Replies

Here is a complete synopsys of every Mythbusters episode ever made. Please tell me the episode number of Mythbusters that:

"recreated this incident exactly. In fact, they got a MORE powerful explosion using a wire spark and fuel tank vapors heated to the levels present in TWA 800."

I have found myths where they tried to explosively decompress an aircraft by shooting out a window, where they have tried to explode a car's gas tank by shooting at it with rifles and tracer rounds, and where they have exploded a toilet inside of a blast chamber.

However, I cannot find one episode where they even came close to trying to recreate the TWA 800 CWT explosion, let alone "recreated this incident exactly." Only Sandia Labs and Cal Tech (referenced in my post #209) attempted to recreate the CWT explosion, using a 1/4 scale model of the CWT. You can read the entire reports in the links provided in #209

If you can't get that right, then one has to question your other assertions as well. Our Navy was in the area that night, airman's warnings were issued for the live fire exclusion area just outside of the corridor TWA800 was flying, and it has been speculated that the exercise was testing submarine VLS anti-aircraft missiles at a target drone.

Nobody in the Navy has confirmed that beyond confirming the presense of an Aegis, a P-3, and three submarines in the area at the time, and that an exercise of some sort was underway.

When weighing the possibilities, an inert missile is just as possible as a ten second, 3,200 foot zoom climb of a 747-100 missing its entire fuselage forward of the windbox, with said wingbox compromised by an explosion so severe that it caused the fuselage to separate.

I'm no tinfoil nut, but to me a radar guided missile, with no warhead, passing through the center of mass where the wings meet the fuselage (a perfect corner reflector for radar returns) makes just as much sense as an errant short somewhere in the 747's wiring causing a spark to be produced inside of the CWT through the fuel quantity sensor. A spark that could not be precisely recreated in tests, causing an explosion that could not be precisely recreated in tests.

Our Navy was in the area that night, airman's warnings were issued for the live fire exclusion area just outside of the corridor TWA800 was flying, and it has been speculated that the exercise was testing submarine VLS anti-aircraft missiles at a target drone.

Speculation, but not informed spectulation. More like paranoid speculation. As should be clear to anyone who stops and thinks about if for a moment.

Your tagline indicates Air Force. So when was the last time the Air Force conducted a live-fire exercise in a civilian air corridor as busy as those around New York? You know, put a couple of F-15s on one side, a couple of F-16s on the other and then shoot at each other through the stream of traffic. When was the last time the Air Force ever tried something like that? My guess is that your answer would be 'never'. The first reason would be obvious, it's insane to take such a risk around civilian air traffic. The second reason would be that the Air Force maintains missile ranges for just such live fire exercises, miles away from civilization and any unauthorized traffic, and tests would be conducted there. Well, the Navy operates the same way. Believe it or not, they can also recognize the insanity of firing into air traffic corridors. And at the time of the TWA800 crash the Navy also maintained a missile test range, hundreds of miles away off Puerto Rico.

Another point, which you would not be familiar with, is the fact that there is no such thing as a VLS anti-aircraft missile on a submarine. Such a weapons system on a sub would be useless. Submarines are stealthy platforms. Their best defense against aircraft is to hide and avoid. Subs are quiet, they can do that easily enough. And it's a big ocean with lots of room to hide in. An anti-aircraft missile like you theorize negates all these defenses. They would need to target an aircraft, using radar. Otherwise what would they shoot at? That gives away their position right off the bat. A missile leaving the water is an even bigger indicator of not only a sub in the area, but exactly where it is. In short, a weapons system like you described would be absolute suicide for a sub.

I don't know exactly what caused the 747 to crash. I spent enough time in the Navy to know that none of the missile theories make a lick of sense. Maybe it was a bomb, but maybe it was just what they said it was. Whatever it was, nothing seems to stop those who would blame the military for it and it really disappoints me that people would believe the military is really that evil.