HOW TO DOWN A 747 in ONE EASY STEP
THEL
Posted on 08/03/2002 5:53:49 AM PDT by JohnFiorentino
Much has been said of those who disagree with the official line regarding the demise of TWA Flight 800.
Many of the those who defend that position use classic disinformationalist tactics to disparage anyone who dares question the status quo. Phrases such as "missile-huggers" and "tin-foil hats" permeate their criticisms.
To be sure their are indeed many wild theories, and is in every group of people, one finds a few wing-nuts.
But is EVERYONE who questions the official scenario crazy, or missile-huggers, or tin-foil hats? The answer of course is no.
Below you will find information and help in ascertaining just how "crazy" some who have questions really are.
International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW)
Analysis and Recommendations Regarding TWA Flight 800
The international Asssociation of Machinists and Aerospace Workers submitted their report to the NTSB as Parties to the investigation. As such they had access to all the information available to the NTSB and other Parties and have formed some opinions that are at odds with the official NTSB line. The Full IAMAW report is available here. http://twa800.com/iamaw/iamaw.pdf
Excerpts are available here.
http://twa800.com/iamaw/iamaw.htm
None of the "shootdown" tinfoil hats wants to provide the readers with a timeline.
You hoo, Asmodeus, anyone home? Take a look at all of my recent posts if you want my timeline, as it's there for your eyes to behold. And you really should wrap that tinfoil around your head a little tighter, as the NWO thought rays are obviously baking what's left of your brain..
I've shown that it would be physically impossible for TWA 800 to have fell from 13,500 feet in the time given. From 13,800 feet, it would be even more impossible, if that itself were possible.
You resort to name calling, ignore any and all information I post, and fail to answer the most basic of questions. Are you unable to comprehend the material presented to you?
In fact, your own website has material that contradicts your now infamous timeline..
You provide the following statement from James Kalstom:
Just after the initial explosion at 8:31.07.5 PM, the aircraft pitched up abruptly and climbed several thousand feet from its cruise altitude of 13,800 feet to a maximum altitude of about 17,000 feet.
We all know that it's impossible for it to have climbed at all, but Kalstrom says that the IE was at 20:31:07.5, whereas YOUR timeline states that it's at 20:31:12, which is in line with the flight data recorder BUT in disagreement with your "source".
Next, we have more of Kalstrom's statement,
Shortly after Flight 800 reach the apex of its ascent - about 15 seconds or so after the initial explosion - a SECOND explosion occurred.
So that would be 31:12 + 15 sec = 31:27, right?
Then we have some more of Kalstrom's statement;
As the aircraft descended, it produced an increasingly visible fire trail. When it reached an altitude of about 1 mile - 42 seconds after the initial onboard explosion - the aircraft's left wing separated from the fuselage, releasing the unburned fuel in the left wing's fuel tanks. The fuel's subsequent ignition and burning produced a dramatic fireball visible to eyewitnesses more than 40 miles away, and detected by an infrared sensor aboard the US Defense Support Program (DSP) missile warning satellite.
So 31:12 + 42 seconds = 31:54, which is the latest time TWA800 could have hit the water according to the radar returns. It appears that Kalstrom disagrees with your timeline claim of 31:47 for the massive fireball. In any case, it couldn't have been at an altitude of 5280 feet (1 mile) as Kalstrom claims for that time, as it was already in the water.
Then you state;
Witness Meyer did not and could not have seen a "flak" shootdown of the airliner at 13,800 feet at 8:31:11 only 3-4 seconds before he saw the reportedly 2000 feet in diameter Massive Fireball explosion fill the sky between 5500 and 7500 feet at approximately 8:31:47. And, of course, he indicates that he and his crewmates agreed at the time that only about 10 seconds elapsed between the time the Massive Fireball exploded and the splashdown of its flames.
I won't even go into your misrepresentation of what Major Meyer saw and when he saw it, as that's a subject unto itself. What I want to demonstate here is that YOU'RE claiming a different time than Kalstrom gave, as it fits into YOUR little timeline, facts be damned. Kalstrom's time for the massive fireball is 31:54, where you claim 31:47. Funny how you impeach your own source on the same page you provide AS a source.
For TWA 800 to fall from 5500 feet with a terminal velocity of 325 feet/second, it'd take;
t = 5500/325 = 17 seconds.
From 7500 feet it would take;
t = 7500/325 = 23 seconds.
So if the fireball DID occur at 31:47 AND it occured between 5500-7500 feet, TWA800 would have hit the water between 32:04 and 32:10, which we know didn't happen according to the radar returns. In fact, those times don't agree with YOUR impact times of 32:55-31:57.
You neglect the fact that Kalstrom had made the statement that the SECOND explosion was at about 31:27, as you are stating that Major Meyer had to have seen this "flak" 3-4 seconds before 31:47, which would be 31:43-31:44. Just to let you know, 31:27 is not the same as 31:43...
So something is definitely amiss in your timeline. You contradict your own sources, yet you want us to refer to them as proof of what you claim.
Are you for real?
He conducted experiments with JP-4 on his barbeque grill to try and ignite the fuel vapors.
I'll admit that I'm coming to the debate very late in the game. Early posts by the likes of Michael Rivero made me discount everything that was being said about any aircraft accident here on FR. So, you may have answered this before, but if this guy was an "expert" why was he doing experiments on his grill at home?
Do you even know what the term "terminal velocity" means? It means the fastest speed that an object can attain when falling through air. Terminal velocity is greater for a streamlined object, whereas a fluid would have a much LOWER terminal velocity as it has more drag than the fuselage of a plane for example. In fact, if fluids didn't reach a reasonably low terminal velocity, every drop of rain would be like rifle bullets, and would cause tremendous damage and kill people. As that doesn't happen, I think it's safe to say that fluids have a low terminal velocity.
I'd say for a fluid, the terminal velocity would be about 25 miles/hour, or 37 feet/second.
Given that speed, for the fireball to have only fell for 10 seconds as claimed, then it would have been at;
d = 37 * 10 = 370 feet.
Now that's a far cry from your wild claims. In fact, for it to have fell a mile as Kalstrom claims (in contradiction to your claim of 5500-7500) feet, it would have taken;
t = 5280/37 = 143 seconds to fall from that high.
Now 143 is a bit more than 10, don't you agree?
Neither did the source of the Massive Fireball flames, the thousands of gallons of jet fuel that gushed out of the left wing tanks when it separated from the fuselage, descend at "terminal velocity" prior to being ignited and thereby becoming the Massive Fireball.
Blah, blah, blah. You really need to look up some basic science facts before you post, as you only reinforce the fact that you have no idea at all what you're talking about....
Oh yeah...that and when George Stephanolplufugufugus was running in the streets the morning of 9-11 on ABC calling TWA a bombing. Whoops!
This may or may not be true. But, at least he is only claiming expertise in one field. Look at the range of functional areas that some folks speak to on these threads.
He also claims to have been an investigator for 50 years, although he won't say what kind of investigator he was (is)...
50 years, hmm, that puts him over 70. Pretty adept at HTML for a 70 year old.
He also claims to have been an investigator for 50 years, although he won't say what kind of investigator he was (is)...
50 years, hmm, that puts him over 70. Pretty adept at HTML for a 70 year old.
That should have said that for TWA800 we're assuming a terminal velocity of 150 miles per hour. Terminal velocity varies from case to case, and is highly dependent on many factors. A human body when skydiving falls through the air at a terminal velocity of 120 mph, whereas rain drops fall much slower or else they'd act as bullets.
In later estimates I've increased the terminal velocity estimate up to 222 mph, and the calculations still show that the zoom climb is not only impossible, but it also becomes apparent that TWA800 had to DIVE UNDER POWER between the initiating event and the time the nose came off for it to have impacted the water when it did.
It should be d = 1/2*g*t2
Yeah. On the Westerfield threads we call that type "DISRUPTORS". Posters that sound like one of the old 33/13 rpm records stuck in the same groove. All they can do is repeat the same phrases over and over. When asked reasonable, logical, common-sense questions, they play possum. Yet they are sure they know more than anyone else in the world. Everyone else is crazy, they are the only sane humans on the planet.
If we ever get this TRIAL over with, maybe I will come over here and give you all a hand with these type of posters. I like the TWA800 threads. Used to be my favorites.
HOW TO DOWN A 747 in ONE EASY STEP
THEL
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.