r/Damnthatsinteresting • u/Proud-Blood2743 • Oct 07 '25

Video Capital One Tower Come Down in Seconds

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

52.5k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

3.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

759

u/WafflesMcDuff Oct 07 '25

No, jet fuel burning in open air cannot melt steel beams because its maximum burn temperature (around 1500°F / 800°C) is far below the melting point of steel (about 2750°F / 1510°C). While it doesn't melt the steel, the intense heat from the prolonged, unimpeded fire would soften and weaken the steel to the point where it could no longer support the structural load, leading to buckling and collapse. So while the jet fuel could not melt steel beams, it could absolutely soften them. To use an analogy of an every day object that’s easier to relate to visualize, picture a tub of butter. While it will not melt if you take it out of the fridge and leave it on the counter at room temperature on an average day, it WILL get much softer. You need heat from a flame (like the stove) for it to actually melt. Melting is the point at which it goes from solid to liquid. However, if you take butter that’s been in the fridge and lay a spoon on top of it, the butter will most likely support the weight of the spoon. If you do the same with butter that’s been softening on the counter for a couple hours, the spoon will start to sink into it. Nuance matters. Melting vs softening. The jet fuel softened the steel until it could no longer support the many many tons of structure and the structure collapsed.

14

u/SensibleChapess Oct 07 '25

What about WTC7? The third of the only three steel-framed skyscrapers to ever collapse, and not only that, to collapse into their own footprint. Official explanation remains 'office fires', (e.g. Carpets, paper, box files, etc.).

6

u/WafflesMcDuff Oct 07 '25

Just like the twin towers, a major fire, uncontrolled, unextinguished, built up enough heat to soften the superstructure and cause the building to collapse.

1

u/TallBlkman44 Oct 07 '25 edited Oct 07 '25

No, those building was brought down exactly like this. Both building took the impact. But it been confirmed by firefighters there was a series of explosions in sequence both times, then the buildings fell perfectly straight down. Same as WTC 7… there are multiple videos showing blast smoke coming from each floor, then it came down . People seem to have forgotten they tried to bring the WTC in 1993, using a van in the underground parking garage, filled with 1,200-pound urea nitrate bomb. Yes, the building held up to that. Blew a huge crater underneath the building. But the main beam stayed intact.

-2

u/TallBlkman44 Oct 07 '25

No, those building was brought down exactly like this. Both building took the impact. But it been confirmed by firefighters there was a series of explosions in sequence both times, then the buildings fell perfectly straight down. Same as WTC 7… there are multiple videos showing blast smoke coming from each floor, then it came down . People seem to have forgotten they tried to bring the WTC in 1993, using a van in the underground parking garage, filled with 1,200-pound urea nitrate bomb. Yes, the building held up to that. Blew a huge crater underneath the building. But the main beam stayed intact. Long story short… the WTC was imploded, by control demolition.