TWA 800: Pilots speak out

After my most recent trip to Washington last weekend, I have come to one sorry conclusion: The only people who believe that a fuel-tank problem destroyed TWA Flight 800 sit in America's major media newsrooms.

They certainly don't sit in the cockpits of America's airliners. After some 200 radio and TV interviews and a score of live appearances, I have talked to at least 100 airline pilots. Of those, exactly one supported the government thesis.

What follows are some of the unsolicited e-mails I have recently received from pilots and my comments on the same. I have edited them only for length and for spelling. Not all of the pilots agree with James Sanders and me on every point in our book, "First Strike: TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America," but they uniformly reject the government thesis.

Each of these individuals identified themselves to me. I have chosen, however, to shield their identities lest there be repercussions.

I loved the book. I am an ex-Air Force combat pilot, functional check flight pilot and standardization and evaluation pilot. I flew 145 combat missions. From the first announcement of TWA 800 I believed the plane was brought down by a missile. To me the strongest evidence of the government cover-up is the lack of satellite photo releases to back up the claim that there was no missile. No part of the earth is probably more under satellite surveillance than the mid-Atlantic from New York City to Washington, D.C. If the satellite photos backed up the "no missile" theory, the photos would be everywhere.

There are other interesting questions: Why, if it was mechanical failure, was the entire 747 fleet not grounded? While there were corrective mechanical changes, anything this catastrophic would have deserved far more severe reaction. Why has Boeing never protested this conclusion? Anyway, great book.

As a pilot for 33 years, I have flown many of the different Boeing A/C, all with a center tank, many times empty, with the pumps running, and guess what? Nothing happened. Even after the TWA incident when the FAA required checks of the wiring in all Boeing A/C, even when insulation was found missing from wires, even with empty tanks … nothing happened.

None of the pilots or maintenance persons I ever talked with believed that tank explosion was caused by faulty wiring shorting out because the pumps were on with an empty tank.

The item "Probe's conclusion built on faked interview" is flawed, as is the NTSB conclusions it tries to refute.

First of all, there were not 736 witnesses who saw the missile. There were 736 witness's to the explosion, but only a small fraction, something like 80 or so, saw a streak of some sort. The majority saw no such streak.

Of those who saw the streak, some said it went straight up, a few said it went down from the aircraft, others saw more than one streak, streaks were from several directions. Wire's missile was climbing at a 40 degree angle, etc.

Assuming this "missile" was a heat seeker such as the Stinger which we gave to bin Laden, it would have homed in on the hottest part of the target, the nearest tailpipe, not the fuselage. The aircraft was under climb thrust and putting out a lot of heat.

I don't know what to make of the 3,000 degree climb of the wreckage. The "video" shown alongside this article shows all four engines leaving contrails. At 13,000 degree? Ridiculous.

I don't believe the NTSB conclusions. Of 1,108 B-747s built, only one experienced this problem? Hardly. I think it was a bomb.

When the wreckage of TWA 800 was raised from the bottom and placed on a barge, I noticed the nose section was blown cleanly off. I went around and searched for the wreckage of PAA 103 at Lockerbie. The nose was blown off at the same frame!

PAA was brought down by a bomb. I think that's what happened to TWA 800. BTW, the aircraft was the same one I flew for my ATP rating in September 1972. I knew many of the crew who perished.

Note: Of the 700-plus eyewitnesses that the FBI interviewed, some 270 (FBI's figure) saw streaks of lights ascending or arcing over before the crash. Roughly one-third of those followed the streaks from the horizon. There were many more eyewitnesses who did not share their accounts with the FBI. We too believe it was a bomb, a flying bomb that was exploded somewhere under the plane.

Sometime in the late '80s, I was on a flight between JFK and Tel Aviv (TLV). The airplane was a 747-200. During the initial climb out from JFK, a strange rattling and metal-to-metal noise began to emanate from the throttle quadrant.

We ignored the noises as a nuisance and since everything else was normal continued on our way. At about 23,000 feet airplane altitude, the FE announced that he cannot control the cabin.

[Later] the FE announces, "I have a Differential Fault" on generator number 3. ... Not more than 30 seconds elapsed from the GenDiff announcement by the FE when he announces that he now has a GenDiff on generator number 4! We not only have the Virgin Mary in first class but Jesus Christ and the 12 Apostles just showed up.

That did it; we declared an emergency, made a 180 degree turn and headed back to JFK. We were just past Nantucket Island heading for Yarmouth in the Canadian Maritimes when we made the turn and dumped about 160,000 pounds of fuel (the natives of Nantucket can thank our crew for having never sighted a mosquito since that day).

... So we had two 85KVA capable generators, running at about half load, dead short against the wing spar. 170KA is equivalent to 1,700 100-watt bulbs; with four generators online, each was running at about one-half load when the first GenDiff occurred and three-quarters when the second went off. The spar also serves as the front portion of the wing fuel tanks which had much fuel and air.

So after F800, I always asked the question – if a dead short electrical arc of considerable power on a fuel tank did not cause us to blow up, how did static electricity cause the [center wing tank] to go off in F800?

All of the above can be quantified with crew names, airplane number and log book write-ups if necessary. I truly don't know the consequence of a dead short on an airframe. All I know is that I have five crew members who witnessed it.

PS: After the shoddy investigation by the NTSB on TWA F840 in 1979, I never had much respect for the outfit.

PPS: I just finished the book – great job. Thanks on behalf of those friends I lost.

Note: This has been shortened considerably. The pilot's point, however, is clear.

I commend you for the excellent series of articles . … I do hope the prosecutions proceed. There is nothing worse than corruption in our government.

My interest in this is that I should have been the captain of 800 that day. Management used its prerogatives and took the flight for training purposes. I lost many friends and associates on that flight. I had flown that aircraft No. 119 only several days prior to the shoot down. Justice over due. Let the trials begin!

I am totally convinced that an outside source blew up TWA 800. In fact I went live on Fox TV on their 10 p.m. newscast that night and stated that fact. (I am their in-house spokesperson for aviation matters.) We can muster up a number of pilots with thousands of hours and years and years of experience to augment and support your theory. Please contact me if you are interested in us pursuing this any further.

Note: Yes, we are. Our best bet for genuine exposure at this time is for America's pilots to force the issue. If some pilot or pilot's organization is willing to take the lead, we are more than willing to help.

Price slashed on "First Strike: TWA Flight 800 and the Attack on America"! New book by Jack Cashill and James Sanders says government lies upped drama ante for terrorists. From WND Books, available in ShopNetDaily.

Purchase Jack Cashill's stunning documentary video, "Silenced: Flight 800 and the Subversion of Justice" from WorldNetDaily's online store.

"Altered Evidence" from Flight 800 How the Justice Department framed a journalist and his wife. Also available from WorldNetDaily's online store!

Well, I thought I'd get called Man from ZOG, instead today I'm a "disinformation artiste." I did predict your childish ad hominem attack in my post. Well, Michael Rivero (or is it his pal Cashill?) says that "Anyone who supports the government version is an informant." Of course, nutball Rivero was tossed off here for his strident insistence that the USG did the World Trade Center, too. So you're in good company. (I actually do work for the government -- I'm in the military, an organisation Rivero, like Clinton, hates).

YOU ignore the same things the NTSB also chose to ignore in their report as well...

Your catalogue of things I ignore appears to come from Sanders's book, most of which is made up. Funny that I addressed some of this stuff.

the THIRD debris field on a vector ~100 degrees from the aircraft's vector

If you are talking about the radar tracks of skin paints, they are not especially reliable. If this is something new in Cashill's book, I have to go back and read it again.

the Mach 2 radar track on the same vector,

far from a radar "track," the radar returns show kind of intermittent twinkles, which can be interpreted as a missile if you take all the ones that are going the way you want and ignore all the others. In other words, if you look at it and gerrymander it around with an a priori committment to a missile solution.

the numerous eyewitness accounts of a "firework," "smoke trail," "contrail," or "missile,"

Which describe four different things. And in so doing, illustrate why eyewitness evidence, while it is very convincing to people, is the least reliable evidence there is. The wreckage documents itself the way it blew up, and that a missile didn't do it. This occasionally makes the nutballs fall back to a bomb (the problem there, is that bombs also leave a characteristic "signature" (as you would have seen in the PA 103 link I placed here, which you apparently didn't read). Hot tip: explosives burn at 20-30,000 fps, fuel doesn't.

Unfortunately, the FBI's interview protocol, in which they don't tape interviews, does us all a disservice, whatever side of the issue we're on. I understand why the FBI does this, and I don't really approve of that either, but I can't change how FBI does business.

the "red residue" that was anazlyzed by a California Laboratory to be consistent with solid rocket propellant,

Yes, on one piece of one seat... that was stolen by Sanders from the investigation, after Sanders already had his mind made up, and on which there is now no chain of evidence. He had it in his control -- his integrity is already suspect, to say the least -- and he could have done anything with it. If that had a pound of Semtex residue, a half pound of camel crap, and Osama's fingerprints it would be inadmissible as evidence. Now, we may not have to hold to courtroom rules of evidence here, but the reason it isn't kosher in court is that it has been carted off into the darkness for Sanders's purposes -- which seem to have been, fame and ego.

You guys might not get this. But people who really work on, or study (as I do) air safety, think Sanders is to air crash investigation as Jayson Blair is to reporting.

[T]he impossibility of the CIA/NTSB noseless 747 "Zoom Climb" scenario to explain away all those witness reports,

Read the analysis of the eyewitness reports in the NTSB file I posted earlier. Some of the eyewitnesses were not in position to see things they reported seeing, for instance.

As I understand it, all CIA did was make the video, by the way. Rivero and crowd love saying "CIA" because they think that proves their case, because in their circles everybody "knows" the CIA is evil. Actually it's just another Government agency with a lot of bureaucrats, who every once in a while do something dumb, and every once in a while save the country. Anyway, the video was supposed to explain the apparent contradiction -- how can a big piece fall off, and the plane go up? Well. it can't, except as far as inertia and aerodynamics carry it... 3,000 feet is possible. With a lot of weight forward of the centre of lift suddenly gone, a massive pitch-up is not just possible but certain. One thing we don't know with certainty (and might be unable to ever be sure about with the data we have) is how quickly the breakup took place. An uncommanded nose-up might have resulted from the doomed plane's aerodynamic surfaces moving, also.

AND the reports from invoestigators [sic] of deliberate re-positioning, removal and alteration of any evidence

What investigators? Sanders again? Sorry, making a decision and then trying to select evidence that supports it doesn't make you an investigator. The guy's a fraud. Or do you mean this clown, J. Greg Miller, whose paper is a farrago of speculation, stated as fact, that SEAL Team 2 was on the scene for the purpose of destroying, removing or altering evidence. One of the most laughable things is his claim that the SEALS used the bad weather of the next few days to sneak in in their SDVs and do their nefarious deeds. Hint: SDV's suck in strong currents. Also, aircraft wreckage is very dangerous stuff to be around -- sharp edges, dangerous chemicals, biohazards from rotting bodies. That's why most of the salvage was done by machines, not people. But Miller can't help insult the SEALS. (And yes, suggesting that these guys would participate in a cover-up of the murder of their countrymen is an insult). ...pointing away from the "official" line you spout.

I'll differ from the official line when it's wrong. The NTSB boots a few, like any organisation made up of human beings. Sometimes it uses a finding of probable cause to fire a shot across FAA's bow on some regulatory matter. Sometimes it hammers a pilot who did as well as the average guy would do, but just didn't get the breaks.

If Kallstrom had persisted in his search for a phantom missile, instead of letting the crash investigators figure it out, we probably would have another kB! by now. Instead several possible ignition causes have been permanently dealt with -- and the tank is not operated in conditons where it can contain a combustible fuel-air mixture. One good thing that came of this is that there is a much better understanding of volatility of Jet A (Jet A is a relatively new fuel, first used in the nineties).

If anybody wants a no-bull inside look at what goes on in an NTSB investigation, get the book on Flight 427, the 73 that dumped in Aliquippa, PA.

Here is one of the self-proclaimed "Independent Investigators" assessing his fellows in conspiracy land:

"Some of the independent researchers have concluded that three different missiles struck TWA Flight 800...some will tell you Middle Easterners fired those missiles...some will say those Middle Easterners entered the U.S. with their missiles from Canada...and that the missiles themselves are known to have come from a specific nation in the Eastern Hemisphere...some will say the Navy fired missiles...some will try to name the ship from which the missiles were fired.....some will name the specific type of missile for you...some will delineate for you what data radar tapes they have never seen contain ...some will tell you the government knows terrorists destroyed TWA Flight 800 and has chosen to protect the terrorist murderers for domestic political reasons ... but even when argued long and passionately such ideas remain speculations, not facts.
These speculations presented as facts are hurting the serious independent investigation work. The constant release of a myriad of unproven charges does more to muck up the investigation than to help it. The speculators sometimes appear to believe that their personal conviction is really all the proof they need to make their case"

I didn't say it, Richard Hirsch and Tom Shoemaker did. Yet their own sites commingle fact with speculation and fantasy.

I'm still waiting for one of you guys to show me how a missile goes through metal without making a hole. "Maybe if Kirk and Spock accidentally beamed down a photon torpedo..."

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.