James G
Squadron vice admiral
Posts: 7,608 
Likes: 8,833
|
Post by James G on Feb 5, 2019 20:29:21 GMT
What possible effects could have come if only one of the Twin Towers was hit on 9/1 and brought down?
A sketch scenario would be the second aircraft misses the South Tower due to a sudden gust of wind blowing smoke from the first (just an idea) and the second plane either hits the North Tower in a double impact or misses and crashes elsewhere in the sudden confusion: it was going fast and there are other buildings. Either way, the South Tower isn't hit.
How does 9/11 look in reflection with one tower still standing and an AQ 'failure' really with only two hits from four aircraft?
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on Feb 5, 2019 21:16:22 GMT
What possible effects could have come if only one of the Twin Towers was hit on 9/1 and brought down? A sketch scenario would be the second aircraft misses the South Tower due to a sudden gust of wind blowing smoke from the first (just an idea) and the second plane either hits the North Tower in a double impact or misses and crashes elsewhere in the sudden confusion: it was going fast and there are other buildings. Either way, the South Tower isn't hit. How does 9/11 look in reflection with one tower still standing and an AQ 'failure' really with only two hits from four aircraft?
Well there would be a huge shock to the US, followed by the OTL panic and then rage and probably an invasion of Afghanistan after the Taliban refuse to extradite bin-Laden. In that I don't think there would be any significant difference.
Where it probably will make some difference would be that with a tower still standing, presuming there isn't too much damage from the other tower going down, it might be seen as a symbol of survival and hope and hence the centre of rememberence. The skyline of Manhatten will be somewhat different and possibly some aspects of the American thoughts over the event.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2019 21:53:25 GMT
The second Tower would be in danger of collapse and need to be demolished.
500,000 tons of steel have smashed into its foundations, after all.
The 39-storey Deutsche Bank building had to be demolished, and that only had a 24-storey gash in it from the WTC collapse.
|
|
mcnutt
Chief petty officer
Posts: 162
Likes: 7
|
Post by mcnutt on Feb 6, 2019 11:56:48 GMT
Nothing changes
|
|
lordroel
Administrator
Member is Online
Posts: 67,987
Likes: 49,390
|
Post by lordroel on Feb 6, 2019 13:36:06 GMT
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on Feb 6, 2019 15:28:28 GMT
Definitely some things change as a lot of people live rather than die but other than that, especially assuming vH is right that the north tower will still need to be demolised most things are likely to go as OTL.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 6, 2019 23:05:04 GMT
There's still at least 1000 dead, many from FDNY, NYPD, EMS, etc. A weakened South Tower will be hugely difficult to demolish because of the damage it sustained when the North Tower collapsed. WTC 7 will have to be demolished too, and large parts of Manhattan evacuated for months while they are.
An attack which demolishes just one tower is almost as disruptive as one that fells them both.
Without the South Tower collapsing first, there is no order for emergency services to evacuate the area.
|
|
James G
Squadron vice admiral
Posts: 7,608
Likes: 8,833
|
Post by James G on Feb 13, 2019 20:18:28 GMT
The footage of the South Tower hit is something I vividly recall. There is video of the North Tower strike so, I'm assuming, that that will have a more memorable place for people without the second impact.
Or as in my hypothetical, an impact elsewhere with the second plane may be recorded and get a place in public consciousness.
|
|
