Ray Lahr wins TWA800 Freedom of Information Lawsuit on the Zoom Climb

My individual battle to pry information out of the CIA, the NTSB, and the NSA regarding TWA Flight 800 has been long, and lonely, and expensive. But at last I have achieved a favorable judgment from the federal court. Although Judge Matz emphasized that he is not expressing any opinions pertaining to the underlying premise of a missile, he has determined that I am entitled to most of the requested data and calculations pertaining to the zoom-climb.

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT by Judge A. Howard Matz: Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) shall produce to plaintiff the material set forth in Exhibit A and the National Transportation Safety Board shall produce to plaintiff the material set forth in Exhibit B.

Plaintiff may file a motion for award of attorneys fees and costs by not later than 11/15/06. Defendants' response shall be filed not later than 12/20/06. Plaintiff's reply shall be filed by not later than 1/8/07. Court will rule upon the papers without a hearing. Parties shall not be precluded by the fact that they have approved this judgment as to form from appealing any aspect of this judgment or of the orders dated 8/31/06 or 10/4/06 (See document for further details)(ir.)(Entered: 10/18/2006)

When and if I receive the requested information, I feel confident that it will show that false assumptions were made regarding the zoom-climb that was propounded in order to discredit the eyewitnesses who reported seeing a missile. Namely, when the nose was blown off, the CG moved 10 feet aft, the aircraft immediately pitched up into a stall, and the aircraft could never climb and then dive as depicted in the zoom-climb scenario. This may be some vindication for this ALPA statement which was included in the official NTSB TWA800 accident report:

"Furthermore, although ALPA does not doubt the technical capability of the NTSB, we are concerned that this analysis was essentially accomplished by only one individual at the Board, with little or no party input or participation. It is a well known and accepted tenet of engineering analysis that the output (results) can only be as accurate as the input data."

Thus far, that input data has never been revealed. If it is released and the zoom-climb is disproved, the government must then acknowledge the eyewitness missile reports. Then the government must determine who fired the missile.

Against all of the rules of evidence, the NTSB adopted the zoom- climb conclusion without providing any supporting data or calculations. It is unfortunate that the missile issue was avoided by this zoom-climb ruse. If the missile issue had been squarely faced, TWA might be flying today. Instead, TWA took the fall for allegedly operating an older aircraft with maintenance that didn't detect a potential spark. Nonsense, that accident wasn't TWA's fault. We can't role back the clock and reinstate TWA, but we can, at least, clear TWA's name.

We don't know who fired the missile. But if it was terrorist missile, and if that had become known, the country would have been alerted to the terrorist threat, and 9/11 might possibly have been averted.

The defendants may appeal this judgment, and if they do, it will delay the final decision. I would appreciate any support that ALPA might feel free to give. In my opinion, it has always been apparent to pilots that you can't blow apart the center section of the wing including the loss of nose and cockpit, and still have the unbalanced and critically damaged aircraft continue to fly and climb. There was no zoom-climb. Three airline crews saw the airplane explode and fall down to the ocean. Someday, the truth shall prevail.

Link to the Judge's Decision in PDF format. Windows users will need Adobe Acrobat Reader.

There is only one problem with Ray Lahr's missile dream.

There is no penetration from outside the airplane into the internal structure where the explosion began.

What Lahr and felon Sanders all the other frauds are arguing as their a priori case is something that the physical evidence conclusively proved was impossible.

As far as the "missile eyewitnesses," I have read the entire docket, all of the supporting documentation, and all of the witness statements and interview reports, as well as the expert analysis of the witness material. All of the claims of "missile witnesses" materially misrepresent what that body of information actually is, and materially misrepresent the utility of witnesses in air crash investigation.

The TWA 800 conspiracy buffs are the exact same kind of buffoon that believes "Loose Change." In some cases, they are the exact same buffoons.

Along with having read the entire material, which took me literally weeks, I have the necessary background to understand it. I have experience in aviation, a good grasp of aerospace engineering, and extensive experience with military weapons and high explosives. I do not believe any of the missile-conspiracy paranoids (including Lahr) can match my background in this odd combination of areas.

Lahr and the others who have been sponging off the bereaved family members they have bamboozled, ought to be ashamed of themselves. I love that Lahr whines in his release about the expense his conspiracy hobby has imposed on him. What does he care? He bums the money off widows and orphans anyway.

Bill Clinton was a lousy president; but if you want to hang a murder on him, start with Task Force Ranger in Somalia. This accident wasn't murder, it was something that had happened before. Unfortunately the FBI's half-assed investigation and institutional craving for publicity hammered the idea that this was a crime or terror act into many people. It wasn't.

The blast was not a missile because a missile cannot destroy a plane without leaving a mark. It was not a bomb because high-explosive leaves unmistakeable traces on metal that aren't erased by a subsequent crash and fire. These traces are clear as day on metal recovered from PA103. There are no such traces on metal recovered from TWA800. Bombs and missiles cannot destroy aircraft without leaving physical evidence.

Yeah, yeah... I'm a government shill... yeah. How unreasonable, not believing in a conspiracy theory that is belied by the physical evidence, when anyone can cherry-pick a few out of 720-odd witness statements to support the magical conspiracy theory.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

PS. If Lahr gets the information he asks for, what then? The famous "CIA animation" was used during an intermediate press conference. It played no part in the final conclusions of the Board (and the Board's experts and parties to the investigation). It doesn't change the physical evidence which shows that Lahr is a fraud. -C18F

I think the naval hypothesis is almost impossible.

I do not agree.

The U.S. Navy denied, for months, it even had ships in the area that night. Then, the Navy finally admitted that there were a number of ships in the area which steamed away from the area just after the downing of TWA 800.

I have two questions:

1. Why would the Navy deny it had ships present?

2. Why would ships of the U.S. Navy depart the scene of an incredible air disaster when it could have at least assisted with the aftermath?

The ships were, of course, ordered to depart the scene to hide their role in the airliner's crash.

I subscribe to the theory there was a secret missile test to see if a missile intercept could distinguish between friend or foe in the busy airspace. It failed and a horrible tragedy resulted. The White House ordered the cover-up of that August fiasco as Clinton was running for reelection in November and would surely have been blamed for the reckless murder of innocents aboard TWA 800 at his authorizing the secret test.

I have done a lot of research on TWA 800.

The FBI completely commandeered the investigation of the crash in violation of federal law which requires the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) to conduct such investigations.

The laughable animation purporting to show the noseless aircraft climbing is a violation of all laws of physics and no serious scientist could agree with the conclusions of the presentation.

The computer animation was created by the CIA, of all the craziest agencies to get involved! It was not NASA or another real scientific agency that created the preposterous animation being foisted upon the public.

Why would the CIA be enlisted to make a scientific case if there was true science, and not propaganda, behind the explanation?

What did the eye witnesses see?

About 720 different things. Read the 302s. Then read the analysis. Some "saw" things that subsequent geometric analysis show they couldn't have seen.

This is not unusual. It is pretty common, given that human memory is constructed on the fly.

What brought down TWA800?

A fuel-air explosion in the CWFT.

The structures group tracked the explosion to the CWFT originally. You can tell which cracks in metal formed before others in a variety of ways. Also, you can sometimes use sooting to tell which metal separated from another part first. It's simple, actually.
The fuel-air mixture in the tank was inflammable at that point in the flight. This was confirmed by flight-testing a functionally identical, but instrumented, 747-200. A complete report on the flight tests was in the docket which as far as I know is still on NTSB's website. There's maybe a gig of .pdfs on there.
Fuel-air hazards are part of the education of every high-altitude and jet pilot. The hazard has been known in theory for decades (at least since the USAF began flying the B-45 Tornado) and there have been a number of fuel-air explosions in turbine aircraft, including one in a 747 operated by the (then Imperial) Iranian Air Force.
Until TWA800, the issue was dealt with by ignoring the inflammability of the mixture in certain ranges of altitude and pressure, and simply trying to prevent any ignition source from existing in the fuel tanks. Something -- probably unsuspected deterioration of Kapton wiring insulation -- let an ignition source into the tank. Since then, the FAA and industry have moved towards inerting the tanks instead. This was not thought practical for civil aircraft prior to 1996. (One approved way lines deal with it is to tanker extra fuel so that an inflammable fuel-air mixture does not arise -- the mixture is too rich to burn).
The physical evidence is all consistent with a fuel-air explosion. No evidence is consistent with a high-explosive detonation. NONE.
The Explosion Dynamics Laboratory at Cal Tech were able to reproduce both the explosion, and the failure of the components of the CWFT, in model studies.

In sum, the evidence for a fuel-air explosion is overwhelming, certainly enough to convince any reasonable jury. There's no way you'll get anywhere with the OJ Jury of the the TWA800 conspiracy fan club, though. Ray Lahr wants to prove that his old airline is innocent. Criminal Jim Sanders and his criminal wife want their convictions overturned (He's the guy that insists on being called an "aviation professional," and won't admit he was actually a stewardess). Jack Cashill wants to sell books. All of them want money from the widows and orphans of Flight 800. Ghouls, the damned lot of them, and lying ghouls at that.

Finally someone mentioned the late CDR Donaldson (sp?) -- first, I don't believe being a serviceman or naval officer makes you infallible. Case in point, John F'in Kerry. Case two, Jack Murtha. Need I continue? Second, he's the poor confused soul that put his cigaret out in Jet A and concluded that it won't burn, let alone explode. It just goes to show that you can fly planes for a whole career and not understand 'em. (Do you know what's going on when you turn the key of your car? Do you need to?).

You see, FUEL DOES NOT BURN. Yeah, you heard me right. FUEL-AIR MIXTURE BURNS. It needs to be at the right temperature and the right pressure -- and the right mixture. There is an ideal or stoichiometric mixture, and there is a range a bit to one side or another where combustion is possible. But if the mixture is too lean (too much air, not enough fuel) or too rich (too much fuel, too little air), then flame can't get going. That's what was happening to Donaldson, and the poor old sailor didn't twig to it. (Don't try this at home, kids -- he was lucky, as the mixture right above the surface of an open container of Jet A can be close to stoichiometric).

The TWA 800 disaster resulted in many changes. Airline pilots now check and calculate the inflammability of the mixture in their empty tanks so that such a disaster will never happen again. In addition to these operational changes, over 40 Airworthiness Directives (like recalls for cars, sort of) have resulted from the accident, mandating changes to transport-category aircraft. For example, Kapton wiring was replaced fleet-wide at a cost of billions of dollars. Finally, research on newer and more cost-effective ways to inert fuel tanks is bearing fruit.

The last and possibly best outcome of the TWA800 accident, is that the NTSB and FBI hammered out a memorandum of understanding so that they will work together better in the future. Hopefully we will never again have this kind of circus, which basically created all of these conspiracy theories with its unprofessionalism, leaks, and general careless methods (during the FBI phase). FBI and NTSB investigation processes differ hugely, because NTSB tries only to find fact, while FBI tries to find just enough facts to try someone on. For example, the FBI uses the 302 rather than what every other pro does (audio or video record interviews) so that the agent can spin things toward the desired goal, whether it is nailing somebody or preventing information from coming out in FOIA or discovery. This Hoover-era technique may be a good law enforcement tool -- that's not my in my areas of expertise -- but it's a horrible investigative tool, as the ease with which the statements in the 302s have been twisted by men of ill will shows. Compare to the similar 911 conspiracists, who keep getting caught when they try to twist the meaning of witness statements, because verbatim audio and transcripts exist.

I get mad about this case. I do because (1) a lot of scumbags are making a living on it and (2) they're doing it by slandering a wide swath of people who not only are innocent of the various charges, but who are providing or have provided incredibly loyal and righteous service to the public, for damned little reward. Ray Lahr, for instance, has accused the Navy, the CIA, and the NTSB of, basically, murdering almost 300 people and then covering it up. (Now he's backed down from the Navy thing and he's blaming jihadis, but originally he named the Navy). And what's his evidence? A bunch of lies and fraud.

Hey, go ahead, send him money. It might be entertaining to see who he accuses next.

d.o.l.

Criminal Number 18F

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.