Posted on 06/19/2013 4:09:14 AM PDT by servo1969
Historical BTTT!
The Suffolk Co. Police medical Examiner saw all the bodies. There was NO MENTION of .2 in pellets in ANY of them and “no localized areas of damage or injuries in the airplane”.
Did you make that up?
Show me the EVIDENCE you claim to have intimate knowledge of.
The Government isn’t my friend, but conspiracy kooks aren’t either.
Keep posting BS period.
Rocket fuel.... where’s the rolleyes icon when you need one.
Nothing but solid rocket fuel was in evidence on every part of the cabin.
Your rolled eyes are in the pickled olive jar with your brain, shill.
Cover kooks aren’t anybody’s friend, but it must pay better than short bus teaching.
I know a 747-100/-200 will continue to fly in a straight line and not tumble, even with its nose torn off to the wing root.
So, which is it? The wing box blown to hell and the wings didn't fall off? The wing box blew and the NOSE of the aircraft fell off but not the wings?
7 psi blew the tail off JAL 123. 7 psi.
Even a small explosion (say 10 gallons of vaporized Kerosene) in the Center tank could make an explosion that overpresures the fuselage, causing the wingbox tank to rupture from the inside out, because that’s what it did.
Why didn’t the wings fall off? They had the Weight of the fuel and engines on them, keeping them from immediately folding up and with the fuselage pitching up from the nose falling off, it too was producing lift, so it went up with the wings (the 3000 ft “zoom climb”)
When the engines finally began to spool down a few seconds later, the plane went ballistic and began to break up completely on the way down, The wings DID come off.
So now the wing box WASN'T "blown to hell from the INSIDE" like you claimed before. If the wing box was indeed blown to hell from the inside there wouldn't be the structural integrity to maintain climbing flight. One or the other.
Now, explain the debris field that went 90 degrees to the right of the flight path.
You can not believe what you don’t want to believe.
A pitched up fuselage could create enough lift that it climbed in formation with the wings at least for a mile or so before going ballistic. It only had to stay together for 15-25 seconds to cover the area it did, before it failed completely and a wings separated.
You’ve seen the WWII video of the B24 taking a direct hit to the wing root? The Wings don’t fold up, the fuselage drops away. If TWA800’s nose drops away instead, the remaining fuselage pitches up, creates lift and takes load off the damaged wing box.
The wings did fall off, they just didn’t fall off right away.
There is No actual Aircraft Accident investigator, who has looked at the displacement of the walls of the Center Wing Tank that said that it wasn’t blown up from the inside. The Center wing Tank Blew up in flight. The Front wall went forward, the top went up, the bottom went down, the back wall went aft.
My prediction: When the Highway department “crash Investigator” reveals his “findings” and you all watch the Riveting TWA800 “documentary” on Epix, you are going to think the “are mermaids real” documentary was less of a waste of your time.
But I will leave the tinfoil hats out there with this: When the NTSB releases its report on the Bagram 747-400 crash, the conspiracy kooks may have something. TWA 800 took off with a CG of 18% MAC, which is super stable (and helped it fly straight after the nose fell off). Boeing engineers say the CG went to 57% MAC after the nose fell off, which is unstable, but apparently not “instant vertical”.
If the CG on the Bagram 747 was forward of 57% MAC, the Boeing engineers has some esplaining to do. If it was 60%+ MAC nothing to see here, move along.
The reason I’m pressing you on this issue is that you claim the wing box was blown to hell from the inside, yet the wings stayed on, with all that weight and pressure, yet blown to hell. Now you’re saying it flew in this configuration 15 to 25 seconds? I’m saying you can’t have it both ways. Either the wing box blew up, and the wings have to fail, or it didn’t blow up immediately, allowing the aircraft to fly 15 to 25 seconds, meaning something else blew up first.
You’re failing to make your case here.
I think the wing box center tank explosion was secondary, and blew up on the way down to the sea. That also fits with eye witnesses descriptions.
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.