Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Richard Reid And TWA 800 Link?  
User currently offlineKUGN From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 615 posts, RR: 6
Posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1960 times:

This morning I was listening on the radio a discussion in which was suggested that Richard Reid was a shue bomber #2, while the first one was successfull - aboard AA 587.


My immediate thought was -- what about TWA 800? If Reid's shoe bomb was strong enough to ignite fuel from his window seat in wing section, then wouldn't it be possible that the same scenario took place on flight 800? What other 747 ever had wiring problems that would lead into such tragedy as the TWA 800 had?

In the light of everything that happened since 9/11 I think that it would be smart to revisit many of unexplained aviation disasters that took place over last decade.


34 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCo 757-300 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2001, 324 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1860 times:

.....definetly something to think about

 Confused Lou


User currently onlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16862 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1856 times:

If terrorists wanted to kill Americans why would they bomb AA 587, outside the flight crew there were little to no US nationals on that flight. Mostly immigrants.


Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineJfk747 From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1840 times:

cause more people to fear flying before a holiday, damage our economy, hurt airlines, kill people on the ground, shut down airports.... I could go on

User currently offlineIkarus From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2001, 3524 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1820 times:

In my opinion, all this speculation is BS of a spectacular degree. First of all, I cannot imagine a shoe bomb being able to do the damage experienced in AA587 or TW800. AA587 seems like a fairly straightforward materials failure - just look at the images of where the bolts tore through the composite. Explosives damage would have been quite different (how would you blow off the rudder anyway, with a shoe? Throw it out through the ceiling?  Yeah sure )

And honestly, a shoe bomb detonating fuel tanks in a jumbo? I don't know about his shoe size, but to cause enough damage to blow the way through the floor and outer tank skin, and ignite the fuel as well..... Based on a shoe?!? Not a realistic scenario. Especially as the explosion would take place undirected - i.e. radially. You could not direct the blast into the floor - it would do most damage where it encounters least resistance - in the passenger cabin.

Media panic. Exaggeration. Hysteria. Exactly all of the things I despise about the media - and the uninformed viewers / listeners / readers who soak it all up...

Next thing we'll hear is that Concorde was brought down by a shoe bomb. After all, it has so many things in common: It flew out of Paris, it was scheduled to fly across the Atlantic, there was lots of fire and explosions.... Jeez, why did no one think of that?  Yeah sure

Regards

Ikarus


User currently offlineEugdog From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2001, 518 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1807 times:

Aviation experts can easily tell in an explosion brought down an aircraft. Because the over pressure caused by purpose built explosives is much greater then any fuel explosion, the tearing of the structure is more jagged and prenounced. Moreover the high over pressure imbeds pieces of the bomb and anythihg attached to it into other parts of the aircraft. There is no trace of these tell-tale mark on either A587 or TW800.

User currently offlineBizzell0 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 62 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1788 times:

Do you think that Richard Reid would have caused a total loss of the aircraft he was on?

User currently offlineBobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6465 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1775 times:

KUGN,

Do you think the authorities ought to look for a shoe bomb as the cause of Amelia Earhart aircraft mystery or maybe even the Bermuda Triangle missing planes. Lets leave no stone uncovered.


User currently offlineKUGN From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 615 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1773 times:

Bizzell0, apperantly so. The aircraft was on high altitude, over the Atlantic. Also, based on his seat position (he didn't try to ignite bomb in toilet where no one would notice him), he would tear the wing connections to the fuselage.

User currently offlineKUGN From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 615 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1763 times:

Bobnwa, I don't apreciate cynical comments. If you think there is no reason to suspect links, just say so. I don't feel comfortable myself thinking about these scenarios, and I gave carefull thought to them prior to posting this topic.



User currently offlineJer32382 From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 34 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1758 times:

I think the links here are unrealistic. We know for a fact that AA587 was brought down by a materials failure, not a shoe bomb. And as for a shoe bomb bringing down TWA800? That would have to be one hell of a shoe bomb. Just don't think it's realistic.

User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8005 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1752 times:

I really doubt that TW 800 was brought down by a shoe bomb.

The investigators could tell almost at once if the explosion was caused by a bomb--there is a very distinct signature of structural failure associated by a bomb explosion, not a fuel tank explosion. Besides, they didn't find any exploded residue of plastique, powdered metal or agrichemical-derived explosives.


User currently offlineKUGN From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 615 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1741 times:

Abstract from Aicraft Accident Report
http://www.ntsb.gov/Publictn/2000/AAR0003.htm

In-flight Breakup Over the Atlantic Ocean
Trans World Airlines Flight 800

Boeing 747-131, N93119
Near East Moriches, New York
July 17, 1996

NTSB Number AAR-00/03
NTIS Number PB2000-910403


...
The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the TWA flight 800 accident was an explosion of the center wing fuel tank (CWT), resulting from ignition of the flammable fuel/air mixture in the tank. The source of ignition energy for the explosion could not be determined with certainty, but, of the sources evaluated by the investigation, the most likely was a short circuit outside of the CWT that allowed excessive voltage to enter it through electrical wiring associated with the fuel quantity indication system.
...



2 points


1. It didn't have to be a shue-bomb. By pointing a link to Richard Reid, I meant to the Al-Queda/related ter.group sponsored mission, in which one of the passangers was carrying explosive.

2. Bomb didn't need to tear the entire 747 apart, but just ignite fuel, and make it appear as something else was the cause.


Could this happen, if the bomber was positioned over the center fuel tanks?





User currently offlineKUGN From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 615 posts, RR: 6
Reply 13, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1735 times:

RayChuang, that was the question I had. So, it means they did not find any explosive residue.

Still do you think it would be worth going thru passanger list once again, and check who was aboard? Would this make sense?


User currently offlineArsenal@LHR From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 7792 posts, RR: 20
Reply 14, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1723 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Going through the passenger could be a good idea, just double check. Nothing wrong in doing that.


In Arsene we trust!!
User currently offlineAcidradio From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 1874 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1700 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Wasn't the ShoeBomb a version of the Reebok Pump, back in the late 80's? You know, those basketball shoes with the little air pump on them to tighten the shoes?


Ich haben zwei Platzspielen und ein Microphone
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13195 posts, RR: 77
Reply 16, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1689 times:

The NTSB are pretty sure what caused the loss of TWA 800.
It's too early to say what caused the AA A300 crash, you certainly cannot say for sure that material failure caused that loss.



User currently offlineKUGN From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 615 posts, RR: 6
Reply 17, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1685 times:

But, have what was stated in NTSB #AAR-00/03 abstract?

....The source of ignition energy for the explosion could not be determined with certainty....


User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1673 times:

However, KUGN, they're pretty certain it came from within the CWT.

If a show bomb had been detonated in the cabin, then it would have to be pretty powerful to get to the fuel AND ignite, and would have been immediatly obvious to the investigators thanks to the localised massive increase in pressure around the bomb.


User currently offlineLZ-TLT From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 431 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1644 times:

OMG!

A huge security hole discovered  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

I see, in some 2-3 months we all will be obliged to get barefeet onboard airplanes. I just hope, it will be allowed to keep socks on


User currently offlineTWAMD-80 From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 1006 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1636 times:

That is an interesting thought. I have been wondering about AA flight 587. The wake turbulence theory could explain the tail separation, but why did the engine fall off the wing? A shoe bomb sounds like one of the many plausible explanations. We 'll just have to wait and see what happens.

TWAMD-80



Two A-4's, left ten o'clock level continue left turn!
User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1622 times:

The wake turbulence theory could explain the tail separation, but why did the engine fall off the wing? A shoe bomb sounds like one of the many plausible explanations.

No it doesn't. Based on the evidence to date: there were large rudder movements. These caused, or something else caused the fin to snap off. As the aircraft rolled out of control, the stress took the engines off. No bomb.


User currently offlineVirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1612 times:

If a shoe bomb did occur it would do no more damage then the TWA 727 and that 747 in the Pacific when they had a whole blown in them A Japaneese tourist was killed on the 747 and over a dozen injured. $ were killed on that 727 along with 20 injured by flying debries.

Remember that bomb that detonated on PA 103? Well it was the size of a coffee mug. Size doesn't matter. It would take much power to destroy a window or poke a basket ball sized hole through the fuse to cause damage. The forces of nature takes care of the rest.



"FUIMUS"
User currently offlineVirginA340 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 15 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1613 times:

If a shoe bomb did occur it would do no more damage then the TWA 727 and that 747 in the Pacific when they had a whole blown in them A Japaneese tourist was killed on the 747 and over a dozen injured. 4 were killed on that 727 along with 20 injured by flying debries.

Remember that bomb that detonated on PA 103? Well it was the size of a coffee mug. Size doesn't matter. It would take much power to destroy a window or poke a basketball sized hole through the fuse to cause damage. The forces of nature takes care of the rest.



"FUIMUS"
User currently offlineOgseminole From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 43 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (12 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1602 times:

To all of you who say "that we know for a fact that TWA 800 or AA 557 was brought down by" whatever.
Where are you getting your facts?
The government agencies that are charged with investigating these incidents also know the potential financial damage to manufacturers, airlines, security co, etc...
Unless you have verifiable independent information, you do not have all the facts.

PS The TWA mechanics union never concurred with the NTSB finding of faulty wiring. Funny that?!


25 DeltaOwnsAll : ...I'm no aviation expert...but about the wake turbulence thing...how could that tear a tail off? It is not like they were very close to the aircraft.
26 777236ER : The TWA mechanics union never concurred with the NTSB finding of faulty wiring. Funny that?! Not really. It was essentially poor maintence that brough
27 Ogseminole : 777236ER Go to www.TWA800.com and view for yourself what they thought of the government investigation. What evidence do you have that TWA's mx was sha
28 777236ER : Yes, i've been to TWA800.com. It's a load of bull. MOST. BIASED. SITE. EVER. Quite frankly, a lot of it is lies. It's accepted in the industry that TW
29 KUGN : 777236ER, hypetheticly speaking, why would terrorist need an ATC transmission? Perhaps, all he needed was to sit in tail section, and ignite himself u
30 Spectre242 : I remember watching a tv programme about TWA 800 last year i think (It may have been an edition of Black Box or one of those type shows on the Discove
31 Ogseminole : Not one shred of evidence ie. burned electrical wire in any of the fuel systems yet this is what caused the accident. The fuel tank ruptured inward, n
32 Ogseminole : Forgot to add wake turbulence theory. Those of us who actually fly transport airplanes have experienced numerous encounters of wake. Rarely if ever do
33 GDB : Guess what? Aircraft accidents are usually very complex events, as is the investigation. Not all wrapped up like in a Hollywood movie. Like or not, th
34 Post contains images 777236ER : Ogseminole, read what GDB said
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Swissair 111, TWA 800 And Egyptair 990 Connection? posted Fri Aug 13 2004 00:37:23 by Starlionblue
TWA 800 And Pan Am 103: Where Are They Today? posted Sun Sep 8 2002 20:45:00 by M.seles_fan
RE: TWA Flight 800 and TWA's fleet / AA727 posted Mon Nov 2 1998 21:33:40 by JJC
Pan Am And TWA Intra-European Service posted Wed Nov 15 2006 00:47:08 by Scalebuilder
TWA 800 10 Yrs Ago Today, 7/17 posted Mon Jul 17 2006 18:49:54 by Richierich
Program Alert: CNN About TWA 800 3 Hour Program posted Sun Jul 16 2006 01:57:33 by Boeinglover24
TWA 800 & AL 981 posted Sat Jul 15 2006 08:28:55 by Arecibo
10 Years Ago This Month - TWA 800 Crash posted Mon Jul 3 2006 21:17:08 by 747400sp
TWA 800 On N24 Fernsehen (TV) posted Sat May 13 2006 13:49:38 by TS-IOR
Deregulation And TWA posted Thu Apr 6 2006 00:50:28 by UAL#1fan