"1. the rocket motor was still burning when the missile impacted the aircraft, 2. There is almost no evidence that describes the VERY noticeable and memorable smoke trail of every Navy SAM employed by our Navy and therefore the motor must have been smokeless. 3. The warhead did not function. 4. the missile must have struck the aircraft in an almost perpendicular flightpath."
First of all I am not following which ever person you are referring to. As for your issues: 1) Highly likely given range of missiles that could have been used and the altitude of the aircraft that the motor was still burning when it hit (even without that there would still be residue), 2) at night the smoke trail would not have been as noticable (but I concede this point more towards your argument - but not entirely), 3) The warhead did not malfuntion and since it worked as advertised it most likely was the cause of the center fuel tank explosion, 4) the perpendicular flight issue I fail to understand why you think it had to be near perpendicular, from the photo's and the eyewitness accounts the plane was struck from the bottom near center of mass with an object travelling at a high rate up speed upward - again very consistent with the path a radar guided missile would take if fired from a surface ship at an overhead target. Early reports did mention the solid rocket motor residue and then went quiet on that subject (if I remember right, some people changed at that time too)
Waited for your reply, but it is very late here on the east coast and us old guys cant stay up too late. I will look for your thoughts again tomorrow.
Jack Cashill is the author of this article and of several books on this topic. He makes his money writing books concerning various conspiracy theories.
With regard to your responses to my points...
1. If the rocket motor was still burning, it was smoking. Big time. Anyone who has witnessed a SAM launch knows that the smoke trail of a burning SAM is unmistakable, unforgettable, and far more prominent than even the flame from the rocket. Yet almost no evidence of that trail is described anywhere near TWA 800.
2. When TWA 800 went down it was still daylight.
3. SAM warheads are proximity or contact fuses. They are not designed to penetrate an aircraft and then explode. They are designed to explode just outside an aircraft to shower that aircraft with thousands of pieces of shrapnel to sever electrical, hydraulic and fuel lines. Not a single piece of evidence was found in TWA 800 to support that.
4. This article states the missile residue was found in rows 17-19. The aircraft was moving at roughly 350kias when it was hit. If the missile hit it in anything other than a perpendicular flight path, the "residue" would have been spread through the length of the fuselage. Not just two rows. If the missile hit the aircraft from the bottom, than it must have been fired from almost directly below it, because no SAM flies a profile that would cause it to intercept an aircraft from a vertical climb. If the missile had been fired from almost directly below, than everyone would have seen a large column of smoke connecting TWA 800 with the source of the missile launch. Nobody did.