Is there anything new on TWA 800 these days? (self )

5-13-19

[InvisibleChurch]

Just watched a 2013 doc. Just wondering.

[MeganC]

“Are you suggesting it is possible to fire a stinger out a 21” diameter torpedo tube the same way we launch tomahawks and harpoons?”

And here’s the link I forgot...

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/6894/have-submarine-launched-anti-aircraft-missiles-finally-come-of-age

[DiogenesLamp]

I remember several things. The guy who headed up the investigation announced the results of the investigation before it started. The people taking part in the investigation were not allowed to talk to each other or anyone else... the “anyone else” I understood, not being allowed to talk to each other made no sense. Except, that they had a predetermined outcome and would not take any chances on anyone disputing it.

There were 130 people that saw a missile. Some of the witnesses went to the FBI and they refused to interview them, or interviewed them taking no notes.

It's like Notre Dame. They know who did it. They are afraid the public will find out who did it.

[Bryan24]

You obviously haven’t read the twa800 reports.

[MeganC]

“No that’s not me.”

Then thank you for your service! From the way it was described to me living in a submarine is not a lot of fun.

Also I’ve never heard the term ‘reactor operator’ so I know he never claimed to be doing that. Probably just a joke that I didn’t understand.

[SkyDancer]

Obviously I have. I have the latest NTSB report on Flt.800 and I’ve read the conspiracy stories as well.

[SkyDancer]

The white heat from a burning solid rocket engine and the white flare could have easily over rode the redness of a setting sun; in fact it would have enhanced it.

With regards to impact, the missiles are designed to explode in proximity of a target not blow through and explode on the other side.

A bit strange why no one from the US Navy has blown the whistle on this so called 'cover up'.

The exhaust temperature of a B747 is between 2-00-300degC, jet fuel ignites at around 38degC

[Intolerant in NJ]

Way back then when we heard from some of the witnesses who saw what looked like vapor trails headed for the plane that they were pressured and bullied by their FBI interviewers to change their stories, it seemed far-fetched - now, not so much......

[OA5599]

Then thank you for your service! From the way it was described to me living in a submarine is not a lot of fun.

No need to thank me, especially considering you're married to military. Sub life isn't that bad. They're pretty big. I didn't mind it.

Also I’ve never heard the term ‘reactor operator’ so I know he never claimed to be doing that. Probably just a joke that I didn’t understand.

Back in the engine room of a Los Angeles class boat, there were ten enlisted crew members and one officer on watch while the reactor was online. One of the watch stations was the Reactor Operator. The officer sat directly behind him. On either side were the Throttleman and Electrical Operator at their own control panels. Those four guys were in a small control room called Maneuvering.

Outside Maneuvering were watch stations such as Engine Room Upper Level, Engine Room Forward, Reactor Technician, etc. These are all just watch stations.

A Machinist's Mate is what's called a rate. That's what you become after going to specialized schools. Your rate follows you around no matter what watch station you're at, on or off a ship and regardless of (enlisted) rank. The other nuclear trained rates are Electrician's Mates and Electronics Technicians.

The joke is that after years of school which includes nuclear physics... it was all really just to learn how to boil water. A nuclear submarine is just the world's most advanced steam ship. But technically speaking, the only rate which actually boils the water is the Electronics Techs, because they're the only ones allowed to qualify as Reactor Operators. Machinist's and Electrician's Mates need not apply.

[OA5599]

We definitely did not have that capability in the 1990s. It really wasn’t on the radar as our biggest perceived threat was other submarines. Helicopters and planes were not really considered threats.

Post 9/11, missions obviously changed. I could see why they did try it out in the mid-2000s. Your article shows a Sidewinder, which is substantially larger than a stinger. Pretty interesting though.

BTW I had a secret clearance (not top secret) and there was definitely a missile we were capable of launching that we received training on and were instructed to say “I can neither confirm nor deny the presence of xxxxxxx on board our vessel” if ever asked about it. No one ever asked me about it, so I was disappointed I never got to use that movie quote sounding line. But the point is, this particular weapon is easily found on google, and I was trained on it. Yet I never heard of anti-aircraft missiles for our boat, and I can’t see that being an even bigger secret than the ones I’m being evasive describing right now.

[ETCM]

Several types of US submarines can launch small surface to air missiles like the Stinger.

A Stinger Det on a sub? No. Back in the day, we did have Stinger Detachments deploy on some surface vessels, even some with air defense systems, as we had identified a weakness against "low-slow" flyers like helicopters and Cessnas. But not subs. A sub would have to be on a special mission to deliberately shoot down a commercial aircraft.

But a secret agent, on a submarine, with a stinger missile, shooting down a commercial airliner? I think I saw that in a Tom Cruise movie. Mission Impossible? I'm not saying it's impossible, just that it didn't happen. SLAM? A weapon that is not deployed, especially back in '96? So we sent a sub out with an experimental weapon to down a commercial aircraft?

He also said that he thought it was a US missile because the US missiles of the time had enough power to take down a big aircraft while the Russian missiles didn’t.

This makes zero sense. Commercial aircraft are a very soft target. You don't need a powerful missile to knock them down.

[Rockingham]

They lined up like trained seals to do the Clintons’ bidding.

[DiogenesLamp]

With regards to impact, the missiles are designed to explode in proximity of a target not blow through and explode on the other side.

Even if they rupture that same fuel tank you claimed did it by itself? That's a bit of a tricky needle to thread.

A bit strange why no one from the US Navy has blown the whistle on this so called 'cover up'.

Navy radar operators and their superiors will follow orders. Nobody else in the Navy knows anything about it, except perhaps for recovery people, and they can be ordered to shut up too.

The exhaust temperature of a B747 is between 2-00-300degC,

Not fifty feet from the engine exhaust it isn't.

.

.

.

jet fuel ignites at around 38degC

100 degrees Fahrenheit? Seriously? Just siting in the tanks on a hot summer day causes it to explode? Someone tell the aviation industry!

[SkyDancer]

I believe this over any Flt800 unacknowledged pseudo-investigator like James Sanders (Navy accidental launch) and then of course Michael Davis who said that it was a bolide exploded near the airplane. A bolide is a large meteoroid, explosively torn apart as it hits the atmosphere.

Next up was Elaine Scarry who said it electromagnetic interference.

William S. Donaldson, a retired Naval officer alluded two missiles being fired from the water, most likely as a terrorist attack, and subsequently the FBI and NTSB conspired to cover up this fact due to political pressure.

No conspiracy theorists can get their collective stories together; you would have to be a non-believer to think that some underpaid sailor wouldn't have been running to the New York Post or The Sun or some other sensational media outlet and sell the story for a few hundred dollars. And the Clinton admin. covered it all up.

[SkyDancer]

You want the NSTB report on that as well? JetA-1 will combust on its own given the right heat source. I guess you don’t know about the flash point test.

[SkyDancer]

Read it: https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19900511-1

[DiogenesLamp]

The white heat from a burning solid rocket engine and the white flare could have easily over rode the redness of a setting sun; in fact it would have enhanced it.

[SkyDancer]

Not the same as a shoulder fired missile.

[Alberta's Child]

Marine surface radar shows a lone unaccounted for boat speeding away from the crash site while all the other boats in the area were rushing towards the crash site.

If true, this piece of information would actually seem to be evidence AGAINST a terrorist attack using a surface-to-air missile.

Many months (or years) after the incident, the U.S. government acknowledged that there was at least one naval vessel in the area that night. If that boat you describe was actually speeding away from the location of the incident and anyone believed there was even a remote chance that the aircraft had been shot down by a terrorist, then surely the naval vessel would have pursued the fleeing boat.

This is the TWA Flight 800 version of the legendary "dog that didn't bark" from Sherlock Holmes lore.

[DiogenesLamp]

You want the NSTB report on that as well? JetA-1 will combust on its own given the right heat source. I guess you don’t know about the flash point test.

I'm beginning to think you must be the goofy fellow with whom I argued the last time around. Yes, I read the report, and it clearly said you had to put some enormous amount of electrical energy into the fuel to get it to ignite. Something like a thousand watts or something.

I pointed out at the time that the temperature ranges are within the realm of possibility, but the electrical energy necessary to get it to ignite was completely impossible.

Here. You need to watch this.

Jet fuel is not so easy to light.

[Alberta's Child]

A Missile fired at a target does not go through the target and out the other side. A proximity fuse detonates the warhead slightly before the missile 'hits' the target. This is to do more damage.

One of the scenarios I had considered was the possibility that there WAS a naval exercise taking place that night off the south shore of Long Island, and that TWA 800 wasn't hit by a missile -- but by a drone used to simulate a missile for testing purposes. A drone would not have exploded like a missile would.