A321
02-02-2016 | 11:55 AM
#1
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,716
Likes: 0
02-02-2016 | 04:04 PM
#4
Moderate Moderator
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 5,681
Likes: 0
From: Curator at Static Display
What kind of bottle?
Been 14 years since I flew the Bus, but I don't know of any pressure-bottles near the overwing exits.
Were you saying because there are no soot-marks?
Just wondering....to me, it looked like an explosive
device.
02-02-2016 | 08:05 PM
#5
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,931
Likes: 701
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
Looks like a pressure-vessel rupture, ie rupture occurred because of too much internal pressure acting on a weak spot. I didn't necessarily mean an O2 bottle. I have no idea where bottles might be located on a bus. I was a demolition man among other things, and it does not look like HE was utilized directly against the fuselage. Could have been HE (or LE) further inside which created a pressure wave which caused the rupture. Or maybe a small amount of HE directly against the wall created a penetration and then cabin pressure opened it up. The later might make the most sense. Explosives can do weird stuff.
Last edited by rickair7777; 02-02-2016 at 08:19 PM.
02-03-2016 | 10:16 AM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2014
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Looks like a pressure-vessel rupture, ie rupture occurred because of too much internal pressure acting on a weak spot. I didn't necessarily mean an O2 bottle. I have no idea where bottles might be located on a bus. I was a demolition man among other things, and it does not look like HE was utilized directly against the fuselage. Could have been HE (or LE) further inside which created a pressure wave which caused the rupture. Or maybe a small amount of HE directly against the wall created a penetration and then cabin pressure opened it up. The later might make the most sense. Explosives can do weird stuff.
Unconfirmed open source reports state presumptive testing positive for explosive residue,(I don't know which test was used, ION SCAN etc).
Kudos to the Crew who did an outstanding job!
I didn't agree with the protocol of the pilot who exited the cockpit to conduct a damage survey.
The major concern is to keep the cockpit secure at all times.
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the FAA Special Agents(1970-1985?) conduct foreign airport site security inspections before their law enforcement authority was reassigned?
I've been to some foreign airports in the last 10 years where a large percentage of the carry-ons were bypassed or not properly screened by airport screeners.
Last edited by NotPart91; 02-03-2016 at 10:33 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
