Wreckage of fatal TWA Flight 800 to be destroyed 25 years after crash

New York Post ^ | February 24, 2021 | Tamar Lapin

[ConservativeStatement]

The wreckage of TWA Flight 800 is set to be destroyed — nearly 25 years after the doomed aircraft crashed off the coast of Long Island, killing all 230 people on board.

For the last two decades, the reconstructed Boeing 747 has been housed in a Virginia hangar and used by the National Transportation Safety Board as a training tool for accident investigators.

But the federal agency on Monday announced it planned to decommission and destroy the wreckage, as its lease on the 30,000-square-foot Ashburn warehouse is set to expire.

[dragnet2]

Thanks for your opinion.

There have been at least three center wing tank explosions

I didn't know that. Did it blow those aircraft out of the sky as well? Btw, there has also been a lot of aircraft shot down by missiles.☺

I don't recall, what was the alleged ignition source? Wasn't it a sensor in the tank or something?

[mabarker1]

You’re probably thinking of AA587 bound for Jammaica that went down from “Wake Turbulence” of Departing Aircraft a head of AA587.

American Airlines Flight 587 - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Airlines_Flight_587
American Airlines Flight 587 was a regularly scheduled international passenger flight from John F. Kennedy International Airport to Las Américas International Airport in Santo Domingo, the capital of the Dominican Republic.On November 12, 2001, the Airbus A300B4-605R flying the route crashed into the neighborhood of Belle Harbor, on the Rockaway Peninsula of Queens, New York City.

The Accident;

The aircraft taxied to Runway 31L behind a Japan Airlines (JAL) Boeing 747-400 (JAL Flight 47) preparing for takeoff. The JAL flight was cleared for takeoff at 9:11:08 am EST. At 9:11:36, the tower controller cautioned Flight 587 about potential wake turbulence from a preceding B747.[4]:2

At 9:13:28, the A300 was cleared for takeoff and left the runway at 9:14:29, about 1 minute and 40 seconds after the JAL flight. The aircraft climbed to an altitude of 500 feet (150 m) and then entered a climbing left turn to a heading of 220°. At 9:15:00, the captain made initial contact with the departure controller, informing him that the airplane was at 1,300 feet (400 m) and climbing to 5,000 feet (1,500 m). The controller instructed the aircraft to climb to and maintain 13,000 feet (4,000 m).[4]:3 The flight data recorder (FDR) showed that the events leading to the crash began when the aircraft hit wake turbulence from the JAL flight in front of it at 9:15:36. In response to a new wave of turbulence, Molin alternated between moving the rudder from the right to the left and back again in quick succession from 9:15:52, causing sideslip until the lateral force caused composite lugs that attached the vertical stabilizer to fail at 9:15:58.[4]:xi,135 The stabilizer separated from the aircraft and fell into Jamaica Bay, about one mile north of the main wreckage site.

The aircraft pitched downwards after the stabilizer loss. As the pilots struggled to control the aircraft, it went into a flat spin. The resulting aerodynamic loads sheared both engines from the aircraft; they fell several blocks north and east of the main wreckage site, causing minor damage to a gas station and major damage to one home and a boat. The loss of engines cut power to the FDR at 9:16:01, while the cockpit voice recorder (CVR), using an emergency bus, cut off at 9:16:14.8, on impact with the ground. At 9:16:04, the stall warning sounded on the CVR.[4]:195 The last recorded words were Molin saying, “What the hell are we into, we’re stuck in it” (9:16:07) with States replying, “Get out of it, get out of it.”[9][10] The aircraft slammed into the ground at Newport Avenue and Beach 131st Street.

[dragnet2]

I think the same type of thing happened at SNA or John Wayne, a small jet or turbo prop type aircraft was on approach and went down into a dealership about 2 miles out. If I recall they said it was wake turbulence.

[Widget Jr]

If you can provide the full title, I will try to look it up.

First, not all witnesses claim a missile strike. TWA 800 was roughly ten miles offshore, at 13,000 to 14,000 feet up when it exploded. The time was around 8:30 pm, scattered clouds, and dusk lighting.

My issue with the missile theories is no one can clearly identify what type of missile, how it could have been employed, or if seeing what was claimed was actually possible for many of the eye witnesses.

• From what numbers I can find the Stinger missile motor burns for 3-4 seconds, and would be at most 5,000 feet up before the motor burns out. Witnesses reported seeing a missile powered all the way to impact. That rules out Stingers and Strelas.
• Stingers and Strelas have lousy combat performance. After the motor burns out, the missile is losing energy, and the missile seeker is running out of coolant the entire time. For a Stinger type weapon to even hit TWA-800 is unlikely, and would be a poor choice to fire just one missile. When the manufacture of a weapon talks about it's 90-plus-% success rate in testing and practice firings, it is guaranteed to not have that when used for real.
• Bigger surface to air missiles uses command link, semi-active or active radar homing. That means tracking and guidance radars. A Roland, SA-8/9K33 Osa, or larger launcher is going to look really suspicious sitting on a barge right off the U.S. Coast.
• The USN doesn't test surface to air missiles right below air traffic corridors, and USN SAMs used in testing are know to use range safety self destruct packages.
• For what is claimed about a missile, a FFG-7 Perry or CG-47 Ticonderoga would have had to have been with a few miles of where TWA-800 went down, and no such ship was seen at the time.
• There is the limit of human vision, which on average is .0003 radian. At at least 10 miles distance, a single stage Standard or Patriot is too small to see directly. Some witness claim to have seen a missile over 20 miles away.
• Dusk lighting, distance, and background mean even the missile's smoke trail would be really hard to see.

Short version:

• Small missiles do not have the performance described.
  
• Big missiles could not hide their launchers.
  
• In all cases, any type of missile at the minimum possible distance to shore of ~10 miles, at dusk, would be nearly impossible to see and identify.

Airliner fuel tank explosions have happened. In a eleven year period, there were three, two definite and TWA-800 (Safety in Avionics: Time to Stop Fuel Tank Explosions)
May 11, 1990, Philippine Airlines Flight 143 had a center fuel tank explosion while on the ground in Manila.
March 3, 2001, Thai Airways International Flight 114 was destroyed by a center fuel tank explosion while parked at the gate in Bangkok.

For TWA-800, the official explanation of the fuel tank explosion exists, because it was recorded on the flight recorder that the pilot was saying that the fuel quantity system was giving crazy readings two and half minutes before the explosion. When the tank was recovered, wiring in the tank showed signs of arcing. In the official explanation's favor, there were two definite center tank explosion, and TWA-800. For the reasons I've explained, the missile theories have larger problems then the official explanation.

Now, I am only asking what I think are reasonable questions, and am not claiming any expertise. So if anyone can point out my mistakes (the close I get to bedtime, the more mistakes I post) to reasonable counter explanations, including Phd Physics papers (where I read the beginning and end and skip the calculus and Latin in the middle), please point me in a direction to look.

[alstewartfan]

Thank you. I only wish I could engage you more, but I can’t. The newsletters from AIM were from the late 90’s,probably 1996, 7 or 8. I’m thinking ‘97.

[Pajamajan]

Seriously?🙄

[Widget Jr]

Honestly, you gave me a reason to express what I had been thinking about for a few weeks. The next time you want someone to give you a excuse to post a page or two, let me know. 😄

What does FDR and AIM stand for? I can go sleuthing through libraries, maybe even get to use a old microfiche card reader.

[alstewartfan]

Slow typist here. Flight data recorder. Accuracy in Media.

[Widget Jr]

Thanks.

[gr8eman]

Yes, I saw it too!

[gr8eman]

It was the Navy, I am sure. I believe at the time only the Russians, Brits, and US Navy had that capability!

[KC_for_Freedom]

I was listening to Lee Rodgers on KSFO and he was totally against the conspiracy theory about a missile. His claim, “you have too many people who have to stay silent and someone would talk” I went along with that idea but this last election seems to have a lot of people who are not coming forward, and what about the FBI and the Steel dossier? As we go on, it seems more and more likely that we have the ability to keep large groups of people quiet about things that should come out by now.

[ALPAPilot]

https://www.aviation-accidents.net/thai-airways-boeing-b737-400-hs-tdc-flight-tg114/

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine_Airlines_Flight_143

Both aircraft were at the gate when the explosions occurred.

My understanding of TWA was that it was a chaffed wire from a capacitor type fuel quantity indicating system.

[dragnet2]

Looking at the links, thanks!

[1066AD]

USN is a possible theory but the thing that troubles me about that is that how would it ever be kept secret after so long and so many people aware of the truth ?

[swingdoc]

I live in Seattle, I know a few people that worked in the tanks of the 747s.
The fuel indicator sensor was a passive sensor with tiny voltage, determined not to be capable of ignition. The investigation never proved the exact cause but hypothesized that a short occurred within the same wire bundled with higher voltages, then sent a voltage back into the tank through the sensor. Everyone I spoke with doing the actual all said no way, no chance. Regardless, all the wiring was replaced with new wire and a new bundling configuration. Also, there were generators for the air conditioning units that lay below the center tank and were stated to have caused enough heat to make the jet fuel more combustible.
Again, all the guys that live and work in these tanks for years completely discounted the supposed official cause

[Widget Jr]

Nice sunny day, at 8:30 pm at night, scattered clouds, dusk lighting, and people on shore at least 10 miles away?

[Widget Jr]

RE #47:

TWA-800 was flying to Rome via Paris. On that model of 747 going to Paris, the center tank would have had fuel in it?

[one guy in new jersey]

An old secret is being buried.

[Amberdawn]

While I don’t know the fuel needs for a West to East flight per say, the airstream does allow planes to use less fuel.