Originally Posted by DIBO
(Post 9183722)
- "]
- given the presence of the extra cargo hold fuel tanks, following the initial explosive energy, TNT has 5 times more combustive energy, enough to set the (leaking) extra fuel tanks ablaze, with the incomplete combustion producing thick black smoke my (military) explosives training was limited to crudely blasting away brickwork with single quarter-kilo TNT sticks, but my uneducated guess would be that a 1 Kg TNT charge in the tail/APU section, would cause massive havoc to the tail section, not corroborated by available photos (it would however explain the HS separation ) 1 gm TNT = 4000 JOULES. 1000 gm TNT = 4,000,000 Joules, result nothing much larger than confetti. Latest news says the explosive was in a mixer fiz can. If this be true then no way would 1 kg be packed in it. |
Originally Posted by Chronus
(Post 9184746)
TNT X Combustive energy than Jet fuel? No, rather an understatement I`d say.
1 gm TNT = 4000 JOULES. 1000 gm TNT = 4,000,000 Joules, result nothing much larger than confetti. Latest news says the explosive was in a mixer fiz can. If this be true then no way would 1 kg be packed in it. Bomb Tech: We found the device to consist of a :mad: mixture with :mad: brisance generating an overpressure of :mad: kPa and an R.E.F. in the range 0.1 to 1.0 Manager: Sir, it was the equivalent of 10g to 1Kg of TNT Director: Minister, it was equivalent of 1Kg of TNT Minister: The device consisted of 1Kg of TNT :rolleyes: |
Minister: The device consisted of 1Kg of TNT |
Originally Posted by AreOut
(Post 9184835)
I see the 1/0 switch so supposedly manual activation but only Russians and Ukrainians on the plane...doesn't add up
|
I think that picture was a sample from a "how to" in an ISIS pub, not a piece of evidence from the actual crash. I'd not read too much into it. has this can as being from Egypt.... If it is a how to... they happen to have chosen an appropriate can. |
4.000.000 J is quite a lot of mechanical energy: it can lift a fire truck 40m high, to give an idea of the damage it can do. An inefficient explosion of a smaller amount of TNT will transfer far less energy to the airplane structure but would be more than destructive enough.
In my opinion the electronics can not have been only pressure based. The altitude where the bomb went off was too close to cruise alt so small measurement errors could have made the bomb fail to explode and if it would explode it would be unclear when. Taking into account they wanted to film the explosion I think a timer was used. With a couple of sensors (vibration, pressure) it is easy to determine when the plane takes off and wait until the plane is above a predetermined camera position. Sensor boards that can perform such functions are present in consumer electronics, it is impossible to prevent they get in the wrong hands. To prevent such an event, focus must be on detection of explosives. |
Originally Posted by thcrozier
(Post 9184823)
Yes, that's exactly how it works!
|
If the bars were replenished in SSH and the bars sealed, then there would be no need for them to be counted by the crew. It could be that someone in the catering company could be the perpetrator. It is my belief something went off in the rear galley area due to the damage on door 4R which wouldn't be the case if it were in the hold.
|
Explosive heat is not the only consideration, velocity of detonation, volume of explosive products and fragmentation all come into play.
|
A range of 0.1 to 1.0 would be equivalent to a range of 100g to 1KG (unless there's a technical point I'm missing). Or maybe the point was that managers can't do math.
|
Hahahaha...
I'd put myself at the Director level, so I know that whatever I receive from the Manager is already filled with errors of all kinds, and whatever the Minister says I said will be ten times as distorted. And with that, I'd say this thread has run its course. Unless some facts indicating a Black Swan event surface, there is already plenty of information here for enhancing self-education. |
Originally Posted by Chu Chu
(Post 9185039)
A range of 0.1 to 1.0 would be equivalent to a range of 100g to 1KG (unless there's a technical point I'm missing). Or maybe the point was that managers can't do math.
|
tail branch speculation
Kulverstukas wrote:
PPS almost all suggestions of "tail" branch of PPRuNe armchair investigation was right And how burns on passengers and scorched seats can be explained? Heat from explosives only is not sufficient. |
bud leon: Not sure what you're getting at. |
So much for the "least risk bomb location" on A320/321...............:confused:
|
Another "source/expert" told "Kommersant" that bomb was planted under seat in the right rear last row. It makes hole 0.8 x 1 m and cut signal cables to FDR. So either he has some inside info or read pprune/aviaforum.
Also there is another leak, now LifeNews: examination was carried on 34 bodies of passengers occupying rows 32-38, which bears explosion marks and also traces of TNT. No definite place of explosive device determined, versions are from rear cargo hold to under a seat to on the body of suicide bomber to upper cargo compartment. Also "experts" claims that blast was directed from rear to front, separating tail section, so bodies of the front passengers and crew doesn't' bear explosion marks. |
|
Originally Posted by silvertate
(Post 9184691)
Note to Pontius - there is no 100ml limit on catering supplies, as you might expect. Therefore either lax pax security or lax catering security. Given an earlier statement (Mitrosoft' s post) that it was under a pax seat suggests pax security. |
IIRC, in the now locked thread that video was given an analysis by someone who "gets" video creation. I vote with Kulverstukas on that score: not a good piece of input/data when analyzing the event.
|
I also can summarize information which we know as 100% facts and can use safely now:
1) Any photo of debris 2) Any video from media agencies shot at the site. 3) Information from FR24, confirmed speed, alt and stage of flight at the moment of accident 4) Information about abrupt ending of FDR recording 5) Information about traces of explosives found at the debris 6) Pax list 7) Condition of airframe and engines from airline papers Anything else still are "leaks" and BS from unconfirmed "sources" Any addition to the list? |
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:51. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.