Hmm ...
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR0003.pdf
Posted on 07/09/2025 4:16:16 AM PDT by MtnClimber
A Pair of Lawsuits Promise to Expose the Truth Behind the July 1996 Disaster.
On July 17, 1996, TWA 800, a Paris-bound 747, blew up ten miles off Long Island’s south shore, killing all 230 souls on board. In the days leading up to the anniversary, I will share some fresh insights on this tragedy and the much too successful cover-up that followed.
After 25 years investigating the destruction of TWA Flight 800, I have learned to temper my enthusiasms. That said, I continue to take heart when I see signs of life. Perhaps the most promising development in the case is the progression through the courts of Krick v. Raytheon.
Ronald Krick is the father of Oliver Krick, a 25-year-old student flight engineer killed in the crash. Krick has been joined in the suit by relatives of other deceased passengers and crew. The defendants are the Raytheon Company, the Lockheed Martin Corporation, and the United States government.
The Krick suit gained momentum when it absorbed information gleaned from a FOIA suit brought by Tom Stalcup, a no-nonsense physicist who has been pursuing this case since he was a grad student in 1996. To establish his claims Stalcup was granted subpoena power and was able to depose several key witnesses from within the investigation.
Stalcup appeared in the 2001 documentary, Silenced, produced by me and my late partner James Sanders. In 2013 Stalcup and the late Kristina Borjesson, formerly of CBS News, produced the excellent documentary, TWA Flight 800. What follows are extended passages from Krick v. Raytheon.
—On July 17, 1996, a Boeing 747 headed for Paris took off from New York’s John F. Kennedy International Airport at around 8:20 p.m. Within twelve minutes of takeoff, the plane exploded and crashed into the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Long Island, New York. All 230 passengers and crew members perished.
—After the incident, the federal government released a false report contending that the explosion was the result of an electrical fire in the airplane’s center fuel tank.
—Only recently, thanks to the work of physicist, Dr. Thomas Stalcup, through his Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) litigation in Massachusetts federal court, has evidence emerged proving that TWA 800’s explosion was not caused by any defect in the airplane, but instead by an errant United States missile fired at aerial target drones flying nearby.
—The evidence unearthed by Dr. Stalcup establishes that the United States, including its agencies, such as the United States Missile Defense Agency (formerly known as the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization), the United States Department of Defense, and the United States Navy (the “Government Defendants”), acting in concert and working side-by-side with Raytheon Company and Lockheed Martin Corporation (the “Contractor Defendants”) and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive (collectively the “Defendants”) were testing the Aegis Weapons System and firing SM-2 missiles with live warheads from warship(s) at aerial missile targets off the coast of New York in close proximity to commercial airline flight paths. One such missile struck TWA flight 800, causing it to break apart and crash into the Atlantic Ocean, killing everyone aboard.
—Newly discovered evidence also shows that these Defendants engaged in a top-down cover-up to prevent the public from learning the truth about TWA 800. Proof of this cover-up, and of Defendants’ underlying culpability for the crash, was only recently unearthed by Dr. Stalcup after more than a decade of FOIA litigation against the Government Defendants.....SNIP
“Yep. Typical turbofan compression ratio is 40:1, about four times higher than an auto gas engine and about twice that of a diesel engine. That’s why a fairly inert fuel can be used.”
Which brings up the elephant in the room. Even a gasoline engine with an electric arc source will not ignite or run on jet fuel even if it is atomized. The compression ratio and combustion temperatures are just not high enough. It is a settled science that has been around since Lenoir in 1860. The combination of conditions absolutely have to be correct.
Hmm ...
https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR0003.pdf
And the plane was at 10,000 feet. Would the missile have enough fuel to get up that high, and out that far?
Very much so.
But I wouldn't call him a glowie, he's more a 'dim'ie..
They lied. The only wiring around a fuel tank is "intrinsically safe". Look it up. The current in those device is too low to cause a spark or cause sufficient heating to ignite fuel. The "intrinsically safe" attribute is a fixed requirement for those systems.
Thank you for chiming in, I was hoping someone who worked in sensitive compartmentalized departments would chime in. It is real, and if you do not comply they can literally destroy your life as you know it. I have been there too... They will disappear you in a heartbeat if it is sensitive enough.
Oddly... The government agencies are not as much to worry about as much as the commercial government contractors are...
Well, sure. I actually do not believe the Navy shot the flight down. I suspect it was a terrorist launch.
Then how do aircraft fires occur? There is no atomization going on in a crash or engine fire.
All said and done, I don't think the Navy shot TWA 300 down.
“But judging by your behavior, if I did shoot electrical arcs into Jet fuel, and videoed it, then showed you the video, you would still deny the truth of it in favor of what the government propaganda is.”
That is the most important statement that has been made yet in this thread other than my own conveying the very same message. And it is true of almost all threads here that display ANY criticism of government.
This place is chocked full of those who consider the government as their master and infallible source of information. Government would NEVER lie... And this stupidity and trust in government is exactly why we are going to lose this battle for our Republic...
“Then how do aircraft fires occur? There is no atomization going on in a crash or engine fire.”
Fires yes, explosions no...
IIRC, they released some photos showing the shrapnel holes in the fuselage from the exploding missile?
“Fires yes, explosions no...”
Read the NTSB report. I posted a link in an earlier post.
Once you've got it lit, the fuel will atomize itself from the heat.
Candle wax will burn too if you get it hot enough so that it will atomize itself.
WildHighlander57 wrote: “Yes, with certain levels of security clearances there comes a lifelong requirement to not talk about what was done/worked on. Been there, done that. This would explain why nobody on board that ship talked.”
I’ve been there too and that explains nothing. There is no requirement to ever follow an illegal order. An order to cover up killing over 200 civilians is on it’s face, illegal.
And, can you imagine the government ever prosecuting someone who violated that illegal order? Just imagine, the prosecutor telling the judge/jury that they had to convict such a whistle blower? They would be laughed out of court.
“...was the pilot of the NG helicopter that witnessed a missile rising up from the waters prior to TWA800 exploding and gave radio traffic description.....
He became unreachable after that time.”
Sounds like a No Contact order. I had one when I was in. Kinda sucks cutting ppl off like that.
The fact they didn’t home in on anyone proffered a story kinda indicates somebody Fd up.
The NTSB report on Flight 800 is a lie. It was part of the Clinton ordered coverup.
If you understand the information contained in it, you can see that the report is a lie.
But you have to know what a Joule is, and what the combustion temperatures of Jet Fuel is. You have to know what amperage is, and you have to know what fusing is.
If you are knowledgeable about the things described in that report, you can tell it is a lie. If you are ignorant of such things, you are wasting your time reading it.
“JET-A1 boils at around 150°C - 250°C and has a flashpoint above 38˚C, which is crucial as the fuel could ignite dangerously.”
“AVGAS, a petroleum-based fuel, has a typical octane rating of 91 or 100 for a lean mixture and 96 or 130 for a rich mixture. Kerozene, on the other hand, has a much lower octane rating of around 15, which makes it similar to automotive diesel and much more resistant to detonation caused by sparks or compression.”
https://www.airwaysmag.com/new-post/properties-jet-aviation-fuel
“If you are ignorant of such things, you are wasting your time reading it.”
Sounds like you wasted your time reading it.
What is your point?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.