PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Twa 800
Thread: Twa 800
View Single Post
Old 3rd Oct 2007, 20:29
  #39 (permalink)  
cyrus15
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: saudi arabia
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Let’s get back to basics:

1. How can a CWT explode in mid air only in that particular aircraft during normal flight, though B747 been in service since 1973. (Supposedly no act of sabotage involved in here).
2. At 13000 feet, air (oxygen) can’t enter the fuel tank due to low ambient pressure and even in empty or half / quarter tank full; the pressure is equalized as the altitude changes. So the possibility of air getting in is not there not to mention the existence of fuel vapor pressure that occupy the empty space seeking lower pressure area to escape well prevent any air to get in (this is during flight).
3. If the electrical device in the fuel tank is electrically shorted or overheated (incase of running dry) what is the possibility during flight to have fire or explosion in this condition? Where the needed oxygen should come from?
4. How fire extinguisher works?
5. The theory of fuel tank explosion in mid air has been talked about and discussed in a span of couple of days after the accident and before even the wreckage recovery started. Four years later in a televised conference, all agencies (NTSB, FBI, FAA etc.) Conclusion was “fuel tank explosion”.
6. Commercial jet engines operation principal are not the same as rockets or space shuttle engines so do the fuel used in both engines are not the same (no oxidizers in jet fuel and no after burner engine used in this case).
7. Did anybody examine the AD (Airworthiness Directive) issued after this accident? How extensive is the work to comply with it? Is there any major changes of fuel tank designs introduced? What other than visual inspection and wire harness change required?
8. Most fuel injected cars (gasoline) has pump in the fuel tank, it is DC powered type of pump, that didn’t cause any concerns of the DOT, NTSB and other regulatory agencies knowing that gasoline is more volatile than kerosene based jet fuel and still the same principal fuel tank designed used. Road Accidents are more likely to cause automobiles fire but not fuel tanks will be on fire by design flaw.

To sum it up:
· Commercial jet fuel tank (bladder or steel type if any) doesn’t explode in mid air. You need fuel, oxygen and source of ignition combined at the same time to have fire or explosion in any fuel tank.
· Fire extinguisher works under the principle of isolating air (oxygen) from the fire, that’s why magnesium fire is a problem because it can produce oxygen when it burn.
· Four years later and millions of dollars spent to tell the same wrong conclusion that started in a matter of days after the accident? Is it plausible?

What is the logic behind permitting manufacturer to have electrical equipments inside fuel tanks (submerged pump) knowing that it could serve as ignition source? Unless there is a strong reason to do so, something like law of physics.

(fuel + source of ignition or heat + no oxygen = No Fire)

Last edited by cyrus15; 3rd Oct 2007 at 21:13.
cyrus15 is offline