Posted on 05/13/2019 2:13:03 PM PDT by InvisibleChurch
Just watched a 2013 doc. Just wondering.
Trust me when I write that I would probably guess right the first time about your knowledge. But I’m not going to do so here.
When you have been ordered to determine the cause is *NOT* terrorism, why would you want to talk to people who would confirm that it is?
I guess then it’s the conspiracy theory you like the best since there are several of them out there.
Certainly the low voltage, low amperage sensor was not enough to do it. They reverted to a theorized short from the high-voltage into the sensor wiring, but, per Boeing, on the 747 the high-voltage and low-voltage wiring are never run parallel or even close to each other so there is literally no way that the high could have shorted to the low. Some threw out a theory that maybe it was something from the entertainment system that did it. No evidence, just a wild-assed guess.
As I say, it’s the conspiracy theory you like the best is the one you’ll defend since there are several of them out there.
On the chance that you might be correct, thank you. I don't even want the discussion to lead in that direction.
When you are instructed to make something up to disguise the fact an aircraft had been hit by a missile, you have to do the best you can to make your alternative explanation seem plausible.
I'm having a hard time finding my previous commentary on the subject. Do you have any search ideas that would help? I really don't want to spend hours looking through my posting history.
When the government goes to extreme lengths to avoid the eyewitness testimony and to obfuscate what they do have to present to the NTSB, then there is something there. I’ve read every single one of their statements. Have you? I thought not. I have also looked at all of the photos of the CWT and do not see the evidence of an explosion of enough force to knock the 77,000 pound nose off the 747. . . And I did the math that shows the plane could not have flown another foot, much less zoom climbed an additional 3600 ft (CIA) or just 1600 ft (NTSB) with NO ENGINE POWER (per Boeing and the black boxes). Without the nose, it stalled and then dropped in a ballistic fall. That’s what the math says, and that’s what the wreckage location says happened. NOT what the NTSB or CIA zoom climbs would have happened in either case to have the witnesses see a trail of the burning plane climbing and mistake it for a rocket trail.
Here is an excerpt from the testimony of a pilot who was in the air and observed something STRIKE the plane. . . A trained observer, Major Fred Meyer, of the New York National Guard, a helicopter pilot who was the first person on the scene of the burning plane on the ocean after witnessing the explosion.
Testimony of Major Frederick Charles Meyer, Pilot, H-60 Helicoptor, New York National Guard, Witness to TWA-800:“I looked up and to my — slightly to my left front , and I saw a streak of light. “
“I saw to — in front of me and slightly to my left of dead front I saw a streak of light in the sky. I have no idea what it was. And my reaction when I saw it was, what the hell is that?
I observed of for somewhere in approximately three to five seconds moving in a gradually descending arc — sort of a gentle descending trajectory. Similar to that which you would observe at night if you observed a shooting star. The difference is that it was red-orange in color and it was broad daylight. It was as bright then as it is right now looking out that window. It was broad daylight.
And there were no clouds in the sky — absloutely cloudless night. Other people have told me there was some haze. If there was, it was very minimal.
I observed the streak of light for three to five seconds. And then I saw an explosion. And about one to two seconds after that I saw a second, and possibly a third, explosion. Now, these were hard explosions. This looked like flak. It’s a hard explosion. It’s like an HPX explosion, as opposed to a soft explosion like gasoline, or something.
How do I know that? Well, I’m recalling back 20, 25 years. And I put — if— if I observe something in the air in Vietnam, different things exploding did different characteristics.
Somebody would have to be more technical. That’s — that’s as much as I can tell you, is that some things are hard explosions. They’re gen — they, to me, resemble anti-aircraft fire and other things are soft explosions; like if you saw somebody hit a fuel storage depot, the type of explosion that would occur there would be slow.
What I saw were — and I want to — I want to step back and tell you that at no time during what I observed did I ever see the airframe. I never saw anything that told me there was an airplane out there. So, the streak of light, I saw the explosion about one to two seconds — second and poss — just a little — there’s something in my mind’s eye that says there was a little something — for want of a better term — maybe a nanosecond after that second explosion.
And then, from that approximate position emanated this fireball, which was a soft explosion. And it was definitely petroleum. If you’ve ever seen a — I — I did not fly attac; I flew rescue. But I was in position to observe A-4s and F-4s hitting storage depots and watching the color of a storage depot that’s being hit and exploding and blowing up. And I knew at that moment — of course, we all know now — but I knew at that moment that that was a petroleum explosion.
And that fireball — you know, it — it was huge. It was easily four fingers, at my extended arm’s length. I looked over here at — at — on my right and I had the setting sun. Now, the sun was just maybe a couple of degrees — the lower orb of the setting sun was bright red, and it was probably just a couple of degrees about the horizon at the time this happened. And at that time I estimated the size that this fireball grew to to be approximately four times the size of the sun. So, I can’t give you degrees and I can’t — all I can do is give you relativity.
I didn’t put my hand out in front of me at the time so I can’t really tell you that it was four fingers. But it was — it was probably even bigger than that. It was probably the spread of the hand across the windshield. And at that time it was somewhere between 10 and 13 miles away. . . “
There were at least two other airline pilots in the sky that night who saw something rise up and hit the airframe of TWA-800 but their testimony was not presented to the NTSB, instead they were subsumed into a summary by the FBI, like Major Meyers and “interpreted” out of any semblance of coherence. It was only years later and FOIA suits that the raw data came out.
By the way, the total number of witnesses who saw something rise up and hit the plane is over 600. . . and they saw the incident from almost 360º around the incident. It was a pleasant evening and a lot of people were out and about and saw it.
You can believe the propaganda if you like, but I don’t. It was not the Center Wing Tank. To believe that you have to believe too many impossible to physics and math and accept too many irregularities with the investigation that have never happened before or since in an NTSB investigation. My father was a civilian expert who worked until his retirement for the Air Force and was involved in many air crash investigations. He was livid about the phony investigation of TWA-800 and the coverup.
-PJ
You should have read further. I posted several different conspiracy theories.
I still go with the NTSB - it’s what conspiracy theory you want to defend since there are several out there. I thought the one with the meteor hitting the plane was interesting.
No one has explained why the nose would have broken off up there when the CWT is between the WINGS, back quite a few feet (about 15 feet) from the break, in front of the front wing spar which would have had to have failed for the explosion to have reached the point of fracture. Remember, we are talking an over pressure of just 2.5 to 3 bar here. In fact, they really haven’t explained how, in their ZOOM climbs after the explosion of the CWT, the WINGS STAYED ON, since the CWT is the structural component that the wings are attached to the air frame. It is a box girder composed of several (five IIRC) large structural prestressed truss girders running across the fuselage with longitudinal purlins crossing between the girders. Compromise that structure and the wings have no strength to support the plane in flight. None. The wings would fold upward under the forces of lift.
Your idiotic picture graphic shows a huge fireball coming from the NOSE, an impossibility, not to mention the fireball coming from a supposed explosion from the Center Wing Tank which had at best somewhere around 40 to 50 gallons There is no way it would produce what they show. The huge fireball came from the wing tanks which were full, most likely when the left wing came off. It certainly could not have come from where your graphic shows it coming from. . . Nor could 50 gallons produce that big a plume of fire. It’s quite a flight of imagination. All witnesses said the fireball rose upward and something fell out of the bottom of it, not flew out of it.
Their was an Email that was going around the office that day from a remorseful Naval officer who admitted it as being a “mistakenly” fired missile from a Navy ship involved in exercizes nearby. One employee was able to print it out before the email mysteriously disappeared from the server about 20 minutes after it had appeared. We all read it. It was an official D.O.D. originated document. I don’t know what ever happened to the one copy that was printed out, but the employee spent a whole hour in the commander’s office It was never spoken of again. We were all told by command that it was a hoax.
-PJ
You didn’t bother to read Major Meyer’s statement, did you? I thought not.
There are hundreds more, very similar. Do you want me to post more? I can. They paint a damning picture.
But you prefer the cover-up. There is actually very little evidence for the CWT explosion. . . In fact there is none. It’s a theory with no proof. Just a claim that if all these improbable events happened, it COULD have happened this way. Boeing did not sign off on that claim. . . and the move to inert the fuel tanks in existing 747s was not a priority. Some were never inerted. Just allowed to fly until they were retired. That shows how much credence Boeing and the airlines gave to this “solution” to this “accident.” Even the NTSB did not make it an airworthiness or safety priority. The most they suggested was to keep a larger ullage in the CWT, making the fuel a larger heat sink.
You are just throwing things against the wall with your posts hoping something sticks, not actually engaging in actual debate. You are not interested in factual data. . . Or you are here only to spread disinformation at the government’s behest.
A sub launched missile he had been working on went dark and he never knew how it turned out. The missile was programmed to hunt for the center mass of its target.
His theory was that a missile like that was being tested out on the Sound and it acquired the airliner instead of its drone.
He said that Electric Boat keeps a sub available for tests and it can run with an extremely small crew. As in just the very few people involved in a dark program. Easy to keep the story contained.
I have so many questions!
EB keeps a sub available? As in their own submarine or they just hold onto one of the $2billion subs that the US Navy paid for with tax payers' money? And the navy, which at the time wanted to have 75 attack submarines but only had 60+ was cool with this?
Who "can run it with an extremely small crew?" Electric Boat? Or the US Navy? Is EB taking their secret submarine out with ex-navy mercenaries? And how do they run it with a small crew compared to the US Navy? Is the navy over-staffing their boats? The navy makes welders and divers out of non-welding and diving rates to cut down on the crew. Does EB perhaps not man every position? Or run that crew into the ground? How many people are we talking here?
Is this EB submarine an existing class? Or their own special design? The relatively secret US Navy submarines at the time were the deep diving nuclear Submarine NR-1 (no weapons on board other than small arms) and the special ops boat USS Parche based in Washington state. But everyone knew about those boats, just not what they did.
When EB took their secret sub out, did they have permission to do live fire exercises in one of the busiest airspaces on the planet or did the defense company just decide the risk to test a near worthless missile was worth it?
Who was flying the drone? Was that controlled by the secret submarine or was it land based? Where did it take off from? What kind of drone was it?
When the airliner was shot down accidentally because it ignored the drone and went for the 747 instead, no one in the secret sub or controlling the drone or anyone at EB that had anything to do with the weapons development blew the whistle? That company must be amazing to work for and the sub captain must have been beloved by crew to keep that kind of secret for the rest of their lives.
Too bad I didn't have a captain like that. None of the guys on the sub I was on would cover up for a screw up like that.
Can’t have the people know the truth that mooselimbs are at war with any and everything not mooselimb.
WTF? I’m just starting the truth of an event that happened that day. There are several people alive who could back up my statement. I’m not discounting or challenging anyone’s hypothesis or theory of what may have happened. Just stating truthfully what took place one day at NUSC. As it stunned us, every one of the Special projects team and we all scratched our heads at the Dept. Heads explanation of the incident as a “hoax” but it has always bothered me. As having been a Naval Intelligence specialist I saw many things that were kept behind the veil to “protect the people” from panic, outrage or scandal. Some of which I agreed with, but some still haunt me. This was but a blip in the overall scheme of things.
-PJ
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.