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

To: FormerLurker
One last reply: Read my post #359 in this thread. You will see that is impossible for it not to have climbed at all. That is a fact that even Swordmaker agrees with. Plain and simple. Nobody is claiming it climbed like the Space Shuttle. Not even the CIA. Certainly not the NTSB.
921 posted on 09/03/2002 8:37:55 PM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 914 | View Replies ]


To: Rokke
Nobody is claiming it climbed like the Space Shuttle. Not even the CIA. Certainly not the NTSB.

If you look at the fall times that Swordmaker and I have calculated from the radar returns, you'll see that it IS impossible for it to have climbed.

There just wasn't ANY time for it to come down from a altitude higher than its last reported height, and even THAT took some time to figure out how it could have come down from THAT high up in the time that it took for it to impact the Atlantic.

There is also the slight problem with the engine being at idle, insufficient lift, excessive drag, and aerodynamic instability. And don't forget insufficient loss of forward velocity in order for it to have climbed.

If you want to post the specific information you have in the post that you mention, please do it here so that we can re-examine those points that you feel prove otherwise..

BTW, the reason why I mentioned the Space Shuttle is that for TWA800 to have gone into a "zoom-climb", it would of had to have gone into a BALLISTIC CLIMB, which is exactly what the Space Shuttle does when it blasts off with its solid fuel booster rockets strapped on...

924 posted on 09/03/2002 8:52:37 PM PDT by FormerLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 921 | View Replies ]

To: Rokke
One last reply: Read my post #359 in this thread.

From post #359:

Rokke: 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.

I'm sorry Rokke, but 3 * 33 ft/sec = 99 feet, NOT 900. Is that the basis of your argument?

926 posted on 09/03/2002 9:05:18 PM PDT by FormerLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 921 | 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