Boeing 747 survives simulation bomb blast

[Flying Wild]

BBC News - Boeing 747 survives simulation bomb blast

A test explosion on a Boeing 747 suggests that a US Christmas Day flight would have landed safely even if a bomb on board was detonated successfully.
The test plane's fuselage did not break in the controlled blast, which used the same amount of explosive allegedly carried by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.
Mr Abdulmutallab, 23, has denied attempting to murder 289 people by trying to blow up a flight to Detroit with a device hidden in his underwear.
The experiment was carried out by UN explosives expert Dr John Wyatt and analysed by air accident investigator Captain J Joseph.

It looks to me from the video as if the aircraft was not pressurised. Surely that would have an impact on how effective the bomb would have been?

[LAS1997]

Also, its detonated along the strongest part of the aircraft, the wing root and not further ahead as in the case of the Pan Am 747 in 1988.

I note it looks like an old Cathay Pacific 747-200 freighter that came to the UK for breaking up. I guess the freighters have strengthened floors, etc, so stronger than normal passenger aircraft?

[Checkboard]

Mythbusters pressurised an airframe, then fired various guns through windows and the like, before finally blowing it up. Search for that.

[AnthonyGA]

Mythbusters pressurised an airframe, then fired various guns through windows and the like, before finally blowing it up.

Yes, but they did that on the ground, where the ratio of inside to outside pressure was much smaller than it would be at altitude, and the outside air density was much higher, so their tests are not necessarily representative of what would happen at high altitudes.

[Peter Fanelli]

What a worthless test, about what I'd expect from the United Nations.

[Checkboard]

Yes, but they did that on the ground, where the ratio of inside to outside pressure was much smaller than it would be at altitude, and the outside air density was much higher, so their tests are not necessarily representative of what would happen at high altitudes.

As I recall, they set up the best differential they could get - which was pretty close to the operational figure. The reactions of the fuselage in the initial second or so would have been under the same impetus, and thus almost identical. I thought it was a pretty good test, short of automating and airliner, and flying it to altitude!

[vs69]

Watch the 'If it's not Boeing I'm not going' brigade fill this thread up. Yaaaaaawwwwwn.

[fire wall]

ex B-HVY ?
How dare they treat her with such disrespect !

[Linedog]

It won't cause much damage as all the doors are open. Instant escape route for the pressure build up.

[David Horn]

Possible they did seal off that part of the fuselage since I didn't see any explosive gases escaping from the doors. However, agree that unpressurised it's not a representative test.

[Davidsoffice]

Looks to me as though the explosion also detonated the cockpit crew escape system!

[7AC]

I'm glad to see both wearing their yellow jackets, very important for aviation safety!

[Mike-Bracknell]

What a worthless test, about what I'd expect from the United Nations.

I think you're missing the point. This is obviously aimed at the average wannabe terrorist who might think again about blowing their nob off in the name of allah if it's not going to take down the aircraft, and hasn't got the relevant knowledge of relative atmospheric pressure, etc.

[SMOC]

ex B-HVY ?
How dare they treat her with such disrespect !

Nup it was HIH, HVY is long gone, RIP

Also what happens when they're pressurised

YouTube - 747 test

[AeroMad]

Very unreliable test.
As said by other posters, the cabin was not pressurised, and the doors were open... thus allowing excess pressure from the explosion to escape from the aircraft.
And regards the Pan Am incident, the initial explosion wasn't the sole cause to the aircraft disintegrating, the shockwaves travelling within the pressurised cabin also played a part...

Regards
AeroMad

[Tester_76]

And now Mr Terrorist knows to bring more bang with him for the next attempt

[lurkio]

Oh well, al least it gives his defence team enough to work on to get him off. What a waste of time, different type, nil differential, sea level etc. etc. At least Mythbusters would have blown everything up at the end.
A couple of new rivets and it'll be flying again next week!

[VS1711]

I shouldn't worry Tester - I'm told there's a limit to the amount of explosive power you can hide in your underpants.

[169west]

Improvised Explosive Device Simulation

With nowadays modeling and simulation technology it is possible to reproduce the consequence of an IED explosion at 40 kft on a pressurize 747 just by standing in front of a computer. So it is not believable they didn’t evaluate the variables involved in such a scenario.
Or maybe they are just trying to communicate a positive message to everyone who still thinks flying on an airplane is more dangerous then driving a car. Good for the economy and good for airline business!

Here same videos on the Philippine Airline 434
Air crash investigation part 1
Air crash investigation part 2
Air crash investigation part 3
Air crash investigation part 4
Air crash investigation part 5

[Blythy]

that doesn't look like glass in the windows, nevermind that whatever material was filling the window holes, seemed to get "popped out"

Also, doing a pressurised test on the ground is dodgy as well, as to get the right pressure ratio, you'd have to pump the cabin full of air, and that'd add more oxygen changing the power of the explosives.