Originally posted by guamainiac
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
TWA Flight 800 "Cover Up" ?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by phoneman View PostOkay you tell me how that can happen.
Also you need to explain the photos and radar track of the climbing arc. It's there. It happened. Less importantly is how does this help a cover up?Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View PostThis is a little known fact but the wings of an aircraft actually generate a small amount of lift that supplements the primary lift that comes from the nose.
Also you need to explain the photos and radar track of the climbing arc. It's there. It happened. Less importantly is how does this help a cover up?
http://youtu.be/V0h3hXvZ7Cc
Comment
-
Originally posted by phoneman View Post
YOU provide explanations.
I SAW THE PHOTOS....A DAY OR TWO AFTER THE CRASH.
The flames/smoke trail show an arc- first it goes up, then it goes down.
Your one link said that ~250 people saw the arc.
Your turn:
Explain why it didn't actually arc even though it sure as hell looked like it arc.
Explain why THIS is significant to the investigation.
I don't want to hear that the CIA cartoon isn't realistic. DUH, it's an expeletive CARTOON to DUMB IT DOWN JUST A LITTLE for simplistic folks like you who can't handle more complex concepts like center of gravity, lift, angle of attack, stall, and how streamlining is blunt in the front and pointed in the back, so that the lack of a nose, while a little bit more draggy is not going to slow the plane that much.
YOU explain. I'm waiting.Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View PostThis is a little known fact but the wings of an aircraft actually generate a small amount of lift that supplements the primary lift that comes from the nose.
Page 95 of the NTSB report has the analysis of why such a plane would climb after losing some 80,000 lbs of weight (i.e. the nose) from the front of the plane.
Comment
-
justLOT787, thanks but you can do that on your dime after you've shown that the Polish crew didn't screw the pooch but it was the work of fog generators, bombs and perhaps a "fourth coulmn" inside the TU. Most of us really believe that things mechanical do bring down aircraft in some cases.
As Kalstrom said, the ac is there so have a go at it.
And yes, capitalism is a bitch. You just don't want to pull apart and rewire each and every Boeing because there are some sporadic failures. Like it or not all of the government agencies operate on something that may be defined as "within the limits of acceptable risk".
What kind of car do you drive?Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.
Comment
-
Originally posted by 3WE View PostNo... As you ask us for explanations (and we have provided)
YOU provide explanations.
I SAW THE PHOTOS....A DAY OR TWO AFTER THE CRASH.
The flames/smoke trail show an arc- first it goes up, then it goes down.
Your one link said that ~250 people saw the arc.
Your turn:
Explain why it didn't actually arc even though it sure as hell looked like it arc.
Explain why THIS is significant to the investigation.
I don't want to hear that the CIA cartoon isn't realistic. DUH, it's an expeletive CARTOON to DUMB IT DOWN JUST A LITTLE for simplistic folks like you who can't handle more complex concepts like center of gravity, lift, angle of attack, stall, and how streamlining is blunt in the front and pointed in the back, so that the lack of a nose, while a little bit more draggy is not going to slow the plane that much.
YOU explain. I'm waiting.
The CIA is claiming that the plane arc'd upwards to explain that what people saw was the plane and not a missile streaking upwards. That's why it's significant to the investigation! Me simplistic? Anytime you believe that the nose provides more lift than the wings, you are simple. Oh by the way, the 747 lost it's left wing after the explosion! Other pilots in the air at the time who saw the explosion, didn't see the plane arc up, but go straight down. What are you, a govt. agent trying to spread false information?
Comment
-
Originally posted by phoneman View PostOkay you tell me how that can happen.
You are the one claiming that it was impossible, so the burden of proof is on your shoulders.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Comment
-
Originally posted by phoneman View Post........... Oh by the way, the 747 lost it's left wing after the explosion! ...............
Comment
-
Originally posted by Highkeas View PostI had not read this before but losing a wing can happen should the wing's angle of attack approaches 90 degree. Plus of course the Center Wing Fuel Tank is integral with the Wing Carry Though Structure, so an explosion of the fuel could cause loss of structural ingrity of the wing attach points.
Comment
-
Originally posted by phoneman View PostI have already provided it! Check the video link! At this point I'm over it!!
The TWA plane not only had a strong shift of the CG as in the video above. It also lost a significant part of its wight and it was going more than twice as fast.
Again, I am not saying that it DID climb. I am questioning the statement that it was impossible for it to do it.
--- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
--- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---
Comment
Comment