Replies

About a minute and a half before the explosion, someone in the cockpit of the aircraft said, "Look at that crazy fuel flow indicator there on number four."

I don't think it takes a genius to surmise that what happened to Flight 800 was a major fuel leak, with engine exhaust as the ignition source. The "streaking light" seen by so many people from the ground was probably a series of ignitions prior to the main explosion, giving the impression that something was rising up to meet the aircraft.

Knowing very little about either aircraft or missiles, I lurked about for quite some time on one of the more popular aviation disaster newsgroups to try and get a feel for the technical issues involved in the discussion of Flight 800. One particular piece of information I garnered from experts who posted there is that there is no known missile whose engines would have continued to burn at the distance necessary to have fit the various missile scenarios described by the conspiracy theorists. Another is that the launch of such a missile would literally have lit up the horizon for many miles around; something not seen by any of the witnesses.

13,800 feet is just in the outside range of a shoulder-fired missile--but that's assuming that you're firing straight up at a stationary target. If the target is downrange even by a little bit, and moving, you've got to factor in the distance downrange as well as its rate of speed, into the equation.

I agree, TWA800 was above the normal range of a shoulder fired missile, but I don't think you can discount the many witnesses whose description so accurately depicted a missile's flight.

I think it was either a lucky shot by a terrorist or an accidental shoot down by our own Navy who was conducting anti-aircraft missile tests in the area. 13,000 ft would be a duck shoot for a ship launched missile and the launch wouldn't be highly visible to witnesses on shore.

The fuel leak (or center fuel tank explosion) scenario just doesn't work for me. You ever try to pour a Coke out your car window at 60 mph? It sprays back along your car, not in a neat column toward the ground. Imagine fuel pouring from an airplane at 200+ mph, no way would you mistake that for a missile coming up from the ground.

The Chinese QW-1 has a spec altitude of 13,130 feet (4 KM) and range of 16,400 feet (5 KM). And the QW-1A has improved performance. Pakistan has a similar MANPAD, the MK-2.

The British Starstreak has a range of almost 23,000 feet. Congressional testimony has given 20,000 feet as the range of easily obtained MANPADs.

"Look at that crazy fuel flow indicator there on number four."

are you claiming that the fuel sensor for engine #4 is in the BODY of the 747 and not out near the #4 engine??

why didn't fuel sensors for engines one, two and three give similar readings?

is there any evidence that the WING or ENGINE #4 exploded?

i'm afraid your theory won't wash. i realize there is a very strong incentive to avoid cognitive dissonance, but when something stinks, it is rotten.