Posted on 06/22/2006 8:43:39 AM PDT by canuck_conservative
Editor's note: On the evening of July 17, 1996, at 8:19 p.m., TWA Flight 800, a Boeing 747, took off from Kennedy Airport, bound for Paris. At 8:31 p.m., over 730 people watched Flight 800 explode, killing all 230 of the people aboard.
Not long afterwards, millions of Americans watched their televisions in fascinated horror as search and rescue crews looked for survivors among the flaming debris. Only dead bodies were recovered.
Flight 800 is mostly an ugly memory for people these days. The U.S. government issued an explanation that a fuel tank had somehow exploded. Yet, they flatly denied any evidence existed of foul play, including the possibility that Flight 800 had been blown out of the air by a missile.
All but a few journalists accepted the government's version of events. Few bothered to investigate the numerous eyewitnesses, the radar records and the physical evidence that all suggested a strikingly different explanation of Flight 800's untimely demise. And those few who did question the government's version were made to look like fools or, worse, thrown in jail and prosecuted as criminals for meddling in an official investigation.
What really happened to Flight 800? ....
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
The center fuel tank was not being used. It was almost empty.
They reproduced the incident. I would suspect it would take several tries to get it just right. The people doing the test did not believe it until they ran test with fuel tanks and recreated it. They also took a 747 up under the same conditions with temperature probes in the fuel tank.
Have you seen the documentary?
Not long afterwards, millions of Americans watched their televisions in fascinated horror as search and rescue crews looked for survivors among the flaming debris. Only dead bodies were recovered. ~~~~ [Later that same night, the 'cocktail party' tape loop was played on network tv. -- the short loop showed a streak of light climbing from the horizon out at sea, and a bright flash from above, out of the cameras field of view. -- People at the party were seen rushing to the rail, pointing. ~~~~end tape~~~ ] ...
The network showed this tape at least several times over a half hour period around midnight eastern of July 17, 1996. --- I saw it, as did at least tens of thousands of other late nite TV viewers. --
The next morning, the loop had disappeared from network news, never to be seen again.
Maybe it just existed in my lying eyes?
OK
That's not the point, I know the center tank was NOT being used. But I doubt fuel was being pumped to the engines from the other tanks once the "explosion" took place. Therefore, no power for climb.
MSNBC and the missing videotape: Jack Cashill examines network's role in TWA Flight 800 cover-up
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1343443/posts?q=1&&page=1
It is my understanding that the incident was NOT recreated, but ignition sources of higher energy were necessary to get a burn. To which documentary are you referring?
About 2 seconds.
The one of the Discovery Channel. They figured the wire in the fuel probe touched another wire in the same harness that was outside of the fuel tank. They examined other aircraft still in service and found numerous aircraft with chaffed wiring.
They recreated the explosion I believe at least twice. They also placed a structual part of the aircraft they felt had failed and initiated the break up behind the cockpit. This part failed in the test.
Two whole seconds! I do not believe the remaining parts of the aircraft could even rotate to a climb attitude in two seconds much less climb 3000-4000 feet. Let's see that would be a climb rate of 90000 feet per minute. I see a problem here!
I think it was climbing at the time, once it lost the foward section, the CG would have shifted drastically to the tail. I just threw in the 2 seconds on the engines. The rate of climb per minute is figured if the plane climbed at that speed for a minute. Its climb was very, very brief.
Lets go to another airplane that has just pulled out of a dive at 450knots, we will say a stunt plane or fighter. What would be its initial rate of climb for the first one to three seconds? Of course this would not be substained.
Do you think for one second a 747 is going to climb with the nose blown off?
If it has wings it will for a while. Get you a model airplane that will fly. Trim it or blance it out. Then break off a good section of the nose and launch it and watch what happens. Its initial motion will be almost straight up.
There is a profound difference between a model airplane and a 747. The 747 with the nose broken off is going to be like a giant sock, which will brake the plane immediately.
And you're never going to convince the statists that it was anything else.
For the rest of us, who were neither there to see nor have a vested interested in one side or the other, the destruction of Flight 800 will remain an unanswered question barring the unearthing of new evidence.
I'm not holding my breath for that to happen.
Just don't act like most of the TWA800 conspiracy types and be a jerk toward those of us who don't eat up conspiracy theories.
Correct, it was in a normal cruise climb at the time, but with the drastic change in aerodynamics and loss of power, hard to imagine much of a climb after "explosion". Did they ever find the "lost" Long Island radar tapes? Sure seems like a lot of tape evidence came up missing once it got in the investigators hand.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.