Twa 800

[minitour]

There was a second gunman on the grassy knoll...

Oh, sorry. Wrong conpsiracy.

Now you've done it...

Where's mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmdonut with his "EMP Guns" ?

 

[414Flyer]

A MANPAD would not bring down a 747, and TWA 800 was too high at the time to be hit by one. It would have had a hit to the engine, but still has 3 others. Even if it has been a fuselage hit, it still would not have caused a breakup.

 

[Swede]

There may indeed be some holes in the official story, but I don't buy the "friendly fire" theory. It'd be impossible to keep that secret. Too many people involved. Look at the Vincennes incident: within minutes, the whole ship knew exactly what'd happened.

This is a common misconception. It is entirely possible for thousands of briefed individuals to keep the deepest secrets for years. The military is FULL of black systems that remain so. The stealth fighter is a good example. I'm not saying this is the case w/ this incident, though.

As for the Airbus accident, the FO contributed but the data also showed some oddities. It's not a big stretch to consider a yaw damper system. 'Bus encounters some wake, the AC yaws pretty aggressively, and the yaw damper goes batty. Much like Boeings rash of 737 rudder PCU failures. They weren't supposed to happen but they did.

 

[flyboytop1]

twa 800

It was a terrorist attack. My dad flew 747 out of JFK for his last 5 years of flying-you don't transfer fueling after takeoff flying to Europe or have and empty center tank. The us gov't hid this to avoid a panic to future flying public-that would stop the industry cold. PS. He was hesitant to talk about it, for he too knows the long arm of the US gov't to keep anyone "permanantly quiet",ALA can you spell KGB !!! Like the doctor who found the cure for cancer many years ago-hes "living" somewhere in the Islands- too much money loss for many if a "cure" was found. Just "manage" it, like just "deal with it". Like aids now-no one really wants to
"cure" it , just manage for life- keep the money flowing then....

 

[Whale Pilot]

This is a common misconception. It is entirely possible for thousands of briefed individuals to keep the deepest secrets for years. The military is FULL of black systems that remain so. The stealth fighter is a good example. I'm not saying this is the case w/ this incident, though.

As for the Airbus accident, the FO contributed but the data also showed some oddities. It's not a big stretch to consider a yaw damper system. 'Bus encounters some wake, the AC yaws pretty aggressively, and the yaw damper goes batty. Much like Boeings rash of 737 rudder PCU failures. They weren't supposed to happen but they did.

You can't be serious? Are you trying to get a job at AA?

I suppose all your "experience" in aviation brought you to this conclusion? Were you in class where the "training video" was presented? Were you familiar with AMR's training curriculum at that time? I didn't think so!

Are you aware that AMR has to send their pilots to recurrent more often than other airlines due to their safety record?

Are you aware that AA pilots have killed more passengers than any other airline? Cali?, JFK, Little Rock. They have the worst safety record. AMR has a whole department dedicated to their image.

I hear they need people like you!

 

[atrdriver]

There may indeed be some holes in the official story, but I don't buy the "friendly fire" theory. It'd be impossible to keep that secret. Too many people involved. Look at the Vincennes incident: within minutes, the whole ship knew exactly what'd happened.

Come on...The F-117A was in sqadron service for almost 10 years before anyone outside the program knew that it existed. Don't tell me that the government can't keep a secret if they want it kept.

 

[Swede]

You can't be serious? Are you trying to get a job at AA?

I suppose all your "experience" in aviation brought you to this conclusion? Were you in class where the "training video" was presented? Were you familiar with AMR's training curriculum at that time? I didn't think so!

Are you aware that AMR has to send their pilots to recurrent more often than other airlines due to their safety record?

Are you aware that AA pilots have killed more passengers than any other airline? Cali?, JFK, Little Rock. They have the worst safety record. AMR has a whole department dedicated to their image.

I hear they need people like you!

Oooh such hostility. I am familiar with the accident report. There are anomilies reconciling the data. Heaven forbid a titanic corporation like Airbus (and Boeing) might desperately seek to deflect blame to a dead man.

 

[EagleRJ]

A MANPAD would not bring down a 747, and TWA 800 was too high at the time to be hit by one. It would have had a hit to the engine, but still has 3 others. Even if it has been a fuselage hit, it still would not have caused a breakup.

A MANPAD would bring down a 747, and TWA 800 was within range of most of the systems on the market. There were most likely two missiles fired from two seperate boats, based on triangulation from eyewitness reports.

An IR-guided missile fired from below wouldn't lock onto one of the engines. That's a common misconception. The resolution of the seeker on a shoulder-fired missile isn't very good. All it "sees" is a fuzzy spot of heat, and it goes for the center. At the center of a 747's heat signature are the exhaust ports for the three Air Cycle Machines. The ACMs lie directly underneath the center fuel tank.

Take it from someone who was trained on the Stinger-RMP system in the ANG. A MANPADS explanation for this crash is not only possible, it is probable.

 

[Spooky 1]

The Flying Tiger Line lost a L1049H Constellation in March of 1963. It was enroute from Agana, Guam to Clark AFB in the P.I. The final destination was Saigon. Onboard were about 96 Vietnam military personnel including one or more Generals. The aircraft was never recovered, nor were there any debris found floating on the surface despite an extensive air search and rescue. A large oil tanker reported seeing a large explosion in th sky at a considerable distance from the ship. In spite of this still no wreckage was spotted. There was considerable talk of the aircraft being downed by a US Navy ship. Keep in mind that in those days the communications networking that is around today was significantly less. I worked for Tigers briefing in 1965 and this story was a hot topic of conversation. Needless to say nothing ever came of it, or at least it was never made public. You can review what little information is known about this accident by Googling N6921C.

 

[414Flyer]

Come on...The F-117A was in sqadron service for almost 10 years before anyone outside the program knew that it existed. Don't tell me that the government can't keep a secret if they want it kept.

The gubmunt' isnt a monolithic entity (even though they sure can act like it), its still made up of normal people. The F-117 was a black world project, and it was secret partially because the people on the project believed in it, and felt it was a national security reason to keep it quiet.

Now granted it was about to come out in the open anyways, the USAF had been flying it in daytime and there were going to be photos coming out soon of it that people had taken. And I had even read a book where the author mentioned it was faceted, not curved..but this is all a tangent and I shall digress...

Compared a national security issue to a cover up is two different animals. People were proud of the F-117, and felt there was a real reason to keep it quiet, It was the new "silver bullet" of the USAF.

Shooting down an 747 would be too hard to cover up. Its not just a single "government", its all the people who would be involved. Anyone like you and me. If you had been on that ship, would you have taken the time to do something like send an anonymous email or phone call, telling exactly what happened?

Besides, it would take Boeing going along with this too. They would love to have something else to blame it on besides a fault in their plane.

 

[414Flyer]

A MANPAD wouldbring down a 747, and TWA 800 was within range of most of the systems on the market. There were most likely two missiles fired from two seperate boats, based on triangulation from eyewitness reports.

An IR-guided missile fired from below wouldn't lock onto one of the engines. That's a common misconception. The resolution of the seeker on a shoulder-fired missile isn't very good. All it "sees" is a fuzzy spot of heat, and it goes for the center. At the center of a 747's heat signature are the exhaust ports for the three Air Cycle Machines. The ACMs lie directly underneath the center fuel tank.

Take it from someone who was trained on the Stinger-RMP system in the ANG. A MANPADS explanation for this crash is not only possible, it is probable.

seems though there would be some kind of unmistakable evidence of being hit then. Being hit by a missle or proximity explosion would have to leave a lot of holes.

 

[Typhoon1244]

The gubmunt' isnt a monolithic entity (even though they sure can act like it), its still made up of normal people. The F-117 was a black world project, and it was secret partially because the people on the project believed in it, and felt it was a national security reason to keep it quiet.

Somebody must've blabbed to Clint Eastwood, though, 'cause the Firefox sure was faceted...

Besides, it would take Boeing going along with this too. They would love to have something else to blame it on...

Yes they would. So would TWA and the FAA. You would think all three of them would be screaming for further study of the eyewitness accounts.

Now I realize that eyewitness accounts of aircraft accidents are notoriously bad...people seem to see flames coming from falling aircraft regardless of what really happened. But two hundred people saw a streak going toward the aircraft? Two hundred? Something's amiss.

Something else author DeMille pointed out: the animation that was created to show what the witnesses actually saw was generated by the CIA. What, Boeing, the FAA, and the NTSB don't have software to do this? Why the CIA?

 

[SDF2BUF2MCO]

and all you conspiracy buffs out there. terrorists usually brag over and over about blowing stuff up. if the govt. couldn't keep clinton's hummers quiet what makes you think they can keep that quiet?

Typically that is true. However, and I admit my memory is fuzzy, were there any "braggers" during the world trade center bombing in the early/mid 90's? Also, what about Pan Am 103/Lockerbie (sp?)?

 

[EagleRJ]

seems though there would be some kind of unmistakable evidence of being hit then. Being hit by a missle or proximity explosion would have to leave a lot of holes.

There was plenty of evidence. The eyewitnesses described a MANPADS launch perfectly- some even described the "tip-over" as the missile turns to track the target as it gets closer.
Many also described the initial explosion as a bright white flash, followed by a growing orange fireball. A helicopter pilot with a military background saw the explosion and even described it as being ordnance. A fuel/air explosion doesn't create a white flash.
Many parts of the aircraft had damage indicitive of a high-explosive detonation- massive deformation and pitting that is inconsistant with a fuel explosion or water impact; and there was a streak of residue consistant with rocket fuel across the cabin above the center fuel tank. The autopsy reports from some of the victims also reported strange 0.2" metal spheres in the bodies that are strangely identical to the pellets found in missile warheads.
It all points to one of the missiles detonating just under the aircraft's belly (as a proximity-fused missile would do), and the remains of the missile body continuing through the fuselage and out the other side.
Some of the key parts were "misplaced" during the investigation, and some had their records changed to indicate they were found somewhere other than where they were. There were even reports of FBI agents removing parts from a warehouse at 2:30am, and people hammering on debris to change its shape. If even 25% of these reports from people who were there are true, something fishy went on in the investigation.

Something else author DeMille pointed out: the animation that was created to show what the witnesses actually saw was generated by the CIA. What, Boeing, the FAA, and the NTSB don't have software to do this? Why the CIA?

In no other accident has there been a video produced by the CIA to explain to eyewitnesses what it was they saw. Most of the eyewitnesses were quick to say "that's not what I saw", but the media appeared to have bought it.

That "zoom climb" theory that was created to explain the streak of light doesn't hold water, either. Boeing determined that the forward part of the fuselage that broke away weighed around 80,000 pounds, and it caused the CG to shift aft by twelve feet! You can't tell me that a plane that is so tail-heavy and has an open front end can maintain aerodynamic flight and climb 4000-5000 feet, like the NTSB and the CIA claim!

 

[Vik]

This lame brain argument again. I predict 10 pages for this thread by Feb!

We'll never really know what happened, so why keep wasting time talking about it? No one knows 100% what happened.