Could fire fighting helicopters have saved the World Trade Center towers?

If they could of got the fires out, they probably would not have collapsed.

 

 

How about a Skycrane with a very long hose and a powerful front nose water jet?

 

You have to remember that water when applied to heat turns to steam, and that would have cooked any trapped people.

Hindsight being 20/20, it's possible that such helicopters may have been able to at least delay the collapse but we should keep in mind that jet fuel was burning in the very core of these massive buildings. The helicopters may have been able to get some water (or preferably foam) into some of the holes in the structure, but I wonder if they would be effective in getting any into the center of the building where the hottest and most damaging fires were burning.

 

Even after the events of 2001, I would wager that one reason why we don't see very many cities with helicopter firefighting units is that the effectiveness of that method may not be as good as it looks to us on the outside.

 

-Greg

I don't see that as a viable method. The action of fire suppression is to drench areas, not narrow targets, and the ability to douse the flames was only going to be external or peripheral, not internal, where all the aviation fuel was burning, bearing in mind that an airliner at speed would penetrate the tower as crumpled wreckage. Further, the range and speed of such helicopters is quite restricting, especially since they would be based away from New York to cope with rural forest fires in known risk areas (though I do accept the ready availability of water in the NY area). Please note that such helicopters are not usually used in urban fires - I'm not aware of any incident where they were.

This may be the most clueless post I have ever seen regarding the fate of the towers on 9-11. It doesn't even rate a response................

I don't see that as a viable method. The action of fire suppression is to drench areas, not narrow targets, and the ability to douse the flames was only going to be external or peripheral, not internal, where all the aviation fuel was burning, bearing in mind that an airliner at speed would penetrate the tower as crumpled wreckage. Further, the range and speed of such helicopters is quite restricting, especially since they would be based away from New York to cope with rural forest fires in known risk areas (though I do accept the ready availability of water in the NY area). Please note that such helicopters are not usually used in urban fires - I'm not aware of any incident where they were.

 

I was thinking if a helicopter streamed high pressure water (or whatever other kind of suppressant would have been more suitable) into the hole the airliner made it might have made a difference. Even if such a helicopter required some kind of a counter thrust device. Of course it would have needed to be a first response type of thing so a city like New York would need to have something like that ready to go.

This may be the most clueless post I have ever seen regarding the fate of the towers on 9-11. It doesn't even rate a response................

.

 

If you can't be more constructive, perhaps you should just delete your response and move on. :mad:

It may be possible to develop such a system, but it wouldn't be easy or cheap. On top of the high-pressure water system you also have to deal with the rapidly changing weight of the helicopter and the turbulence around the building (both from winds and the fire). Also, in many cities most of the skyscrapers are packed pretty tight together which would make it even more difficult for a helicopter to get into the right position.

Wouldn't be hard for a Heli to get near a building. They land on them all the time too. It's just this whole idea isn't going to work and like I already mentioned, that little thing called steam.

Wouldn't be hard for a Heli to get near a building. They land on them all the time too. It's just this whole idea isn't going to work and like I already mentioned, that little thing called steam.

 

Descending and landing on a rooftop would be somewhat different than hovering next to the building while dealing with potentially rapidly shifting winds, changing weight due to pumping water and counteracting the force of spraying the water into the building. There is also the fact that all of this would only be useful if there was a large hole or opening in the side of the building, or if the outside of the building was on fire.