, we have to take this into consideration:

For that, without fires the whole demolition operation would have been too risky, as then there wouldn't be a plausible explanation for collapse (though it's still not plausible, but that's not the point made here).

Therefore, to carry out the demolition it was necessary to prevent firefighters from knocking out the fires. And the explosions which occured simultaneously (or shortly before) the plane impact ensured this. Besides the explosions in the basement, there was another explosion, fitting into this pattern of preventing firefighting operations.

WTC1 housed the Security Command Center (SCC) on the 22nd floor. This command center controlled the Closed Curcuit TV (CCTV) of the WTC complex, the HVAC (Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning)system and the access to the roof and the Mechanical Equipment Rooms (MER). Simultaneously with the basement explosions the SCC was disabled due to an explosion, causing more stress and handicaps to the emergency efforts.

From the 9/11-Commission Report:

From the NIST:

From Port Authority Transcripts:

As we know, three shafts continued from the impact zone down to the basement. These three shafts were also the only ones reaching from impact zone to the 22nd floor.

It's important to note that Cars 6 and 7 didn't stop on floor 22. Only Car 5, 48, 50 and the elevators of Bank B did. So there were no doors or framing which could be blown out in the case of Car 6 and 7. The only one remaining for the official version to be true, is Car 50, the main freight elevator. But the witness also describes looking down and just seeing cables. Obviously the car would be in the shaft somewhere, most likely out of sight, but the witness describes seeing the elevator cables, which if severed as they were in the case of car 50, would not just be hanging there.

So elevator 6 and 7 had no door framings, and the remaining elevator 50 had no cables still hanging inside tha shaft. It seems that Yarembinsky is not talking about one of these three elevators, which would of course be in contradicition to the official version.

Despite this, from firefighter Dunne and Bessler we know also, that more than one elevator was affected. So more than elevator 50. This then must be 6 and 7, as no other shaft reaches the impact zone.

This would mean that two seperated fireballs, one in the shaft of Car 50, one in the shafts of Car 6 and/or 7, travelled down the shafts and both exploded on floor 22. This would be an incredible coincidence. An even greater coincidence considered that there were no openings on floor 22 for Car 6 and 7, making it even less probable that the overpressure of an explosion in shaft 6 and 7 would go this way.

This is highly unlikely, and it's reasonable to consider that the elevators the firefighters are describing are not 6 and 7, and likely not 50. This would lead to the question how the fuel got there. So both variants, that 6,7 and/or 50 where the origin of the damage on floor 22 or other elevators caused this, both variants contradict the official version. Because it was assumed that shaft 6 or 7 were the origin of the explosion, how could the fireball explode on the 22nd floor and on basement-levels without exploding on all the levels between?

In contrast to the damage on the 22nd floor, there's no damage one floor below:

And probably no damage one floor above ( unsure at the beginning, then seems to clarify as 23):