Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: barf
Likely this is what fodded the No. 3 engine.
There were *3* other 747s that met their fate with *circumstances* TOO similar to TWA800 to be ignored - and *each* of those too had #3 fodded ... including a 747 that *survived* a FCBD event - in which #3 was heavily fodded ... WHAT is able to fod #3 engine with ease - blow the FCBD and eject luggage/luggage containers several seats with passengers (SEVERAL from this area have never been found/WEREN'T attached to the airframe, hence, they *must* have been sucked out - as happened on several other Boeing 747 'hull rupture' events (UA811, AI182, PA103) ...
As far as I can recall, the cargo door latches were intact.
... as in "they were still ???" - what? Still attached? To what? The door or the airframe?

I'm going to have to post the following in it's entirety, unfortunately, to support a different position:

 

TWA 800 Cargo door area reconstruction showing rupture at aft midspan latch of forward cargo door inflight and destruction sequence description.





Outward opening skin indicates expansion from within, not outside pressure pushing inward. Red paint smears indicate metal below expanded upward and slammed into skin above transferring paint. (Witnessed on other aircraft who underwent similar event.)

Most of door missing indicates unable to claim it did not malfunction.

Right side of fuselage damage only and port side smooth indicates not center tank explosion which would give equal bilateral damage not the one sided damage shown above. 1 Nov 97

Projected description of destructive sequence when aft midspan latch ruptures in forward cargo door inflight on high time Boeing 747s, based upon NTSB AAR 92/02, NTSB wreckage reconstruction of TWA 800, CASB Aviation Occurrence VT-EFO, Indian Report of Court Investigation "Kanishka", UK AAIB Aviation Accident Report 2/90, FAA ADs, and UK Comet accident reports:

Sequence of Destruction for TWA Flight 800

Aft Midspan Latch Rupture in Forward Cargo Door

Wire bundle gets chafed by continuous door openings and closings on it. Sheath around bundle gets worn through to insulation. Insulation gets worn through to bare wire. Bare wire shorts against metal powering on door motor which turns cam sectors to unlocked position. On TWA 800, at 13700 feet MSL and 300 KCAS, the eight lower cam sectors were prevented from unlocking because of the strengthened locking sectors which now have steel doublers as per AD 88-12-04. However, the two midspan latches have no locking sectors at all. The slack in bellcranks, torque tubes, and high time worn cam latches allowed the aft midspan latch to rotate just past center allowing the 3.5 PSI internal pressure to rupture the forward cargo door at the aft midspan latch.

The nine foot by nine foot squarish door burst open at midspan latch sending the latch and door material spinning away in the setting sun which reflected upon the shiny metal and appeared as streak to ground observers. The aft door frame was clean of attachment to door and bulged outward. The door fractured at midline and shattered. The bottom eight latches held tight to the bottom eight latch pins on sill while bottom external skin of door blew away. The top piece of red door slammed out and up smashing into the white fuselage skin above leaving the red paint on the door on the white paint between passenger windows above. The top piece of the door took the hinge with it and fuselage skin as it is tore away. The hinge appears to be working normally while having overtravel impression marks on the opposite hinge when door overextended to slam on fuselage above.

The now uncompressed air molecules rushed out of the nine foot by thirty foot hole equalizing high pressure inside to low pressure outside. The sudden rushing air was recorded on the Cockpit Voice Recorder as a sudden loud sound. The explosive decompression of the forward cargo hold disrupted the nearby main equipment compartment and abruptly shut off power to the Flight Data Recorder.

The door hole was now at least nine feet by thirty feet large. At least nine passengers were blown out of the hole into the nearby number three engine which mulched them up into tiny bone fragments. The number three engine also ingested metal in baggage and started on fire from inefficient burning of fuel. Then the number three engine with pylon started to vibrate and soon detached from wing as designed.

The floor beams were bent, fractured and broken. The main structural members of door and frame were gone and compromised. The flight attitude of the aircraft was askew to the left from reaction of explosive decompression to the right. Air rushed into the hole and weakened other skin and frame peeling skin outward. The 300 knots of air pressed upon the weakened nose and crumpled it into the large hole. The nose tore off and fell and landed in a dense heap before the rest of the plane.

Pieces of baggage and fuselage skin flew backward and left more severe damage on starboard side, such as right wing fillet, of TWA 800 fuselage than port side.

The port side forward of the wing was smooth and unshattered while the starboard side forward of the wing is shattered, torn, and frayed at ruptured cargo door area.

The rest of the plane without the nose suddenly decelerated from 300 knots and caused whiplash injuries to passengers. Passengers inside fuselage had baro-trauma to eardrums which ruptured trying to equalize middle ear pressure. The plane maneuvered with huge gaping wound in front increasing drag. The wind force disintegrated the fuselage and wings. Fuel poured out of ruptured tanks. The broken fuselage, the ruptured wings, the fuel cloud, the center tank, and the spinning, on fire engine number three met at 7500 feet and exploded into a bright loud fireball putting singe marks on the fuselage skin while leaving the nose burn free. Center tank exploded/caught fire as well as other nearby fuel tanks. The debris falls and spreads out from 7500 feet to sea level.

Ground observers hear the fireball explosion of the center tank and other fuel and look up. Noise of fireball to observers is about 50 seconds for the ten mile distance. They see the still falling shiny pieces of the forward cargo door as it is still falling from 13700 feet to the sea in about 60 seconds.

The detached burnt engine number three and pylon fall apart from the other three engines which fall together.

Explosive decompression at the forward cargo hold led to suspicion of bomb in cargo compartment but bomb later ruled out.

Streak of shiny metal object spinning away reflecting evening sun to ground observers led to suspicion of missile but later ruled out.

Fire/explosion of center tank into fireball leads to suspicion of center tank explosion as initial event but difficulty arises in determining ignition source, fuel volatility, unheard of explosion sound, unilateral damage, and weakness of tank needed for such an initial explosion.

Fuselage rupture at aft midspan latch of forward cargo door inflight is initially rejected because most of latches are found latched around locking pins.

Further investigation reveals door rupture at aft midspan latch in forward cargo door possible with bottom latches latched and midspan latches missing.

Questions about center tank explosion as initial event which

evidence raises.

1. Sudden loud sound on Cockpit Voice Recorder is described as start of aircraft breakup but not sound of explosion. How can an explosion in the center tank be powerful enough to start the aircraft breakup and blow off nose of Boeing 747 and not be heard on CVR?

2. Center tank explosion would be spherical, not directed, and would either give no damage forward of the wing or about equal damage on both sides of the fuselage of TWA 800. The wreckage reconstruction shows smooth skin with little damage forward of the wing on the port/left side yet severe, shattered, torn, and frayed damage on the starboard/right side of the fuselage in the cargo door area. How can a center tank explosion cause unilateral damage only on starboard side?

3. TWA 800 wreckage reconstruction shows outward peeled skin, outward rupture hole, and paint transfers. Water impact damage would be inward, not outward. How could water impact damage produce outward peeled skin, outward rupture hole, and paint transfers?

4. TWA 800 wreckage reconstruction shows red paints smears only above the forward cargo door area and nowhere else on both side of the Boeing 747 fuselage. This indicates that the red painted door below ruptured/opened outward, slammed upward, and smashed into the white painted area above and transferred red paint from door onto white paint between windows. How did red paint smears get where they are?

5. A center tank explosion would be far enough away from power cables to allow the Flight Data Recorder to record longer than the abrupt power cut it suffered. How can a center tank explosion which is not loud enough to be heard on the CVR and some distance away be strong enough to abruptly cease power to the FDR?

6. How could forward cargo door rupture/open when bottom eight latches are latched and locked in TWA reconstruction?

7. How could forward cargo door rupture cause center tank explosion?

Answers of forward cargo door rupture to questions which

evidence raises:

1. Sudden loud sound is sound of explosive decompression which gives a sudden loud sound when forward cargo door ruptures/opens in flight. The TWA 800 sudden loud sound was linked to PA 103 sudden loud sound on CVR which was linked to AI 182 sudden loud sound on CVR which was linked to DC-10 cargo door explosive decompression on CVR. UAL 811 had a cargo door rupture/open in flight and recorded a sudden loud sound on the CVR. The sound is the sudden rushing of air molecules which were compressed now moving fast outward to equalize with the lower pressure outside air.

2. Explosive decompression and rupture of forward cargo door area when aft midspan latch ruptures would give shattered, torn and frayed, damage to cargo door area while leaving port/left/opposite side smooth and light damage. Cargo door rupture would give the unilateral damage on starboard side as shown by TWA 800 wreckage. UAL 811 also had unilateral cargo door area damage when its door opened in flight.

3. Explosive decompression in nose of TWA 800 would give outward peeled skin in nose, outward rupture hole, and paint transfers as internal high pressure rushes outward to equalize with the low outside pressure.

4. After the rupture at aft midspan latch the door fractured and upper piece of the red painted door was pushed outward, rotated on its hinge, slammed upward and smashed into the white painted fuselage skin above, transferring red paint to the white painted area between the passengers windows, as shown by the TWA 800 reconstruction. UAL 811 also had paint transfer from door to fuselage when its door opened in flight.

5. The explosive decompression in the cargo compartment would severely disrupt the cargo hold floor and the adjacent main equipment compartment in which the FDR and power cables are located. The severe disruption would abruptly cease power to the FDR. UAL 811 also had abrupt power cut when its cargo door opened in flight.

6. The forward cargo door of Boeing 747s is over nine feet by nine feet square. It has a hinge on the top and eight cam latches on the bottom. On each nine foot side is one midspan latch. The bottom eight cam latches go around eight latching pins. Over each cam latch is a locking sector. The two midspan latches have no locking sectors. The forward cargo door could rupture at the midspan latch and the hinge and bottom eight latches could still be attached to fuselage skin. The top of the door with hinge attached would tear off with the fuselage skin and spin away. The bottom eight latches could stay attached to bottom sill and continue down to the sea with the nose. The middle of the large door can still be ruptured/opened while the lower part stays attached to airframe. Doors can open/rupture with most or all latches latched. TWA 800 reconstruction shows aft mid span latch missing which implies it became unlatched. The aft door frame sill is smooth and not attached to door which implies door opened in that area.

7. When cargo door ruptures in flight a huge hole is created in nose which the 300 knot slipstream tears off. The falling, noseless, structurally compromised aircraft disintegrated into wings of rupturing fuel tanks, fuselage pieces including center tank, and spinning hot on fire jet engine. When falling debris reached about 7500 feet, the fodded on fire engine number three ignited the fuel cloud and center fuel tank into a fireball. Center tank fire/explosion occurred but later and lower than forward cargo door rupture initial event.



Contents


357 posted on 12/17/2001 7:35:09 PM PST by _Jim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies ]


To: _Jim
Are you a clone of John Barry Smith? His digital diarrhea must have inspired you as well. How to use a million words to say absolutely nothing.
361 posted on 12/17/2001 8:47:59 PM PST by barf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies ]

To: _Jim
There were *3* other 747s that met their fate with *circumstances* TOO similar to TWA800 to be ignored - and *each* of those too had #3 fodded ... including a 747 that *survived* a FCBD event - in which #3 was heavily fodded ... WHAT is able to fod #3 engine with ease - blow the FCBD and eject luggage/luggage containers several seats with passengers (SEVERAL from this area have never been found/WEREN'T attached to the airframe, hence, they *must* have been sucked out - as happened on several other Boeing 747 'hull rupture' events (UA811, AI182, PA103) ...

Fire/explosion of center tank into fireball leads to suspicion of center tank explosion as initial event but difficulty arises in determining ignition source, fuel volatility, unheard of explosion sound, unilateral damage, and weakness of tank needed for such an initial explosion.

Lessee now, _Jim...Pan Am 103 was determined to have been destroyed by a terrorist BOMB by the Brits who investigated the incident. I'll have to research the other two before commenting, but the rest of the article has John Barry Smith making a pretty good case for the unlikely CWT ullage overheat/phantom spark scenario being just exactly what it was; a fantasy...As was the "cargo door failure" scenario he so unsuccesfully tried to find everlasting glory in

Which only indicates that the NTSB/FBI were, and are still, lying about the cause of the crash.

Is it possible that you believe the NTSB/FBI would pass up the opportunity to be able to point to an actual, verifiable, believable mechanical problem in favor of the CWT fairy-tale? One where they had to make liars and drunks out of credible, sober citizens and produce a multi-million dollar "cartoon" to cover their own lies and ineptness?

_Jim, that hound won't hunt. They would have jumped on a cargo door failure like ugly on an ape, without having a bit of problem selling it to the populance.

Therein lies the question John Barry Smith couldn't answer, and the reason that his work is not accepted by logical people with the intelligence to pound sand...WHY DIDN'T THEY?

You need to find yourself another hero...Fast!

365 posted on 12/17/2001 11:23:42 PM PST by acehai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 357 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson