"Airliner would have survived xmas day bomb"

You guys appear to be engaged in re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

None of this matters. The test was a publicity stunt.  There was no practical reason to perform it, other than to produce a video product to titillate techies, garner ratings and to sell copies and/or advertising time.
 
Regardless of how well or poorly the test was constructed, the results are without value.  Whether or not that particular bomb would have brought down that particular aircraft at that particular point in its flight has no practical relevance or usefulness to anyone.

Preventing terrorist bombs from getting aboard aircraft is the issue.  Understanding with precision the yield of the required bomb aids only future homicidal terroists.

You guys appear to be engaged in re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

 

Did you know that the Titanic’s excess deck chairs were stored in the superfluous 4th chimney stack?

In that case it goes to show that this post was both meaningful and beneficial

Meaningful and beneficial, interesting, of interest, to those that took part... apart from the last four posts.

No need for ''mathematical proof'' at all. I think you know I mentioned this as a possibility, a suggestion.

Okay, after watching it on iPlayer [as Ras said earlier] later in the program, they explain that the aircrafts altitude was low enough so that the absence of a door was not a factor. The pressure differential was not relevant.

10,000 and descending Slopey.

At 10,000 ft with a cabin altitude of 8,000 ft the cabin diff. pressure will be around 1.5 to 2.0 psi.

At max cruise altitude (41,000 ft) differential pressure is 8 psi.

To give you an idea - 0.3 psi is sufficient to stop you from opening the cockpit window or the cabin door.

Best regards,
Vulcan.

Are you actually aware of what Jihad is?   Thought not.

That second line is a little rude, isn't it, Odai?

I think I have a rudimentary understanding of what Jihad is.  In very general terms, I believe it to be religiously sanctioned violence conducted by members of the Islamic faith against those they believe to be enemies of their religion, their prophet and their God.

I'm sure there are many nuances and details that I am unaware of, but that definition is sufficient for a non-Muslim to understand the gist of it as it applies to us, I think. 

When a Muslim studies under the same Yemeni Imam who corresponded with, encouraged and praised our recent Fort Hood terroist/murderer, then boards an aircraft armed with a bomb and attempts to follow the orders he was given to detonate it over US soil, that's close enough for me.  I doubt he did it because Northwest Airlines refused him an upgrade to 1st class, wouldn't give him any more peanuts during the flight or anything like that. He's a Jihadist.

Do you believe the despicable little terrorist is not a Jihadist?