Posted on 07/14/2013 3:57:14 PM PDT by DFG
I think that is the more likely scenario with Flight 800 IF is was brought down by a missile.
Note the recent equipment problems with the 787. They got grounded. People weren't sure about the battery, so all the planes stopped flying until some level of comfort was arrived at via a thorough investigation. And some might say, not enough was done.
TWA 800? Center fuel tank?? Any groundings? Any investigation? Nope. They kept flying. Because everyone knew that the center fuel tank played no role in the explosion.
TWA 800 was a successful shoe bomber, IMHO. Witnesses reported an explosion and flames in the fusilage before it went down.
Sorry check that. Didn’t mean TWA 800 meant AA 587. I think.
Is that a DC-10 in the image?
WHAT ARE THEY HIDING NOW...?
That's become the question of the day—every day.
I flew on TWA 800 about 18 months before it went down. The flight then was scheduled to go from JFK to Paris and then on to Tel Aviv. There were many orthodox Jews on the flight and before take off (which was in the late afternoon),I remember them facing the setting sun out the airport windows and praying while bobbing up and down.
Our flight was uneventful, but I always thought maybe the fact that the final destination was Israel had something to do with the crash. I never saw this fact brought out in the news at the time. I suppose it is possible that the flight no longer went on to Tel Aviv from Paris and whoever brought it down didn’t know that the schedule was changed.
And they are designed to home in on engine exhaust which in the case of a 747 is out on the wings. A near miss to an engine could result in the MANPAD hitting the center fuel tank area at which point the missile's contact fuze would detonate, or a timed/proximity fuze might have detonated.
Regardless of whether a MANPAD exploded via direct contact, or nearby via timed/proximity fuze, there would be evidence of the aircraft's skin being penetrated from outside to inside.
The "official" explanation is that fuel in the partially filled center tank was heated on the ground by nearby air-conditioning equipment. Once in the air, the relatively small amount of heated fuel in the center tank sloshed around and created a warm fuel vapor inside the tank. Some sort of electrical discharge then ignited the fuel air mix.
Because the main "official" theory is a fuel-air explosion in the center tank, A hot piece of missile shrapnel, or burning explosive could have penetrated into the tank and ignited the fuel-air mix but again, there would be evidence in the form of penetration(s) from the outside inward to the fuel tank. I've never heard of any such evidence.
Just my own research, and an old thread I put together:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1018214/posts
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.