On Jul 20, 2004, at 3:28 PM, Gerard M Foley wrote: > From: <lafrance@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 5:43 PM >> I guess CO is now not to blame as they claimed............. >> > Sorry, I did not catch on to the fact that the story really said that > the > titanium sheet did not come from the DC-10. > > It asserts that if the sheet had not been titanium it would not have > caused > the rupture of the fuel tank. I assumed story implied that titanium > had > been substituted for an original material on the DC-10, which is of > course > extremely unlikely. No, you got it right the first time. The material DID come from the CO DC-10, but the gist of the story was that it was titanium instead of the "original alloy", and the original alloy would not have been strong enough to puncture the tires, but titanium indeed was. -- Michael C. Berch mcb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx