We've had this discussion for years now. Every time this subject comes up, we spend a good part of the time hashing out the shoulder fired missile angle. I don't think any of us has the full answer to this mystery. What is certain is that our government covered up the real cause of this flight going down.
Don't you think it's far more productive to address issues like the federal government stating that there were no military surfact ships within something like 135 miles of N.Y. at the time of the event, only to find out months later that there was indeed an exercise going on almost, if not directly under the crash site on the night of the crash?
Now, back to hissing and moaning about shoulder fired missles vs non-shoulder fired missiles, something that people vehemently disagree about to the point that the issue of a surface fired missile taking out the plane goes almost undiscussed over and over again.
Who really gives a blank about the source at this point? It was a missile, it left the surface and it hit TWA 800. End of story. Maybe we should switch to surface water temperature. I'm sure we could work up a good sweat over that.
D1, you've been around long enough to know that the other side will latch onto the smallest inconsistency or error to discredit any points we make. Not only that, but trying to promote a shoulder-fired SAM takes attention away from the Naval angle that IMO is the most likely scenario.