Is that what has your panties in a wad??? You ARE a nitpicker aren't you. That merely stated that MOMENTUM is COMPOSED of INERTIA (and) STORED ENERGY... it was a quick explanation of what I have been telling you all along. I have, MANY TIMES, more clearly stated the difference. YOU fail to understand the relationships or the implications.
As to your damn motorcycle...
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).
I have never said your motorcycle scenario is impossible. That is a "strawman" argument YOU have erroneously and probably deliberately brought up.
My "flawed" calculations are correct. Show me any error in the math, Rok, or shut up. They ARE NOT MY CALCUATIONS, they are Newton's. They CAN be applied to any objects with forward and upward momentum.
Evel drives his his motorcycle FORWARD at 100 Mph which calculated to 147 feet per second, he goes up a Ramp that is 147 feet long and 16 feet high. Evel is FORCED upwards 16 feet in ONE SECOND imparting an upward momentum of 16 feet per second per second... he leaves the ramp and immediately gravity begins to pull down on him at 32 feet per second per second. One half second second later, still moving forward at 147 feet per second he reaches the peak of his climb (ignoring wind resistance) at 8 feet plus the original 16 feet making motorcycle and rider peaking at 24 feet above the level ground, one half second later he is back to his 16 Foot altitude on his downward trajectory IN A BALLISTIC FALL... and if all goes well, a slightly lower ramp is waiting for him to land on... 147 feet from the first. Below him were 12 or so 10 foot wide school buses.
He successfully jumped the this using the SAME FORMULA I USED TO CALCULATE THE MAXIMUM RISE for TWA800.
Satisfied???
Next topic. I will first point out the errors of the math you have offered. Then I will explain how your flawed assumptions make your arguments moot.
1. Small point, but since you started the whole definitions thing, 16 ft per sec per sec is not the upward momentum of the motorcycle. 16ft per second is its upward velocity.
2. Smaller point, but momentum is not measured in feet per second per second. That would be acceleration.
3. Bigger point...the highest altitude above the surface of the ramp he will reach is 4 feet. Not 8 feet. Use this equation: h=rt-1/2at^2, where h = height, r = rate, t = time and a = acceleration. Plugging in the appropriate values gives you the following:
h = 16ft/sec*.5sec - 1/2(32ft/sec^2)(.5sec)(.5sec)
h = 4ft above ramp height, or 20 feet above ground.
So what does that prove...it proves that even the great Swordmaker can make calculation errors. But lets forget that for now and transition to TWA 800. In your initial post you concluded that TWA 800's upward momentum vector would be overcome by gravity in less than 1 second. I think later you revised that to about 1 second. Then you said that in the next second, TWA 800 would fall 64 feet. Using the same calculations you just provided for the motorcycle, TWA 800 would have only climbed a maximum of 17 feet above its initial altitude of 13,800ft, and then fallen 47 feet below its initial altitude about 1 second later. Apply that to Evel, and he would be digging a trench well before any landing ramp positioned based on the laws of physics. As I said previously, Evel would not be pleased.
Now, lets look at reality...as you have said, it took 3 seconds for the wings to stall after the initiating event. The NTSB has applied the data given to it by Boeing and calculated that at the time of the stall, the pitch of TWA 800 was 30 degrees nose high and its airspeed was 260KCAS. Remember that it reached that pitch during 3 seconds of increasing vertical velocity caused by an up to 2.7g climb. If you assume it was in a 30 degree climb when it stalled, it would have peaked about 800ft above its stall altitude, which was the IE altitude plus 3 seconds of climb before the wings stalled. Even if you assumed the rate of climb remained 33 ft per sec during those 3 seconds, you now have a climb of 900ft. Considerably more than the 100-200 feet you assume, and closing on the 1200-2200ft the NTSB assumes. How do you account for the other 300-1200ft. Well, we don't actually know the rate of climb after the FDR shutdown. The NTSB used data provided by Boeing, and several computers to calculate and simulate the flightpath of a crumbling aircraft. We used some very raw assumptions and a calculator. I imagine there are several factors not included in our raw assumptions that are included in the data the NTSB used.