Block of Flats fire - 7 storey structural collapse

[jomper]

A fire at a seven storey block of flats under construction in Edinburgh has caused a "massive" structural collapse.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7332817.stm

...

I'm posting this link because, in the picture, it looks like all seven stories of the building's frame have, so far at least, survived. Minor point...

[Lee]

The story says "massive structural collapse" but they only show the structure on fire. No doubt the debunkers will be sniffing around this story with glee but it would be interesting to know how long the structure burned for before the collapse and just how much collapse was actually involved.

Given that it was only partially constructed it's not really surprising that a collapse ensued. Any scots know any more about this?

Let's hope it burned for over an hour...purely for evidential reasons of course.

Just found this...

http://news.scotsman.com/edinburgh/100-evacuated-as-blaze-destroys.395 2643.jp

[Serge]

This has to be a fake surely?. The people in the scotsman link are superimposed into the image.

[John White]

[fish5133]

Given my 25 years experience in the construction industry as a chartered surveyor and Estimator looking at the photos (without further knowledge) it raises a number of questions.

If it was steel framed with concrete floors given the point of construction with scaffold still around the outside I doubt if there would have been enough combustible material to cause such a huge blaze from ground to top floor which raises questions

If, as is common these days the building was a combination of steel and timber framing its quite understandable how the blaze could start and spread so quickly and a "massive" structural failure of structural timber framing would be of no surprise and not a comparison with the WTCs.

Given the BBCs prior knowledge of WTC7 collapse and its hit piece on 911 Conspiracies it seems questionable their use of the phrase "massive" structural collapse which echoes the words of one of the so called eyewitnesses the American news channels interviewed just after the collapse who had solved the collapse

[Lee]

[Mark Gobell]

So.

What burned ?

[Lee]

[fish5133]

Unlikely scaffold planks would burn like that in the photo. Looks like inside and throughout the building .

[Lee]

[Disco_Destroyer]

Don't worry guys they have huge piles of rubble unlike WTC

[Disco_Destroyer]

See also in pictures http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_pictures/7333187.stm

[outsider]

If you look very closely at the small shed in the bottom left corner of previous picture, you might just be able to see Osama scuttling away in it's shadow in his wheelchair, clutching his dialysis equiptment.
It helps if you wear 3-D glasses and cadge some of David's mushrooms!

[Pugwash]

Prior to this, there are 2 instances of fires alone causing structural damage to steel framed buildings. These were completed buildings albeit the buildings were not multi-story and failure was only partial
These instances were however due to steel distortions by fire alone.
The point is non-chemical fires fueled by atmospheric oxygen alone CANNOT melt steel as is evident from film evidence of the twin towers collapse. Arguments regarding the design and constuction of the buildings in question are an irrelevance, fires such as these cannot melt steel.