'Underwear Bomber' Could Not Have Blown Up Plane, page 1

'Underwear Bomber' Could Not Have Blown Up Plane
An experiment that detonated a bomb similar to the so-called "underwear bomber's" shows that the plane would have withstood the impact.

By Eric Bland | Wed Mar 10, 2010 09:22 AM ET



THE GIST:

* A test explosion shows the "underwear bomber's" device would not have ruptured the airplane's fuselage.
* Blown ear drums would have accounted for most of the injuries among the passengers.
* Newer planes with composite materials are likely even safer in the event of an explosion.






news.discovery.com...

I just saw this article about the attempted "bombing." of flight 253 seems that even if Abdulmutallab had been successful other then the person sitting next to him dying the worst the other passengers would have gotten were busted eardrums.To this day I believe the whole purpose of the entire episode was to push the full body scanners through I recall that at the time we had every counter terrorism pundit selling these things as the cure all for hijackings.

[edit on 053131p://0426 by mike dangerously]

[edit on 053131p://0726 by mike dangerously]

[edit on 053131p://1226 by mike dangerously]

[edit on 053131p://1526 by mike dangerously]

reply to post by FredT

---

Yeah,I know I finally found a working one... ugh..not my day today.

reply to post by truttseeker

---

Wouldn't have done anything, either.

Airplane was only ten minutes from touchdown at Detroit.

By that time, cabin pressure is down to match pressure altitude at destination. Cabin altitude only slightly higher. Taking window out suddenly, result: Some painful ear popping as pressure equalizes.

Even at altitude, explosive decompression --- more ear-popping, sudden temperature drop in cabin, sometimes fog forms. Loose objects drawn to window, as air escapes, until pressure is equalized.

"Mythbusters" did it in an episode, once.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Here's the video ( seems to be the UK version )

Technically, they were testing whether a bullet fire through a window, from inside when pressurised, would cause it to blow out...but, illustrates my point well.




[edit on 10 March 2010 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by weedwhacker

---

WW, at altitude, yes the explosive decompression would not cause half of what people imagine.

The problem is if the pilots got their oxygen masks on quick enough so they would not pass out.

Oh and if the mechanics that last worked on the system did not mess up the oxygen system.

Last test I did on an oxygen system, about a quarter of the masks were not getting much flow. I do not know about the newer systems though, these were on a older aircraft.

Hopefully no pilots puts Vaseline lip balm on while flying. That would not be very funny.

reply to post by weedwhacker

---

Now,you know why so many people consider the situation to so odd.Perhaps it was never an operation meant to succeed in the first place.

reply to post by endisnighe

---

The Flight Deck O2 is completely separate. All crew stations (seats) have a quick-donning mask. We preflight the masks as part of the "Receiving Aircraft" checklist (this either first flight of the day, or when a crew change occurs mid-day)

Older crew masks had to two adjustment knobs, settings were numbered so you could pre-flight your mask, just set your number. Nowadays, just about all have the inflatable harnass, they don very quickly. About one second is all it takes (maybe less....)

We pre-flight and check for proper flow, and also test the "EMER" position, where it has a positive pressure, then we set to 100% 'demand', and re-stow the mask. Also, during these checks, we watch the O2 pressure guage. IF the O2 valve is closed (down at the tank, in the E&E compartment, and therefore inaccessible to us in flight) then it will be shown on the guage, as the O2 in the lines will deplete quickly.

So, no....we don't fly until we're sure.

Cabin O2 in modern jets comes from chemical generators. Yank the masks, lanyard pulls the pin, and O2 flows as byproduct of chemicals.

Finally, rapid descent procedure, even from cruise altitude, takes about five minutes, tops (rate of descent in excess of 6,000 fpm). Passengers will not die of oxygen starvation in that short time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Oh, and the chapstick? Well....that's true, and not true. Depends on how long you expose your lips to the 100% O2. A few minutes, and it won't begin to burn yet. Female pilots wear lipstick, and face make-up.

More a concern for military types, who wear mask continually (since most fighters aren't pressurized)



[edit on 10 March 2010 by weedwhacker]

reply to post by weedwhacker

---

Thanks for the breakdown, it has been about 20 years since I worked as a mech.

Like I said, thanks.

reply to post by mike dangerously

---

I tend to think of it as "terribly misinformed terrorists" (or 'terrible terrorists'??).

This is a fringe element, mostly, who are attempting this, and they just ain't the sharpest knives in the drawer, if ya know what I mean?

But, they look at past instances of onboard bombs (Pan Am 103 comes to mind) and think, "Hey, we can do that too!"

Thing is....I could tell you where you could cause great concern, from within the cabin, in regards to compromising the controllability of the airplane, but it varies by airplane to airplane. And, I won't say, anyway....duh!

reply to post by weedwhacker

---

Oh c'mon WW. You could be just like the MSM.

Remember any specials on the New networks showing places that have barely any security. Like **** and the ****** oh and especially the *********.

I mean really, this is why conspiracy theorists are the way we are.

My God, these news agencies might as well be the intelligence arm for the terrorists. Oooops, I just let the cat out of the bag. Think about it, would any true media outlet, show people our weakest points of attack?

I am sorry, there are stupid people out in the world, but most of them do not run big companies.

There is another conspiracy to add to the list. SEE, what you just made me do.

reply to post by endisnighe

---

I cringe whenever I see that, if I think I know what you're referring to.

But, I don't think news media do it in order to "inform" the bad guys, and give them ideas. That may be a side effect, but it's more of the "gotcha" journalism, to expose those who aren't doing their jobs properly.

When it comes to aviation security, it is not 100% fool-proof. Don't think anything is, really.

I am certainly aware of many, many "holes" in security, but since I'm not bent on terrorism, then I'm a safe bet. AND, I don't share, except with others who also know what I know.

There's a good deal of self-policing within the industry, too. Especially nowadays. It should be better. But, people are human.....

Did Carl Sagan know something?
  Posted 16 days ago with 276 member flags

The Coca Cola Conspiracy: The secret cause for the U.S. obesity epidemic
  Posted 12 days ago with 138 member flags

The Devil\'s Chord: The conspiracy to open the portal of consciousness and mystery of the octave
  Posted 1 days ago with 127 member flags

Earthly coincidences...or not.
  Posted 12 days ago with 122 member flags

STOP....Take a STEP BACK....and look at the BIG PICTURE!!
  Posted 18 days ago with 115 member flags

Was this the real reason why Megaupload was closed down?
  Posted 17 days ago with 96 member flags

The Mysterious Death of Marilyn Monroe
  Posted 15 days ago with 85 member flags

Bank of America DOES NOT accept U.S. DOLLARS as payment on mortgages
  Posted 5 days ago with 85 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: