Jump to content

Talk:American Airlines Flight 63 (2001)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Reid's seat location in the 767 is important. My recollection is that he was in a window seat over the wing. If this is true, then his small explosion would have certainly caused the cabin to depressurize but also may have ignited a center fuel tank, which is considered to have caused TWA 800 to explode in July 1996.

Here is a link to the seat map for an American Airlines Boeing 763ER, the aircraft used on flight 63. AA B763ER seat map Hopefully this is helpful. --71.238.11.12 (talk) 00:37, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Just found this link. Telegraph UK: Shoe bomb This tells exactly where Reid was sitting on the airplane. --71.238.11.12 (talk) 22:11, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the evidence that the explosives if ignited would have caused the cabin to depressurize? Who's to say he wouldn't have just blown his feet off?Mztourist (talk) 10:30, 10 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Escort service

[edit]

Two fighter jets escorted Flight 63 to Logan Airport. What is this good for? --Abdull 09:13, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? What is the sentence good for, or what was the escort good for? --Golbez 18:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It was a post 9/11 security measure. The plane possibly would have been shot down by the escort if it did not land as instructed - purpose would be to prevent the plane from being used as a weapon of mass destruction as on 9/11.KeptSouth (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References needed

[edit]

This story sounds so silly, so it needs some very good references, and not just "it was in all the media". A discussion about how he could fail after managing to get on board with the explosives would also be relevant. Was he just stupid, or what? Apus 14:43, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

he was an attempted suicide bomber, of f**king course he's stupid! (I'm not logged in but my user is 'XM8 Carbine') —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.187.244.221 (talk) 12:58, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Passengers #?

[edit]

Nowhere in this article does it say how many passengers were on board. This information also isn't found in the Richard Reid article. I think it's vital, especially considering the request about his seat location. I mean, shouldn't we give an idea of what sort of mayhem was averted?

Good point, I added that. Had there been a bombing leading to a crash of the plane it would have cost the lives of 197 people so the mayhem would have been quite considerable. --88.73.152.36 15:47, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Plot holes in the bomb plot

[edit]

In the version I heard about he tried to set fire to plastic explosive with a match; which seems to match this article. That could never possibly work in a million years. You need detonators for high explosive. If it was possible, one wonders why he didn't go to the toilet, where he would have privacy if the first match didn't work? (Yes there are smoke detectors, but the door can be jammed easily enough.) There's a fundamental problem of credibility that this article and the origonal news coverage never goes into. Does anyone have any credible sources on the likelihood of this being even remotely possible?ANTIcarrot 01:41, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The TAPN and corded fuse were the detonator, no original research is needed to mention this, it is in the news stories and the court filings.KeptSouth (talk) 23:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merging with Shoe bomber article

[edit]

Was proposed via tag with no explanation on Jan 1. It is now Jan 13, with no discussion. I oppose the merging and will delete the tag. Generally these incidents have two articles, one for the aircraft, one for the terrorists, see Northwest Airlines Flight 253 and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. In keeping with this practice, I think the two articles should remain separate, and I will add referenced text to this article in the near future.KeptSouth (talk)

If sudden opposition to my proposal surfaces, my response is this: I believe the merge should at the very least be delayed to see how this neglected article is developed. KeptSouth (talk) 23:11, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 08:21, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2001 failed shoe bomb attempt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:21, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:American_Airlines_Flight_63_(2001)/Archive_1&oldid=1090201718"