On Jan 12, 1:37*pm, I am Tosk wrote:
In article c7993f80-2b13-4835-9900-485670830134
@h9g2000yqa.googlegroups.com, says...







On Jan 11, 6:55*pm, I am Tosk wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Mon, 11 Jan 2010 08:41:02 -0800 (PST), Tim
wrote:

On Jan 10, 10:05*am, John H wrote:
....can't blow a hole in an airplane.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...2773940934022#

or:http://tinyurl.com/ybaez5v
--
John H

All decisions, even those of liberals, are the result of binary thinking.

John, if the guy had that much applied to his thigh, I think the best
that could have happened is that when it went off, it would have
guarenteed that he couldn't infest his genetics into anyone else

?;^ Q

And that was only a drop!

The x rays or whatever they showed in the early days showed it to be a
bundle about the size of a tube of tooth paste... Quite a bit of
explosive there if he had the kind in the video... That could take down
a plane, easy... Blow it in half for sure. I am assuming here however
the video posted is accurate...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You would be wrong. *From the passnger compartment it is difficult to
place explosive on a critical component in an aircraft. *Unless
directionally controlled explosives dissipate their force equally over
the entire sphere. *That force diminishes exponentially with distance..

I don't know which part you are calling wrong. From what I saw, the
video showed a drop dissipating a watermelon. From what I saw, the
amount of material this guy had was about the size of a small tube of
toothpaste. Hundreds of thousands of "drops", in that area. Why would
you not think the force would blow the aircraft in half right there at
that point over the wing? Seems to me it would. There was also a
demonstration at one point of the amount of explosive in the shoe
bombers shoe and it blew the plane to pieces.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Blowing up a watermelon and blowing up a plane have little in common.
From the passenger compartment the most either of those bombers could
have done was to blow a hole in the fuselage. Not enough to crash the
plane. But both tried to detonate the material while it was still on
them. Not while it was pressed against a window or wall. The shoe
bomber would have blown a hole in the floor and his foot/lower leg
off. The crotch bomber would have absorbed at least half the blast or
more with his body. Another significant amount would have been wasted
on the seat materials. Neither was successful in detonating. They
were clearly both kooks and working alone. A well planned attack
would have at least tested their detonation mechanism.