Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Darksheare
Shoulder launched missiles could not have caused a violent yaw which broke off nose, empennage and outer wing panels. A supersonic 2,900 lb SM-2 hybrid could. A simple matter of physics. I contend that terrorism was not involved and the needs of trial lawyers dictated that Boeing was at fault.
270 posted on 12/14/2001 10:26:50 AM PST by barf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 269 | View Replies ]


To: barf
Once again you forget one simple little thing: Slipstream. What happens when you punch a hole in an aircraft? Any size hole..? Do you remember that Aloha Airlines flight out by Hawaii back in the 80's? How big was the hole that caused the roof to come off? Now read this slowly so you can understand it: That was a small microscopic crack along a rivet that didn't extend into any structural members. And yet it tore the roof off of the cabin for a couple of stringers. Now, we're talking six pounds of explosive (Or 10 in the case of an SA-18, plus unspent fuel) sending thousands of fragments into the air.. all travelling in the direction of thrust.

Now, what happens when a body panel is torn from the plane in it's own slipstream after a hole appears in that nice thin aluminum skin? IT YAWS! And that's just from getting hit by a Stinger. The plane WOULD yaw and break up while losing paneling. Just keep thinking in the ways of straight newtonian physics... They don't take into account slipstream over the airframe (Aircraft peppered by AA fire also lose body panels and violently pitch/yaw/roll and other things, all without getting hit by an SM-2..got it?)

273 posted on 12/14/2001 10:44:15 AM PST by Darksheare
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson