TWA 800 New Probe ?
Jun 25, 2013, 1:29 pm
#16
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,705
All of this makes me wonder...
If it was a terrorist attack, who did it? Real terrorists always claim responsibility for their attacks. Until NTSB came out and said that it wasn't an attack, the FBI was actively investigating, so if it was an attack, the attackers would have come out and said that they did it, and the FBI would have investigated their claim of responsibility. Naturally, a lot of nutbags who had nothing to do with it also claim responsibility, but if the FBI investigated, they would have figured out which group did it.
Supposed "eyewitness" accounts don't hold much water with me. Anyone who saw what happened had to be miles away from and thousands of feet below the plane, and the human eye plays so many tricks on people at that distance, over open ocean, it ain't funny.
So, I don't think it was an attack. I find nothing compelling in the wild rantings of a bunch of consipracy theorists who are trying to make money selling a documentary.
I don't belive the Phoenix Lights were alien space monsters, either.
And yes, I DO believe that those guys in the 60s and 70s ACTUALLY landed on the moon.
If it was a terrorist attack, who did it? Real terrorists always claim responsibility for their attacks. Until NTSB came out and said that it wasn't an attack, the FBI was actively investigating, so if it was an attack, the attackers would have come out and said that they did it, and the FBI would have investigated their claim of responsibility. Naturally, a lot of nutbags who had nothing to do with it also claim responsibility, but if the FBI investigated, they would have figured out which group did it.
Supposed "eyewitness" accounts don't hold much water with me. Anyone who saw what happened had to be miles away from and thousands of feet below the plane, and the human eye plays so many tricks on people at that distance, over open ocean, it ain't funny.
So, I don't think it was an attack. I find nothing compelling in the wild rantings of a bunch of consipracy theorists who are trying to make money selling a documentary.
I don't belive the Phoenix Lights were alien space monsters, either.
And yes, I DO believe that those guys in the 60s and 70s ACTUALLY landed on the moon.
I don't recall the political situation at the time (whether or not that might have influenced the handling); I recall mention that Boeing got sizable $$ from defense contracts and thus might have been amenable to an explanation of events that they did not necessarily agree with.
It was not an entirely implausible scenario. And I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist [removed OMNI/PR comment]
Last edited by cblaisd; Jun 25, 2013 at 8:50 pm
Jul 3, 2013, 4:19 pm
#17
Join Date: May 2012
Location: DCA, lived MCI, SEA/PDX,BUF (born/raised)
Programs: Marriott (Silver/Gold), IHG, Carlson, Best Western, Choice( Gold), AS (MVP), WN, UA
Posts: 8,737
I remember reading once, long ago when this all happened, that there was some kind of US military exercise or activity in the area. There was a suggestion that this was a 'friendly fire' sort of accident. That would be problematic at the best of times (openly admitting US civilians died because of a US military screw-up on US soil). It would be a lot more problematic if it was an entire airliner; possibly even more awkward if there were foreign nationals aboard.
I don't recall the political situation at the time (whether or not that might have influenced the handling); I recall mention that Boeing got sizable $$ from defense contracts and thus might have been amenable to an explanation of events that they did not necessarily agree with.
It was not an entirely implausible scenario. And I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist [removed OMNI/PR comment]
I don't recall the political situation at the time (whether or not that might have influenced the handling); I recall mention that Boeing got sizable $$ from defense contracts and thus might have been amenable to an explanation of events that they did not necessarily agree with.
It was not an entirely implausible scenario. And I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist [removed OMNI/PR comment]
I believe in this theory with the case.....
The crux was it wasnt live ammo that was fired but dud exercise weapons fired.
Then that thud of hitting the plan in the empty center fuel tank would have been enough to spark the interior tank into an explosion.
The reasons for this.....
1. TWA was late in take off ...I think it was one of the last europe flights to leave.. This international routing/flight area closes down around 8pm and is then used for military exercises.
2. There was a military exercise going on in that area on that specific date.
3. too many people said that saw something come up toward the aircraft.
4. The FBI and other agencies seemed to get involved in this investigation.
5. If the explosion was that much of a risk there would have been more incidents like this because many aircraft flew with an empty center fuel tank....none exploded.
Jul 3, 2013, 5:47 pm
#18
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,974
Jul 3, 2013, 10:13 pm
#19
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Chicago
Programs: UA1MM*GL/1K, AA, BnVy PlatL, HH Silver,
Posts: 681
I remember reading once, long ago when this all happened, that there was some kind of US military exercise or activity in the area. There was a suggestion that this was a 'friendly fire' sort of accident. That would be problematic at the best of times (openly admitting US civilians died because of a US military screw-up on US soil). It would be a lot more problematic if it was an entire airliner; possibly even more awkward if there were foreign nationals aboard.
I don't recall the political situation at the time (whether or not that might have influenced the handling); I recall mention that Boeing got sizable $$ from defense contracts and thus might have been amenable to an explanation of events that they did not necessarily agree with.
It was not an entirely implausible scenario. And I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist [removed OMNI/PR comment]
I don't recall the political situation at the time (whether or not that might have influenced the handling); I recall mention that Boeing got sizable $$ from defense contracts and thus might have been amenable to an explanation of events that they did not necessarily agree with.
It was not an entirely implausible scenario. And I'm not generally a conspiracy theorist [removed OMNI/PR comment]
No one was going to admit friendly fire or terrorist under any circumstance at this time. Something external definitely hit the plane. Whether friend or foe, experimental (at the time) drone, or dud as someone else noted...just look at pictures of the reconstructed plane. Half the area above business was never found; the cargo door is shredded and yet the wing root and fuselage above the wing where the fuel tank is is relatively in tact. Also the front gear doors were bent inwards. The guy who took a swath of seat from the lower deck business that tested for rocket fuel ends up in prison... For the sake of the families, hopefully the truth comes out some day.
Jul 4, 2013, 9:19 am
#20
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: IAD
Programs: United MP
Posts: 7,822
It was days before the Atlanta Olympics and a presidential election year (1996)...4 months away, no way would Clinton have recovered if he goes on TV and say we accidentally shot down a plane...or...the "pre" al Qaeda took the plane down from a speed boat off Long Island (still seems more far fetched than the first).
Jul 4, 2013, 9:32 am
#21
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: MSY; 2-time FT Fantasy Football Champ, now in recovery.
Programs: AA lifetime GLD; UA Silver; Marriott LTTE; IHG Plat,
Posts: 14,518
Jul 4, 2013, 10:11 am
#22
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Salish Sea
Programs: DL,AC,HH,PC
Posts: 8,974
In this case how many people do you think would have to be in on the "secret" - hundreds, thousands, more? Barely credible that in 17 years not one of them has had a pang of conscience and spoken out. Or needed the money such a revelation would doubtless garner.
It could be that the tank explosion is just the most likely cause without it being proven beyond a doubt. Perhaps forensics are better today than back then, which might be reason enough to take another look, but is it really worth the time and money?
Aug 9, 2013, 7:02 pm
#23
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Boston
Posts: 467
TWA 800 Revisited
Seventeen years ago a Paris-bound 747 blew up over Long Island. What really happened?
TWA 800 is back with us again, thanks to a new documentary from filmmakers Kristina Borjesson and Tom Stalcup. The movie is called, well, "TWA 800," and it revisits the theory that the Paris-bound 747 was destroyed not by an explosion of vapors in its empty center fuel tank, as was concluded after the most expensive crash investigation in U.S. history, but by a missile -- three of them, in fact.
You're liable to watch the film and come away suspicious of the official findings, which is of course the whole intent. My personal opinion is that yes, it was an accidental fuel tank explosion. And if you read the full report and weigh both sides, I think you'll feel the same way. Frankly, the film is a little insulting to the many NTSB, FAA, and TWA employees who devoted so much time and effort to solving the flight 800 mystery. Here's why....
The full story is at www.askthepilot.com
Enjoy,
Patrick Smith
TWA 800 is back with us again, thanks to a new documentary from filmmakers Kristina Borjesson and Tom Stalcup. The movie is called, well, "TWA 800," and it revisits the theory that the Paris-bound 747 was destroyed not by an explosion of vapors in its empty center fuel tank, as was concluded after the most expensive crash investigation in U.S. history, but by a missile -- three of them, in fact.
You're liable to watch the film and come away suspicious of the official findings, which is of course the whole intent. My personal opinion is that yes, it was an accidental fuel tank explosion. And if you read the full report and weigh both sides, I think you'll feel the same way. Frankly, the film is a little insulting to the many NTSB, FAA, and TWA employees who devoted so much time and effort to solving the flight 800 mystery. Here's why....
The full story is at www.askthepilot.com
Enjoy,
Patrick Smith
Aug 9, 2013, 8:15 pm
#24
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Between AUS, EWR, and YTO In a little twisty maze of airline seats, all alike.. but I wanna go home with the armadillo
Programs: CO, NW, & UA forum moderator emeritus
Posts: 35,432
worked on the riginal investigation.FWIW, your recap excellent of the investigation (see link above) certainly seals the deal for me and points to several items I never knew of before.