# 102 minutes that changed America - now on c4



## Spion (Sep 7, 2009)

A collection of on-the-scene footage from the morning of 9/11. It's incredible

Still waiting for the 2nd plane to hit. 

Knowing that the people watching are all too close is weird


----------



## untethered (Sep 7, 2009)

Are they going to show the missiles and holograms?


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

watching this.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

I still remember the day this happened clearly enough, its weird thinking about.


----------



## Stoat Boy (Sep 7, 2009)

I find it all to morbid.

It was a terrible event and the documentary made by the two French guys who were out with the NYFD on the day itself is enough for me.


----------



## Spion (Sep 7, 2009)

Yeah, tis morbid.

Oh fuck, falling people


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

Spion said:


> Yeah, tis morbid.
> 
> Oh fuck, falling people



forgot about the falling people bit though, shit!!


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 7, 2009)

whoah - that's intense


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 7, 2009)

Stoat Boy said:


> documentary made by the two French guys who were out with the NYFD on the day itself is enough for me.



A remarkably documentary.


----------



## scumbalina (Sep 7, 2009)

Pretty hardcore viewing 

I like (iyswim, prob wrong word for this show) the idea of doing the whole thing from eyewitness footage. Weird to watch, that bit in the lift was like Cloverfield or something...strange...


----------



## Sadken (Sep 7, 2009)

Had to turn it over...


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 7, 2009)

This is compelling viewing.
It's giving me the shivers.


----------



## Sadken (Sep 7, 2009)

Incidentally, the thread from 9/11 on the archive forum is pretty incredible to read


----------



## Stoat Boy (Sep 7, 2009)

Fedayn said:


> A remarkably documentary.





Stunning. I can remember watching the whole thing unfold and the look on the faces of those inside the Tower before it fell when they realised what the terrible thudding noises were will haunt me for ever.

I could never watch it again but rate it as the greatest documentary I have ever seen or likely to see.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 7, 2009)

Stoat Boy said:


> Stunning. I can remember watching the whole thing unfold and the look on the faces of those inside the Tower before it fell when they realised what the terrible thudding noises were will haunt me for ever.
> 
> I could never watch it again but rate it as the greatest documentary I have ever seen or likely to see.



what's this documentary called?


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 7, 2009)

Stoat Boy said:


> Stunning. I can remember watching the whole thing unfold and the look on the faces of those inside the Tower before it fell when they realised what the terrible thudding noises were will haunt me for ever.
> 
> I could never watch it again but rate it as the greatest documentary I have ever seen or likely to see.



What 'made' it was that the two French fellas had been there a number of weeoks filming a docu about a firehouse and a probationer iirc. That they happened to be ther on the 11th Spetember was coincidental. What also struck me, and made me smile as the son of a fireman, was the utter lack of gung-ho revenge that came from any of the firefighters. Just a programme watching human beings deal with what they can never have expected to deal with.


----------



## Spion (Sep 7, 2009)

Oh god. Phone calls from the towers. This is going to be grim


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

Why are there people still so close at that time?


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 7, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> what's this documentary called?



9/11 by Jules & Gedeon Naudet


----------



## Stoat Boy (Sep 7, 2009)

Fedayn said:


> 9/11 by Jules & Gedeon Naudet




If you have not seen it then I would call it a 'must'.

For me it is the record of what happened on the day itself. There must be hundreds of other documentarys that cover the whys and hows but for me this one is just the ultimate record of what happened on that day and the impact on those who lived, and died, through it.

There is one shot of the firemen being sent up the stairs and for me it is one of the most stunning examples of what real bravery is. Nobody trys to turn back and yet they have must been guessing what awaited them. Incredible and even writing about it now makes the hairs on my arms stand up.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 7, 2009)

Stoat Boy said:


> Stunning. I can remember watching the whole thing unfold and the look on the faces of those inside the Tower before it fell when they realised what the terrible thudding noises were will haunt me for ever.
> 
> I could never watch it again but rate it as the greatest documentary I have ever seen or likely to see.


Didn't know owt about it until hours later.  I was flying toward JFK at the time.  We ended up getting diverted to Halifax, Nova Scotia.  Didn't hear anything until we were allowed off the plane.  The ex was going mental at the time.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 7, 2009)

I arrived home from Brazil the morning this happened and switiched on the TV just after the 1st plane hit...I was watching the news when the 2nd one hit...I thought I was watching a movie. 

Watching this again I am most disturbed, as I was then, with the people jumping. No words for what that must have been like for them.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 7, 2009)

Spion said:


> Oh god. Phone calls from the towers. This is going to be grim



There was a program on last night about the recordings left by people to their family's answerphones after they realised they weren't going to get out, someone was telling me about it at work, I had to tell her to stop talking about it, just hearing her description was too much for me, I don't know how anyone could actually watch that.


----------



## Stoat Boy (Sep 7, 2009)

MikeMcc said:


> Didn't know owt about it until hours later.  I was flying toward JFK at the time.  We ended up getting diverted to Halifax, Nova Scotia.  Didn't hear anything until we were allowed off the plane.  The ex was going mental at the time.



My apologies. I was refering to the documentary, not the day itself.

The days itself was just weird and when I heard the first reports I was on my way to buy a joystick for my new PC as it come with a flight simulator which has always struck me as significant in some terrible sad little way. 

I can remember assuming that it must have been one of the traffic spotting planes that most big citys have buzzing about and never in my wildest dreams did I consider that it was an airliner.

Watched the events themselves in a theme pub in the middle of Croydon as it was the first one I found with televisions. Strange sitting there in the company of strangers with everybody just glued to the horror on the screens.

And to top it off the pub got its token drunken Scotsman stumbling around telling everybody it was the end of the world.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 7, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> There was a program on last night about the recordings left by people to their family's answerphones after they realised they weren't going to get out, someone was telling me about it at work, I had to tell her to stop talking about it, just hearing her description was too much for me, I don't know how anyone could actually watch that.



cos it's fascinating


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 7, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> I arrived home from Brazil the morning this happened and switiched on the TV just after the 1st plane hit...I was watching the news when the 2nd one hit...I thought I was watching a movie.
> 
> Watching this again I am most disturbed, as I was then, with the people jumping. No words for what that must have been like for them.



I was working on International Operator Assistance at the time. We were busy that afternoon.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 7, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> cos it's fascinating


 I know, I'm watching this but that was different, it was last words to loved ones from people who knew, without doubt that they were about to die.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 7, 2009)

Fedayn said:


> I was working on International Operator Assistance at the time. We were busy that afternoon.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 7, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> I know, I'm watching this but that was different, it was last words to loved ones from people who knew, without doubt that they were about to die.


that makes it even more gripping


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 7, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> that makes it even more gripping




b/f thinks I'm morbid/weird for wanting to watch it.

He's watching Waking the Dead so I'm videoing it


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 7, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> b/f thinks I'm morbid/weird for wanting to watch it.
> 
> He's watching Waking the Dead so I'm videoing it



There is a certain irony to this situation.

At least what you want to watch is real.

It is all kinds of gripping, scarey and facinating in a weird, sad, desperate way.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 7, 2009)

It's the knowing what's coming


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 7, 2009)

i think its fascinating, not sure why. maybe just to see how people react under extreme pressure. also, it's amazing that so much footage exists of what actually happened that day - completely different to something like the titanic where there's just a few photos


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 7, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> There is a certain irony to this situation.
> 
> At least what you want to watch is real.
> 
> It is all kinds of gripping, scarey and facinating in a weird, sad, desperate way.




yeah, and he watched the last 2 or 3 programmes that have been on (ie. the millionaire widows), the film with Nicholas Cage and the one before that


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 7, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> It's the knowing what's coming



Yeah now it is...but the morning it happened, I just sat in front of the tele, glued to it, jetlagged, stunned and unable to switch it off.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

Brixton Hatter said:


> i think its fascinating, not sure why. maybe just to see how people react under extreme pressure. also, it's amazing that so much footage exists of what actually happened that day - completely different to something like the titanic where there's just a few photos



Yeah, i'm amazed how much detailed footage there is.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 7, 2009)

the despair in that female telephonist's voice is horrible


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 7, 2009)

I'm just starting to watch it on 4+1.


----------



## Wookey (Sep 7, 2009)

I know what's coming...


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 7, 2009)

Wookey said:


> I know what's coming...



don't we all


----------



## starfish (Sep 7, 2009)

We had an American girl in our office at that time. Her mum was flying out from Seattle that day.


----------



## ebay sex moomin (Sep 7, 2009)

wasn't going to watch this, but this thread has sold me on it- I'ma watch it on 4+1.


----------



## Wookey (Sep 7, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> don't we all



And they don't - and therein lies a grisly tension.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

this is so fucking weird being taken back to all this


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 7, 2009)

did people at the time expect the towers to fall? it doesnt seem so. people just stood around staring even when they were really close. and firefighters went into the buildings


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 7, 2009)

Brixton Hatter said:


> and firefighters went into the buildings



That's what they do.


----------



## Wookey (Sep 7, 2009)

Brixton Hatter said:


> did people at the time expect the towers to fall? it doesnt seem so. people just stood around staring even when they were really close. and firefighters went into the buildings



I don't think anyone was expecting it.


----------



## Iguana (Sep 7, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> the despair in that female telephonist's voice is horrible



The two girls watching from their apartment as the 2nd plane hit really got me.  Just how they screamed and screamed and then the realisation that it was an attack and their panicked run from their building.


----------



## Wookey (Sep 7, 2009)

There it is, barely an hour after impact.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

holy shit


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 7, 2009)

Brixton Hatter said:


> did people at the time expect the towers to fall? it doesnt seem so. people just stood around staring even when they were really close. and firefighters went into the buildings



No they didn't. The fire crews would not have been on their way in had they even imagined it.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 7, 2009)

it must have been terrifying to get caught in the smoke and dust that engulfed the streets after the first tower fell - it goes completely dark


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 7, 2009)

Brixton Hatter said:


> it must have been terrifying to get caught in the smoke and dust that engulfed the streets after the first tower fell - it goes completely dark



Another haunting image later in the day...thousands of people walking across Brooklyn bridge covered in dust, in shock, zombie like.


----------



## Brixton Hatter (Sep 7, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> No they didn't. The fire crews would not have been on their way in had they even imagined it.


it seems so obvious to us now with the benefit of hindsight, but did it not cross anyone's mind that it was a possibility the towers could collapse?


----------



## DJ Squelch (Sep 7, 2009)

Having these inane adverts between sections of a programme showing such powerful footage seems so wrong.


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

DJ Squelch said:


> Having these inane adverts between sections of a programme showing such powerful footage seems so wrong.



Especially with there being a break every 10 mins


----------



## Iguana (Sep 7, 2009)

That cloud of dust looked terrifying.


----------



## Iguana (Sep 7, 2009)

Brixton Hatter said:


> it seems so obvious to us now with the benefit of hindsight, but did it not cross anyone's mind that it was a possibility the towers could collapse?



My brother was sitting in our livingroom and he had just said what a credit it was to the sturdiness of the buildings that they were still standing.  The words were just out of his mouth when the first tower collapsed.


----------



## silverfish (Sep 7, 2009)

FUCKIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING HELL

how the fuck do you plan for that


----------



## silverfish (Sep 7, 2009)

and the guy running back in covered with dust and blood in his trainers and shorts


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 7, 2009)

Brixton Hatter said:


> it seems so obvious to us now with the benefit of hindsight, but did it not cross anyone's mind that it was a possibility the towers could collapse?



Impossible to know, it didn't look like it.


----------



## Spion (Sep 7, 2009)

"SECRET SERVICE" on that guy's vest


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 7, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> Impossible to know.



the troofers know


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

Why on earth is the guy with the camera filming so close at that point? Very brave but very stupid.


----------



## Wookey (Sep 7, 2009)

I remember waking me laddo up after the first impact and telling him what had happened, and straight away he said: "That'll be Osama bin Laden then," and I was like: "who's she?"


----------



## Fedayn (Sep 7, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> Impossible to know.



Added to the fact that a previous attempt top blow it up in 1993 failed even though it was planted near the base. Doubtless few expected such a collapse when both buildings were struck so high up.


----------



## mincepie (Sep 7, 2009)

I rember watching this in my school common room.
When the first tower fell, you could see the ENG camera guy at the base of the tower, start to panic, run and then put the camera on the ground (broadcast cameras are kinda heavy) Then cut back to studio
Lots of people at my school found that funny. Sick f***s He probabally died 

Kinda stuck in my mind, all this time as it was like seeing the event through somemes eyes.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 7, 2009)

Brixton Hatter said:


> it seems so obvious to us now with the benefit of hindsight, but did it not cross anyone's mind that it was a possibility the towers could collapse?





They were probably built to withstand fire etc. but all that jet fuel would have made the temperature inside intense and maybe buckled the structure.

I dunno, I'm not a builder


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

wow@ the guy talking saying he was 15 mins away from being in that building, monday night football saved his life?


----------



## Iguana (Sep 7, 2009)

It was just after 2 and I was washing up in the kitchen with my mother when my brother called us from the livingroom.  I remember my mum and I exchanging a "what crap is Luke on about now look" before going into him.  The first tower had been hit and I asked "on purpose?" and then the 2nd plane hit and we were all "I guess so."


----------



## silverfish (Sep 7, 2009)

The firefighters rigging up looking grim knowing whats happened shows some fecking grit. next up to bat...............


----------



## nick h. (Sep 7, 2009)

Hardly anybody thought the collapse was possible - that's a large part of the conspiraloon argument (burning jet fuel isn't hot enough to melt steel or burn the insulation which was protecting it, ergo the CIA must have planted bombs). But there were architects who were convinced a collapse was inevitable, including one who was very familiar with the towers' construction. He was nearby and could see what was happening - he tried to phone the fire department but couldn't get through. There was a documentary about it.


----------



## Wookey (Sep 7, 2009)

God that clip of the smoke disappearing to leave just blue sky was incredible.


----------



## silverfish (Sep 7, 2009)

That was the second bottle of wine going down :-(


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 7, 2009)

Wookey said:


> God that clip of the smoke disappearing to leave just blue sky was incredible.



It really was


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 7, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> They were probably built to withstand fire etc. but all that jet fuel would have made the temperature inside intense and maybe buckled the structure.
> 
> I dunno, I'm not a builder



BBC - Horizon.
Sure they did a brilliant programme,explaining why the Two Towers came down in the manner they did.


----------



## gnoriac (Sep 7, 2009)

The clips of the dust cloud coming from the 2nd tower collapsing were spectacular, far more than the live coverage on the day. Though the sense of dread isn't quite there like there was at the time, I guess because it was unknown territory, nothing remotely similar had happened in our lifetimes.


----------



## Iguana (Sep 7, 2009)

mincepie said:


> Then cut back to studio
> Lots of people at my school found that funny. Sick f***s He probabally died



He would have survived, there is no report of any cameraman dying.  In fact out of both towers only 110 people who worked below the floors that were hit dies.  And in the South Tower (the 2nd hit tower which collapsed first) 18 people were rescued.  The evacuation was very successful although 416 rescue workers died.


----------



## silverfish (Sep 7, 2009)

the post collapse coverage is jaw dropping, the lack of activity, other than firefighters filing through the dust and the quiet (relatively) atmosphere. very strange

And the sobbing woman/blue sky shot


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 7, 2009)

Amazing footage now...the fire crews, utter disbelief on their faces.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 7, 2009)

one shot that got to me was all the people crossing the bridge and one woman hesitating not knowing what to do


----------



## silverfish (Sep 7, 2009)

The emergence of the population when the dust settled.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 7, 2009)

This has totally blown me away


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

Weird ending to that.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 7, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> one shot that got to me was all the people crossing the bridge and one woman hesitating not knowing what to do



Yeah I saw her.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 7, 2009)

Sesquipedalian said:


> BBC - Horizon.
> Sure they did a brilliant programme,explaining brilliantly why the Two Towers came down in the manner they did.




The way the Towers came down (like they were imploding) fascinates me.


----------



## Wookey (Sep 7, 2009)

Well, that was as heart-stopping and chilling as I thought it would be. Very well made, and not just a random string of clips.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 7, 2009)

DJ Squelch said:


> Having these inane adverts between sections of a programme showing such powerful footage seems so wrong.


I'm watching it on 4+1 and just saw an advert for CSI sofas, the advert location looked like New York, with images of the flat iron building, seems a bit in poor taste really, a film about the devastation of New York, cut to an ad using it to sell sofas.


----------



## Wookey (Sep 7, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> Yeah I saw her.



I saw her too, lost.

In fact a couple of times I saw the same person twice on different cameras.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 7, 2009)

It's only just occured to me that there was no "narration" 

Really didn't need it.


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 7, 2009)

That was a stunning documentary.
Most of the footage,i had not seen before.
It was the nature of the footage that made me feel as if i was in NYC,on the streets,in the surrounding apartments,the expressions on individuals faces,
the crowds in Times Square,that i think has profoundly upset me.
I felt as if i was there.
It wasn't done in a titillating fashion or with any kind of agenda.
I think it also showed what it is to be human.

Advice to those that missed it or decided not to watch it - "Watch it."


----------



## TrippyLondoner (Sep 7, 2009)

Sesquipedalian said:


> That was a stunning documentary.
> Most of the footage,i had not seen before.
> It was the nature of the footage that made me feel as if i was in NYC,on the streets,in the surrounding apartments,the expressions on individuals faces,
> the crowds in Times Square,that i think has profoundly upset me.
> ...



Agreed, completely.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 7, 2009)

Iguana said:


> He would have survived, there is no report of any cameraman dying.



Actually there was a photographer who went out to document what was going on and he was near the towers when they collapsed. All they found of him was his broken cameras but they developed the images and put them on exhibition. 

The photographs were all good, he kept his eye for a composition even in those circumstances.


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 7, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> It's only just occured to me that there was no "narration"
> 
> Really didn't need it.



I was going to include that comment in my post (91) but bit drunk.
Agree entirely,it didn't need it.
More profound without it.
The footage told the story.
The adverts REALLY got in the way though.
Nethertheless,well done to C4 but why do they have to always pull this trick at the end of a BigBro series ?


----------



## weltweit (Sep 7, 2009)

I wonder if al Queda knew the buildings would not remain standing after such impacts or if their collapse was some kind of bonus for them.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 7, 2009)

There was also a program about the jumpers which I found compelling. 

One can only imagine the horror of being faced with the awful choice, burn or jump. 

The program focussed on one jumper and tried to identify who he might have been, it was pretty tough stuff. No body seemed to want to identify the jumpers, almost as if they had taken the easy way out. Was a difficult program to watch.


----------



## berniedicters (Sep 7, 2009)

Brixton Hatter said:


> it seems so obvious to us now with the benefit of hindsight, but did it not cross anyone's mind that it was a possibility the towers could collapse?


Well, clearly at the time they didn't know about the explosive charges and the secret operatives...

But no, they didn't. The towers had been specified to cope with an aircraft impact - a light plane. Nobody had thought what would happen if you hit it with a jetliner that threw 20 tons of fuel into the structure and then lit it. But I suppose people thought "Plane impact: check" and never went further than that. And indeed it wasn't the plane impact that brought the towers down ("no", says a conspiracy theorist, "it was the hidden explosive charges"), but the subsequent weakening of the structure by the fires burning. And once the top had started to pancake, the collapse wasn't ever going to stop - one thing they could be certain of was that the building would never survive several thousand tons of itself being dropped onto it.


----------



## silverfish (Sep 7, 2009)

Sesquipedalian said:


> I was going to include that comment in my post (91) but bit drunk.
> Agree entirely,it didn't need it.
> More profound without it.
> The footage told the story.
> ...



No shit my 8-10  tely shift has gone from big brother frivolities to PTSD and 102 minutes of fear, misery and appreciation of heroics of people I don't know


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 7, 2009)

weltweit said:


> I wonder if al Queda knew the buildings would not remain standing after such impacts or if their collapse was some kind of bonus for them.



As i posted before,BBC Horizon did a brilliant documentary regarding the collaspe of the Towers.

I'm not technically gifted with regards to internet 
(and a bit drunk)
but found this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/tvradio/programmes/horizon/broadband/archive/leslie_robertson/


----------



## nick h. (Sep 7, 2009)

weltweit said:


> I wonder if al Queda knew the buildings would not remain standing after such impacts or if their collapse was some kind of bonus for them.



Maybe. The head of the Bin Laden family - Osama's grandad - made his fortune as a building contractor. And according to one source Osama may have studied civil engineering.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 7, 2009)

Another thing that struck me:

Lots of news helicopters, but no helicopters trying to take people off the roofs of the buildings. Assuming of course they could get out onto the roofs, but they were trapped by the fire coming up, I would have expected some to get onto the roof and then only helicopters could help.


----------



## Wookey (Sep 7, 2009)

Sesquipedalian said:


> Nethertheless,well done to C4 but why do they have to always pull this trick at the end of a BigBro series ?




It could be because BB always finishes the week before 9/11?


----------



## Diamond (Sep 7, 2009)

I really wasn't sure about this documentary.

I think part of that unease was the frustratingly minimalist style which seemed, given the whole process of selecting, editing and stitching together hours of footage, sort of hypocritical.

At the end I felt that the only kind of light that the documentary shed on the events was just how impossible it was to understand or get any kind of perspective on what was happening.

There's a sense that in watching 102 minutes of other people's footage of essentially the same thing from hundreds of different angles pushes you farther away from appreciating any kind of truth.

There was always a sense of distance and spectacle that was only punctured a couple of times when the cameras had the capability or were withing range to zoom close enough up on the structure to see individual people waving out of windows and occasionally tumbling down, looking very small indeed against the huge outside steel beams.

I remember a similarly remote sensation on the day itself when the second tower collapsed.

At the time the Beeb had a tight shot on the top of the tower. I think you could even see a couple of tiny specks that must have been people hanging out of windows. And then it all just slid away and down, out of shot, and the camera zoomed out and then everything was lost in the smoke.


----------



## Wookey (Sep 7, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Another thing that struck me:
> 
> Lots of news helicopters, but no helicopters trying to take people off the roofs of the buildings. Assuming of course they could get out onto the roofs, but they were trapped by the fire coming up, I would have expected some to get onto the roof and then only helicopters could help.



The smoke was hellish on the roofs, and there was a 5mile exclusion zone (explained one news reporter on that doc)


----------



## Diamond (Sep 7, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Another thing that struck me:
> 
> Lots of news helicopters, but no helicopters trying to take people off the roofs of the buildings. Assuming of course they could get out onto the roofs, but they were trapped by the fire coming up, I would have expected some to get onto the roof and then only helicopters could help.



That'll be the heat, the updrafts and the smoke.


----------



## silverfish (Sep 7, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Another thing that struck me:
> 
> Lots of news helicopters, but no helicopters trying to take people off the roofs of the buildings. Assuming of course they could get out onto the roofs, but they were trapped by the fire coming up, I would have expected some to get onto the roof and then only helicopters could help.


i thought that, even if it was a line bumped againstt the building that would be better than feck all...................having said that i have no ideas about the practicality of that


----------



## Iguana (Sep 7, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Another thing that struck me:
> 
> Lots of news helicopters, but no helicopters trying to take people off the roofs of the buildings. Assuming of course they could get out onto the roofs, but they were trapped by the fire coming up, I would have expected some to get onto the roof and then only helicopters could help.



That was the plan, they readied some helicopters, but there was so much smoke the visibility was too poor to risk bringing in a helicopter so close.  Also the roofs were too hot to land anything on and NY rescue choppers aren't equipped for vertical rescues.


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 7, 2009)

Wookey said:


> It could be because BB always finishes the week before 9/11?


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 8, 2009)

Can't believe that guy who was wearing a full on gas mark and carrying a child with no protection at all!


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Can't believe that guy who was wearing a full on gas mark and carrying a child with no protection at all!



Yes, I noticed exactly that also !!!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Another thing that struck me:
> 
> Lots of news helicopters, but no helicopters trying to take people off the roofs of the buildings. Assuming of course they could get out onto the roofs, but they were trapped by the fire coming up, I would have expected some to get onto the roof and then only helicopters could help.




It was on one of the recent programmes that the doors to the roof were locked


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Can't believe that guy who was wearing a full on gas mark and carrying a child with no protection at all!




my b/f said that but they say on aircraft for the adults to take care of themselves first, but still, to have no scarf or anything... 

Where the hell did all those people find those masks anyway?


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

Not to dampen any feelings we might have for Americans but it is pretty incredible that a rag tag bunch of terrorists in Afghanistan could pull off such a feat as the 9/11 attack. 

And where was the fourth plane bound for? The white house perhaps? 

Anyhow, the rest is history, the war in Aghanistan which has now continued for longer than the duration of the second world war and looks to continue for tens of years more .. And still no Osama Bin Laden.


----------



## silverfish (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Yes, I noticed exactly that also !!!



better kid gets out than not at all


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> There was also a program about the jumpers which I found compelling.
> 
> One can only imagine the horror of being faced with the awful choice, burn or jump.
> 
> The program focussed on one jumper and tried to identify who he might have been, it was pretty tough stuff. No body seemed to want to identify the jumpers, almost as if they had taken the easy way out. Was a difficult program to watch.




I remember that.  Didn't they think he was a chef or a waiter or some such?


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> It was on one of the recent programmes that the doors to the roof were locked



I am sure they were, to prevent suicides using the roof, but I wonder if it might have been possible to smash their way through them somehow. Or firemen from the outside with axes to cut their way through. 

Whatever, there were a lot of people above the points of impact who had precious few chances of escape, none in fact as it turned out. 

And when they rang the emergency numbers all the operators were telling them was to stay where they were. Fat lot of good that would do them.


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 8, 2009)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Can't believe that guy who was wearing a full on gas mark and carrying a child with no protection at all!



Yep


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I remember that.  Didn't they think he was a chef or a waiter or some such?



Yes thats right. 

It was a strange program, people did not seem to want to confront the notion that people had jumped to their deaths rather than stay in the burning building.


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Yes thats right.
> 
> It was a strange program, *people did not seem to want to confront the notion that people had jumped to their deaths rather than stay in the burning building.*



Reminds me of Piper Alpha.


----------



## Wookey (Sep 8, 2009)

The doc that was on the other night about the phone messages left by the people inside had a firefighter in #2 saying the stairwell was clear of fire - but full of smoke. 

Kinda gave the impression the those above the impact zone could have escaped down it had they had breathing apps.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

I wonder what the designers of tall buildings have learnt from this. 

Heck it could be a good thing for people in the top floors to have parachutes even at least that way they might have a chance.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> I wonder what the designers of tall buildings have learnt from this.




probably not a lot.  Wonder how much difference lifts outside the building would have made?

*thinks of Towering Inferno*

probably not a lot

a couple of skybridges between the two buildings like the Petronas maybe?


----------



## Iguana (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> there were a lot of people above the points of impact who had precious few chances of escape, none in fact as it turned out.



They could escape from the South Tower, one of the stairwells remained intact and 18 people from on or above the floors that were hit survived.  There was no way whatsoever to rescue anyone aerially.  The roofs of the building were unsound and landing anything on them wasn't possible.  If they had tried it's possible that they would have hastened the collapse.


----------



## <chap> (Sep 8, 2009)

After watching this doc one question occurred to me which I'd never thought of: Where was the military assistance? So far after, some internet searching, I can find little evidence of military involvement in the rescue effort. Surely there should have been a military presence of some kind to aid the fire and medical services. Was it a matter of timing? It is 90mins from the time of the second plane impact till the first tower collapsing - surely in that time the army or navy should have arrived to help.


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 8, 2009)

<chap> said:


> After watching this doc one question occurred to me which I'd never thought of: Where was the military assistance? So far after, some internet searching, I can find little evidence of military involvement in the rescue effort. Surely there should have been a military presence of some kind at least after the second plane went in?



There was none.
Most of,if not all,of the "Military Planning" was facing outwards. 
That's changed since the invention of the "Homeland Security."
Which now has a huge budget.

I think what Military focus there was at the time,was elsewhere.
(eg;getting Bush and Cheney to a place of safety and protecting The White House.)

Also,the "Military",never showed up in N.O. until it was way too late.


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 8, 2009)

@ Chap
PS ; You have been around for a while and this your first post


----------



## purves grundy (Sep 8, 2009)

Not this mouldy old chestnut again... jeeeeeeeeesus


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 8, 2009)

purves grundy said:


> Not this mouldy old chestnut again... jeeeeeeeeesus



Which one ?


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Another thing that struck me:
> 
> Lots of news helicopters, but no helicopters trying to take people off the roofs of the buildings. Assuming of course they could get out onto the roofs, but they were trapped by the fire coming up, I would have expected some to get onto the roof and then only helicopters could help.



Say for example there were 50 people that did manage to get onto the roof, if a helicoptor had come near enough for an attempt at rescue or landed it would have been totally swamped by panicing people and would have had no chance to take off again, it would only have added to the carnage TBF


----------



## The Octagon (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> I wonder what the designers of tall buildings have learnt from this.
> 
> *Heck it could be a good thing for people in the top floors to have parachutes even at least that way they might have a chance.*



I was thinking this as well last night.

Sure, a few will splat against a building, but the majority get a chance.


----------



## Spion (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> it is pretty incredible that a rag tag bunch of terrorists in Afghanistan


 They were mostly Saudis. Nothing to do with Afghanistan


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> Say for example there were 50 people that did manage to get onto the roof, if a helicoptor had come near enough for an attempt at rescue or landed it would have been totally swamped by panicing people and would have had no chance to take off again, it would only have added to the carnage TBF



No, helicopter does not land. 

Instead it lowers winching cable and lifts as many people as hang on to it until helicopter is full, then it goes and deposits them on the ground and goes around again. 

Plus, if the doors to the roof were locked, helicopter drops fireman onto roof to break down doors with axe and release people onto roof..


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

Spion said:


> They were mostly Saudis. Nothing to do with Afghanistan



What are you suggesting, that the USA should have invaded Saudi Arabia rather than Afghanistan?


----------



## Spion (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> What are you suggesting, that the USA should have invaded Saudi Arabia rather than Afghanistan?


I'm saying that it was nothing to do with Afghanistan.

I'm neither a millionaire or a member of the US state apparatus so I have not the slightest interest in the US invading anyone. 

The US would never have taken any action against Saudi, a major ally and oil supplier, so they chose a country with a troublesome government that lay on a potential oil pipeline route to invade instead.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> No, helicopter does not land.
> 
> Instead it lowers winching cable and lifts as many people as hang on to it until helicopter is full, then it goes and deposits them on the ground and goes around again.
> 
> Plus, if the doors to the roof were locked, helicopter drops fireman onto roof to break down doors with axe and release people onto roof..



Winching cable goes down what happens then? there wouldn't be an orderly queue, it would be carnage.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 8, 2009)

there were complaints about adverts last night but this is the best one:
"Does Channel 4, not find it incredibly insensitive to display an advert for Birds Eye salmon fish fingers during the advert break in this programme given the advert shows two identical rectangular structures both collapsing (albeit I accept that its just an advert and meant to be fun). I find it especially stupid to show that advert given its possible symbolism prior to the part of your programme that shows the collapse of the world trade centre. Surely a little common sense could have been applied here!"


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 8, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> there were complaints about adverts last night but this is the best one:
> "Does Channel 4, not find it incredibly insensitive to display an advert for Birds Eye salmon fish fingers during the advert break in this programme given the advert shows two identical rectangular structures both collapsing (albeit I accept that its just an advert and meant to be fun). I find it especially stupid to show that advert given its possible symbolism prior to the part of your programme that shows the collapse of the world trade centre. Surely a little common sense could have been applied here!"



It does beg the question how much thought goes into what adverts are played when and if each programme aired is used as a base-guide for deciding the appropriateness of adverts.

I remember seeing the fish finger advert last night and thinking...Mmmmm salmon fish fingers. I didn't make the link.


----------



## Spion (Sep 8, 2009)

Who watches the adverts? Or expects them to be well-chosen?


----------



## Spion (Sep 8, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> there were complaints about adverts last night but this is the best one:
> "Does Channel 4, not find it incredibly insensitive to display an advert for Birds Eye salmon fish fingers during the advert break in this programme given the advert shows two identical rectangular structures both collapsing (albeit I accept that its just an advert and meant to be fun). I find it especially stupid to show that advert given its possible symbolism prior to the part of your programme that shows the collapse of the world trade centre. Surely a little common sense could have been applied here!"


What a sad case s/he is


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> What are you suggesting, that the USA should have invaded Saudi Arabia rather than Afghanistan?


I believe Spoin is just corecting your factual inaccuracy about the nationality of those involved: 15 were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one from Egypt and one from Lebanon.

Saudi Arabia is, of course, the world's leading producer of oil.

Nor were the hijackers "ragtag", they were mainly middle class, degree level professionals, some with families.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> Winching cable goes down what happens then? there wouldn't be an orderly queue, it would be carnage.



Winch cable goes down, a number of people cling on to it, winch cable goes up and people get into chopper, repeat until chopper is full. next chopper and so on .. 

But no, they instead had a 5m exclusion zone for helicopters, wonderful!

So, you argue its better to leave them cooking burning or falling to their deaths with no chance of escape then is it?


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

Spion said:


> I'm saying that it was nothing to do with Afghanistan.
> 
> I'm neither a millionaire or a member of the US state apparatus so I have not the slightest interest in the US invading anyone.
> 
> The US would never have taken any action against Saudi, a major ally and oil supplier, so they chose a country with a troublesome government that lay on a potential oil pipeline route to invade instead.



So  you are saying that the invasion of Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11, that Osama Bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11 .. ?


----------



## g force (Sep 8, 2009)

That's another thread altogether....


----------



## Crispy (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> I wonder what the designers of tall buildings have learnt from this.



Plenty. Although the design of the WTC towers was quite unique. Crashing a plane into almost any other skyscraper would not have the same effect.

The replacement tower that they're building right now is ridiculously over-engineered.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Winch cable goes down, a number of people cling on to it, winch cable goes up and people get into chopper, repeat until chopper is full. next chopper and so on ..
> 
> But no, they instead had a 5m exclusion zone for helicopters, wonderful!
> 
> So, you argue its better to leave them cooking burning or falling to their deaths with no chance of escape then is it?



There was nobody on the roof. but let's not let that cloud you.

I'm not saying people should just burn, thanks for accusing me of that, but a helicoptor rescue would have been impossible, do you have any idea of the heat that would have been coming up, and what that does to air currents? 

Christ, get of your high horse and use your brain you numpty.


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> So  you are saying that the invasion of Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11, that Osama Bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11 .. ?




I just hope it's intentional.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 8, 2009)

Spion said:


> Who watches the adverts? Or expects them to be well-chosen?



The person OU quoted.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> There was nobody on the roof. but let's not let that cloud you.
> 
> I'm not saying people should just burn, thanks for accusing me of that, but a helicoptor rescue would have been impossible, do you have any idea of the heat that would have been coming up, and what that does to air currents?
> 
> Christ, get of your high horse and use your brain you numpty.



I am not on any kind of horse thanks  

Actually on one of the towers the impact region and fire was quite low down from the top and it is possible that the wind could have kept the heat blowing out sideways. Obviously this may have changed with time. 

Did you miss my suggestion that a helicopter drop firemen onto the top of the building to open the doors (with an axe) to let people onto the roof to enable some to be rescued by helicopter. 

Emergency rescue clearly had little idea of what was about to happen, telephone operators were telling people trapped above the fire (and possibly below the fire) to stay put. Fat lot of good that would do them, and loads of firemen were walking up the stairs of a building that was going to collapse on them. 

If I had been trapped above the fire, I would have liked the chance to try to escape by helicopter.


----------



## Diamond (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> I am not on any kind of horse thanks
> 
> Actually on one of the towers the impact region and fire was quite low down from the top and it is possible that the wind could have kept the heat blowing out sideways. Obviously this may have changed with time.
> 
> ...



I think the reason that the telephone operators were telling people to stay put was because they were trying to keep them calm while also being painfully aware that there were no viable options on the table.

And I think you're still missing the basic point about updrafts and thermals coming off of the tower. I should imagine hovering a helicopter over it in those conditions and with limited visibility is close to impossible.


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 8, 2009)

Jesus, I'm no scientist but it must have been hundreds of degrees hot above those towers. Just go into the kitchen and light a gas hob for 2 seconds.

And how do you survive the smoke on the roof, and how to you see who is on the roof . . . this is just stupid stuff.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> I am not on any kind of horse thanks
> 
> Actually on one of the towers the impact region and fire was quite low down from the top and it is possible that the wind could have kept the heat blowing out sideways. Obviously this may have changed with time.
> 
> ...



Dropping firemen onto the top of buildings burning with that intensity (if you could get anywhere near it) would just not happen. This didn't happen in Hollywood, maybe if it had Bruce Willis et al could have helped


----------



## g force (Sep 8, 2009)

Exactly....too many people assume you could just 'drop' on top of the towers whack open a door and wait for the Watchmen to come pick people up


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> maybe if it had Bruce Willis et al could have helped



Now you do have to admit, if John McClane's wife had been in that building, Bruce Wills would have found a way


----------



## editor (Sep 8, 2009)

Crispy said:


> The replacement tower that they're building right now is ridiculously over-engineered.


That's because you may as well paint a great big target on it.


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 8, 2009)

Yep, it'll be interesting to see what rents they think they can charge on the 110th floor this time around.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

I was not even aware that they had chosen a winning new building from the candidates yet.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

London_Calling said:


> Yep, it'll be interesting to see what rents they think they can charge on the 110th floor this time around.



You would have to pay me to get me up there. 

And I would want a parachute!


----------



## The Octagon (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> I was not even aware that they had chosen a winning new building from the candidates yet.



I think it's this isn't it?


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

blah.............


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> You would have to pay me to get me up there.


It's an office block


----------



## Ranbay (Sep 8, 2009)

The Octagon said:


> I think it's this isn't it?



needs more


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

London_Calling said:


> It's an office block



ha ha, yes ok, but an office workers pay would not get me up there!

And I would not pay rent to be up there, they would have to pay me danger money!


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 8, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> there were complaints about adverts last night but this is the best one:
> "Does Channel 4, not find it incredibly insensitive to display an advert for Birds Eye salmon fish fingers during the advert break in this programme given the advert shows two identical rectangular structures both collapsing (albeit I accept that its just an advert and meant to be fun). I find it especially stupid to show that advert given its possible symbolism prior to the part of your programme that shows the collapse of the world trade centre. Surely a little common sense could have been applied here!"


That was a piss-take, surely?


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Winch cable goes down, a number of people cling on to it, winch cable goes up and people get into chopper, repeat until chopper is full. next chopper and so on ..
> 
> But no, they instead had a 5m exclusion zone for helicopters, wonderful!
> 
> So, you argue its better to leave them cooking burning or falling to their deaths with no chance of escape then is it?


Winch cable goes down, too many terrified of dying people cling on to it, a fight breaks out, punches fly, too many people cling on and they are pulling the chopper down and preventing it from taking off, or making it unstable, and then because it's overloaded beyond it's capacity and can't take off, and buffeted by thermals and affected by poor visibility due to smoke, it crashes into the roof or side of the building and kills even more people. 

So, you argue its better to also kill a few helicopter pilots as well as those unfortunate people in the buildings, then?


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> So, you argue its better to also kill a few helicopter pilots as well as those unfortunate people in the buildings, then?



In a nutshell, yes!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> I remember seeing the fish finger advert last night and thinking...Mmmmm salmon fish fingers. I didn't make the link.


 

I think there was a Coco Pops advert on as well.  Surprised the person who complained didn't complain that popping could equal explosions


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> In a nutshell, yes!


 


but then nobody would be saved

You haven't really thought this through have you welt?


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> I am not on any kind of horse thanks
> 
> Actually on one of the towers the impact region and fire was quite low down from the top and it is possible that the wind could have kept the heat blowing out sideways. Obviously this may have changed with time.
> 
> ...


You do know, don't you, that more than 2,500 people perished in the World Trade Center?




			
				from wikipedia said:
			
		

> ...2,604 died and another 24 remain listed as missing...



Admittedly, some would have died on the initial impact, but that still left potentially hundreds of people who needed rescuing.  In conditions too dangerous for a helicopter rescue.  

Do you think if there was maybe one or two helicopters that managed to get within close enough promixity to attempt a rescue, that all those terrified people would have formed an orderly queue and let the women and children and elderly go first?  Or do you think it would have been a mad and dangerous free for all that would have ended up with the helicopters going down as well?


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> You do know, don't you, that more than 2,500 people perished in the World Trade Center?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Isn't that what I said?


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Do you think if there was maybe one or two helicopters that managed to get within close enough promixity to attempt a rescue, that all those terrified people would have formed an orderly queue and let the women and children and elderly go first?  Or do you think it would have been a mad and dangerous free for all that would have ended up with the helicopters going down as well?



To my mind, a free for all, following which some people got rescued is always going to be better than total inaction where zero people get rescued.


----------



## jusali (Sep 8, 2009)

My abiding memomory of that doc. will be the fireman watching a person falling down, down, down and him winceing as you hear the thud of the inevitable final impact.  Gutted!


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> Isn't that what I said?



Yes, but it looks like we are going round again..


----------



## 8den (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> To my mind, a free for all, following which some people got rescued is always going to be better than total inaction where zero people get rescued.



You're an idiot. Seriously you're a complete fucking moron. Firemen who put their own life at risk aren't any use to anyone. 

Landing a helicopter on an unstable structure is a massive no no, and just, fuck, jesus, such a completely retarded concept, I don't even know where to start. I really hope that in daily life you don't have any level of responsibility over people.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 8, 2009)

Liked the guy at the end who didn't want to give an interview saying only 'I'm having a really bad day' before dragging his briefcase and coat off through the dust. Great documentary. Just a shame that the broker who wanted to bomb all the Arabs got out alive.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 8, 2009)

goldenecitrone said:


> Liked the guy at the end who didn't want to give an interview saying only 'I'm having a really bad day' before dragging his briefcase and coat off through the dust.


Yeap, that was a really poignant moment for me to.


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 8, 2009)

8den said:


> I really hope that in daily life you don't have any level of responsibility over people.


 

Tbf, he doesn't read like he's much older than around 20. A lot of things are black and white at that age . . .


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Yes, but it looks like we are going round again..



And it was all so wrapped up

CATCH UP PEOPLE!


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> And it was all so wrapped up
> 
> CATCH UP PEOPLE!


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

This is obviously what is needed 



> A skyscaper on fire may act as a chimney; particularly, if someone leaves the door on the roof open. The roof is potentially a very dangerous location. Placing rescue personnel there without means of rapid extraction puts them at unnecessary risk. The Heli-Basket is a new line of rescue equipment for high-rise buildings. The small HB2000 Heli-Basket allows up to 16 persons to be rescued at one time. The HB3000 Heli-Basket can carry 26 persons. More than 34 people can fit into the large HB5000 Heli-Basket. In the paragraphs below we outline how this piece of equipment is to be used.


 






and you've probably need some heavy-duty Chinooks to accommodate that many people in the first place


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> This is obviously what is needed
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And ovenproof firemen


----------



## Iguana (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> To my mind, a free for all, following which some people got rescued is always going to be better than total inaction where zero people get rescued.



Sweet Christ!  416 rescue workers were killed helping people and you are moaning on about them not following your utterly fucking stupid helicopter nonsense.

1.  They did initially plan to attempt helicopter rescue, but it was not possible to bring a chopper anywhere near the buildings due to the heat and smoke.

2.  NY rescue helicopters are not equipped for vertical rescues.  They DO NOT have winches and cables for that type of rescue.  Sensibly, because that type of rescue is just not possible.

3.  It would not have been possible to land a helicopter on the roof as the building integrity was compromised.  If they had attempted it they could very easily have hastened the collapse of the buildings and many of the people who did survive would have died.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> And ovenproof firemen


 

yeah, but weltwelt's not worried about the fireman.  He can chuck them out of the cradle and jump in himself whilst kicking anyone off desperate enough to try to get on


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

Iguana said:


> 1.  They did initially plan to attempt helicopter rescue, but it was not possible to bring a chopper anywhere near the buildings due to the heat and smoke.
> 
> 2.  NY rescue helicopters are not equipped for vertical rescues.  They DO NOT have winches and cables for that type of rescue.  Sensibly, because that type of rescue is just not possible.
> 
> 3.  It would not have been possible to land a helicopter on the roof as the building integrity was compromised.  If they had attempted it they could very easily have hastened the collapse of the buildings and many of the people who did survive would have died.



That all sounds very logical, so they did consider it, thanks for that. 

I fail to see why insulting language was necessary in your post, to my mind it only serves to make you look like a twat!


----------



## spring-peeper (Sep 8, 2009)

Iguana said:


> Sweet Christ!  416 rescue workers were killed helping people and you are moaning on about them not following your utterly fucking stupid helicopter nonsense.
> 
> 1.  They did initially plan to attempt helicopter rescue, but it was not possible to bring a chopper anywhere near the buildings due to the heat and smoke.
> 
> ...



I'm wondering if the fact that the Americans said that would blow up anything that was in the air had something to do with the lack of helicopters.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> yeah, but weltwelt's not worried about the fireman.  He can chuck them out of the cradle and jump in himself whilst kicking anyone off desperate enough to try to get on



erm, thanks but you are missing what I actually said - which was put firemen on the roof to open the doors.

It has since been pointed out (on this page) that openning the doors to the roof can increase the chimney effect and make the fire worse.


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> To my mind, a free for all, following which some people got rescued is always going to be better than total inaction where zero people get rescued.


But it would most likely have ended up in a free for all whereby no one got rescued and the helicopter went down killing the pilot/co-pilot and other rescuers staffing the winch or whatever.  It would most likely have ended up with more deaths as opposed to some lives rescued.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> But it would most likely have ended up in a free for all whereby no one got rescued and the helicopter went down killing the pilot/co-pilot and other rescuers staffing the winch or whatever.  It would most likely have ended up with more deaths as opposed to some lives rescued.



wasn't that said up there? ^^^


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> But it would most likely have ended up in a free for all whereby no one got rescued and the helicopter went down killing the pilot/co-pilot and other rescuers staffing the winch or whatever.  It would most likely have ended up with more deaths as opposed to some lives rescued.



According to Iguana a helicopter rescue was considered and discarded.


----------



## 8den (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> That all sounds very logical, so they did consider it, thanks for that.
> 
> I fail to see why insulting language was necessary in your post, to my mind it only serves to make you look like a twat!



While suggesting members of the FDNY didn't do enough on a day when they lost hundreds of men makes you look like an insensitive asshole.


----------



## nick h. (Sep 8, 2009)

Lots of companies tried selling parachutes to office workers after 9/11. Check this out, and wait for the CNN clip to load http://escapeline.com/

Here's another one, built into an office chair: http://cbs2chicago.com/local/Seatchute.high.rise.2.1041541.html


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

spring-peeper said:


> I'm wondering if the fact that the Americans said that would blow up anything that was in the air had something to do with the lack of helicopters.


 



er doubt it, weren't those news helicopters in the footage (or were they police)?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> It has since been pointed out (on this page) that openning the doors to the roof can increase the chimney effect and make the fire worse.


 

Yes, I know, I posted the link


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> According to Iguana a helicopter rescue was considered and discarded.


 


round and round and round


----------



## AnnO'Neemus (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> This is obviously what is needed
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, I think weltweit was saying something earlier to the effect of why where all those news helicopters flying around when there were people who needed rescuing from the roof.

Equipment like would need a serious heavy duty lifting helicopter, possibly military, as opposed to the 'eye in the sky' traffic chopper, which wouldn't have been up to the job.

And even the biggest one only carries 34 people.  If you have a few hundred people on a roof, and 34 get in, loads of the others would doubtless try to cling on to the outside and would prevent the helicopter taking off or would cause it to crash.

I can't imagine in that scenario there would have been an orderly evacuation of the roof.  People were so terrified of being burned they were throwing themselves out of windows.  They wouldn't calmly have filled a cage to capacity, stood back and let it take off and then waited for it to come back, fearful of dying in the meantime.  

I think weltweit's deluded.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

nick h. said:


> Lots of companies tried selling parachutes to office workers after 9/11. Check this out, and wait for the CNN clip to load http://escapeline.com/
> 
> Here's another one, built into an office chair: http://cbs2chicago.com/local/Seatchute.high.rise.2.1041541.html


 



> The Seatchute comes with an instruction manual. "*It is a very detailed instruction manual*," Hilsenbeck said.


 
You'd die whilst reading it 

and it only costs £3,000 (or it may have been dollars)


----------



## Iguana (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> That all sounds very logical, so they did consider it, thanks for that.
> 
> I fail to see why insulting language was necessary in your post, to my mind it only serves to make you look like a twat!



Because I already replied detailing this about 4 pages back and you ignored it.  Who looks like a twat now.


(Page 5, posts 107 and 123.)


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

AnnO'Neemus said:


> Equipment like would need a serious heavy duty lifting helicopter, possibly military, as opposed to the 'eye in the sky' traffic chopper, which wouldn't have been up to the job.


 

That's why I mentioned Chinook


----------



## spring-peeper (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> er doubt it, weren't those news helicopters in the footage (or were they police)?



I don't remember - I was in total shock.

All I really remember is seeing the planes crash into the towers and the announcement that all planes in the air must immediately land.  I spent more time following all the planes landings and their locations than I did watching the clean up of the towers.

The downing of all the planes was far more interesting, imo.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

I THINK WETWELT KNOWS NOW THAT WHAT HE SUGGESTED WOULD NEVER WORK, I THINK HE KNEW THAT A COUPLE OF HOURS AGO. 

ithankyou


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

8den said:


> You're an idiot. Seriously you're a complete fucking moron. .....





8den said:


> .... you look like an insensitive asshole.



Two posts, two insults. 
This is only a discussion, are you unable to make points without being insulting?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

spring-peeper said:


> I don't remember - I was in total shock.
> 
> All I really remember is seeing the planes crash into the towers and the announcement that all planes in the air must immediately land. I spent more time following all the planes landings and their locations than I did watching the clean up of the towers.
> 
> The downing of all the planes was far more interesting, imo.


 

Yes, but two planes crashed, it took seconds.  The footage was on for hours and you don't remember seeing any helicopters


----------



## spring-peeper (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Yes, but two planes crashed, it took seconds.  The footage was on for hours and you don't remember seeing any helicopters



I just said that I didn't watch after the initial impact......


----------



## 8den (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> That's why I mentioned Chinook



Its a similar argument to CTers who think that F-16s should have shot down the planes mid flight that morning. They don't grasp that there isn't a fleet of F-16s sitting weapons hot on the runway, with the pilots sitting in a ready room nearby like a group of spitfire pilots in WW2 (sans the cups of tea, pipes and a dog called nigger). Thats not how NORAD was designed. Similarly getting a chinook or a AgustaWestland, or a Blackhawk, up in the air over New York in the space of an hour would be nigh on impossible.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 8, 2009)

spring-peeper said:


> The downing of all the planes was far more interesting, imo.



why's that?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

spring-peeper said:


> I just said that I didn't watch after the initial impact......


 

I thought you meant on the day, not subsequent footage


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

8den said:


> Its a similar argument to CTers who think that F-16s should have shot down the planes mid flight that morning. They don't grasp that there isn't a fleet of F-16s sitting weapons hot on the runway, with the pilots sitting in a ready room nearby like a group of spitfire pilots in WW2 (sans the cups of tea, pipes and a dog called nigger). Thats not how NORAD was designed. Similarly getting a chinook or a AgustaWestland, or a Blackhawk, up in the air over New York in the space of an hour would be nigh on impossible.


 

Yes, I realise that as well, my ex used to be a Chinook mechanic/engineer 

He drank lots of tea, and he smoked, but not a pipe and he didn't have a dog called nigger, but he was only an engineer, not *THE *pilot


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 8, 2009)

Iguana said:


> Sweet Christ! 416 rescue workers were killed helping people and you are moaning on about them not following your utterly fucking stupid helicopter nonsense.
> 
> 1. They did initially plan to attempt helicopter rescue, but it was not possible to bring a chopper anywhere near the buildings due to the heat and smoke.
> 
> ...


On top of that, the roofs weren't built for a helicopters to land (they sloped rather severely)


----------



## tommers (Sep 8, 2009)

Apparently if you open a door on the roof you create a chimney.  And those news helicopters aren't suited to rooftop rescues, they'd be overloaded in an instant.  And they don't have winches.  In fact, even the NY rescue helicopters don't have winches.  And they'd overload the building, which might make it collapse _even sooner. _

HTH.


----------



## spring-peeper (Sep 8, 2009)

Orang Utan said:


> why's that?



After the crash, the Americans said they would shoot anything in the air down.  Seconds later, the Canadians were telling all pilots in Canadian airspace to land - the border was basically suspended.  

It was a mad scramble and planes were putting down in airports that were too small for the planes and several couldn't take off again (iirc).

The most dramatic were the planes coming in from Europe.  As soon as they reached NA airspace, they had to land.

A small town, Gander, Newfoundland, welcomed all the international flights and housed the passengers.  It was a very dramatic story.

Actually, this September 11 there will be a documentary aired about this - it's called "diverted" and I'm definitely going to watch it.  

Hubby was partially involved in the process - hence my interest.  That plus the fact that everyone _did_ land the planes - it was awesome!!!!


----------



## spring-peeper (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> I thought you meant on the day, not subsequent footage



tbh - I've never watched the footage.

I suppose I should retire from the thread - this being in the telly section


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

So now, post 9/11 if a plane is hijacked over North America, what are the rules of engagement as to when the military might decide to shoot it down?


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 8, 2009)

Yesterdays convictions talk to the difficulty of hijacking post 9/11.


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

tommers said:


> Apparently if you open a door on the roof you create a chimney.  And those news helicopters aren't suited to rooftop rescues, they'd be overloaded in an instant.  And they don't have winches.  In fact, even the NY rescue helicopters don't have winches.  And they'd overload the building, which might make it collapse _even sooner. _
> 
> HTH.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

spring-peeper said:


> After the crash, the Americans said they would shoot anything in the air down. Seconds later, the Canadians were telling all pilots in Canadian airspace to land - the border was basically suspended.
> 
> It was a mad scramble and planes were putting down in airports that were too small for the planes and several couldn't take off again (iirc).
> 
> ...


 


That sounds interesting.  Wonder if it'll be available to watch anywhere else?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


>


 

round and round and round


----------



## tommers (Sep 8, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


>



Would you like me to explain it all again?

The roof sloped as well.  It would have been impossible. 

In fact.  I heard they tried it but couldn't even get close.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

tommers said:


> Would you like me to explain it all again?
> 
> The roof sloped as well. It would have been impossible.
> 
> In fact. I heard they tried it but couldn't even get close.


 

could this be because of the smoke?


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

tommers said:


> Would you like me to explain it all again?
> 
> The roof sloped as well.  It would have been impossible.
> 
> In fact.  I heard they tried it but couldn't even get close.



Would you like to read the thread?


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

London_Calling said:


> Yesterdays convictions talk to the difficulty of hijacking post 9/11.



Do you mean the convictions of the liquids bombers?

Not sure how that means that hijacking is harder though. 

They did reinforce the cockpit doors and in the US at least had an armed air marshall on board. Do we have armed air marshalls on UK flights I wonder?


----------



## Sesquipedalian (Sep 8, 2009)

spring-peeper said:


> After the crash, the Americans said they would shoot anything in the air down.  Seconds later, the Canadians were telling all pilots in Canadian airspace to land - the border was basically suspended.
> 
> It was a mad scramble and planes were putting down in airports that were too small for the planes and several couldn't take off again (iirc).
> 
> ...



I'd like to watch that too !


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 8, 2009)

<chap> said:


> After watching this doc one question occurred to me which I'd never thought of: Where was the military assistance? So far after, some internet searching, I can find little evidence of military involvement in the rescue effort. Surely there should have been a military presence of some kind to aid the fire and medical services. Was it a matter of timing? It is 90mins from the time of the second plane impact till the first tower collapsing - surely in that time the army or navy should have arrived to help.


How? It's not like the military sit around all day kitted up just in case!  Take an example, I'm in the TA, in a medical unit.  Say something like this happens in the UK, I have to go home and get changed, then drive 25mins to get to my TA centre.  There's then a few hours of faffing around to get wagons ready, kit out of stores and onto vehicles, then drive to where we might be needed.  That's assuming anyone has thought to actually mobilise us in the first place, we can't just tip up off on our own say so.  Say it happened in London, it would be the best part of an hours drive even if the police cleared roads ahead.  So best guess would be flash-to-bang time for us of 4-5 hours as an ABSOLUTE MINIMUM.


----------



## tommers (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> could this be because of the smoke?




yes.  And the temperatures on the roof would have been _astronomical._

What with the thermals and the side winds and things... well....


----------



## 8den (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> So now, post 9/11 if a plane is hijacked over North America, what are the rules of engagement as to when the military might decide to shoot it down?



Firstly they've changed the security on internal flights, drastically shifting up baggage checks, increased air marshal presence, locked and secured doors to the cockpit. Secondly as we saw on the day, passenger behaviour has changed radically and would not be passive during a hijacking. This is what would be the major impacts on an hijacking on the day. We need to only look how the passengers around Richard Reid (the shoe bomber) behaved. 

Finally as 911 and the Payne Stewart incident showed us, if a plane goes off course, or behaves oddly it's still unlikely to get a fighter into the air in under an hour, never mind intercept. If you're really interested you can read the transcripts and even listen to the recordings of all NORAD activity on the day. Their timing, and relationship with FAA operators was staggeringly good.


----------



## Iguana (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> That sounds interesting.  Wonder if it'll be available to watch anywhere else?



You could read up on Operation Yellow Ribbon, which was the name the Canadians gave the operation to accept all the planes that had been bound for the US while grounding all other planes in their airspace.

It must have been extremely weird for people who were in the air at the time.  You suddenly get an announcement that you are being diverted and I doubt they tell you why.  You are extremely pissed off that you are going to Nova Scotia instead of NY, Boston, Washington or wherever.  Then you land angry and indignant and find out why.  It must have been the weirdest feeling.  And if you were going home to NY terrifying.  

I wonder how Muslim or middle eastern passengers on those planes were treated?


----------



## 8den (Sep 8, 2009)

<chap> said:
			
		

> After watching this doc one question occurred to me which I'd never thought of: Where was the military assistance? So far after, some internet searching, I can find little evidence of military involvement in the rescue effort.



Because of the fact that there aren't a load of military bases on Manhattan Island?

Oh and the last two people pull out of the towers were found by Marine Reservist Dave Karnes. He went and got a haircut and then drove to the towers to help with the rescue.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 8, 2009)

spring-peeper said:


> After the crash, the Americans said they would shoot anything in the air down. Seconds later, the Canadians were telling all pilots in Canadian airspace to land - the border was basically suspended.
> 
> It was a mad scramble and planes were putting down in airports that were too small for the planes and several couldn't take off again (iirc).
> 
> ...


Where I was in Halifax there were 44 airliners parked two abreast down the length of one of the runways.  One idiot panicked after a while and triggered one of the escape slides on one of the other planes!

Here's a picture of the place at the time
http://www.aero-farm.com/people/cyhz.jpg

The Canadians were great, really looked after us all, kept us fed and watered, free calls home, entertained us.  When people talk about the Blitz spirit, it must have been quite similar, everybody just pitched in.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 8, 2009)

Anyway, I hope you all realise that that wasn't a real documentary. It was obviously all actors on a huge set out in the Nevada desert. Not a bad effort but not as convincing as the Blair Witch Project.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 8, 2009)

goldenecitrone said:


> Anyway, I hope you all realise that that wasn't a real documentary. It was obviously all actors on a huge set out in the Nevada desert. Not a bad effort but not as convincing as the Blair Witch Project.


Oh please...don't start..


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

8den said:


> Firstly they've changed the security on internal flights, drastically shifting up baggage checks, increased air marshal presence, locked and secured doors to the cockpit. Secondly as we saw on the day, passenger behaviour has changed radically and would not be passive during a hijacking. This is what would be the major impacts on an hijacking on the day. We need to only look how the passengers around Richard Reid (the shoe bomber) behaved.



Do we have armed air marshalls on British / European flights? 

Re "have a go passengers", yes I can see that has changed a lot, I would have a go these days because what is the alternative? a bomb or being flown into a target, but I am not trained so I would probably not be very effective. 



8den said:


> Finally as 911 and the Payne Stewart incident showed us, if a plane goes off course, or behaves oddly it's still unlikely to get a fighter into the air in under an hour, never mind intercept. If you're really interested you can read the transcripts and even listen to the recordings of all NORAD activity on the day. Their timing, and relationship with FAA operators was staggeringly good.



So if it takes an hour to get a fighter airborne we would probably not see hijacked airliners being shot down unless they were hijacked a long way from their targets and it became known, long enough in advance, that they had been hijacked.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

MikeMcc said:


> Where I was in Halifax there were 44 airliners parked two abreast down the length of one of the runways.  One idiot panicked after a while and triggered one of the escape slides on one of the other planes!
> 
> Here's a picture of the place at the time
> http://www.aero-farm.com/people/cyhz.jpg



Wow, thats a lot of planes / people, great picture.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

Where did they put all the people?


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

tommers said:


> yes. And the temperatures on the roof would have been _astronomical._
> 
> What with the thermals and the side winds and things... well....


 

and opening the door causing a chimney effect


----------



## lizzieloo (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Where did they put all the people?



Stranded in Gander

Pics here


----------



## Balbi (Sep 8, 2009)

Those tubey things with wings, they're hollow and full of seats


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

8den said:


> Because of the fact that there aren't a load of military bases on Manhattan Island?
> 
> Oh and the last two people pull out of the towers were found by Marine Reservist Dave Karnes. He went and got a haircut and then drove to the towers to help with the rescue.


 

He was in that Nicholas Cage film.  I'm sure he was a priest.  Well he went to church but I might have imagined he was a priest

PS:  I think they were Nos. 18 and 19 pulled out of the towers

Maybe the film-makers just made him into a priest?

Hm, apparently he was just a good christian

Found this:

Then he drove to church. He asked the pastor and parishioners to say a prayer that God would lead him to survivors. A devout Christian, Karnes often turned to God when faced with decisions.

and also found this.  Most suspicious  



> For Karnes, it was a "God thing" that he was in the Porsche—a Porsche 911—that day. He'd only purchased it a month earlier—it had been a stretch, financially. But he decided to buy it after his pastor suggested that he "pray on it." He had no choice but to take it that day because his Mercury was in the shop. Driving the Porsche at speeds of up to 120 miles per hour, he reached Manhattan—after stopping at McDonald's for a hamburger—in the late afternoon.


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 8, 2009)

And amazingly, the car park is three-quarters empty. You could almost think something wasn't quite right.


----------



## DJWrongspeed (Sep 8, 2009)

What an incredible amount of very good quality footage.  There was one moment when the cameraman went ".....amazing"  which did kind of remind me of Stockhausen's quote about it being the devil's "greatest work of art ever"

I'm not suggesting it was anything other than a huge tragedy but watching that doc did revel in the sheer magnificent evil destruction of the whole thing.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

lizzieloo said:


> Stranded in Gander
> 
> Pics here


 

How long were they stranded in Canada?

Weren't the Canadians worried there might be terrorists heading for them if the US flights had been diverted?


----------



## 8den (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Do we have armed air marshalls on British / European flights?



No but there are on transatlantic. 



> Re "have a go passengers", yes I can see that has changed a lot, I would have a go these days because what is the alternative? a bomb or being flown into a target, but I am not trained so I would probably not be very effective.



The passengers on United 93 weren't trained but did a very effective job. Air hostesses attacked the hijackers with boiling water. 



> So if it takes an hour to get a fighter airborne we would probably not see hijacked airliners being shot down unless they were hijacked a long way from their targets and it became known, long enough in advance, that they had been hijacked.



Slow hand clap. The boy catches on. NORAD defends America in a donut pattern. Looking for external threats. 

There's a famous story from WW2. A US senator complained that the soldiers manning the anti aircraft guns on the Capital building weren't being re leaved often enough. It had to be explained to him that the "soldiers" were dummies, and the guns wooden. Because simply put they were there just for show. 

Any more stupid claims about 911 you need to be walked through?


----------



## 8den (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> How long were they stranded in Canada?



Two friends of mine were stuck there for three days, in a warehouse sleeping on camp beds.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

8den said:


> No but there are on transatlantic.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

The British had fake tanks and planes scattered around Britain during WWII


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

8den said:


> Two friends of mine were stuck there for three days, in a warehouse sleeping on camp beds.


 

Had they ever been to Canada?  Did they like it?


----------



## 8den (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Had they ever been to Canada?  Did they like it?



Yeah a massive warehouse filled with stressed freaked out air passengers with hour long Qs to use the phones and loo is just a singing and dancing introduction to a country.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 8, 2009)

DJWrongspeed said:


> What an incredible amount of very good quality footage.  There was one moment when the cameraman went ".....amazing"  which did kind of remind me of Stockhausen's quote about it being the devil's "greatest work of art ever"
> 
> I'm not suggesting it was anything other than a huge tragedy but watching that doc did revel in the sheer magnificent evil destruction of the whole thing.



Osama bin Laden must have it running continuously in his cave as he chuckles evilly to himself, bwah ha ha hahhhhhh.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

8den said:


> Yeah a massive warehouse filled with stressed freaked out air passengers with hour long Qs to use the phones and loo is just a singing and dancing introduction to a country.


 

now now, don't get narky

Did the hospitality of the people not want to make them go back, and didn't they think "what a beautiful country, maybe I'll visit it one day as it's only next door" 

Anyway, here's the other marine who was involved in the rescue 







he's black 



> Shamberg said he apologized to Thomas for an inaccuracy in the film: Thomas is black, but the actor cast to portray him, William Mapother, is white. Filmmakers realized the mistake only after production had begun, Shamberg said.
> 
> Thomas laughed and gently chided the filmmakers, then politely declined to discuss it further. "I don't want to shed any negativity on what they were trying to show," he said.


----------



## Iguana (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Did the hospitality of the people not want to make them go back, and didn't they think "what a beautiful country, maybe I'll visit it one day as it's only next door"



Ask MikeMcc, he was on one of the diverted planes.  Post 21;



MikeMcc said:


> Didn't know owt about it until hours later.  I was flying toward JFK at the time.  We ended up getting diverted to Halifax, Nova Scotia.  Didn't hear anything until we were allowed off the plane.  The ex was going mental at the time.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

Iguana said:


> Ask MikeMcc, he was on one of the diverted planes. Post 21;


 

Yes, was probably more worried that "the ex was going mental"


----------



## yield (Sep 8, 2009)

Absolutely harrowing. The jumpers and phone calls from people trapped inside. Seeing the firefighters going in now knowing what was going to happen....

Doesn't feel like 8 years ago.

After watching that and Shock Doctrine I need some cheering up. 

*Watches some Benigni*


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

yield said:


> Absolutely harrowing. The jumpers and phone calls from people trapped inside. Seeing the firefighters going in now knowing what was going to happen....
> 
> Doesn't feel like 8 years ago.
> 
> ...


 

BBC1 @ 9.00pm


----------



## yield (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> BBC1 @ 9.00pm



Lost Land of the Volcano?

I'll give it a go. Thanks Minnie.


----------



## 8den (Sep 8, 2009)

weltweit said:


> Yes thats right.
> 
> It was a strange program, people did not seem to want to confront the notion that people had jumped to their deaths rather than stay in the burning building.



Most life insurance policies won't pay out in cases of suicide. I think everyone from the families didn't want to dwell on this aspect for this among many other excellent reasons.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

yield said:


> Lost Land of the Volcano?
> 
> I'll give it a go. Thanks Minnie.




Don't blame me if it doesn't cheer you up


----------



## yield (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Don't blame me if it doesn't cheer you up



Of course, I won't.

If the world's smallest parrot doesn't cheer me up, what will?


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

8den said:


> Most life insurance policies won't pay out in cases of suicide. I think everyone from the families didn't want to dwell on this aspect for this among many other excellent reasons.



aha, well that is a powerful enough reason certainly.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

Bush was very criticised for his reaction to the 9/11 events, many people thought he should have gone straight to New York, him being the boss as it were.


----------



## Balbi (Sep 8, 2009)

Many of those people believe he should have been stood inbetween the towers though


----------



## weltweit (Sep 8, 2009)

Is it a failure of American intelligence that they were not able to find out and stop this plot before it happenned? (well I guess yes!) The perpetrators were in training in US flight schools even. 

I can't remember if the US intelligence commmunity were beating themselves up about this or not.


----------



## MikeMcc (Sep 8, 2009)

Iguana said:


> Ask MikeMcc, he was on one of the diverted planes. Post 21;


Aye I'd love to go back to Canada.  The folks there were fantastic.  They were falling over themselves to try and help people out.  Some folks were put up in private homes.  We were all kept fed, watered and entertained.  I didn't get to see much of the place unfortunately.  The exhibition hall I was staying in was a bit far out from town and most people didn't want to travel too far incase any news came through about flights out.

On the first night there were huge platters stacked with fast food, the fast food joints were going flat out to keep everyone fed.  It took a couple of days before more formal catering got set up.  They laid on free calls home.  When I couldn't take my penknife home with me in the cabin luggage they posted it home to me!  Really brilliant folk.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Sep 8, 2009)

I wasn't expecting much from last night's programme, tbh. I feel like I over-loaded on coverage at the time, and then when the docus started coming out. But I've got to say it was gripping, tragic, mortifying, harrowing and so incredibly sad. I didn't know what to expect, so was thoroughly refreshed by the lack of voice-over. From a completely objective point of view, one of the most interesting things about it is that it marks a point in history where so much amateur footage was shot. There were more than a few Cloverfield moments in there, which was pretty unnerving in itself.

The most moving thing for me throughout was the utter courage of the firefighters. Even after the first tower fell more and more converged on the spot, suited up and headed on in. The image just before the clock ticked on to the second tower collapsing, of a screen-full of firefighters walking towards the tower, combined with the previous listing of engine crews in the towers by a radio operator, was almost too much for me to handle. I still can't fully comprehend what it means.


----------



## Vintage Paw (Sep 8, 2009)

Fedayn said:


> I was working on International Operator Assistance at the time. We were busy that afternoon.



I was working for BT 192. Even though that was for UK numbers, we got flooded too as people just couldn't get through to relatives and were getting increasingly desperate.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> Had they ever been to Canada?  Did they like it?





8den said:


> Yeah a massive warehouse filled with stressed freaked out air passengers with hour long Qs to use the phones and loo is just a singing and dancing introduction to a country.







MikeMcc said:


> Aye I'd love to go back to Canada.  The folks there were fantastic.  They were falling over themselves to try and help people out.  Some folks were put up in private homes.  We were all kept fed, watered and entertained.  I didn't get to see much of the place unfortunately.  The exhibition hall I was staying in was a bit far out from town and most people didn't want to travel too far incase any news came through about flights out.
> 
> On the first night there were huge platters stacked with fast food, the fast food joints were going flat out to keep everyone fed.  It took a couple of days before more formal catering got set up.  They laid on free calls home.  When I couldn't take my penknife home with me in the cabin luggage they posted it home to me!  Really brilliant folk.



So maybe my question above isn't so stupid considering Mike's response below


----------



## 8den (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> So maybe my question above isn't so stupid considering Mike's response below



Okay maybe Welt Welts got me tetchy, but yes as my friends mentioned everyone was really pleasant and helpful, and bent over backwards, but if you're planning on a quiet week sight seeing in new york before starting college and instead get three days living in a warehouse sans luggage isn't exactly a fun way of starting a new life.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

8den said:


> Okay maybe Welt Welts got me tetchy, but yes as my friends mentioned everyone was really pleasant and helpful, and bent over backwards, but if you're planning on a quiet week sight seeing in new york before starting college and three days living in a warehouse sans luggage isn't exactly a fun way of making a living.




have you de-tetched now?


----------



## 8den (Sep 8, 2009)

Minnie_the_Minx said:


> have you de-tetched now?



Oh I'm back to my usual semi tetchy state. Between Sass and WoW is my usual state of mind.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Sep 8, 2009)

8den said:


> Oh I'm back to my usual semi tetchy state. Between Sass and WoW is my usual state of mind.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Sep 9, 2009)

Vintage Paw said:


> The image just before the clock ticked on to the second tower collapsing, of a screen-full of firefighters walking towards the tower, combined with the previous listing of engine crews in the towers by a radio operator, was almost too much for me to handle.* I still can't fully comprehend what it means.*



I hear you VP...



> *416 rescue workers* were killed helping people



This is what it means I suppose.

I also think the footage of some of the fire crews at ground zero after the dust settled a bit post the 2nd tower collapes was incredible. The sheer disbelief and shock on their faces....like nothing you'll ever see again. Absolutely amazing in a disturbingly, quiet, dust-covered kind of way.


----------



## 8den (Sep 9, 2009)

Rutita1 said:


> I hear you VP...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



As the dust settles you start to hear a cheeping sound, like car alarms or very loud birds. Someone told me it was the sound of hundreds of PASS devices. Firemen wear them, if a firemen stops moving ie is unconscious or dead, they admit this high pitch warning sound. When you hear that cheeping you're hearing the sounds of the dead.


----------



## goldenecitrone (Sep 9, 2009)

8den said:


> Most life insurance policies won't pay out in cases of suicide. I think everyone from the families didn't want to dwell on this aspect for this among many other excellent reasons.



Another billion dollar insurance question is were the attacks one event or two separate events ie, should the insurers pay out once or twice. Obviously the insurers saw the attacks as one single event.


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 9, 2009)

Vintage Paw said:


> The most moving thing for me throughout was the utter courage of the firefighters. Even after the first tower fell more and more converged on the spot, suited up and headed on in. The image just before the clock ticked on to the second tower collapsing, of a screen-full of firefighters walking towards the tower, combined with the previous listing of engine crews in the towers by a radio operator, was almost too much for me to handle. I still can't fully comprehend what it means.


If anyone can show any evidence that firefighters entered the second tower after the first collapsed I'd very much like to see it.

You cannot enter buildings in that situation and, no matter how fucking clueless were the bosses,   I cannot believe they were told to do so by management.

They were walking, they were at least a mile distant.


----------



## 8den (Sep 9, 2009)

London_Calling said:


> If anyone can show any evidence that firefighters entered the second tower after the first collapsed I'd very much like to see it.
> 
> You cannot enter buildings in that situation and, no matter how fucking clueless were the bosses,   I cannot believe they were told to do so by management.
> 
> They were walking, they were at least a mile distant.



No but there firefighters in the North Tower, when the South Tower collapsed. Firefighters had reached the 78th floor, and would have only had half an hour to evacuate themselves after the first tower collapsed. They didn't have time.


----------



## Iguana (Sep 9, 2009)

London_Calling said:


> If anyone can show any evidence that firefighters entered the second tower after the first collapsed I'd very much like to see it.
> 
> You cannot enter buildings in that situation and, no matter how fucking clueless were the bosses,   I cannot believe they were told to do so by management.
> 
> They were walking, they were at least a mile distant.



As soon as the south tower went down the order was given by the emergency services to get out of the north tower.  Some evacuated slower than they could have because they were helping injured civilians, but there was no mass entry into the tower, they were getting out not going in.  The 12 firemen who survived the north tower collapse in a stairwell had slowed to help a woman who was on crutches from an existing injury.


----------



## Gingerman (Sep 9, 2009)

Got round to watching this last night,depressing to hear people wanting to 'bomb their country' and 'wipe them from the face of the earth',maybe understandable in the heat of the mo,did anyone else notice the guy in the mask covered in dust kicking out at another gentleman ? wonder was he taking out his anger on someone who looked Arabic? Watching the whole thing again even after 8yrs  still packs a powerfull emotional punch for me anyway.


----------



## QueenOfGoths (Sep 9, 2009)

Iguana said:


> As soon as the south tower went down the order was given by the emergency services to get out of the north tower.  Some evacuated slower than they could have because they were helping injured civilians, but there was no mass entry into the tower, they were getting out not going in.  The 12 firemen who survived the north tower collapse in a stairwell had slowed to help a woman who was on crutches from an existing injury.




There was  a really interesting documentary a year or so ago about the firemen who survived the collapse of the north tower.

Partly because of all the "ifs" you get in a situation like that i.e. if they hadn't been slowed down by the woman, if they hadn't been in that stairwell etc.. but also how they dealt with all the contradictory feelings about surviving such a terrible event.


----------



## London_Calling (Sep 9, 2009)

Iguana said:


> As soon as the south tower went down the order was given by the emergency services to get out of the north tower.


Exactly as it should be. Not saying the footage was misleading on that point but it was easy to infer something that wasn't the case.


----------



## weltweit (Sep 9, 2009)

QueenOfGoths said:


> There was  a really interesting documentary a year or so ago about the firemen who survived the collapse of the north tower.
> 
> Partly because of all the "ifs" you get in a situation like that i.e. if they hadn't been slowed down by the woman, if they hadn't been in that stairwell etc.. but also how they dealt with all the contradictory feelings about surviving such a terrible event.



Yes, I also saw that documentary.


----------

