20150819 - Bill Birnes and Jim Sanders - Live Chat Thread

[FightTheFuture]

The NTSB and FBI got it exactly right. It was the center fuel tank. I just don`t think there`s anything to see here. The lead fire and explosives investigator at the time, James Folly, is, and was, "absolutely 100% certain" it was the center fuel tank.

The FBI thoroughly investigated the missile and/or bomb theories and completely debunk both. There`s just nothing to go on here. Birnes and Sanders are out to lunch on this one. But, maybe they`ll still make a shekel or two from pedaling their little book.


Interesting video:
http://video.nydailynews.com/?freewheel=90051&sitesection=nydailynews&VID=24923354

[VtaGeezer]

as i understand i, the airplanes fuel system was a sealed system. thusly  a spark in the fuel tank will not ignite the fumes, as there will be very little to no oxygen in the fuel tank, only fumes.

The 747 tanks were vented to the atmosphere; else they'd be trying to pump against a vacuum.  New airliners have inerting systems that produce inert nitrogen-rich gas to fill the tanks as fuel levels change.

[nika01]

The NTSB and FBI got it exactly right. It was the center fuel tank. I just don`t think there`s anything to see here. The lead fire and explosives investigator at the time, James Folly, is, and was, "absolutely 100% certain" it was the center fuel tank.

The FBI thoroughly investigated the missile and/or bomb theories and completely debunk both. There`s just nothing to go on here. Birnes and Sanders are out to lunch on this one. But, maybe they`ll still make a shekel or two from pedaling their little book.


Interesting video:
http://video.nydailynews.com/?freewheel=90051&sitesection=nydailynews&VID=24923354

so explain why there was not a grounding of the fleet. makes zero sense to me unless another reason was known. you cant explain this away with your proclamations.

[FightTheFuture]

so explain why there was not a grounding of the fleet. makes zero sense to me unless another reason was known. you cant explain this away with your proclamations.

I don't know, but one sure reason to ground the fleet,  would involve missiles being fired at commercial  airliners.                                                                                                               

[wr250]

The 747 tanks were vented to the atmosphere; else they'd be trying to pump against a vacuum.  New airliners have inerting systems that produce inert nitrogen-rich gas to fill the tanks as fuel levels change.

i didnt know that.
automotive fuel systems have a purge setup where excess pressure (over 3 lbs usually) is purged into the intake air stream, to be burned. gasoline vaporizes easily, and having a vacuum form is a non issue.

[nika01]

I don't know, but one sure reason to ground the fleet,  would involve missiles being fired at commercial  airliners.                                                                                                               

unless the reason was known!! geez . then why ground anything? This is exactly what happened. The explanation of design flaw caused explosion does not make sense. Sorry.

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

unless the reason was known!! geez . then why ground anything? This is exactly what happened. The explanation of design flaw caused explosion does not make sense. Sorry.

It's an interesting thought and I don't know the specifics of why they didn't think a grounding of the fleet was warranted.  Keep in mind, however, that the 747 had operated reliably for decades.  At the time there were over 1000 produced, and no real alternatives in that class of aircraft.  Airbus had only just started to work on the A380.  Grounding the fleet would have likely put most major airlines out of business as they were already having financial difficulties.