On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 14:57:04 -0700, "Steve B"
wrote:


"Terry" wrote in message
.. .
I was watching some outrageous video clips. One of them was a demo
crew blowing up a building. It looked like the first 2 or 3 floors
collapsed, but the rest of the building did not collapse.

Anyone see the show? I guess they had to use a wrecking ball to take
it down.

It looked like you could have pushed it a little and it would have
gone over.


IIRC, the famous team of the Loizeaux family (sp?) dropped the Hacienda
hotel here in Las Vegas. A large end wall stood there after the explosion.
The next day, a nudge from a loader and wrecking ball brought it down.

But, yes, I did see one building, a rather large one that only dropped a
couple of floors. That would be asshole pucker factor one getting next to
it with equipment and chewing away at it. Or crawling in there and placing
more explosives.

I think they just get those big hydraulic machines with the crab claw arms
to reach in there and break it apart very slowly and expensively.

Someone paid big bucks for that screwup.

Steve


I saw on the tv news about a year ago where they exploded a building
and it knocked out the bottom level. The top of the building landed
flat on the ground and remained standing, just one floor less. That
was pretty funny to watch. They had to use a wrecking ball to finish
the job too. I dont recall where this was.

I was watching some outrageous video clips. One of them was a demo
crew blowing up a building. It looked like the first 2 or 3 floors
collapsed, but the rest of the building did not collapse.

Anyone see the show? I guess they had to use a wrecking ball to take
it down.

It looked like you could have pushed it a little and it would have
gone over.

On Mar 31, 5:13�pm, Terry wrote:
I was watching some outrageous video clips. *One of them was a demo
crew blowing up a building. *It looked like the first 2 or 3 floors
collapsed, but the rest of the building did not collapse.

Anyone see the show? *I guess they had to use a wrecking ball to take
it down.

It looked like you could have pushed it a little and it would have
gone over.

Is this an outtake from a phony WTC video?

"Terry" wrote in message
...
I was watching some outrageous video clips. One of them was a demo
crew blowing up a building. It looked like the first 2 or 3 floors
collapsed, but the rest of the building did not collapse.

Anyone see the show? I guess they had to use a wrecking ball to take
it down.

It looked like you could have pushed it a little and it would have
gone over.


Why don't you ask Rosie O'Donnell. She's an expert on building construction
and demolition, if any of her recent statements about Building 7 at the WTC
can be believed.

Steve

"Terry" wrote in message
...
I was watching some outrageous video clips. One of them was a demo
crew blowing up a building. It looked like the first 2 or 3 floors
collapsed, but the rest of the building did not collapse.

Anyone see the show? I guess they had to use a wrecking ball to take
it down.

It looked like you could have pushed it a little and it would have
gone over.


IIRC, the famous team of the Loizeaux family (sp?) dropped the Hacienda
hotel here in Las Vegas. A large end wall stood there after the explosion.
The next day, a nudge from a loader and wrecking ball brought it down.

But, yes, I did see one building, a rather large one that only dropped a
couple of floors. That would be asshole pucker factor one getting next to
it with equipment and chewing away at it. Or crawling in there and placing
more explosives.

I think they just get those big hydraulic machines with the crab claw arms
to reach in there and break it apart very slowly and expensively.

Someone paid big bucks for that screwup.

Steve

"Steve B" wrote in message
...

"Terry" wrote in message
...
I was watching some outrageous video clips. One of them was a demo
crew blowing up a building. It looked like the first 2 or 3 floors
collapsed, but the rest of the building did not collapse.

Anyone see the show? I guess they had to use a wrecking ball to take
it down.

It looked like you could have pushed it a little and it would have
gone over.


IIRC, the famous team of the Loizeaux family (sp?) dropped the Hacienda
hotel here in Las Vegas. A large end wall stood there after the
explosion. The next day, a nudge from a loader and wrecking ball brought
it down.

But, yes, I did see one building, a rather large one that only dropped a
couple of floors. That would be asshole pucker factor one getting next to
it with equipment and chewing away at it. Or crawling in there and
placing more explosives.

I think they just get those big hydraulic machines with the crab claw arms
to reach in there and break it apart very slowly and expensively.

Someone paid big bucks for that screwup.

Chuckle. A few years back, one of the big demo firms took down an old
department store in Detroit, and managed to gash up an elevated track for
the downtown loop rail car system, in spite of their assurances that the
old brick wall would drop where they said it would. (Think airport tram, but
without the airport). For a year till they rebuilt that section, the train
had to do U's instead of O's. Not a big deal, since other than during the
annual auto show, the thing is more of an amusement part ride for tourists,
rather than a real mass transit device.

Given that the 'as built' specs for old buildings are often very different
than what the old plans and the site survey say, it is remarkable that demo
implosions usually go exactly as planned. They tended to build things a lot
stronger back them, because they just weren't sure how strong was strong
enough.

aem sends....

In article ,
"aemeijers" wrote:


Given that the 'as built' specs for old buildings are often very different
than what the old plans and the site survey say, it is remarkable that demo
implosions usually go exactly as planned. They tended to build things a lot
stronger back them, because they just weren't sure how strong was strong
enough.

aem sends....

The archetype of that was the Sands. The guys from Controlled
Demolition started to put their charges on the building and found that
the concrete slabs were almost 25% above what they were supposed to be.
The consensus was that the concrete contractor was so intimidated by
building for the Mob that he made SURE there were no problems. (g0;.

Steve B wrote:


"Terry" wrote in message
.. .
I was watching some outrageous video clips. One of them was a demo
crew blowing up a building. It looked like the first 2 or 3 floors
collapsed, but the rest of the building did not collapse.

Anyone see the show? I guess they had to use a wrecking ball to take
it down.

It looked like you could have pushed it a little and it would have
gone over.


Why don't you ask Rosie O'Donnell. She's an expert on building construction
and demolition, if any of her recent statements about Building 7 at the WTC
can be believed.


I don't follow that fat bitch's antics, but I had to see what you were
talking about. I found her blog:

http://www.rosie.com/blog/2007/03/15/wtc-7/

You know - If I wanted to hear about lesbian licking techniques, how
to gain 30 pounds overnight, or how to completely alienate myself from
thinking folks -- I'd listen to the fat-slob..

For her to be on the same television set as Barbara Walters is
blasphemy. So now I have respect for Bawwwwbwaa WaaaaWaaa either.

Have you ever seen the show, "The View"? It sounds like a bunch of
high-pitched clicking -- so annoying that I could only stand about 30
seconds of their babble. They are the reason the term "bitch slap"
was coined.

On Mar 31, 8:52 pm, Milhouse Van Houten wrote:
Steve B wrote:

"Terry" wrote in message
.. .
I was watching some outrageous video clips. One of them was a demo
crew blowing up a building. It looked like the first 2 or 3 floors
collapsed, but the rest of the building did not collapse.

Anyone see the show? I guess they had to use a wrecking ball to take
it down.

It looked like you could have pushed it a little and it would have
gone over.

Why don't you ask Rosie O'Donnell. She's an expert on building construction
and demolition, if any of her recent statements about Building 7 at the WTC
can be believed.

I don't follow that fat bitch's antics, but I had to see what you were
talking about. I found her blog:

http://www.rosie.com/blog/2007/03/15/wtc-7/

You know - If I wanted to hear about lesbian licking techniques, how
to gain 30 pounds overnight, or how to completely alienate myself from
thinking folks -- I'd listen to the fat-slob..

For her to be on the same television set as Barbara Walters is
blasphemy. So now I have respect for Bawwwwbwaa WaaaaWaaa either.

Have you ever seen the show, "The View"? It sounds like a bunch of
high-pitched clicking -- so annoying that I could only stand about 30
seconds of their babble. They are the reason the term "bitch slap"
was coined.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


If you're really ****ed off that ABC allows this to continue to go on,
then find out who the advertisers are on all ABC shows and sent them
an email telling them what you think about their association with this
whole dispicable act.

In article .com,
wrote:


If you're really ****ed off that ABC allows this to continue to go on,
then find out who the advertisers are on all ABC shows and sent them
an email telling them what you think about their association with this
whole dispicable act.

And while you are at it, I would do the same with NBC and Trump. The
male version of Rosie (albeit with marginally better hair). Both are
serious wastes of protoplasm.

Kurt Ullman wrote:

The archetype of that was the Sands. The guys from Controlled
Demolition started to put their charges on the building and found that
the concrete slabs were almost 25% above what they were supposed to be.
The consensus was that the concrete contractor was so intimidated by
building for the Mob that he made SURE there were no problems. (g0;.

There's no profit in that. There's got to be some profit in it for
everybody.

Find a large local government project being built at the same time as
the Sands, and you'll probably find out who paid for the Sands it-fell-
off-a-truck concrete. The concrete was probably billed as extras.
You've got a problem with that?

R

On Apr 1, 10:01 am, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article .com,

wrote:

If you're really ****ed off that ABC allows this to continue to go on,
then find out who the advertisers are on all ABC shows and sent them
an email telling them what you think about their association with this
whole dispicable act.

And while you are at it, I would do the same with NBC and Trump. The
male version of Rosie (albeit with marginally better hair). Both are
serious wastes of protoplasm.


The issue is not a waste of protoplasm. That could be said of most
of TV. The issue is ABC is hosting Rosie spewing offensive, anti-
American venom, with no basis in fact, like claiming 911 was a false
flag operation run by the govt. That is offensive to the families
of those that died that day and just gives aid and comfort to the
responsible Islamic extremists.

In article .com,
"RicodJour" wrote:

Kurt Ullman wrote:

The archetype of that was the Sands. The guys from Controlled
Demolition started to put their charges on the building and found that
the concrete slabs were almost 25% above what they were supposed to be.
The consensus was that the concrete contractor was so intimidated by
building for the Mob that he made SURE there were no problems. (g0;.

There's no profit in that. There's got to be some profit in it for
everybody.

Find a large local government project being built at the same time as
the Sands, and you'll probably find out who paid for the Sands it-fell-
off-a-truck concrete. The concrete was probably billed as extras.
You've got a problem with that?

R

No, Godfather. Although I think the proper term is
You gotta problem wit dat?

On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 13:47:08 -0500, wrote:


I saw on the tv news about a year ago where they exploded a building
and it knocked out the bottom level. The top of the building landed
flat on the ground and remained standing, just one floor less. That
was pretty funny to watch. They had to use a wrecking ball to finish
the job too. I dont recall where this was.

I saw that too. It would be a good technique if you had a building
that was 10 feet too tall.

On Apr 1, 4:02�pm, mm wrote:
On Sat, 31 Mar 2007 13:47:08 -0500, wrote:

I saw on the tv news about a year ago where they exploded a building
and it knocked out the bottom level. *The top of the building landed
flat on the ground and remained standing, just one floor less. *That
was pretty funny to watch. *They had to use a wrecking ball to finish
the job too. *I dont recall where this was.

I saw that too. *It would be a good technique if you had a building
that was 10 feet too tall.

technically they DONT blow them up its called controlled demolition,
they mostly cut the main supports then take out what remains with
explosives cutting the beams

On 1 Apr 2007 13:11:44 -0700, "
wrote:

technically they DONT blow them up its called controlled demolition,
they mostly cut the main supports then take out what remains with
explosives cutting the beams

In Las Vegas; buildings a stripped with recycle in mind. The local
Animal Control received materials at a better rate than new.

Basically, local governments can obtain material that is still
useable.

--
Oren

"If things get any worse, I'll have to ask you to stop helping me."

"RicodJour" wrote in message
oups.com...
Kurt Ullman wrote:

The archetype of that was the Sands. The guys from Controlled
Demolition started to put their charges on the building and found that
the concrete slabs were almost 25% above what they were supposed to be.
The consensus was that the concrete contractor was so intimidated by
building for the Mob that he made SURE there were no problems. (g0;.

There's no profit in that. There's got to be some profit in it for
everybody.

Find a large local government project being built at the same time as
the Sands, and you'll probably find out who paid for the Sands it-fell-
off-a-truck concrete. The concrete was probably billed as extras.
You've got a problem with that?

R


I have lived in Las Vegas, and can see that you know nothing about Las
Vegas. When the mob builds a building, they tell you who to use, how much
to use, and where to go to the bathroom. AND, they are by every week or
two for their envelope or brief case. If it's not ready, they need a little
less concrete because someone's taking up a little space in there.

During the construction of the Dunes, construction cost overruns were very
high because of union contractors who had to kick back to the mob. It was
local knowledge, and Loizeaux ran into exactly the same problems on that
implosion with overbuilding.

Who are you and where do you live that you can give such adamant advice
about what happened in Las Vegas in the sixties?

Steve

They spent more on concrete because they ordered more. They ordered more
because if the job had been done right, there wouldn't have been as high a
vig for the mob boys.

I notice you use the word "probably" a lot. That means you don't know and
are guessing.