First, his published "timeline"
8:31:11 Intact and climbing 747 approaches 13,800 feet.
8:31:12 Initiating Event at 13,800 feet.
8:31:47 explosion of Massive Fireball at 5500-7500 feet.
8:31:55-8:31:57 splashdown of the Massive Fireball flames
exerpt from 135 posted on 7/30/02 5:59 PM Eastern by Asmodeus
Asmodeus has made several statements wherein he indicates HIS belief that the CIA-NTSB animations are "untenable." When asked to explain these statements, he responded:
As you know, my answer to that question was that "although the absence of any credible eyewitness support for the re-creation videos is evidence that the fiery events in them are inaccurately depicted, it is not evidence that the rest of the sequence of events including the loss of the nose section and the so called "zoom climb" depicted in them is inaccurate".
excerpted from 130 posted on 7/30/02 4:12 PM Eastern by Asmodeus
However, if in FACT TWA800 performed a "zoom-climb" as reported by CIA-NTSB. Then Asmodeus "splashdown" time MUST be in error.
The NTSB video shows the initial explosion at 20:31:12, the nose separating at 20:31:16 and the aircraft beginning its zoom climb at 20:31:20. It reaches the peak of its 1,500 ft climb at 20:31:28 or 8 seconds later. This is a rate of climb of 187 ft./sec. or 11,250 feet per minute. Considering that a fully loaded 474-100 with full power climbs at less than 4,000 feet per minute, it is hardly likely that a crippled 747, with extreme drag due to the loss of the nose, could climb at nearly 3 times the normal rate with the engines at idle, which is what Boeing says would happen with the loss of the nose section. In addition, with the aircraft reaching its peak altitude of 15,200 ft. it would take the aircraft another 40 seconds to fall from 15,200 feet. However, there is a significant problem with this. The aircraft is only visible on radar for another 20 seconds. It disappears from radar after Sweep 8. It should have been visible through Sweep 12. It was not.
Lastly, if there was a zoom climb, the aircraft's forward velocity would have slowed significantly between 20:31:20 and 20:31:28. There is no evidence of a significant loss of horizontal speed during this time period. In fact, two of the three radars tracking the flight path show the aircraft speeding up. The third shows it slowing slightly. In all cases it appears to have maintained a forward velocity of over 300 knots during this period. Using a physics calculation for the loss of forward velocity in a zoom climb, you would expect the forward speed to have dropped to around 200 knots. The radar data does not support this. Therefore the "zoom climb" could not have happened.
CIA Zoom Climb.
The CIA video was even more ridiculous in that it showed the aircraft climbing to 17,000 ft. You still have the same problem of the aircraft not being capable of climbing 3 times faster than normal. You also have the problem that it would take much longer to get to 17,000, even at this absurd rate of climb. That brings us to the biggest problem with the CIA scenario and that is the time it would take to hit the water. It would take at least 54 seconds after reaching 17,000 for the aircraft to hit the water assuming it reaches a terminal velocity of 450 ft/sec. It is only visible on radar for another 20 seconds. Where was the aircraft for those extra 34 seconds?.....
You will notice in Asmodeus's remarks he makes NO DIFFERENTIATION between the CIA or NTSB video versions.
How can we interpret these discrepancies?....Does it mean that the timeline proposed by Asmodeus is in error?.....The answer to that question is NO, it DOES NOT.
Can one verify his proposed timeline solely by the data HE himself presents?......NO
Does his timeline (if accurate) support IN FACT a "zoom-climb" as proposed by CIA-NTSB.....NO
The timeline and location of the major events of the TWA 800 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.
Note also the reference to the "splashdown of the Massive Fireball flames". It should go without saying that the approximately 2000 feet in diameter Massive Fireball was not confined within the wreckage and that the falltime of its flames to the surface took far longer than most of the wreckage.
By the way, if you or anyone else have any statements from witnesses including their observations of the wreckage splashdown, please present them for the readers to review.
"Does his timeline (if accurate) support IN FACT a "zoom-climb" as proposed by CIA-NTSB.....NO".
I've never said it did.
What I said is that there is no credible eyewitness support for those videos.
They are therefore untenable for their stated purpose of claifying what the streak witnesses saw.
I've never taken any position on whether the zoom-climb was aerodynamically possible under the circumstances because I don't have the training and experience to expertly evaluate that issue.
There is a continuing dispute between those who say yes which includes the NTSB experts and those who say no who are most if not all "shootdown" tinfoil hats. Frankly, that issue appears to me to be immaterial because [1] neither of the video's were ever intended to be proof of the cause of the crash, [2] the overwhelming evidence that the 747 was not the victim of a missile or bomb, and [3] the tinfoil hats haven't been able to present any compelling evidence to the contrary.
Truth is determined by facts - not suspicions, speculations, allegations or accusations.
Please clarify that timeline conflict for everyone.
Yahoo twa800 forum
From: "John Fiorentino"
Date: Fri Mar 15, 2002 4:18 pm
[excerpt][quote][emphasis added - caps yours]
However, based on Meyer's statements, I don't believe he witnessed the IE. Fl. 800 didn't explode in a MF at 13000+, the MF was somewhere 7500-8500ft. Look at his timeline. Please explain, HOW he could have witnessed the IE?.
[end quote]
Yahoo TWA800 forum - April 12, 2002
From: John Fiorentino
Subject: Re: [twa800] Kabofovic revisited
[excerpt][quote][emphasis added]
Most here are convinced a "missile" did the dirty deed. I'm not, not yet at least. The initial assessment was "bomb". I thought so to. I still do. [end quote]