It also takes all of 7 seconds more to fall back to the initiating altitude of 13,800 feet before falling from there into the ocean... that means that we have to account for that time (14 seconds) in the time line from the initiating event to splash down.
We know exactly when the initiating event occurred and we know within an approximate 4.8 second window (the sweep interval of the radar sweeps) when the plane splashed in to the ocean. The wreckage of the falling plane returned a passive radar blip for just 8 sweeps after the event (a total of 38.4 seconds from first sweep to eighth sweep)... and then disappeared as it fell into the ocean. TWA 800 splashed into the ocean between 38 and 43 seconds after initiating event. There is simply no time to add in 7 seconds of Zoom climb and 7 seconds of fall, a total of 14 seconds (actually the math says 16 seconds) to the record.
We also know the exact locations of the aircraft at the radar sweeps (triangulation of two radars) but not the altitude. From these position markers we can calculate the speed of the aircraft at any point in the trajectory. A Zoom Climb exchanges forward velocity for upward velocity.... which would mean that the plane would appear to slow down in its easterly vector. The calculated speeds between sweeps show the plane DID NOT SLOW DOWN during the first two sweeps when the Zoom Climb was supposed to have taken place.
Since the engines revert to idle when signal from the cockpit is lost (per Boeing), the only source of energy to power the Zoom Climb would be to convert the forward momentum into upward momentum. To achieve the 3200 feet of the CIA's Zoom climb 100% of the forward momentum would have had to have been converted into an upward vector... any less and the plane could not have reached that altitude. In fact, that's the theoretical maximum climb that the available forward momentum could have provided. I think that's how the CIA came up with that altitude because they certainly could not have derived it from the radar record. When the plane reached its peak altitude (all energy is converted) the forward momentum and hence velocity would be ZERO... and the plane would fall straight down into the ocean from that peak... it didn't.
Instead the trajectory between the 13,800 foot altitude of the initiating event and the place where we KNOW the plane splashed in, matches almost exactly the theoretical ideal ballistic fall.
This is why the later NTSB version of the Zoom Climb changed the total gain in altitude to only about 1500 feet... that smaller climb left about 75% of the forward momentum to try to explain why the plane did not fall close to the peak altitude point. The math still doesn't work. It would have splashed in a two to three thousand feet closer to the initiating point than it really did.
You're applying a micrometer to an ax cut. First, the radar lost the aircraft parts when they fell below the radar's line of sight horizon, not when they hit the water. Secondly, the radar gain is set to detect massive aircraft, not spinning parts, so it is quite likely that many of the pieces were simply not returning an adequate amplitude to be processed. If someone knows radars at all, they know the limitations of a radar with such a slow sweep.
To use a lack of information as proof, when it comes from a system not capable of providing such information is guaranteed to produce an erred analysis.
Since the engines revert to idle when signal from the cockpit is lost (per Boeing), the only source of energy to power the Zoom Climb would be to convert the forward momentum into upward momentum. To achieve the 3200 feet of the CIA's Zoom climb 100% of the forward momentum would have had to have been converted into an upward vector... any less and the plane could not have reached that altitude. In fact, that's the theoretical maximum climb that the available forward momentum could have provided. I think that's how the CIA came up with that altitude because they certainly could not have derived it from the radar record. When the plane reached its peak altitude (all energy is converted) the forward momentum and hence velocity would be ZERO... and the plane would fall straight down into the ocean from that peak... it didn't.
That whole statement is flawed. It appears to be the creation of parsed facts, imagined events, with a big dose of flawed data points.
But please explain why you put so much stock in whether the climb was 3000 or 1500 feet, and why the conspirators would create a false climb to begin with? Wouldn't it have been easier for them to just go with the "actual" path? You should take note that the mathematical projections of impact are often wrong, way wrong. When the military has lost things falling from aircraft (like hydrogen bombs), they have used the same models and have failed to find the items or found them miles, even tens of miles away.