Cape man buoys theory missile downed jet (TWA Flight 800)

Boston Herald ^ | Tuesday, July 18, 2006 | Joe Dwinell

[PajamaTruthMafia]

Cape man buoys theory missile downed jet By Joe Dwinell

A Bay State physicist is taking on the National Transportation Safety Board in federal court in Boston to help bolster his theory a missile is to blame for taking down TWA Flight 800 a decade ago.

“I don’t want this 10-year anniversary to go by without paying attention to this plausible theory,” said Tom Stalcup, a Falmouth resident who holds a doctorate in physics and heads up the Flight 800 Independent Researchers Organization.

Flight 800 exploded and crashed in the sea south of Long Island, N.Y., at 3 p.m. on July 17, 1996.

Stalcup’s group, linked mostly by the Internet, has filed a complaint in U.S. District Court in Boston seeking documents relating to the crash, including a “wreckage item” that exited the plane’s airframe at “apparent supersonic speeds.”

Stalcup alleges the Navy recovered this “smoking gun” wreckage.

Federal officials say the crash was an accident - not a missile strike from a Navy exercise or anything else

[DJ MacWoW]

But as someone else pointed out, the Stinger has a heat-seeking IR warhead.

Post 70

(FIM-92A) 3,500 m (conversion to 11,483 feet)
(FIM-92B/C) 3,800 m (conversion to 12,467 feet)
IR/UV homing

[DJ MacWoW]

Sonny M: What kind of terrorists don't contact media and everyone else under the sun and make sure they know that they did it.

Ditto: One question. If it was terrorists, why didn't they take credit for it like they did with Kobar, the Cole and 9-11?

The CIA discounted their claim.

See post 42

[Non-Sequitur]

NATO ships have been prominent fixtures at "Fleet Week" festivities in every Memorial Day weekend in New York harbor for years. Do you really believe they sail those ships all the way across the Atlantic Ocean just to take part in these events?

No, of course not. They sit around for six or seven weeks and then take pot-shots at airliners.

I think your tin-foil beanie is just a tad tight today.

[Non-Sequitur]

Clancy never claimed it was based on a true story, but at the time he did mention that rumors persisted in military circles that something like that had occurred.

Again, 25 years in and I never heard a whisper. And I knew a lot of people, too. If you don't think military officers gossip in the mess then I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

[Ditto]

I had 25 years of military service and that's the first time I've heard anyone, including Clancy, claim that his novel was based on a true story. If an insurance salesman like Clancy could have found out about such an incident then don't you think the media or another author would have found out about it as well?

I worked for a company pretty much run by x-Navy Nuke guys at the time that Hunt for Red October came out. We actually bought a hundred copies of the book and sent them out to other "ring knockers" who were our customers. They were all impressed with the technical detail that Clancy had in the book, but none ever hinted, even "under the influence," that the story-line itself had any basis in reality. They were simply impressed that he understood and could write an interesting bit of fiction about the workings and operations of submarines, especially without ever having served on one himself.

All of his "details" were in the public domain. He succeeded in weaving them into a good story.

[TX Bluebonnet]

Anyone read Nelson Demille's Night Fall? Pretty good read. "Fictional" story about what really happened

[Swordmaker]

OK. But go back and look at what I posted in #97. Under normal circumstances, an airliner flying out of JFK would have been at least 2,000 feet higher than Flight 800 was that night.

True... but flights being held at 12,000 was not unusual. ATC often held them there to avoid approaching aircraft that were descending for landing. From the number of pilots that reported near misses with what appeared to be missiles in the Long Island area in the months preceding TWA-800, other attempts may have been made. On the other hand even 15,000 feet is within the range of some of the more modern Tier Two MANPAD missiles.

[Swordmaker]

It would home in on the hottest thing around, which in this case would be one of the 4 engines. Nothing I've seen indicates that an engine was hit.

No, they home in on the AVERAGED heat signature of the overall target when fired from that distance. At Mach 2.5, there isn't much opportunity to maneuver in the last few hundred feet making a choice between four equally hot targets. This is built into their software so as to avoid homing in on a hot counter measure flare released at the last second. Most of them use proximity fuzes so that even a "close" detonation can be effective.

[Swordmaker]

They'll appear to be arriving over the horizon, that is "going up".

But the seldom curve...

[TexConfederate1861]

It was Superman.

[Swordmaker]

Just think about the time intervals we're talking about here. 45 seconds is an incredibly long period of time in any kind of incident like this.

Right. The Primary Radar returns show that the main body of the wreckage was splashing into the Atlantic Ocean approximately 43 seconds after the initiating event.

[Gone GF]

Dang, I told my wife to buy more tinfoil. AIIIYYYYEEEE

[Non-Sequitur]

Licoln refused negotiation with S.C. delegates prior to Ft. Sumter. There were no offers.

And what, exactly, was Lincoln supposed to negotiate? The confederate delegation had one purpose, as outline by the legislation authorizing them. They were to establish relations between the government of the United States and the confederacy. In other words, Lincoln's only choice was to accede to confederate demands. And end to secession wasn't an option. Reunification wasn't open for discussion. Lincoln could either surrender or refuse to talk. He refused to talk.

[muawiyah]

?

Is that a meaningful statement?

[Swordmaker]

?Is that a meaningful statement?

Yes... if you add a "y" to "the" it become "they" in reference to bolides appearing to come up from the horizon.

"But they seldom curve..."

[muawiyah]

If they're really large, of course not, but they'll seem to do so to anyone on the ground.

We have a seasonal meteor shower starting this evening. Take a look (if you don't have any clouds) and see what it looks like.

[Old_Mil]

It was *not* a short circuit leading to excessive current going into a wire to a fuel pump detonating Jet A vapors in a fuel tank.

[Old_Mil]

Transcribed directly from the ATC recording...

TWA 507: "We just saw an explosion ... just went down in the water"

Virgin Air: "9 o clock position, about 5-6 miles out, an explosion."

TWA 507: "We are directly over the site, 19 miles on the 236 radial from the Hampton..." NY Center: "TWA 800, Center...TWA 800, Center..." Unknown: "I think that was him." NY Center: "I think so." TWA 507: "it blew up in the air, we saw two fireballs ... we saw what looked like a landing light heading towards us and then it blew."

[Old_Mil]

Let's try that again...

TWA 507: "We just saw an explosion ... just went down in the water"

Virgin Air: "9 o clock position, about 5-6 miles out, an explosion."

TWA 507: "We are directly over the site, 19 miles on the 236 radial from the Hampton..."

NY Center: "TWA 800, Center...TWA 800, Center..."

Unknown: "I think that was him."

NY Center: "I think so."

TWA 507: "it blew up in the air, we saw two fireballs ... we saw what looked like a landing light heading towards us and then it blew."

-----

Could it have been Flight 800's landing lights? Unlikely, as it is a common practice among commercial pilots to leave their landing lights on as the jet executes a 250 knot climb to 10,000 feet as it departs the terminal area, and then to switch those lights off as the jet passes 10,000 feet. Flight 800's landing lights would already have been shut off.

What then did Flight 507 see that the thought was a "landing light"? The missile that shot down Flight 800.

Those individuals who believe that the theory that TWA 800 was shot down is false tend to be either political supporters of an administration that tried to cover up this terrorist attack, ignorant of physics, ignorant of aviation, or all of the above.

[tophat9000]

What would be the reason for coverup? Am I missing something?That a good question many don't ask in most cases it hurts the cover up theory....

However in TWA 800 we had Bill the king of Spin in the WH and looking back he did seem to have a pattern of not wanting to confront Mid East terrorist if he didn't have too... because it too political risky ... he had to keep poll number up...

This was the man of the snap poll and triangulation for any and all position to decide what got the best political advantage...

If he was given any wiggle room on twa 800 as an accident vs terrorist... he be highly motivated to take the ease answer

Come on this was the guy that try to spin OKC as the main stream right wing and Rush's fault...