Open Blog where you Submit, Vote and Read

Submit
Our content is based entirely on readers' submissions
Recent

read and Vote on recent items
Hot
Read the front page or the best rated articles

Collapsible Emergency Escape Elevator

Webman's picture

Categories:    -Companies and deals-   -Design-   -How to-   -Technology-

Pursuant to Sept 11, new developments has emerged in the field of skyscrapers emergency rescue. One of the companies specializing in this area is Escape Rescue Systems. The company developed an external elevator with multiple collapsible chambers. The advantage of the system is the ability to rescue people from several floors at a time. The higher the building, the more essential it is to rescue people from more floors at the same time.

Watch the video to see the system in operation.

Information from the company website:

The building-wide system is composed of (at least) two devices; each is an array of five collapsible cabins. The system is permanently stored on the roof in a folded position.
Upon deployment, each array is lowered to the ground. It then unfolds, enabling emergency responders to board the cabins. It travels upwards until it stops opposite five elevated floors simultaneously; enabling 300 occupants to enter through specially configured exit windows (150 people from 5 floors into each array). Each array is then lowered to the ground and tenants exit as it refolds. The system repeats this cycle, transporting responders up and into the building and evacuating tenants as required.
The system, based on a unique, patent-pending technology, enjoys substantial advantages over competing concepts and other new products:
• Very high throughput capacity;
• Effective to all building heights;
• Serves both evacuation (“down”) and rescue personnel transport (“up”);
• Requires no skill or unfamiliar actions by evacuees; and is
• Suitable for all ages and physical conditions of evacuees, including disabled people.



Links:
url: http://www.youtube.com/watch_fullscreen?video_id=es8CK0-DsHc&
l=142&s=0D42788F97E26FCB:8A51374783A7BCE6&fs=1&title=building%20eva

url1: http://www.escaperescue.com/work/movie_window_wma.htm

Recommended Best Deal    
   Message to readers: The content of this CoMagazine is written by readers like you. You are invited to register or login to submit your article, news item, link recommendation or write a column.   
   Please vote. Your vote determines the front page articles

   Navigation   
Front Page
New items
Hot items
Other items by this writer

   Save:   RSS   Search Digg   digg   bookmark   reddit   spurl   wists   simpy   blinklist   furl   fark   blogmarks   My Web 2.0   cosmos   
   printer friendly version   send this link   Permalink

thats great..buuut...

thats great that someone thought about this to help save lives...But dont get it twisted...the twin towers didnt collapse because of a fire...they collapsed because it was a controlled demolition...but still thats good someone made these...it would work great for fires in skyscrapers..but im pretty sure they wont be good when our own government is blowing up buildings...

how dumb could you possibly

how dumb could you possibly be... but then again how could Charlie Sheen be wrong

dumb?

there is enough evidence to say it was controlled demolition, even though the evidence was quickly carted away and sold. It's ok to have questions, you know.

yes its okay to have

yes its okay to have questions but after looking at the information it should be fairly obvious that it was not a controlled demolition.  Now lets get this straight I'm not a fan of Gerorge Bush, but it seems to me that most of the people that beleive this crap are also, to put it lightly, very harsh critics of the president.  Lets also not pretend that this Loose Change film is in anyway unbiased.  Ill put it this way, if you have done kust a little bit of fair research and you still think that those building were taken down in a controlled demolition then you are either stupid or as in most cases just biased to the point where you are filtering all the information down to support only what you want to hear.  Maybe people just feel better if they think that the government orchestrated 911 instead of failing us horriblt by not preventing it.

Have YOU looked at the information?

yes its okay to have questions

Good, we can agree on something.

but after looking at the information it should be fairly obvious that it was not a controlled demolition.

Many demolition experts have looked at the information and have concluded just the opposite.

it seems to me that most of the people that beleive this crap are also, to put it lightly, very harsh critics of the president

Fallacy: poisoning the well. Whether or not someone likes/dislikes Pres. Bush does not mean what they have to say is invalid. Answer the points that have been raised, on their own merit.

 if you have done kust a little bit of fair research and you still think that those building were taken down in a controlled demolition then you are either stupid or as in most cases just biased to the point where you are filtering all the information down to support only what you want to hear

Hmm, I thought you said it was good to question, the whole spirit of inguiry and all. I guess it's only good when you conclude that all observations and data are answered by an airplane+fire takes down 3 buildings theory. Sounds like you're just as biased, only in the other direction, against anything that smacks of conspiracy. You're a hypocrite.

Have you read/looked at the information? The NIST Report Summary, the FEMA Report, or the 9/11 Commission Report? Or any of the reports that conflict with those, written by physicists, demolition experts, and metallurgical experts?

<!-- .page { background:

<!-- .page { background: #FFFFFF; color: #013252; } .tborder { background: #CCCCCC; color: #000000; border: 0px solid #CCCCCC; } td { font: 8pt tahoma; } .alt1 { background: #FCFDFE; color: #013252; font: bold 12pt Arial; border-left: 1px solid #FFFFFF; border-top: 1px solid #FFFFFF; } -->

  دردشة , منتديات دليل مواقع ,  مون لايت , شات صوتي  , دردشه صوتيه شات كتابي ,  دردشه كتابية  , بلوتوث

 دردشه صوتيه  - منتديات - شات صوتي  , دردشه ,  برامج  ,  افلام  , صور , يوتيوب , ازياء  , الارشيف , منتدى , توبيكات , صور سيارات , فساتين

ديكور , حواء , اسلاميات  , خواطر , اخبار الفن , نكت , قصص , العاب , شات ,  يوتيوب - مقاطع يوتيوب ,  شعر , قصائد  - دليل مواقع - سعودي نت

  استضافه استضافة - مسلسلات رمضان - مسلسلات - مسلسلات رمضان 2009
 sitemap شعر محو أمية  خواطر محاورات رخصة قيادة الحاسب تحضير توزيع منهج أهداف عروض بوربوينت ملخص أسئلة مطويات محو أمية
شات -  منتديات النسيات - دليل مواقع - توبيكات - ارشفه
دردشة , منتديات دليل فاتن - دليلي - دليل نت  - دليل الويب - دردشة

فيس بوك - نت لوق  - Facebook  - Netlog

بروكسيات بروكسي - برنامج يفتح المواقع المحجوبه - ترافيان

 بلياردو

 

شات طرب  طلال دليل قلوب  دليل حنون دليل طيف دليل حلوه الهنوف المحاربه دليل المهاجر دليل المسافر دليل مسافر دليل النور

دليل سافر دليل الرمال دليل وناسه دليل حبايبنا دليل حلوين كويت 25 كويت كام دردشة فله دليل ون دليل ثري دليل قسوة دليل الرحيل

دليل رحيل دليل انهاز دليل اشواق حب كام دليل حبتين دليل السعوديه دليل المهاجر دليل النمور دليل نمور دليل هلا دليل حلوين دليل الحان

دليل شمس دليل الدنيا دليل قطر دليل رايقين دليل رايق دليل روائع دردشة رجه دليل سحايب  دليل ليالي شبكة مون لايت دليل زكرتيه

دليل الكون دليل اشواق دليل سعودي دليل سنتوب دليل توب دليل الامارات دليل زقرتيه دليل زقرتي دليل سحالي دليل رائع قطر كام

دليل الحره دليل هنوفه دليل الكلام دليل سحابه دليل تو دليل فور دليل فايف دليل سكس دليل نواعم دليل نواعم دليل حب شات حورية

فلها وربك يحلها ريم كام دليل روح الغلا دليل سوريا دليل همسات دليل قلبي قلوب طرب

check your fact books

go ahead and look it up... no other skyscraper has ever collapsed from fire alone. Some skyscrapers burned for 17+ hours and still didn't collapse. But the WTC falls under it's own weight from a fire at the TOP OF THE BUILDING??? Yeah, right.

Check your facts again

I seriously doubt that any fire in any skyscraper was nearly as hot at that of the WTC. I assure you that thousands of pounds of Jet fuel will burn much hotter than any fire that an office building could ever produce. The flames from the jet fuel would have been hot enough to melt metal. Conspiracy theorys suck. It's plain physics and thermodynamics

Jet Fuel. OK

Then what was responsible for WTC7 coming down? No jet fuel there.

People standing at opening!!

Then how were people standing at the edge of the hole in the side, waving for help???!  Under your theory, they would have been vaporized.

What A Complete Moron!!!

A controlled demolition??? LMFAO I guess the planes slamming into the towers were just for effect and the pentagon was hit by a missile... You are a worthless human!!!

rolo tamasi

can you prove otherwise?  There has been no certifiable evidence that the WTC fell because of the planes alone.  Seriously dude, look it up.  No other skyscraper has fallen from fire.  But WTC falls in just a few hours?  C'Mon...

seriously dude, no other

seriously dude, no other skyscraper was hit by a jetliner loaded with jet fuel.  most of the structural integrity of the wtc towers was from the outer skin of the building, when that plane hit it took alot of that a way, then you have an extremely intense fire fueled by jet fuel burning in that same spot, now people will argue that it could not have possibly burned hot enough to melt steel.  well it didnt have to melt to the point where its a liquid it just had to get hot enough to soften the allready damaged structure.  factor in the weight of some 20 stories worth of building on top of this weak spot and you have yourself a broken building.

OK so explain...

...what took down WTC7. No airplane. No jet fuel. Making it the only steel structered high rise in all of history to collapse from a fire.

large parts of the two big

large parts of the two big towers that fell down right next to it hit it... pretty simple explanation...

Stay with the program

Even the official reports of the WTC7 collapse put the cause as fire+debris, not just large chunks falling from WTC1 & WTC2.

Yes, debris from WTC1 (350' away) did fall on WTC7, but the damage was clearly non-symmetrical, and evidently, none of the 24 core columns was severed by falling debris.

Why did WTC 7 collapsed rapidly and nearly-straight-down symmetrically -- even though fires were randomly scattered in the building?

The likelihood of complete and nearly-symmetrical collapse due to random fires as in the “official” theory is small, since non-symmetrical failure is so much more likely.  If one or a few columns had failed, one might expect a portion of the building to crumble while leaving much of the building standing.

Interestingly, there are several examples of buildings that have collapsed from random events (earthquakes) where only parts of the building were damaged.  For example, major portions of WTC 5 remained standing on 9/11 despite very significant impact damage and severe fires.

Why was molten metal (>1000 oC) pulled from the debris pile early on? In other words, it was not caused by the subsequent subterranean fires.

'The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse [“official theory”] remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis [fire/debris-damage-caused collapse] has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analyses are needed to resolve this issue.' (FEMA, 2002, chapter 5; emphasis added.)

Read the official reports. Then read what demolition experts, metallurgical experts, and physicists have to say.

WTC was a controlled

WTC was a controlled demolition? NO WAY!

QUICK!! CALL CNN!!

Oh, wait a second, the news agencies, the government, and thousands of other people are in on the 'conspiracy' and noone has leaked anything let.

seriously, at least be open to the possibility

have you ever taken a look at how completely complacent modern media outlets really are?  When was the last time you saw someone ask a tough question to anyone important?  It's not that they're in on it.  It's that our culture is built on looking past all the tiny glitches in percieved reality.  It's how we get through our day.  Apparently you get through your day by flaming people for simply raising a little doubt.

hahaha

Be open to the possibility that... planes crashed into the WTC, but those thousand-degree flames didn't affect whatever explosives you're claming was planted there by (let me guess) the Bush administration, hoping to ignite the flames of war so America can take over the world's oil?

 I DO have an open mind.  If you took off your tin foil hat you might, too.

 
 

jing

Tiffany On Sale is a famous tiffany Jewelry store which sell directly Tiffany Rings, Necklaces, Errings, Bracelets and other Tiffany Jewellery.

provide the highest quality ttiffany jewelry at rather competitive prices.Please feel free to browse our selection, and contact us with any questions that you may have.

Since 2005 We have done online tiffanys Jewelry business from now on and we have many cusotmers from USA, Europe,India and other countries. Buying from here will save you lots of money and get high quality Tiffany Jewelry

Confused?

Av gas burns at an extremely high temperature when exposed to air (oxidize). This temperature is hot enough to melt steel girders which made up the supporting structure of the towers. When a structure folds in the middle all the weight above it acts like a hammer pounding it two the ground. So there you go Add two full tanks of Av gas, oxygen and 2 big buildings for Fireman pancake.

a discrepency

yeah, but explain how the girders in the basement (where the poster below would argue the "explosives" were planted) were exponentially hotter than the ones from where the planes hit, even weeks after the buildings collapsed. 

Sounds reasonable but....

...what took down WTC7 which was not hit by any airplane?

You are stupid.

If you don't think it was a controlled demo, then go watch "Loose Change 2nd Editon" on google video, that will sure change your mind, it did for me.

Loose Change didn't do it for me...

...but this did.

Read it

Questioning the capacity

I'm looking at that demo and I don't see where you could fit 60 people in each of those compartments... or is it 30... (150 or 300 total, the article id a little fuzzy) Either way, the unit shown doesn't look like it could hold even that many. Good idea, but I'm hoping a live version would be a little larger.

Gravity is not a conspiracy!

Gravity still works at the top of a sky scraper... Yes, it is good to question but you should listen when credible answers are presented. As for facts, sky scrapers have collapsed from fires, check your history books, just none in the last forty years. Also how many of the sky scrapers that have burned but not fallen wear built exactly like the TTs? None! so how can you compare apples to oranges? Stop taking uneducated "experts" word that they have done all the research. Are they educated in proper research methodologies, just because you googled it does not make it research. What was the weight of the floors above the burning sections? What is the temperature at which steel becomes unable to suport its rated load, not melting temp but load temp? What is the acceleration of the total weight of the floors above the burning section if the supports do not resist the rated load placed on them? Is this acceleration force greater than the structural load capabilities of the floor below? Until you can answer these questions for yourself, stop making stuff up or listening and repeating what you have heard from persons who do not know how to answer these questions. Boy, were they right or what when they said american schools are failing to educate!

no... it's a theory

Well don't you sound smart.  Listen, I would appreciate your argument if it were supported by facts and not just more questions.  You don't have any of the information needed to make an informed decision, and neither do the people who made the posts below, so why does everyone claim that the other is wrong?  What's wrong with asking questions?  That's where American schools failed.

History books won't help on this one

The NIST did heat and load tests on steel beams comparable to the ones used in WTC1 & WTC2. They were not able to reproduce results consistent with the fuel+impact+fire theory.

The point is, knowing the weight and falling momentum of the floors above the fracture zone is irrelevant if you do not know the mechanism whereby the fracture happens in the first place :)

stupid conspiracy theories

there is no conspiracy, get over it.

loose change is the dumbest video ever... those 'jets' they say are bombs as its falling are actaully ejectorate from the midsection of the building collapsing and forcing all the material out the centre through the windows.

To the guy that says watch "Loose Change 2nd Edition"

I did watch and it is sh*t. I'll tell that you are right because there is a conspiracy only it involves conspiring to make these sh*t documentaries and selling them to people to uneducated to know better.

If Loose Change doesn't make you question

Wow

People who say, "BULLSHIT, CONTROLLED MY ASS... I HEART BUSH ON BOTH MY GIRLFRIEND AND AMERICA" you single handely are the people Big Brother looks for in order to create a controlled environment. It's true, when was the last time any one asked a tough question on CNN (and please, keep your CNN hats at home)

Evidence does lean towards a possible "demolition" if you watched the 3 hour video on google video. But still, who knows?

If you claim to live in a "free" America, then ask questions. It's natural for humans to be curious.

Yet some of you "people" here contradict basic human instinct to know more. Have fun being blind folded, clubbed and carted away.

Idiots...

You are a moron.

You are a moron.

You're an even bigger moron...

for not being able to answer any of the points raised so far.

Aliens Among Us

Yes, it was a controlled demolition. Furthermore, it was the work of the grays.

Soon you will all see the truth.

Did someone check this guy...

...for explosives!

just read this...

I used to be one those who lol at anyone claiming the WTC buildings fell from anything other than what we all saw on tv: 2 airliners full of passengers and fuel, travelling at >450mph.<p><p>

But here's some things to bear in mind:

-Jet fuel burns very quickly, and can not account for the amount of heat that was necessary for the beams buckling and the following molten steal that was pulled from the debris.

-Why do multiple witnesses report that they heard explosions coming from the lower part of WC1 & WC2 prior to their collapse. (Are they all just confused and/or not qualified in knowing what an explosion sounds like?)

-Why did WC7 fall? It was not hit by an airplane.

-Why was a full (as in metallurgical) study not done on the debris? I mean, after a large airline goes down, the NTSB goes to the painstaking trouble of trying to reassemble everything they can find. They don't ship off the remaining metal to China.

-As has been pointed out; WC1, WC2, & WC7 are the only modern steel structured high rises to collapse from a fire. (& remember WC7 was not hit by an airplane)

I'm not saying it was a government conspiracy, that's a conclusion I can not reach.

Screw Loose Change, read this and then make up your own mind.

 

The official theory is lacking...

The official theory lacks repeatability in that no actual models or buildings (before or since 9-11-01) have been observed to completely collapse due to the proposed fire-based mechanisms.

On the other hand, dozens of buildings have been completely and symmetrically demolished through the use of pre-positioned explosives. And high-temperature chemical reactions can account for the observed large pools of molten metal, under both Towers and WTC 7, and the sulfidation of structural steel.

The controlled-demolition hypothesis cannot be dismissed as "junk science" because it better satisfies tests of repeatability and parsimony. It ought to be seriously (scientifically) investigated and debated.

 If you believe that a thorough and complete investigation of the WTC collapse took place, then your are misinformed.

<a href="http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html">Read this</a>

Cheers 

 

About my experience.

About my experience. My basis was, like I told the Commission, there was an explosion that came from under our feet, we were pushed upwards lightly by the effect, I was on basement level 1 and it sounded that it came from B2 and B3 level.

Rapidly after that we heard the impact far away at the top. My assertions are [that] my 20 years experience there and witnessing prior to that many other noises [enable me] to conclude without any doubt where the sounds were coming from.

2ND- Some of the same people that I saved gave testimonies in interviews of the same experience prior to my actually being reunited with them after the event!!!

[Testimony of William Rodriguez]

What caused that explosion Mr. Rodriguez felt?

wow...

This argument is ridiculous, on both sides. The bottom line is that nobody here can PROVE one theory of the other. I'm not saying it couldn't be proven, but nobody here has the resources to do so. In any case, the notion that a government would conspire to kill thousands of its own citizens and cause billions of dollars of damage on its own soil for some unknown purpose (presumably to spur a war on terror) is ludicrous. Of course, that doens't mean it's impossible. However, I think that Occam's razor should apply here. I know it is philosophically flawed, but it still applies to general statistics like this. Which seems more likely given the known:

WC1 and WC2 were hit by airliners weighing thousands of tons and travelling at hundreds of miles per hour.

The fires in both buildings were aided by large amounts of a chemical accelerant (jet fuel).

The weight of the floors above the points of impact is huge (I won't even try to guess).

There are probably several other known factors here, but these are the ones I could think of off the top of my head. There are a limitless number of possibilities given only these knowns, but the simplest is that towers collapsed due to the weaking of its supports from the impact and weight of the planes and from the chemically accelerated fire.

For you conspiracy theorists, read this article on wikipedia about occams razor, and you will see why the rest of us are skeptical. You may be right, but don't expect the rest of the world to believe you until you come up with FACTS that make your theory more likely than the preffered one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam's_Razor

The bottom line is that

The bottom line is that nobody here can PROVE one theory of the other.

 Correct. So what's wrong with a discussion that concludes more investigation should happen? That enough experts have weighed in and concluded that many issues have not been answered by the official reports?

A conspiracy to bring down those buildings does not automatically mean the government was doing the conspiring.

On Occam's Razor: all things being equal, the simpler of theories should prevail. So, if all theories have been equally tried and tested, according to scientific methods of investigation, go with the more simple one. 

The problem is that the official theory has not been given due diligence. Other experts have presented theories that, simply put, offer a better theory that explains all the observations.

You want facts, then read this. 

Or this.

the roof is gone

what if the roof is blown up?

TheJollyLlama875

Now, I am neither architect nor engineer nor physicist, but I would like to point out that the no-skyscraper-falling-from-fire-ever argument seems pretty weak, because this isn't exclusively a falling-from-fire event. I don't know the planes' speed upon impact, butI would imagine that a 160,000+ lb. plane capable of traveling 540 MPH slamming into the side of the structure would take somewhat of a toll on the structural integrity of the metal that would subsequently be exposed to a whole lot of fire. And there was another good point made, too. All that jet fuel would probably damage the explosives beyond repair, if they didn't ignite them, which was obviously not the case.

What the experts say...

All the experts agree that WTC1, 2, & 7 were built to survive exactly the type of attack that happened. One expert said that "airliners hitting those buildings would be like a pencil hitting a mosquito net".

The airplanes impacting and subsequent fires would only damage the demolition explosives that were near those zones. What makes you think that other explosives wouldn't be enough to cause a collapse. Are you an expert? Have you read what the experts have said?

why argue - net is made for pron

if anyone knows this girl, please email he her phone number. im addicted. my dream girl

Dude! Thats my mom

Dude! Thats my mom

Clueless...

Some of you are clueless as to what HAS been planned by our govt in the past. Our govt has ALREADY shown numerous times that it will lie to us, to further things. All one really has to do, is put down the remote to "Fear Factor", and start learning the words..."Operation Northwoods". Had it not been for Kennedy, Northwoods WOULD have happened folks. Is it possible that 911 is a lie? To flatly state it is not possible, shows complete and utter ignorance. The Gulf of Tonkin, The 91' Iraq "Inucubator Story", and countless other Pat Tillman/Jessica Lynch lies along with Operation Northwoods PROVES they are indeed "capable", and willing.... We need to wake the hell up, and stop being so trusting. To think that something that happened in Rome, Hitler's Germany, and other civilizations couldn't happen here in America? You are fooling yourselves'. Did a concentrated effort to do this to US happen? Who knows. On the other hand, to simply dismiss it as nothing more than a "conspiracy theory" shows that one is clueless of HISTORY, and clueless to actions that our govt HAS done. http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662 http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/doc1.pdf#search='Operation%20Northwoods' Wake up America!

the notion that a government would conspire is ludicrous?

---""In any case, the notion that a government would conspire to kill thousands of its own citizens and cause billions of dollars of damage on its own soil for some unknown purpose (presumably to spur a war on terror) is ludicrous.""---

I Submit....
Feb 27th, 1933 Germany
The Reichstag Parliament Building

United States of America
"Operation Northwoods"--A plan signed off by ALL of the Joint Chiefs of staff to BOMB American cities, KILL innocent Americans, blow up a civilian plane after dropping off it's "cargo" to appear like many died in it, and murder the astronaut John Glenn, while blaming all of this on CUBA to incite SUPPORT for war against Cuba.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/

Wake up America!

What was this article about again??

The next time someone posts an article about anything, hopefully they won't mention 9-11. Then people might actaully talk about the topic at hand. As for the elevators, they seem useful. However it should be noted that if you can put enough planning into an attack to hijack a plane, you can probably manage to think far enough into the future to sabotage the building's rescue system as well. These might be helpful in the case of non-attack based emergencies, but a planned attack will probably manage to render them completely useless at best, and a weapon to use against people fleeing at worst. Picture the claimed 150 people it can carry all getting on and then the wires being blown by a planted charge. Not a pretty picture.

Post new comment


*

  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <embed><object><param><a> <em> <strong> <cite><blockquote> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br><p><img>
Creative Commons License
Except where otherwise noted, works in this website are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 2.5 License.
israeli news  Cheapest Xbox Playstation Wii in Israel  wedding in IsraelMariage en Israel