DeltaGuy From United States, joined Sep 2001, 4174 posts, RR: 30 Posted (6 years 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 13500 times:
This issue has probably been beat to death before, but I saw the photos of the TWA wreckage from the other post, and thought I'd try to get a consensus from the group, as I have to write a paper here soon, and thought I'd write about the theories on the aircraft's crash.
My personal opinion...Surface to Air Missile shootdown by an Arab terrorist, aiming for an El Al 747, but hit the TWA 747, as their departure order had been flip-flopped last minute. I believe the fueltank thing was a total coverup, because if Israel had lost their 747, there would have been a bloody holy war. Just my .02 cents, trying not to bring politics and religion in lol.
Anybody have any thoughts? R.I.P. TWA 800.
DeltaGuy
"The cockpit, what is it?" "It's the little room in the front of the plane where the pilot sits, but that's not importan
1 PUDFW: Anyone else find it interesting that the media has largely left that alone. I mean those of you who are really familiar with airplanes does the explan
2 Jwenting: yes, it's been discussed to death. The only people who say it was shot down are people who want to keep the conspiracy theories alive in the hope they
3 Tallguy14: TWA 800 was S H O T D O W N! No doubt in my mind, based on the reports I've read about suppression and falsification of evidence by the FBI and NTSB.
4 DeltaGuy: PUDFW, Good point, I think the media and govt didn't do it as it would have worried people. I find it odd that the other possible explanations were av
5 JAL777: Any of you actuall read the report? The whole notion of it being shot down is non-sense.
6 N844AA: Call me naive, but I generally trust my government to tell the truth and to do the right thing. (I recognize that something it cannot tell the truth o
7 Redngold: This topic should be retired lik Boeing vs. Airbus. So, for a standard topic I will give my standard response: For those of us who lost loved ones on
8 Lhr001: Events surrounding TWA 800 -President Clinton was on television hours later saying how saddened he was by the loss of life -Onlookers on Long Island,
9 DeltaGuy: LHR001, Thanks for all the good facts...especially the mil exercises, and the other a/c being told to stear clear. Someone mentioned patriot missles,
10 Copaair737: I think it was a shootdown. I think it was covered up so the americans wouldnt be worried. It makes you wonder what else the government isnt telling y
11 Startvalve: As much as I would love to stick Clinton's intern banging lie fest administration with yet another scandal/cover-up I have to say it was something int
12 STT757: TWA was not shot down by a misile, atleast a shoulder fired misile. Shoulder fired misiles are heat seeking, they would have gone for one of the engin
13 HlywdCatft: It wouldnt be the first time that the government didn't admit to a mistake. Look at the Itavia Dc-9 that was shot down in June of 1980 in Italy. It to
14 Jhooper: I personally don't buy the "fuel tank explosion" story. I can't say for sure because I'm not an expert, but I don't think fuel tanks just explode at r
15 Dc10guy: I know what happened. If you guys promise not to tell, I will tell you O.K. Hillary Clintons secret team of all lesbian commandos where having "missil
16 Iberia340600: I dont think it was terrorist related, but I do believe it was "mistakenly" shot down by the military. For one, I was working at JFK when TWA 800 expl
17 N844AA: A center fuel tank explosion may be unlikely, but how many 747's take to the sky each day? How many of them explode without warning? Basically, my rej
18 Lhr001: In reference to the above- Who here recalls the media and such interviewing the pilots of the military plane that was in the air that evening? Who her
19 B747skipper: My opinion as a 747 pilot is that TW800 did not blow up by itself... Two thirds, maybe three quarter of 747 crewmembers will tell you same. xxx (s) Sk
20 Aviatortj: People rely on eyewitness accounts all the time. The fact is that these accounts are not very reliable. A few years back we did a project in Psycholog
22 Qantasguy: I certainly understand the sensitivity of this topic, however, it is one that has intrigued me for a while. With all due respect I would like to comme
23 N844AA: I just still don't understand why the truth of this incident would be covered up, assuming it was not solely a center fuel tank explosion. The United
24 LHR001: aviatortj, You are blaming the eyewitnesses... or saying that we are basing our inquiry as to what they have said? The reason from my point of view is
25 Lhr001: N844AA, Pan Am 103, was in direct relation to the United States bringing down Iran Air in July of 1988! United States, Innocent??? NO Fail in the eyes
26 Garnetpalmetto: As a correction to one thing stt757 stated, the more recent generation of shoulder-launched IR SAMS do NOT hone in on engines necessarily, but rather
27 Cfalk: Fuel tanks HAVE in fact been known to explode, on rare occasions. Remember the Thai 737 a few years ago? There have been others as well. It is exceedi
28 Lhr001: CFalk, Since you are an expert... Tell all of us- Why did the President come on national television only hours later? Why did more than 50 eyewitnesse
29 JMChladek: Well, I've read the reports myself and I consider the fuel tank to be the most plausible explanation as well. First of all, there was apparently an in
30 Aviatortj: I think you are fine to have your inquiries. I am only saying that witnesses are not a reliable source. After reading reports, these are refuted. I wa
31 Cfalk: I don't have all the answers, and I have more things to do than researching all this to refute every claim. Why did the President come on national tel
32 Iberia340600: The fuel tank theory is just not plausible. How many times did the NTSB and FBI change their story as to what may have caused people to see the white
33 N844AA: Iberia340600, for you to make a statement like that impugns the honor of the investigators of the NTSB, not to mention several million other governmen
34 Motech722: This thread is interesting, and it's difficult to convince each other if it was the fuel tank or is a conspiracy theory. Some people that have posted
35 Iberia340600: N844AA: Well, we all have our own opinions so we shall leave it at that. I have my beliefs and you have yours, thats what makes us different. All I as
36 Cfalk: but I have experienced enough to know not to judge a book by its cover. Certainly not. But how about when a thousand different books (all the investig
37 Lhr001: N844AA, CFALK, It is nice that you have your own ideals in this subject. An opposing point of view is why we are here. We are here to discuss aviation
38 4holer: Just want to let the newbies here who may be surprised that the majority of responders to this thread seem to be pro-conspiracy, that the majority in
39 LHR001: 4holer, It is aviation and this is an aviation forum!
40 N844AA: Lhr001: There was a good account in either Newsweek or the Washington Post about the Vincennes accident (the Iranian A300). Let me see if I can find i
41 Cfalk: It took over 10 years for the victims on Pan Am 103 to even recieve recognition from the U.S.! Say what?!? The U.S. got Libya pushed right off the wor
42 B747skipper: Some of you do mention that there was a possibility that the center wing tank wiring to the two center wing tank boost pumps of that aircraft, could h
43 Lhr001: B747Skipper, Very well stated! Why is it than many Americans care to forget that 5 months prior to the tragic and horrid loss of 103, the U.S. blew up
44 Lhr001: N844AA, Do you recall Itavia??? Have you read the reports in reference to Itavia? ... case in point! In broad daylight.. a missle just happens to hit
45 B747skipper: This matter of TW800, and having the US officials admitting that, indeed, the aircraft may have been shot down, touches a touchy political subject...
46 N757KW: If terrorist shot TWA 800 down then why no claim, hey we did it! If the US Government did it, then find hard evidence of the cover up! Otherwise it wi
47 Alpha 1: Hey, did the let all the inmates out of the asylum on the same day? I think Elvis used a Stinger to do it, and he had JFK helping him, too.
48 N844AA: But Skipper, don't you think in today's political climate, it would be supremely advantageous for the Bush administration to uncover a TW 800 conspira
49 B747skipper: Dear N844AA xxx Let us not get away fron TW800 and discuss politics here. I agree with you that many "files" should be opened - but that is up the Was
50 N844AA: Sorry, Skipper, not my intention to bring politics into the mix -- more trying to make a point about the nature of conspiracies. I always hate to see
51 Richierich: This thread has gone from silly to ridiculous. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and it seems everyone has an opinion on this topic. Basically
52 Zrb2: Remember that idiot who tried to blow up his shoe over the Atlantic Ocean? What if someone like that was on TWA 800 and pulled a similar stunt? If he
53 ConcordeBoy: If terrorist shot TWA 800 down then why no claim, hey we did it! When you think about it though, Al Quaeda (nor any other group) never really took for
54 SN-A330: Hi all, This topic was archived. But after discussion between the moderators, it was un-archived again on 31/10. reagrds, SN-A330 (forum mod)
55 B747skipper: Merci/Wel bedankt SN-A330... xxx The topic of TW800 should not ever be archived... It would be a slap to the memory of a large number of innocent vict
56 ConcordeBoy: Skipper... what's the approx range on the 747 (any series that you have data for) with only wing tanks filled?
57 DeltaGuy: Thanks SN-A330 and other moderators...was pleasantly surpised to see this thread flying again! Thanks for all the good inputs from everybody, esp Skip
58 Startvalve: This has been beaten to death. If a terrorist group shot it down they would have taken credit, if the navy had done it someone would have squealed by
59 ConcordeBoy: If a terrorist group shot it down they would have taken credit see response #53
60 Lehpron: I think it was an accidental shoot down and not a terrorist attack.
61 CO2BGR: As Skipper said I dont believe that a center fuel tank caused the explosion, as the pump was not on and that there was very litle fuel in the tank. Wh
62 UPSfueler: What altitude was TWA 800 at when it exploded?
63 Okie: Skipper or anyone else with knowledge of the 747 switch configuration might chime in on this. One of the pilots of an approaching aircraft to TWA 800
64 B747skipper: TW800 was at 13,000 feet... I do not remember the accurate figure from the flight recorder or ATC readout... xxx Dear ConcordeBoy... Let me look at th
65 Vanguard737: SHOT DOWN!! But our wonderful ex predident Billy boy Clinton wouldnt dare allow his name be tarnished....further. He knew there were major threats to
66 Potomac: just bcs there doesnt need to be fuel in the center tank does not mean that there wasnt any in there on this particular flight. and what happened to t
67 B747skipper: Dear Okie - xxx The fuel pump switches are located on the flight engineer's panel... bottom... The landing lights are on the overhead panel, bottom ro
68 Potomac: a missle, presumably fired from a position further offshore than the plane was...yet still visible that far away by the naked eye of people who weren'
69 ConcordeBoy: Also, what about the Thai Airways 737 which exploded randomly while sitting at the gate? Everyone blamed the fuel tanks on that one as well.
70 Brian_ga: Shotdown and coverup. That's my two cents. Brian_ga
71 Okie: Thanks for the information Skipper. The thought about the lights had been tossing around in my mind for quite some time.
72 Cessnapimp: The stuff I have read here... - The Gov't blowing one of their own to protect Israel from itself. - AF captains being told of exercises. Whoever that
73 Goose: Jwenting wrote; The altitude and location would have necessitated a fairly advanced large missile like a Patriot or SM2MR. Such a weapon requires a fr
74 Potomac: 10,000 feet ceiling, not 13,000. and again, how visible is a stinger fired from out in the ocean to someone not looking for it onshore. we're not talk
75 DeltaGuy: Liked the idea of the landing light wiring....even though I'm opposed to the center-tank explosion, if I did argue it, it'd look better than the other
76 N844AA: Cessnapimp, very well said. I personally could not agree with you more. I'm perfectly willing to accept that there are unexplained details pertaining
77 Goose: DeltaGuy Wrote; Those stinger specs are startling...anybody have any idea of Soviet SAM's available to anyone with cash on the Black Market? Arabs cer
78 Ant72LBA: I have absolutely no doubt that it was an internal incident that brought the plane down. If it was a missile then facts should be available; i.e. if t
79 Goose: I cannot bring myself to believe, however, that rank and file military personnel, NTSB investigators and law enforcement officers -- all of whom would
80 HlywdCatft: **The unavoidable fact is that any fuel tank is a potential bomb, especially when empty and full of fumes, as the TWA 800's center tank was. That will
81 Potomac: nope, i still think that while as interesting as the conspiracy theory may be, the easier and less exciting explanation is more logical and likely. fi
82 767Lover: I have always felt the center fuel tank theory seemed unplausible. I also thought the timing was uncanny...2 days before the Olympics began here in At
83 Hardkor: what about the Air China 747-200 that went down (last year?). Wasn't that a fuel tank flaw as well? In my opinion, TWA 800 was a major strucutural cat
84 Dantessoul: I admire the diversity this thread has exposed in the membership of this forum. First let me offer my prayers for the souls of the departed, may they
85 Goose: I reserve judgement on what happened to TWA 800; I find it odd that, despite the official findings of a centre tank explosion, that Boeing or the NTSB
86 Positive rate: I believe it was mechanical failure that brought down TWA 800. The center wing fuel tank was empty, the plane was sitting on the ground for hours with
87 HlywdCatft: **and if terrorism is the explanation, i defer to the lack of claims of responsibility, not to mention the fact that if this was possible so many year
88 MD11LuxuryLinr: "I find it odd that, despite the official findings of a centre tank explosion, that Boeing or the NTSB...... made efforts to refit or eliminate the po
89 PW100: I tend to believe that it could very well have been a centre fuel tank explosion. Although I have not studied any detailed reports [for some reason I
90 B747skipper: In my numerous postings on the subject of TW800, I simply stated that an explosion of the center tank was an unlikely reason for the disaster... I nev
91 DeltaGuy: Skipper, Thanks for all the good 747 tech advice...I think all the info we've got disproves the center tank theory. There's a slew of other explanatio
92 777236ER: but I think the NTSB shouldn't have come out and said it was something that it really wasn't. A college student and a 747 pilot know better than profe
93 BN747: The problem I have with people who easily sling the term 'Conspiracy' is this... First of all, it only requires 1 or more to conspire. When money is i
94 Sovietjet: Well I haven't seen car fuel tanks spontaneously combust and you're saying a B747 which is 100 times more complex and insured will explode? Just my ex
95 DeltaGuy: 777236ER, If I didnt have enough faith in the NTSB, I wouldn't be up in the air every week. I honestly can't fault them for much else, they get to the
96 B747skipper: To 777236ER - xxx Sir: For your information the NTSB crash investigators are made of a team of experts in their own fields, composed of pilots, engine
97 Delta-flyer: BN747 -- so are you saying that hundreds of people who know that the 747 was shot down are keeping quiet because they have been paid off? I suspect th
98 JBirdAV8r: Didn't the Iranian Air Force (IIAF) lease some TWA B747's at some point? Didn't they lose one that was attributed to fuel tank explosion as well? Well
99 Dantessoul: To Goose: You compare the possibility of a cover up on TWA800 to covert activities at groom lake? Forgive me if I consider that absurd. Groom lake was
100 Delta-flyer: .....I haven't seen car fuel tanks spontaneously combust.... No one is saying the TW800 fuel tank combusted spontaneously. The conclusion is that it c
101 BN747: Pete/Delta-flyer, You must NOT have read a word I wrote. I checked your profile just to see if there was an excuse such as you being a 16-18 yo (not a
102 MD11LuxuryLinr: "...I think all the info we've got disproves the center tank theory" YOU think. That's one of the funniest things I've heard on the manner. The center
103 Cicadajet: Whats the deal with EO 13039? The conspiracy sites are quick to point that out...
104 777236ER: Your tone is not appreciated. I tried to inform our members here, as a 747 pilot, of the technical features of that type of aircraft. I have stated th
105 Bobs89irocz: I PERSONALLY believe it WASNT the fuel tank theory. I think it is possible. Remember the KC-10 that had the fuel pump left on and over heated and caus
106 B747skipper: Friends - xxx The only possible explanation which would verify a center wing tank explosion is this scenario. I talked to many flight engineers about
107 Ruscoe: If TWA800 was brought down by terrorist action, would not the most likely mechanism be a bomb planted on the craft. Security was not as tight then as
108 Cicadajet: Yes, the press did report explosive residue on some seats and this was countered by the story that the aircraft had been involved in a training exerci
109 Goose: You compare the possibility of a cover up on TWA800 to covert activities at groom lake? Forgive me if I consider that absurd. I was illustrating that
110 AA777: I believed the U.S. government at first. But then it started to not make sense.... eye witnessess seeing something fly towards the airplane, then imme
111 Delta-flyer: BN747 ... You must NOT have read a word I wrote. I did, indeed, but was a bit confused and was seeking clarification. I agree that people can be coerc
112 RayChuang: Gawd, I can't believe the tinfoil hat crowd is out again. Let's consider the following facts from what we know from the recovered parts of TWA 800: 1.
113 Caribb: My gut feeling tells me this was a center fuel tank explosion not a missile shoot down. It would be too difficult to find everyone who saw a missile s
114 MD11LuxuryLinr: I am by no means a religious person but AMEN to that Caribb!!
115 BN747: Pete/Delta-flyer 'Looks like people will believe what they want to believe, logic and science notwithstanding.' Exactly, Pete....exactly. In the curre
116 JMChladek: Thanks Skipper, I think you just provided the last link in the chain here that makes this event highly probable in my mind that it was a center tank e
117 B747skipper: Dear JMChladek - xxx Believe me, that TW 800 disaster had all of us 747 pilots spending hours to discuss each and any possibility. As I mentioned, 747
118 Lehpron: Seriously though, based on the eyewitmess reports of something flaming near the plane, everybody assumes it was a missile -- what if it was just a str
119 Portcolumbus: I was reading up on TW800 for a research paper. I found that the last four seconds of the CVR tape and Flight Data Recorder were missing, anyone know
120 Backfire: "Even though our employees are not law enforcement personnel, they examined every piece of wreckage for any physical evidence that the crash of Flight
121 Caribb: I think it is important to ask a very fundamental question in all this speculation; What would it serve to prove it was not a center fuel tank explosi
122 DeltaGuy: Hmmm, what about that CVR and FDR? PortColumbus, can you get the audio of those, or just the transcripts? It's a morbid but still engrossing last pict
123 Portcolumbus: Don't know where to get the CVR transcripts or audio, sorry. The only thing I can find is the ATC transcripts, and that starts just after it had gone
124 HlywdCatft: **"Even though our employees are not law enforcement personnel, they examined every piece of wreckage for any physical evidence that the crash of Flig
125 Backfire: HlywdCatft - your post is full of paranoid delusion.
126 HlywdCatft: **HlywdCatft - your post is full of paranoid delusion.** If you want to spend your life believing everything that the government and its agencies tell
127 Positive rate: There was a series called "Black Box" and one episode was all about the TWA 800 crash- i have it on tape. In the background you can hear ATC talking t
128 SCRAMJET: Definitely shot down. Not by terrorists--their surface-to-air missiles can't reach that high. Probably a gaffe by the US military who tried to cover i
129 Garnetpalmetto: Aw jeez. A US military gaffe - I'd point out that the Navy fessed up to the shoot-down of that Iran Air A300 back in '88 by the USS Vincennes. While I
130 Positive rate: Had 10-15 other 747s been blown out of the sky because of the center fuel tank, I'd be more inclined to believe that. Take the 737 rudder problem. Eno
131 Cessnapimp: Ah yes SCRAMJET, You are well brought up in the ways of multiple failures happennig time and time again before something is done about it... for ONE m
132 DeltaGuy: Not really related to TW800, but wasn't the carrier near the USS Vincennes the USS Forrestal, not the USS Yorktown? That boat has been decomm'd for so
133 Garnetpalmetto: No, DeltaGuy - the cruiser near TWA Flight 800 was the USS Yorktown, also a Ticonderoga-class cruiser like the Vincennes. I apologize if it failed to
134 DeltaGuy: Garnet, LOL! Stupid me, always thinking about the flattops. I did remember that there was another CG near it (now i know the name), but then also a ca
135 DeltaGuy: Rather, a CG near the TW jet......there was another CG near the Vincennes too We just studied the Iran A300 incident in Naval Science, actually. Delta
136 DeltaGuy: Cessnapimp brings up some good stats about flike accidents...Aloha was an out of the blue happening. Question- were there any formal airworthyness dir
137 Twa747100: All I can say is I still remeber that night, even though i was young. I will allways remeber that night. Ill allways remeber the pictures on the news
138 HlywdCatft: **Aw jeez. A US military gaffe - I'd point out that the Navy fessed up to the shoot-down of that Iran Air A300 back in '88 by the USS Vincennes. While
139 SCRAMJET: One case of a 737 rudder failure didn't make Boeing solve the problem. In regards to the fuel tank exploding on TW800, it's been shown that the aircra
140 AmbiantAir: I find it interesting that not long ago there was a thread about the "common person's" ignorance towards aviation (for example: "all big planes are 74
141 N863DA: To all the armchair NTSB investigators here: We do not know the answer. We have been told one potential explanation, but there are many others. Howeve
142 Backfire: However, we must accept here that we DO NOT KNOW. Nonsense. It's simply a case of accepting the evidence. Not so long ago a chap managed to get a book
143 AmbiantAir: **Aw jeez. A US military gaffe - I'd point out that the Navy fessed up to the shoot-down of that Iran Air A300 back in '88 by the USS Vincennes. While
144 Lowsonboy: Are there any similarities with the China Airlines 742 that disintegrated at 35,000ft off Taiwan last year? Are the two accidents connected?
145 Continental: I think the evidence of missle residue, and military missle activity in the area in the time is enough to deduce that it was indeed the government. I
146 Windshear: At first they thought... But the China Airlines crash is now believed to have been caused by another factor... But the other accident you CAN compare
147 AmbiantAir: ***Are there any similarities with the China Airlines 742 that disintegrated at 35,000ft off Taiwan last year? Are the two accidents connected?*** I h
148 Positive rate: The air conditioning packs heat the center wing tank up to an extent. They are located directly underneath the center wing tank and so far all the cas
149 BN747: N863DA wrote: 'However, we must accept here that we DO NOT KNOW.' Backfire replied: "Nonsense. It's simply a case of accepting the evidence. Not so lo
150 Elwood64151: Jwenting: Thank you for very early pointing out that the likelihood of the plane being shot-down is next to nil. You forgot the Sea Sparrow (which als
151 B747skipper: Gentlemen - No conclusive answer... xxx Anyone wants another controversy to discuss in the forum...? Post this one - Arrow Air DC8-63 - Gander - Explo
152 BN747: "Thank you for very early pointing out that the likelihood of the plane being shot-down is next to nil. You forgot the Sea Sparrow (which also shot d
BN747 From United States, joined Mar 2002, 4080 posts, RR: 56 Reply 153, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 7848 times:
I was wrapped in addressing Elwood64151/Fred and chastising him about 'spellcheck' ..that screwed up myself...a few times...oh well sh*t happens.
I meant to say:
So that leaves us where I'm entitled 'to' question what I choose including my gov't. And you can believe everything someone 'official' tells you...well you keep doing that...and see where gets you. Apparently, Fred, it hasn't served you well being and Ex-Air Tran and Ex-Vanguard employee....if you don't wise up kid...you're gonna have a lotta ex's on your resume before you even get married.
BN747
Patriotism is being loyal to your government yet being able to question it's motives in the most adverse conditions.
Nationalism is blindly following your government no matter what it says or does. Like all those people in March of this year waving banners reading 'Bomb Iraq' and chanting "USA!USA!USA!" and all those loyal germans during Hitler's tenure...Patriotism and Nationalism...check them out decide where you stand.
After 8 years of exporting fear..now the USA is back to exporting it's best... 'Hope, Freedom and True Leadership'
Elwood64151 From United States, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 9 Reply 154, posted (6 years 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 7851 times:
BN747:
Your post is so full of hatred that I can't even begin to conceive the emotional trauma you must have suffered as a youth. To answer your questions:
1) The radar images were made public several years ago. Do an internet search.
2) Since I became aware of terrorism, I've been wondering why they haven't used our relatively open society against us. And as for the MS-Flight Sim thing, I've been saying it for years, and previously on this forum. Also, I did not say I predicted 9/11, I said I anticipated it. There is a difference.
3) Yes, members of the US government have lied. Yes, we do not live in an honest society. But that does not mean anyone who comes up with a theory about a government cover up must be telling the truth. That's my point.
4) You're right. I misquoted. According to an article in Reader's Digest this month (just happened to have it lying around), it says, "One in three young Germans believes the U.S. may have orchestrated 9/11."
5) Spell check will not find errors in a quote. Besides, I need not quote exactly an axiom of old, so long as the idea conveyed is, in general, the same.
6) Our times seem more complex to us now. We have significantly more access to information than we did even ten years ago. I do not believe we live in more complex times than we ever really have. We simply have more information available to us. That is my humble opinion.
7) Your personal attack on my employment history is so unwarranted that it belies any comprehension. By the way, Vanguard went out of business and AirTran didn't offer enough hours to remain employed there. Don't make a snide comment until you know what the FUCK you're talking about, jerkoff.
8) I do not believe everything someone official tells me. I take information as it is received, evaluate its source, evaluate my previous opinion on the matter, and come to a conclusion based upon the information available to me. Most of it is tossed out. We do this automatically with what is important at the moment as far as our sensory systems are concerned. We are overloaded with information and only a limited amount is kept. We have obviously chosen differently as to which information we keep.
9) The portion of my previous post directed at you was intended to make you think about your own statements by turning them around on you, not to insult. I was playing "devil's advocate". I apologize if you took offense to it. I do not, however, apologize for any part of this post. Your vicious and hateful attack on me and my character is absolutely abhorrent and does not deserve any amount of respect or other consideration than to show everyone on this forum what a hateful bastard you must be. Such a horrible, personal assault on someone who was only trying to get you to examine a small portion of your own argument is, in my mind, proof positive of the lack of thought that went into it.
By the way, to close an italic, you must use the < / I > tag.
-------Original Post Above-------Edited Section Below-------
Please forgive any abusive language or incomplete thoughts in the post above. I was so angry that I still feel sick to my stomach ten minutes later. If this post is deleted, I want his deleted, too.
[Edited 2003-11-04 06:19:33]
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
HlywdCatft From United States, joined Jan 2001, 5321 posts, RR: 11 Reply 157, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7674 times:
**They are presently on generation 3 I believe of the Patriot system. In any case, people of the Navy Shootdown theory, fail to explain what exactly the missile was aimed at? If it wasn't suppose to hit TWA800, what was it fired for. As had already been given here, there were no live fire exercises at the time in that area.**
I thought a few pilots from nearby flights were aware of live fire excercizes in the area and were told to keep away. Who claims that there were no live fire excercizes? The NTSB?
**Personally, I've anticipated 9/11 since I first became aware of terrorism, and that anticipation only increased when I got MS Flight Simulator 4.0 and first crashed my Lear 35 into the Sears Tower.**
That obviously must have been Mayor Daley's reasoning too when he shut down Miegs, he must have played Flight Simulator too much.
**There is an old axiom: All things being equal, the simplest explaination is usually the truth. In this case, the simplest explaination is that there was a mechanical failure on a TWA 747-200 flying from New York to Paris at approximately 13,000 feet and 350-400 knots over the Atlantic Ocean just south of Long Island, New York, causing it to explode in mid-air and crash-in pieces-into water 100-150 feet (30-45m) deep.**
That is a much simpler explanation than it being shot down either by a terrorist or accidentally by our own navy? I have never seen so many government agencies get involved in a single airplane crash before. After all they gathered up all the debris and reassembled the plane and did all kinds of tests with desert 747s trying to prove this fuel tank theory and that is supposed to be more simple than a missile bringing it down? No one has explained yet why the center fuel tank was nearly empty and full of fumes just minutes after take off if the plane is flying 8 hours away to France.
AmbiantAir From United States, joined Oct 2003, 116 posts, RR: 0 Reply 158, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7622 times:
Reading the comments of some here, from both sides of the argument, I'm reminded of my favorite quote:
"To doubt everything or to believe everything are two equally convenient solutions; both dispense with the necessity of reflection." -- H. Poincare
I find it also interesting how as soon as someone disagrees with one of the conspirists, they are not only "blind sheep", but "nationalists." That's interesting. I'm sure soon someone will be accused of being a govt. agent sent here to propagate the conspiracy. If you don't believe a conspiracy, or heaven forbid, dare to debate them, it ends up, as usual, as an unwarranted direct personal attack on your person and your "experience." And then just to spice things up they throw in "being patriotic is questioning your government." Thank you for that. I wasn't sure. What exactly that has to do with the facts I'm not sure. Oh right. Its the age old debate trick to make you think "Well gee. I'm not being patriotic?"
In any case, it usually succeeds in ending all debate, a victory for them.
HlywdCatft From United States, joined Jan 2001, 5321 posts, RR: 11 Reply 159, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7622 times:
**Not so long ago a chap managed to get a book published claiming that the September 11 crash of a 757 into the Pentagon never happened. I couldn't believe that people were prepared to give him even five seconds' attention, let alone waste hours discussing this bullshit. And this was an event which had a shedload of evidence to back up the real story.**
I'm not jumping in and believing this conspiracy, obviously we saw the two 767s hit the towers, but there was no footage of the plane hitting the pentagon. In support of (again not saying I agree with this guys book), but in all the pictures I have seen of the Pentagon, all you see is that blown out section, I don't see anything that resembles an airliner in that picture. They claim that the 757 was only flying around 300 miles per hour at the time, wouldn't you think at a lower speed like that you would see some aircraft parts like part of a tail?
Again I am not saying that I believe that guy, but I can see where he might be drawing those conclusions.
Many people don't think that the passengers brought down the United Flight over Pennsylvania and that it was shot down by an F-15. Again, I am not saying that I believe the plane was shot down and I would like to believe that the passengers who fought the terrorists were heroes. But this question comes up... many people have probably heard the tapes of that United flight where Cleveland control keeps calling Flight 93 and there is no response, don't you think after that many calls jets would have been scrambled to the area especially with the other events happening in the meantime? And doesn't a story like the passengers of Flight 93 being heroes sound a lot better than an F-15 having to do the grim job of bringing down a plane of passengers? The F-15 pilot would not be a hero, especially to the families of the loved ones onboard the jetliner, but the passengers fighting the terrorists to save yet another target bring a "happy" ending to a terrible day.
I want to believe Flight 93 pax were heroes that day and it relieves me that if that were to happen again, passengers would say "Lets Roll" and kick some terrorist ass. What confuses me is how do they know that the rugby player on that flight broke Terrorist #2's neck etc? Don't tell me forensics, when a plane crashes, anything can happen to the body, the neck could have broken on impact with the ground.
**If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and sounds like a duck, then you either swallow your pride and accept that it's a duck - or you yell and scream that it's a government cover-up. But you'll look like an idiot and it'll still be a goddamn duck**
Or we can all be sitting ducks too and let our governments tell us that everything they say is believeable. I don't even want to get into the gun control debate, but thats an example right there. The word should be "lemmings". In other words are we going to be lemmings and believe everything a government agency says without questioning it?
Now please point out if I said anywhere up in any of my posts that I "know for sure" a missile brought down the plane. I apologize if I have, because that wasn't my intention. I am just saying that I believe the missile theory, but don't know for sure if it has happened. I lived in Michigan at the time, I didn't see the missile hit the plane, but that is the theory that I am leaning to and I am attempting to come up with evidence to support that theory.
There are people on here claiming that they know the NTSB is right. Anyone on here claiming the NTSB is right work for the NTSB? or were involved in the accident investigation? Yes, I am not inclined to believe everything a government agency tells me. All governments use propaganda of some sort.
As a passenger, I would want to believe the accidental shootdown the most, because it is the least likely to happen again of the 3 theories.
1. A terrorist strike could happen anytime, someone could hide in a woods with an SAM.
2. The NTSB explanation would make me paranoid to fly, I could be on one of those planes with the bad center fuel tanks (not like you can ground 1000 planes at one time). Of course many "faulty" planes then were in operation (if the planes were indeed faulty), the general public is going to be afraid to fly. They could be flying an Airbus fresh out of the factory (even though it only affected old Boeing aircraft), but as you know most people don't know shit about airliners and think that all planes are the same so that did a lot of good to the transportation industry
3. Yes the navy missile theory would sound most appealing to me as a passenger because it is the least likely to freak me out when flying. All the government would have to do is make sure all missile tests off the coast are banned so this doesnt happen again
AmbiantAir From United States, joined Oct 2003, 116 posts, RR: 0 Reply 160, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7614 times:
***That is a much simpler explanation than it being shot down either by a terrorist or accidentally by our own navy? I have never seen so many government agencies get involved in a single airplane crash before. After all they gathered up all the debris and reassembled the plane and did all kinds of tests with desert 747s trying to prove this fuel tank theory and that is supposed to be more simple than a missile bringing it down?***
Do you remember the timing of this accident? It was right before (I mean right before) the Atlanta Olympic Games were going to open, and everyone was very security concious, worried of "terrorist activity." The missile theory was one of the first to be put out there, and that is why the FBI among others joined in as well. People wanted to know what happened right away.
Potomac From United States, joined Jul 2003, 713 posts, RR: 1 Reply 161, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7575 times:
i think all of the emotion and bad-mouthing here has clouded some of the facts that have been presented in the is forum and through the original investigation. lets get back to the basics.
that being said, as far as the terrorist SAM theory goes, i ask why a plane at FL130 and several miles offshore was targeted (as opposed to a lower flying aircraft at closer range), if it could even be hit given its location, and why it hasnt happened since then.
when the navy conducts exercises, i find it hard to believe that they take place so close to shore and around civilian air traffic with live ammunition/weapons. and as someone asked, what exactly would they be aiming at? you think they'd send up a drone aircraft to shoot down anywhere near the airspace offshore where you have flights going up and down the east coast and headed out to europe?
and while i agree the govt officials can be and have been deceptive, i think the scope of the cover-up required, and the time passed, if this were an accidental shootdown is far too significant to be practical. but, the cover up is much more interesting than the mechanical explanation. and just bcs we have former 747 pilots or mechanics here who say something like that couldnt happen, doesnt mean that it didnt. many mechanical failures happen bcs they were not anticipated or thought to have been possible, or else they would have been addressed during the original design process or mitigated during inspections, pre-flight check, etc..
i still stand by the notion that witness accounts - like in any incident - are often exaggerated or misconstrued. i find it hard to believe that people saw streaking light headed toward the aircraft. streaking light which, under any of these shootdown scenarios, would be hard to see at night, especially when you're not looking for it and when it is going towards an aircraft which would be barely visible at that range and altitude anyway.
and the whole notion of the AA 757 pentagon crash never happening is ridiculous - obviously these theorists never spoke to the people i know who saw the aircraft hit the building. or ask they guy who's car was chit by the light pole the plane knocked down. i suppose ever other aircraft incident that has happened in teh past either never happened or didnt happen as was detremined because we don't have video of it.
Cessnapimp From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 1319 posts, RR: 31 Reply 162, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7537 times:
"No one has explained yet why the center fuel tank was nearly empty and full of fumes just minutes after take off if the plane is flying 8 hours away to France.
Can someone answer this gentleman; please B747Skipper help me. Although I am unsure or Aerolinas Argentinas procedures. I have spent 6 months last winter fuelling every possible airplane in existence except the DC-8 and Concorde at Toronto Pearson. Over and over again. On most transat flights, the center tanks in a 747 stay with unusable fuel. I'd get a slap on the hand by AC techs/pilots if I was to dare putting fuel in the center tank (which is hard to do unintentionally on a 400 series fuel panel) on a YYZ-FRA. The length of these flights from coastal DO NOT warrant filling the center tank.
Hlywdcatft, please inform yourself before making statements like this. The tech forum is an awesome tool and you have plenty of experts in their field ready to answer your questions in there.
AmbiantAir From United States, joined Oct 2003, 116 posts, RR: 0 Reply 163, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7529 times:
If I'm not mistaken, TWA 800 spent something like 4 hours on the tarmac of JFK (at over a 100 degree temperatures) with the AC units running. As far as I know that is why the tempertures reached explosive levels if I am not mistaken.
Potomac From United States, joined Jul 2003, 713 posts, RR: 1 Reply 164, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7524 times:
ambiantair - that's my understanding too...one of those critical facts that seems to have been forgotten when discussing exactly what a sparrow missle would do to a 747....
Windshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2184 posts, RR: 15 Reply 165, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7525 times:
A curious guy asked about the China Airlines crash, and was looking for an update...
The NTSB also works on this crash, because of its similarities to the TWA 800 crash...
But they have concluded that the probable cause of the crash was fatigue to the structure in and around the pressure vessel, which then caused and led to an instant in-flight break up!
Or in more specific terms:
"Preliminary results of the investigation into the May 25, 2002 accident of a China Airlines Boeing 747 of Taiwan led the NTSB to issue four safety recommendations on April 8, 2003. They address possible improper repairs to the airplane pressure vessel which may be hiding damage, allowing the development of multiple-site fatigue damage and fatigue fracturing that could lead to structural failure."
The investigation has not ended so this is not the final and concluding probable cause of the crash...
Read some details about the crash here: http://aviation-safety.net/database/2002/020525-0.htm
Also a final comment...
I see most of these conspiracy theories to have their roots in the human belief in the saying, everything happens for a reason, that a single and highly deadly or violent event, never happens out of pure bad luck or "simple" or "minor" reasons can be the cause of history changing events like TWA800 or the 9-11 attacks...
It is and always have been the hardest task for us humans to accept that we are just small beings in a giant universe...That people die violent deaths with out any hardcore reasons or causes...
Also because we always tend to believe that bad things only happen to bad people, and that good people always die good deaths or have happy memories, we tend to put the blame on distant things, or evil things, instead of simple, but logical reasons and causes.
We tend to blame foreign or local authorities or governments, even people, ethnic groups or simply our disliked neighbor, before we look objectively at the case or event...
Why this?
Well read about the human mind, psychology shows us how humans react, and if you can read and analyze then, the answer really is in a good psychology book!
We are humans people, so don't jump on the other guys back, for not believing that so many innocent people can die such a cruel death, for no apparent reason...
And as for the NTSB...They are pure professionals they have a heap of knowledge and are all eager to finding the truth...!
Think of the united DC10 that crash-landed in Sioux City, Iowa...It landed with no hydraulics, the cockpit crew were heroes, and why did it loose its hydraulics? Because of a tiny flaw in the number two engine, after running flawlessly for over a decade, the flaw caused the engine to fail, which cause debris to fly through the tail and sever all three hydraulic cables that end up in the tail!
What are the odds? That a flaw on a rotor disk, the size of a sand corn, could cause the engine to fail and then causing the entire aircraft to experience a total loss of control?
It's in the billions it shouldn't happen, but it did...
Now if the crew hadn't landed safely wouldn't there have been conspiracy theories as well?
The NTSB solved the mystery of what caused the DC-10 loose an engine and hydraulic control, are the same NTSB that wrote the accident report on the loss of TWA800, so to neglect the abilities and know how of the NTSB like some of you have, makes me think of the ancient Egyptians!
They build the Pyramids, yet people tend to not believe that they COULD have done it, they would rather have Aliens build them, than brilliant engineers...
Be realistic guys...And don't disrespect the NTSB...!
www.ntsb.gov
Boaz...
"He who matures early lives in anticipation." -Theodor Adorno
Cessnapimp From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 1319 posts, RR: 31 Reply 166, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7495 times:
Are you comparing the NTSB to pyramid builders!!?
LOL! Just kidding! You brought some good points on the table Windshear. We observe countless airplanes take-off and land every day without a hitch. Then events like the Sioux city crash reminds us all of how fragile these marvelous contraptions can be.
The777Man From United States, joined Jul 1999, 3691 posts, RR: 55 Reply 168, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7434 times:
I've read parts of the NTSB report in Aviation Week and think it's the most likely explanation to what happened. So fuel tank explosion it is, in my opinion.
Windshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2184 posts, RR: 15 Reply 169, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7405 times:
Go to their site...Look for my earlier reply there is a link for the PDF report...Read the original report...
To the guy who was interested in the CAL 611 crash I found the Taiwaneese investigation website, it's the organisation called ASC that is in charge of the investigation...
This is the link to ASC's CAL 611 investigation...
http://en-asc.asc.gov.tw/asc/askr/MdFront?command=reportList&c_id=CA0000002217000017&p_id=CA0000002217000016&s_id=CA0000002217000017
And here is the link for the reports:
http://en-asc.asc.gov.tw/asc/askr/MdFront?command=reportDetail&t_id=MT0000002217000000&m_id=MD0000002217000026
Hope that helps...
Boaz...
"He who matures early lives in anticipation." -Theodor Adorno
AmbiantAir From United States, joined Oct 2003, 116 posts, RR: 0 Reply 170, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 7400 times:
Thanks for the info Windshear, and saying a little more poetically what I couldn't a number of posts ago
The NTSB is something I aspire to be work in even though the odds are heavily against me (since I'm almost 30 and working on a second degree in Engineering).
Garnetpalmetto From United States, joined Oct 2003, 4717 posts, RR: 63 Reply 171, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7379 times:
You forgot the Sea Sparrow (which also shot down the Iranian Airbus in the Persian Gulf in the '80s)
Whomever stated this is INCREDIBLY wrong. The Vincennes shot down the Iranian Airbus with SM-2 Standard Surface-to-Air missiles, NOT Sea Sparrows. The Standard is a longer-ranged missile whereas the Sea Sparrow is pretty much a point-defense weapon. The variant of the Standard utilized on most USN vessels, the SM-2 Medium Range, has a range of about 40-90 nautical miles, whereas the Sea Sparrow has a maximum range of a little greater than 30 nautical miles, with a greater probability of a hit as the target gets closer to the launch source.
South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
SCRAMJET From United States, joined Oct 2003, 99 posts, RR: 0 Reply 172, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 7360 times:
We know the government hides nothing from its citizens. And of course some young sailor wouldn't blab that he/she was on the ship that accidentally brought down a US passenger plane. Somewhere, someone would eventually talk.
Does Area 51 not exist because no one who works there talks about what goes on there? Surely someone who works there would want to sell their story to a newspaper or tabloid and make enough money to buy a small country!
Startvalve From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 174, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 7297 times:
this topic is about as worn out as Boeing vs Airbus or why didn't AA keep the 717. Quit posting to it and ask the moderators to kill it and do us all a favor.
DeltaGuy From United States, joined Sep 2001, 4174 posts, RR: 30 Reply 175, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7208 times:
Was nice to hear the opinions of some people, and not see an arguement ensue..those who posted a coupla good opinions, those count. Didn't want this to turn into a politics game, we're all friends here.
Thanks dudes.
DeltaGuy
"The cockpit, what is it?" "It's the little room in the front of the plane where the pilot sits, but that's not importan
Elwood64151 From United States, joined Feb 2002, 2477 posts, RR: 9 Reply 176, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7211 times:
AmbiantAir, Patomac:
Thank you for posting your well-reasoned and thoughtful posts.
Garnetpalmetto:
Thank you for correcting me. I had been informed that this incident involved a Sea Sparrow. However, the Standard is a much more capable missle at longer ranges. Your statement makes a lot more sense.
::Side note::
Y'know, I was going to avoid this topic all together, but I was bored. I guess that's my punishment for being human.
Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it in summer school.
DeltaGuy From United States, joined Sep 2001, 4174 posts, RR: 30 Reply 177, posted (6 years 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7134 times:
Right, Sea Sparrow took down the Iran jet...plus they're alot smaller than a Standard, might be a little harder to see? I know much about the AIM-7 Sparrow (as carried on the Hornet and Tomcat)...does anybody know how much different the Sea Sparrow is? (other than booster, I think it uses one)
DeltaGuy
"The cockpit, what is it?" "It's the little room in the front of the plane where the pilot sits, but that's not importan
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Sep 2001, 4174 posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 1319 posts, 
From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2184 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Mar 2002, 4290 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
