TWA Flight 800 "Cover Up" ?

[BoeingBobby]

I said this years ago after the AF crash and was chastised by many for it. Just as I called the cause of the AF crash which later came out!

[phoneman]

There is a rough cut of this video at Vimeo.com/59099154 the pass code is epix123

[VViscount]

There is a rough cut of this video at Vimeo.com/59099154 the pass code is epix123

I appreciate the video phoneman. I will check it out later.

[phoneman]

Why do you say that?

Explosion happens, nose falls off causing huge shift in COG towards the back. Plane still has plenty of speed, is already climbing and has engines still running.

It is certainly plausible.

Doesn't matter how fast plane was going, If the plane tilted the way CIA said it did, plane would have stalled and fall to the ground.

[VViscount]

How about that, on exceedingly rare occasions, crap happens.

Rudders go left when they should go right.

The roof tears off.

A random wind blows a plane into the ground.

Engines shut down on short final even though you have plenty of fuel.

Or some dude pulls the stick full back for 5+ minutes and doesn't detect that he's in a slow, mushing stall.

TWA 800 is wierd as hell...

So are most plane crashes.

"Crap" as you called it happened in 1988 also in Iran Air Flight 655. Many nations have shot down multiple passenger aircraft's over the last 60 years.

[TheKiecker]

Let's start out by getting it correct; though one aircraft, there were two crashes that night.

Do tell .

[3WE]

Doesn't matter how fast plane was going, If the plane tilted the way CIA said it did, plane would have stalled and fall to the ground.

Please give this a break. Sure, the CIA cartoon "takes some liberties" but...

...riddle me this...if the nose falls off the plane isn't going to INSTANTLY stall

...the nose goes up, it climbs. Especially a big 747...it's going to gracefully start to climb...and yeah I think it does eventually stall, but the I'm thinking that the debris field, radar trajectories, and videos all clearly suggest that the nose separated, and the rest of the fusilage climbed a bit before descending. I've seen a balsa wood glider whip 'instantly' into a stall after I removed the little weight off the front, but again, a 747 is a little bigger than that.

Or are you saying they somehow put a tree up there where it shouldn't be?

Repeating- the center tank blew up and the nose broke off (I'm thinking there was a similar breakup for Pan Am 103/Lockerbie). There's video of a flaming hulk flying up and then down in a sad, but graceful arc.

As to whether there was a short circuit in the gas gauge or some poor 18 year old missle operator accidentally twitched while trying to click his mouse on the "cancel launch" button...

[3WE]

Do tell .

You are over thinking it and you deleted his hint that said, "only one aircraft"

[DCC]

I watched the movie last night and thought it was very interesting.

One bit of evidence that stood out and seems problematic to the official report was a splatter pattern of molten material sprayed across the outside, top of the center fuel tank.
In the official report the center tank is the source of the heat but the material on the outside of tank shows that something external to the tank was already molten while the tank was still intact. When the tank was pieced back together the splatter pattern was found and is consistent across the top of it.

if that is true, I'm not sure how that could fit with the official report?

[justLOT787]

Yes this was a cover up. Clinton had some one on the plane he did not like and shoot down this airliner. Same thing goes for the TU-154M Polish Air Force this also is a cover up. Like all cover ups it will see the light of truth. I have never ever heard of a gas tank explosion on an airliner it's just all BS to me. If gas tanks exploded we would have more airliners crash!! Now just watch for the former investigator to be dropping dead like fly's!

[guamainiac]

After the explosion I thought the radar track had the wings and remaining fuselage "flying" up and forward for some seconds after the nose plummeted to the sea. I can only imagine the horror of those who could see nothing ahead of them as the plane continued forward even if for only a few seconds.

[phoneman]

Please give this a break. Sure, the CIA cartoon "takes some liberties" but...

...riddle me this...if the nose falls off the plane isn't going to INSTANTLY stall

...the nose goes up, it climbs. Especially a big 747...it's going to gracefully start to climb...and yeah I think it does eventually stall, but the I'm thinking that the debris field, radar trajectories, and videos all clearly suggest that the nose separated, and the rest of the fusilage climbed a bit before descending. I've seen a balsa wood glider whip 'instantly' into a stall after I removed the little weight off the front, but again, a 747 is a little bigger than that.

Or are you saying they somehow put a tree up there where it shouldn't be?

Repeating- the center tank blew up and the nose broke off (I'm thinking there was a similar breakup for Pan Am 103/Lockerbie). There's video of a flaming hulk flying up and then down in a sad, but graceful arc.

As to whether there was a short circuit in the gas gauge or some poor 18 year old missle operator accidentally twitched while trying to click his mouse on the "cancel launch" button...

Boeing said that they could not see any way the 747 could climb after the nose was blown off! They and other engineers have said it's aerodynamic impossible!

[guamainiac]

If there was a US Navy ship involved someone would have come forward by now, especially if there was (sadly), a dollar to be made.

I remember one of the Kennedy conspiracy plots that involved Lyndon Johnson and after an hour you had to be almost thoroughly convinced that Johnson was involved along with a cover up that included that doctors that did the autopsy at the Bethesda Hospital and much of it hinged on the physicians and corpsmen who assisted and they were "all deceased". The TV station managed to "dig" up one of the key Navy corpsman who was found to be living in a trailer park and he blew the whole conspiracy thing to shreds.

One of the crew would have talked by now, that is human nature, drive by guilt or money or just the need to tell what they know.

[3WE]

Boeing said that they could not see any way the 747 could climb after the nose was blown off! They and other engineers have said it's aerodynamic impossible!

What's their explanation for the "upward" arc that is clearly visible?

Indeed, I'm not an engineer, did not stay at a Holiday in, but I did take introductory physics in college.

If you take weight off the front of a plane it might pitch up.

If the plane pitches up, it might climb.

At least that's been my experience...what happened when that immensely heavy armoured vehicle broke loose and went to the back of a 747- it climbed like hell for a while and then stalled.

Seriously- what you say goes against a lot of common sense. They could be right- but if so- what's the explanation because it violates typical physics and aerodynamics- so please explain how it's impossible that the plane would climb and please explain the nice upward arc of smoke on the video?

[guamainiac]

The "missing" French Exocet from the Falklands debacle? My sources tell me that the "third missle theory" ...

One of the things that smacked of honesty last night was the Kalstrom interview and he put it bluntly, aircraft has been reconstructed and is still stored in a warehouse "intact" and was never destroyed. If there are advances in science and physics, it's still there to be examined and have at it. I have seen this a few times in science where fingers were pointed when an area was declared "clean" only to be found twenty years later to be "contaminated" yet so many hollered cover up. They never mentioned that the new 'studies" used transmission or scanning electron microscopes that were in their infancy and not even recognized methodologies at the time.

The plane is still there .. have a ball.