Retired Airline Pilot sues NTSB for "Zoom-climb" data

You calculate your take off data based on the information for your proposed take off time. I just found a document that will end this topic of discussion. Go to the NTSB report and find the document titled Meteorological Factual Report. It contains an hourly breakdown of the weather at JFK the day of the incident. The coldest the temperature got that evening was 26 degrees celsius. Light Rain was reported at 1827. The temperature then was 29 degrees celsius.

Look Einstein. Answer this simple question: What is the momentum of an object at rest? Now, answer this question: Does an object at rest have intertia? Face it. You are wrong. Be a man and admit it. Inertia does not equal momentum and momentum does not equal inertia.

"Did the wings suddenly exceed their design parameters?"

Yep, which does not mean they fell off. The aircraft pulled approximately 3 g's if memory serves. That my friend, is significant and your assumptions and calculations of the climb did not include it.

Now you are arguing momentum equals Kenitic Energy????? We're going backwards. You yourself have said momentum = mass * velocity. That ain't energy. Go back to your dentist buddy.

Why do the Evel Kneivel calculations? Because they will prove your calculations are flawed and based on false assumptions. Come on smart guy. I'm sure it isn't beyond your ability.

"Commander Donaldson who spearheaded the investigation into the cause of this crash is now deceased. He was a trained aircraft accident investigator and Viet Nam veteran. His web site lives on and so do the questions."

The Donaldson brothers website states "CDR. Donaldson has extensive experience as a Naval crash investigator" and includes the following photo.

LSoft Flight 900 Forum - 16 November 1997
Cdr. Donaldson: "My First official aircraft crash investigation was of an accidental air to air missile shootdown of a Navy A4 in 1977. I am a Graduate of crash analysis training from the Naval Post Graduate School".

Crash School graduates are trainees. His referred to "first" investigation would have been as a trainee. Was there ever a second? He couldn't seem to remember when asked under oath.

Mr. LIPINSKI. Excuse me, Commander, but how many military air crashes have you participated in as a lead investigator?

Commander DONALDSON. Lead investigator, one or two.

Mr. LIPINSKI. How many overall?

Commander DONALDSON. Because of the way that the military is structured, I have supervised probably a dozen. I go through and critique in the superior-the wing safety officer, for instance, reviews every squadron crash in detail--

Mr. LIPINSKI. So as lead, one or two, and you were involved in 12 other ones. Have you ever participated in an official investigation of a civil air crash?

Commander DONALDSON. No.
Source.

So when did he get the "extensive experience" alleged in his website?

How expert was he at interviewing witnesses and analyzing their reports when he attempted to assume those roles after the Flight 800 disaster? Well, he touted witnesses such as Fred Meyer and Dwight Brumley as "missile shootdown witnesses" and even made Meyer a Board Member of ARAP.

Dwight Brumley: "I could not positively say that what I saw was a missile. What I saw was a very bright flame of light moving parallel to my aircraft."
Source.

Fred Meyer: "I saw a streak of light in the sky. I have no idea what it was. And my reaction when I saw it was, what the hell is that?"
Source.

The "Missile Witnesses" Myth

Bonafide experts, including the following, determined that the "shootdown" notion was nonsense long before the re-creation videos.

http://www.kreindler.com/
Accident Investigation
Kreindler & Kreindler is widely respected for diligence and skill in undertaking independent aviation and other accident investigations. Time and again, the firm has fought on behalf of victims to uncover the truth that an operator or manufacturer sought to conceal. On many occasions, the firm discovered the actual cause of accidents that had eluded government investigators.

The firm's attorneys are not only excellent lawyers but also offer unmatched technical expertise. Our ranks include aircraft pilots, helicopter pilots and engineers. In addition, the firm has an in-house technical department headed by a former Federal Aviation Administration airworthiness inspector. We work with leading experts from around the world in many technical areas including piloting, aircraft design, metallurgy, crashworthiness, meteorology, air traffic control, avionics, computer technology and other fields as necessary to prove the cause of an accident.

TWA Flight 800 disaster

Kreindler & Kreindler represents the largest group of families of passengers killed in the July 1996 TWA Flight 800 disaster off Long Island, New York. At the outset, many believed that a bomb or missile caused the crash. But based on our own intensive hands-on investigation, including the examination of several 747 aircraft in the California desert, the firm quickly determined that the likely cause of the disaster was a mechanical malfunction leading to an explosion in the center fuel cell. Armed with this knowledge, we filed the first suit in October 1996 against the airline and manufacturer. Three of the firm's partners were appointed by the court to the Plaintiffs' Committee, including the post of Committee Chairman.

____________________

FBI Chief Forensic Metallurgist William Tobin had also determined that there was no physical evidence to support the notion that Flight 800 was the victim of a missile or bomb by early or mid September 1997 and nine other expert metallurgist agreed.
Source,

The "Missile Witnesses" Myth

Obviously, you did not do your homework assignment. Rokke, the world does not work on YOUR definitions of things. I provided you with an authoritative source. I have provided you with the scientific terminology AND their definitions. I have demonstrated the math.

Here is the definition FROM AN AUTHORITATIVE SOURCE, once again:

Inertia is the resistance an object has to a change in its state of motion.

Whether it is moving or or at rest, an object HAS INERTIA.

Right now, in front of me is a 21 inch computer monitor that masses approximately 110 Lbs. It has momentum.

"What?!" you cry... "it is at rest."

No, my friend, it is NOT at rest. It is currently moving in an easterly direction approximately 900 miles per hour... and it is moving around the sun at approximately 67,000 MPH and it is moving around the Galaxy center at approximately 250,000 MPH.

The amount of momentum carried by this Monitor is stupendous. Just using the larger of these we find my monitor has 20,000,000,000 Kg*m/s of Momentum. Thank God its momentum and vedtor happens to be shared by almost everything else in the neighborhood.

Rokke, there are different ways of pumping energy into things. You can wind up a spring or a rubber band to power a toy. You can throw a rock, loading it with the energy of your arm (which, until it hits something, keeps that energy stored in the form of MOMENTUM). to kill a small animal or to break a window. You can pick up a book moving it higher in the gravity field (adding to its energy) and put it on a high shelf where the potential energy is stored in its position, logically called positional energy. These are all examples of MECHANICAL ENERGY which has two forms: Potential and Kinetic.

Consider a pendulum... it cycles between the two states of mechanical energy as it swings. At the end of its swing it has NO kinetic energy but a great deal of potential energy... at the bottom of its swing it has the largest amount of kinetic energy but no potential energy. As the pendulum rises to its peak of swing, the energy is being converted to potential energy... as it falls it is being converted back into kinetic energy. At the top of each swing the pendulum has ZERO relative MOMENTUM (it does still have inertia). At the bottom of the swing it has the greatest amount of Momentum.

There is a relationship between work (applied force) and mechanical energy change. Whenever work is done upon an object by an external force, there will be a change in the total mechanical energy of the object. If only internal forces are doing work (no work done by external forces), there is no change in total mechanical energy; the total mechanical energy is said to be "conserved."

You yourself have said momentum = mass * velocity.

Oh, you invoked Einstein: remember e = m*c^2???

e = energy, M = Mass, c^2 is a velocity squared. Think about it.

I again suggest you do a little studying... you may learn something. I know it takes an effort. But then you wouldn't display your ignorance for the virtual world to see.

Bonafide experts, including the following, determined that the "shootdown" notion was nonsense long before the re-creation videos.

http://www.kreindler.com/
Accident Investigation
Kreindler & Kreindler is widely respected for diligence and skill in undertaking independent aviation and other accident investigations. Time and again, the firm has fought on behalf of victims to uncover the truth that an operator or manufacturer sought to conceal. On many occasions, the firm discovered the actual cause of accidents that had eluded government investigators.

The firm's attorneys are not only excellent lawyers but also offer unmatched technical expertise. Our ranks include aircraft pilots, helicopter pilots and engineers. In addition, the firm has an in-house technical department headed by a former Federal Aviation Administration airworthiness inspector. We work with leading experts from around the world in many technical areas including piloting, aircraft design, metallurgy, crashworthiness, meteorology, air traffic control, avionics, computer technology and other fields as necessary to prove the cause of an accident.

TWA Flight 800 disaster

Kreindler & Kreindler represents the largest group of families of passengers killed in the July 1996 TWA Flight 800 disaster off Long Island, New York. At the outset, many believed that a bomb or missile caused the crash. But based on our own intensive hands-on investigation, including the examination of several 747 aircraft in the California desert, the firm quickly determined that the likely cause of the disaster was a mechanical malfunction leading to an explosion in the center fuel cell. Armed with this knowledge, we filed the first suit in October 1996 against the airline and manufacturer. Three of the firm's partners were appointed by the court to the Plaintiffs' Committee, including the post of Committee Chairman.

____________________

FBI Chief Forensic Metallurgist William Tobin had also determined that there was no physical evidence to support the notion that Flight 800 was the victim of a missile or bomb by early or mid September 1997 and nine other expert metallurgist agreed.
Source,

The "Missile Witnesses" Myth

Bump - R'29.

"Accident Investigation: Kreindler & Kreindler is widely respected for diligence and skill in undertaking independent aviation and other accident investigations"

"Go run your commercials on another channel!"

My "commercials"? I've never had ANY business relationship with that law firm. I simply quoted from their website. There are lots of others, including additional law firms with extensive expertise in such matters, who rejected the stillborn "missile shootdown" or bomb notions nearly 6 years ago whereas the tinfoil hats are amateurs popping off about things they know little or nothing about.

The bankrupty of your missile shootdown "case" is dramatized by your contant drumbeat of crude shoot-from-the-lip accusations. It's evident that's because you have little or no knowledge of the subjects your postings have been blitzkreiging the readers with since your arrival at FreeRepublic on 28 July 2002.

Once again, the timeline and location of the major events of the disaster was approximately as follows:

8:31:11 Intact and climbing 747 approaches 13,800 feet.

8:31:12 Initiating Event at 13,800 feet followed immediately by the commencement of the decapitation process.

8:31:43-8:31:47 Streak of light appears.

8:31:47 Explosion of Massive Fireball at 5500-7500 feet.

8:31:55-8:31:57 Splashdown of the Massive Fireball flames.
Source.

Do you agree or disagree? If you disagree, where is your timeline?

Oh the lengths you will go to avoid admiting you are wrong. If this statement were correct: "Momentum is merely inertia, stored energy" you could have just answered "zero", and "yes" to my very straightforward and simple questions. Instead, you offer a long explaination about how everything is moving, nothing is at rest, and my monitor has a momentum similar to a small asteroid. I guess we should start to call Newton's First Law of Motion the Law of Momentum, and his Third Law the Law of Inertia since the two are interchangeable, and he obviously didn't have your grasp of physics. Interestingly, the "authoritative source" you sent me to has this to say about momentum and inertia:

Inertia is a quantity which depends solely upon mass. The more mass, the more inertia. Momentum is a quantity in Physics which depends on both mass and speed.

So even your own "authoritative source" identifies them as different. Now strap on one half of a testical and admit you are wrong.

With regard to the rest of your blathering, I offer you some quotes from your "authoritative source":

Kinetic Energy: "Kinetic energy is a scalar quantity; it does not have a direction. Unlike velocity, acceleration, force, and momentum, the kinetic energy of an object is completely described by magnitude alone."
Here is another good website for you to go to Kinetic Energy is NOT Momentum

Potential Energy: potential energy is the energy which an object has stored due to its position relative to some zero position. An object possesses gravitational potential energy if it is positioned at a height above (or below) the zero height position. An object possesses elastic potential energy if it is at a position on an elastic medium other than the equilibrium position.

"I again suggest you do a little studying... you may learn something."
I did. I learned you have an inability to admit you are wrong. Now about that motorcycle jump....

Well, I'm afraid your not going to get a better source than the automated surface weather observation system at JFK. Since the article you linked to didn't provide a source for their information, it is impossible to tell where they got it but it does not match the info from the JFK ASOS in any parameter. Here is the ATIS report recorded at 2000:22 on the cockpit voice recorder:

-- visibility greater than one zero ceiling better than five thousand temperature two eight due point two one altimeter three zero zero seven approach in use VOR DME runway two two left departure runway runway two two right and southwest departures runway three one left from intersection of kilo kilo all pilot are require to read back all runway hold short instructions in interest of noise abatement please use the assigned runway advise you have tango Kennedy airport information tango two three five one Zulu weather wind two two zero eight visibility --.'

"Did you error in stating that 23:51 zulu was 7:15 EST?"
Yes. I meant 7:51pm. I simply post the facts as listed in the NTSB report. If I make a mistake, (like typing 7:15 instead of 7:51) I admit it (unlike some people around here). I don't know when Tango was posted, but since ATIS is updated based on significant weather or information changes, if it weren't applicable, it would be changed. Here is a link to the NTSB report on the web.
TWA 800 Report
Most of it is pdf format so you will need to download adobe acrobat. The final report is on the left and the individual reports are on the right under the title of docket information. For the life of me, and can't figure out why folks continually bash a report they either haven't read (not you), or don't have access to. You will find the answers to almost every bogus question or accusation brought up on all the for profit consipiracy sites. That includes why some of the tests at CalTech, etc. used different substances to create explosions, etc. Each test was performed for a different purpose, and each test is explained in detail in the report.

Rokke... exactly where do you get the velocity portion of Momentum???? Is it imparted to the mass by the blue fairy?

No, of course not. Inertia IS a property of mass. No where have I stated that inertia is energy. In classical physics it remains the same regardless of the forces applied to the mass or to the velocity (at the speeds we are talking about) of that mass. For this reason it takes exactly the same amount force to accelerate a frictionless mass from rest to a speed of 1 m/s as it takes to accelerate the same mass from 1000 m/s to 1001 m/s... or to 999 m/s... or or to apply the same force at 90 degrees perpendicular to the trajectory to change the vector of that mass so that is moving 1 m/s away from its original trajectory while still maintaining its original momentum. Momentum is inertia plus kinetic energy. The mass doesn't care whether it is moving or at rest... it resists changing its motion with the same reluctance in either state.

If I push (apply a force) to a frictionless 1 kg ball (a mass) and accellerate it from relative rest to a relative 1 m/s (a velocity) in a hypothetical force free vacuum, it will continue moving (being displaced) at the same 1 m/s for eternity. The mass now has Momentum equal to 1 kg*m/s.

WHAT DID I ADD TO IT???

I did not change its inertia... that is still the same. I added motion... velocity... kinetic energy.

Five years from now I encounter this 1 kg ball still moving at 1 m/s (it still has the same Momentum) and I place a lever in front of it which is attached to a device that converts a depression of the lever into a rotation which spins a small generator that is attached to a lightbulb. The 1 kg mass COLLIDES with the lever, transfers its 1 m/s velocity to the lever, spinning the generator and lighting the lightbulb for one second. The 1 kg mass is now at rest, its relative momentum is 0 kg*m/s as its velocity is now 0 m/s.

WHERE DID THE ENERGY THAT LIT THE LIGHT BULB COME FROM????

WHERE WAS IT STORED???

The rest of your post is more nitpicking. So what that Kinetic energy can be described without a vector??? Even expecting energy to be described with a vector is like expecting milk to have a direction.

So you can copy a definition of potential energy? It has no bearing on the issue at hand.

Nor does Evel's motorcycle.

"FBI Chief Forensic Metallurgist William Tobin had also determined that there was no physical evidence to support the notion that Flight 800 was the victim of a missile or bomb by early or mid September 1997"

NOW MY DEAR ASMODEUS, WE ALL KNOW TOBIN REACHED HIS "CONCLUSIONS" in Sept. 1996.....NOT 1997....Now don't we?

Fascinating. Surprisingly enough, I understand all those terms like Ixx and Iyy.

Without running the numbers, my guess is that a pitch-up of 22 degrees in one second would pull the wings off a 747.

"No where have I stated that inertia is energy."

Allow me to quote you once again...
"Momentum is merely inertia, stored energy."

In addition to saying momentum is inertia or stored energy (potential energy) you have also said it is kinetic energy. Wrong, wrong and wrong. And if your flawed calculations concerning TWA800 were legitimate, than they could be applied to any object that starts with upward and forward momentum but has no lift or thrust. We've all seen motorcycles accomplish what you say is impossible (which is why I chose it as an example). As I said before, you have proved nothing other than a less than accurate understanding of the physics involved, and that despite being wrong, you cannot admit it. But I'll give you an A+ for effort, and for clintonian level talent in attempting to deny the undeniable.