Politics for Pros- moderated Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Alan Smithee who wrote (340307)	12/28/2009 4:11:37 PM
From: unclewest	Read Replies (2) of 793964

I promise you can take this to the bank. Other than splattering blood, 3 ounces of high explosive enclosed by and smothered by an adult human body is going to be no more than minimally invasive to anything else in the vicinity. He may have been sitting above a fuel tank but he was not going to damage that tank while seated in an aircraft seat with 3 ounces in his BVDs. AQ's demo men know that. They are highly skilled. Therefore I do not believe the intent was to take out the aircraft by damaging the fuel tank. I can think of one specialty charge that might puncture a fuel tank with three ounces. It is usually made with C-4, but it would have to be within 2 inches or less of the tank when detonated to even have a chance to do so. Even then it would be a hole no more than a dime in diameter and in the top. The only way to get it to leak would be to fly the acft upside down.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next