D_I_Y American style!

I think it rather depends upon whether the PP means safe in the sense of not putting life and limb at risk

or safe in the sense of making sure that you don't end up destroying the building next to it (which I presume is not meant to come down)

tim

high and the hoops and staves would be weakened by the fire, so it'd probably topple. Certainly safer than the method shown.

It looked to me as though the increasing load on the remaining staves suddenly caused them to crumble. I suspect the same would happen even if you burned out supports on one side. It might need a tensioning cable from the top, in the intended direction of collapse.

then cut the hoops with explosives or thermite.

The Wikipedia article suggests that disassembly is the reverse of assembly, leaving the parts in a condition to be used again.

Colin Bignell

Total bloody tool. Even in the absence of a tripod, something can be arranged.

You mean kike looking in the viewfinder and keeping the subject centred?

I'm sure they're not cheap trainers, which must be why the's so keen to show them off.

Bloody funny.

Don't forget a lot of the americans think skyscrapers will topple over rather than fall straight down.

they don't really understand Newtons laws.

Obviously did not look at this, but I can remember seeing a film of a person trying to demolish a tall wall with a bulldozer, like it was obvious that if you pushed at the bottom the top would fall on top of you and so it did luckily for the driver who decided to do it, narrowly missing his head. I understand the dozer needed a lot of repairs though.

Brian

Unreinforced concrete staves; probably gave up when enough bending load was put on it by knocking out one side. I don't think I'd like to try to predict when, where or how it would go.

Probably, but they must have been assembled with some sort of formwork holding the staves in place whilst each ring was assembled. You'd need something similar, a crane/hoist and scaffolding to dismantle it.

Sledgehammers and rednecks are cheaper.

put on it by knocking out one side. I don't think I'd like to try to predict when, where or how it would go.

I scrolled through it, frame by frame, to see how it did go. There's a point just before the cameraman reacts, where the silo has taken on a Pisaesque lean to the right.

The five of the staves to the left of the hammerman have all broken outwards at two points, about 1/3rd and 2/3rds of the way up. All the other staves seem to have similarly gone, but are too shaded/blurred to see details.

It seems they've all gone at the same level, maybe a weak point where there was a slot to retain the rings.

just before the cameraman reacts, where the silo has taken on a Pisaesque lean to the right.

At 1:13.

put on it by knocking out one side. I don't think I'd like to try to predict when, where or how it would go.

You have more patience than me.

a Pisaesque lean to the right.

at two points, about 1/3rd and 2/3rds of the way up. All the other staves seem to have similarly gone, but are too shaded/blurred to see details.

Immediately before that, with the help of the time you gave, you can see the stave he was about to swing at start to bulge outwards.

Colin Bignell

I wonder if such lemmings are conditioned to expect it to give way Hollywood-style, with one stave/strand of rope giving way at a time and with a suitable interval between each one breaking.

So did Al-Quaeda.

Ditto.