At 09:03 AM 2/26/99 -0500, Michael S. Lorrey wrote:
>> IAN: You've already been corrected on that one
>> at least twice and yet you continue to make that
>> false claim. It wasn't the nose section that the
>> video says hits 29 seconds after the 17,000 climb,
>> but the main fuselage section that did the climb.
>>
>> Since you "explained" the way-too-fast fall with
>> an argument based on a falsehood, I guess you've
>> run out of arguments for the CIA video. Please
>> try to both listen and watch the video this
>> time: http://www.newsday.com/jet/year/video.htm
>
>I haven't had a chance to go back over the video yet, as I've been moving my
>computer equipment (now you'll accuse me of being in a conspiracy).
IAN: You made a false statement several times, which I've corrected. Apparently it's useful to you to try to twist that into my being paranoid.
>Commander Donaldson may be a fine pilot. He is not skilled at all as a jet
>mechanic. I am.
IAN: Oh? Donaldson was the maintenance officer of a Navy jet squadron and a graduate of crash analysis training from the Naval Post Graduate School. His first crash investigation was of an accidental shoot down of a Navy A4 in 1977 (http://members.aol.com/bardonia/cdrindex.htm).
>> IAN: Mike, jet fuel is not explosive at temps
>> below (I believe around) 165 degrees. Commander
>> Donaldson has shown that you can put out a
>> cigarette in Jet A-1 fuel.
>
>There is no such thing as Jet A-1 fuel. There is A-1, A-2 and A-3 fuel,
all are
>aviation rated. Jet fuels are J-1 thru J-6. Please get your nomenclature
>straight. It is true you can drop a lit cigarette in any J class fuel AT ROOM
>TEMPERATURE without triggering ignition.
IAN: Even above room temperature.
>However, an electrical arc is much
>higher temperature than a cigarette, as it is a plasma, especially an
>electrical arc triggering an explosion of kapton insulation, which would not
>only add high temperature, but high compression from the small blast shock
wave
>to provide conditions similar to that inside the combustion chamber of a jet
>engine. Not to mention the fact that I have all along been talking about jet
>fuel FUMES, which are highly flammable at even room temperature, given the
>proper ignition. There is a significant difference between liquid fuel and
>fumes, which you can't seem to grasp.
IAN: You just spoke of drops of the fuel
leaking out and being ignited, not fumes.
Donaldson does a lot of tests with jet
fuel, where he attempt to explode the
fuel and the fumes, and gets little
in the way of impressive results.
He has these tests on video tape.