X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 01 Jan 2006 22:53:35 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from imo-m28.mx.aol.com ([64.12.137.9] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.5) with ESMTP id 907672 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:53:05 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.137.9; envelope-from=RWolf99@aol.com Received: from RWolf99@aol.com by imo-m28.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v38_r6.3.) id q.9b.6e77731c (3866) for ; Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:52:15 -0500 (EST) From: RWolf99@aol.com X-Original-Message-ID: <9b.6e77731c.30e881bf@aol.com> X-Original-Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2005 19:52:15 EST Subject: TWA Flight 800 X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="-----------------------------1136076735" X-Mailer: 9.0 SE for Windows sub 5022 X-Spam-Flag: NO -------------------------------1136076735 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Brent Regan writes -- <> So that missile had nothing to do with it, eh? Actually, the claim is that TWA Flight 800 exploded due to old-style certification practices which allowed ignition sources and high fuel temperatures inside of fuel tanks. SFAR 88 was written hastily in order to reduce the allowable ignition sources within fuel tanks, and lower the temperatures of the fuel (also reducing the potential for ignition). Other certification guidance has been written since then but the gist is the same. Yes, aged and cracking insulation around the wires in the fuel tank may have played a factor, but the bigger problem is having the wire in the fuel tank in the first place, don't you think? - Rob Wolf -------------------------------1136076735 Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Brent Regan writes --

<<Just be mindful that TWA Flight 800 exploded in midair and cras= hed=20 into the Atlantic because of, i= n part,=20 poor wiring practices.>>

So that missile had nothing to do with it, eh?

Actually, the claim is that TWA Flight 800 exploded due to old-style=20 certification practices which allowed ignition sources and high fuel=20 temperatures inside of fuel tanks. SFAR 88 was written hastily in orde= r to=20 reduce the allowable ignition sources within fuel tanks, and lower the=20 temperatures of the fuel (also reducing the potential for ignition). O= ther=20 certification guidance has been written since then but the gist is the=20 same.

Yes, aged and cracking insulation around the wires in the fuel tank may= =20 have played a factor, but the bigger problem is having the wire in the fuel=20= tank=20 in the first place, don't you think?

- Rob Wolf

-------------------------------1136076735--