Interesting story. Makes me wonder why the B1 doesn't have redundant braking systems... Most if not all heavies have it that way. 747 for example has two pairs of brakecircuits on each main landing gear. The second one mostly used for parking, but its the same technique. Usually almost every system is redundant. Is there any more information regarding that accident? I guess they wont have such a thing as an accident report for the general public?
QUOTE(Shadowforce @ Mar 14 2009, 04:50 AM) [snapback]130440[/snapback]
From what I was told at the time, the bombs exploded at less than 30% of the full power(they didn't explain why but i was also told they could last 5 or so hours in a fire which was not the case)
I'll make a guess. They won't have as much power when lying in a fire because of the metall hull loosing its mechanical strength. The Hull gets softer while being exposed to such a heat and therefore the explosion looses power. After all the power or type of an explosion is influenced by its hull.
E.g. light up some gunpowder and it will simply burn away. Wrap it and pack it into paper and it'll make a little bang. Fill it into a metal tube and it'll explode.
As a second theory I could imagine that there is a difference in how an explosive is triggered (from the inside by a fuse or from the outside). Quite similar to the fuel/air mixture in a piston engine. It depends on where it is ignited. To increase its efficiency you will want the flames to equally distribute themselves threw out the mixture.
The bombs can
last 5 hrs they don't have to
though. After all the article said that a pair of 2000 pounders were still intact when the fire was finally out.
just my 2cents, Chill