|
|
|
| Authored by: Crocodile_Dundee on Wednesday, July 04 2012 @ 11:02 PM EDT |
A single bullet isn't going to cause explosive decompression.
Google for "aircraft bullet explosive decompression" to get a heap of
hits.
Even if it manages to rear enough of the skin of the aircraft that a
deliberately designed section of it comes away, the hole so formed will actually
be smaller than the vent in the aircraft where excess pressure is allowed to
escape (air is pumped in all the time from the engines).
In the worst case, this would result in a relatively slow loss of pressure from
the aircraft, although it would be pretty exciting to be right next to it.
Of more danger is the risk of striking an essential piece of equipment, but
again, unless you're in the cockpit you'd have to be (un)lucky or know what to
shoot at.
Explosive decompression is generally the result of losing a significantly larger
amount of the skin of the aircraft, and the risk is more due to things flying
about and structural risk to the aircraft than a loss of pressure per se.
In actual fact, it would probably make it a lot harder for an aspiring terrorist
to be faced with insufficient oxygen and fog, so explosive decompression might
be a good thing.
---
---
That's not a law suit. *THIS* is a law suit![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, July 05 2012 @ 06:33 PM EDT |
Err, have you *seen* what happens to a plane under explosive
decompression (such as when a bullet punctures the skin or the plexi-type
windows)?
You must have missed that episode of Mythbusters.
Nothing appears.
Yes, Mythbusters is not a definitive reference, often
their methodology stinks, but it was a pretty simple experiment. They had to go
to a lot of effort to demonstrate explosive decompression, a simple bullet
puncture wasn't enough. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
