"COLD CASE" - TWA FLIGHT 800 Movement in D.C. on FBI cover-up

World Net Daily.com ^ | August 17, 2006 | Jack Cashill

[phoenix0468]

Makes sense, guess I didn't see the parody, sorry. BTW, you believe that TWA wasn't brought down by a bomb or missle? Can you tell me why? And I am being neither facetious nor argumentative, just would like your opinion, thanks.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

The simplest way to evaluate the viability of any potential conspiracy theory is to ask, how many people know all or part of the secret? How many people, must I, the conspirator silence?

Of the two (really three conspiracy theories), the bomb theory is the most plausible.

I'd be least likely to dismiss the idea of a bomb and a coverup out of hand, simply because you wouldn't have to worry about surpressing eyewitnesses to the event.

Still, you have to account for a lot of people, and you have to assume that they remain silent for ten years.

The other theory, a missile strike is laughable. Forget the addition of eyewitnesses to the list of people you have to deal with.

There are two variants of this one. The first is that the USN accidentally shot the plane down. That one can be dismissed out of hand. You've got to be out of your tree to buy into that.

The other is a terrorist shootdown using a MANPAD. A Man Portable Air Defense Missile..i.e. a missile you can launch off your shoulder.

The maximum effective range for the most current variant of the FIM-92 Stinger is somewhere around 3 miles. It's ceiling is something like 2 miles. TWA 800 was 8 miles off the coast, so you are looking at a missile launch from a small boat. And it's altitude was roughly 2 miles.

You are trying a execute a night shot, from a boat, on a relatively fast moving target, near the maximum altitude of your missile. I was a qualified naval stinger operator, on a version more advanced then anything available in 1996. That's a tough shot from a boat. Even when, like the night in question, the weather is relatively benign. It would be a tough shot standing on the beach.

The Stinger basically erases helicopters and low slow flyers. An airliner at 2 miles up isn't low, and it really isn't that slow either.

In 1996 there weren't any foreign MANPADs that were significantly better then the Stinger. Probably still aren't any.

It's just not as easy to score a MANPAD kill on anything reasonably high and reasonably fast as some would have you believe.

The real killer for all three of these theories is the magnitude of the conspiracy required to maintain a coverup.

[dodger]

Had Clinton levelled with the American people (LOL) about Islamofascism, he almost certainly would NOT have been re-elected.

The sheeple may have been roused from slumber and started asking a few tough questions. Honest answers to tough questions is not what Billy the Boy President is all about.

His entire MO from age 3 on has been to schmooze his way to power, glory, money and gals.

His MO as CINC was to 'accentuate the positive' and otherwise lull the sheeple to continue their placid slumber whilst he was getting his libido lavaged.

For all that, blame the American electorate!

[phoenix0468]

The other theory, a missile strike is laughable. Forget the addition of eyewitnesses to the list of people you have to deal with.

I have to disagree with this simply because shortly after the incident, this was the primary alternate story being circulated (outside of the MSM's version that is). A very good number of eyewitnesses expressed certainty they saw something travel from the surface to where the plane exploded.

It's just not as easy to score a MANPAD kill on anything reasonably high and reasonably fast as some would have you believe.

The vast amount of experience that Afghanistan rebels had with these types of weapons shooting down very fast and rather high flying Russian aircraft would give me cause to believe a terrorist could do it. Also, a portion of the aircraft that could very well answer the question of whether there was a missile strike or not, has either never been recovered, or has yet to be revealed.

I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing with your hypotheses, as it sounds very intriguing, and you also seem to have some doubts. Could this have been a terrorist attack? The answer is yes, it could have been. Could the Clinton administration have covered up the fact that it was an attack. I have to agree with you that it would be very difficult to do so, but not at all impossible.

[MindBender26]

What I love is how one "true believer" develops a theory, another expands on it, a third swears to it and a fourth claims they know a high ranking but anonymous government official/military pilot/secret agent who verifies it.

Example: One group makes great issues that Warning Area 105 south of Long Island was ACTIVE, but TWA 800 was still allowed to fly into it, so the controllers were obviously in on it because they let the the 747 was allowed to fly into the Warning Area.

They don't even understand that Warning Areas are almost always active, this one was for Grumman and the C-130 USAFR AirSea Rescue unit at Westhampton Beach Airport that was flying A/C that night, that flights are NEVER prohibited into Warning Areas (only Restricted and Prohibited Areas.) Warning Areas are no more than an official "Heads Up"

They base their little plots on false beliefs that any candidate for a private pilot's license with three hours of ground school knows is BS.

Why they want to believe so very much I will never know.

[AnimalLover]

Wow, some of these keywords look familar! What threads have I seen them on?

You are so right! When I originated this thread I only had 3 or 4 keywords if I remember correctly.

Who would have added that tremendous list? A Balrog of Morgoth maybe?

He does seem to have a script to respond to each and every comment.

Didn't he read my original comment, to investigate and put this to bed once and for all - accident, terrorist action or whatever? Having worked for over 34 years in classified areas of a defense contractor, I know that I or my coworkers ever stamped anything "finished" until every question was answered in detail or had a decent explanation of why, how or what.

P.S. Note my tagline.

[ALOHA RONNIE]

.


NEVER FORGET



THE only questions that really count here have always been:


WHY did TWA Flight 800 just have to go down the very evening before former CLINTON White House Security Chief CRAIG LIVINGSTONE was scheduled to go before National TV cameras to state under oath at a U.S. Senate Investigating Committee Hearing...

...that HILLARY was indeed the one who hired him to get her those secret personal FBI Files on Republicans in Congress for her blackmail for power purposes..?


I wonder which event you saw convered on national TV that next morning, and over and over again for weeks afterwards, ...and which not:


-burning jet liner parts & human clothing floating on the surface of the Atlantic Ocean..?


...or...


-CRAIG LIVINGSTONE's Congressional testimony set up to nail HILLARY that ended up being delayed for weeks ...away from the national spotlight and glare of TV lights..
...that ended up with his pleading the 5th to protect HILLARY instead..?


I THOUGHT SO..!!!



For the CLINTONS' lifetime M.O. has always been...


..'It's the TV, Stupid,

...no matter WHO pays for it'



And that someone WHO is ...US.



NEVER FORGET

.

[Swordmaker]

I don't know what conspiracy posters you are listening to, but in a climb instituted by CG shift aft, it is not a rotational force caused by elevators, but rather a weight shift. Does not stall until has run out of the forward momentum potential delta.

I am not a pilot... but I have quite a bit of physics knowledge from college... and other pilots and physicists have weighed in on this. You are very late to the discussion. A wing will stall when the airflow over it no longer supports lift. If the wing no longer is presenting the correct angle of attack, it is very likely it will stall. In addition, the Aircraft itself suddenly was no longer aerodynamically stable... the fuselage was now completely open... a 20 foot circular scoop instead of streamlined nose.

I once calculated the thrust of the 747 engines required merely to overcome drag and keep the aircraft flying level at the same speed. Those calculations are here in the archives on FreeRepublic. Boeing released information that when the electronic control signal from the flight deck was lost, the engines would revert to "idle" and produce little thrust.

Boeing's own specifications for the 747 state that at 10,000 Feet, the maximum climb rate is 2000 feet per minute to 16,000 ft. Below 10,000, a fully loaded 747 can climb at 4000 feet per MINUTE with the engines at 100% (per Boeing). Yet, the CIA Zoom climb has the aircraft climbing more than 3000 feet from 13,800 ft. in 16 seconds!... That's an astonishing 200 feet per SECOND... but that is an average for the entire 16 seconds. Consider that in the last second, the wreckage would only climb 16 feet before topping out. How fast did it climb in the first second?

Which brings up the question: How many G's was the plane subjected to in that first second of the "Zoom climb" and how did it keep its wings with the main box girder that connect them to the fuselage (the Center Wing Tank) supposedly shattered??? If we just assume it moved the average 200 ft/sec, that's 6.25 Gs!!!! In actual fact, to get that average, it had to move quite a few more feet in that first second than 200... maybe as many as a thousand (I'm not going to take the time to calculate it)... which would be ~31Gs (Est.) of (averaged) acceleration in that first second. Where did that much force come from to change the vector from forward momentum into upward momentum?! Certainly the wing was not designed to withstand 31Gs of acceleration... and especially not with a broken box girder. If the vector of motion was changed so rapidly, the wings would have folded and any climb aborted. Again, the physics say that the zoom climb scenario is impossible.

Let's return once again to the BALLISTIC FALL of the wreckage of TWA-800. Mindbender, if there had been ANY zoom climb at all, it requires time. The laws of physics state that it takes an equal amount of time for the fall as for the climb... simply to reach the altitude where the zoom climb began. In this instance, the CIA claimed the wrecked fuselage, minus the nose, zoom climbed 3,200 additional feet from the 13,800 ft. altitude of the initiating event and loss of the nose in approximately 16 seconds... Calculating the available forward momentum of the aircraft, minus the mass of the nose and its momentum, I found that if 100% of that forward vectored momentum were instantly turned into upwardly vectored momentum that 3700 ft was the maximum theoretical gain in altitude... and that's ignoring drag! That's 100% of any forward, North Easterly momentum AND motion. From that theoretical altitude gain, the wreckage would have to drop straight down to splashdown in the ocean because there is no forward momentum left.

Ballistic Fall. The captain of the NOAA research ship Rude entered Flight 800's last secondary radar position, speed, heading and gross weight into his computer and it predicted the landing point by calculating a ballistic fall. He went to that spot and immediately found the main wreckage including the fuselage, wings and engines.

Since it didn't... and in fact splashed in exactly where calculations show an uncontrolled ballistic fall from 13,800 feet, with the starting velocity of TWA-800, would splash in... there was no "Zoom climb."

Looking at the time line... We know exactly to the second when the "initiating event" took place: 20:31:12. We know the times of the primary radar returns after the secondary radar transponder stopped responding. The Islip Radar sweep was 4.65 seconds. So every 4.65 seconds we have a position (distance and vector), but not an altitude. However, if we plot the distances on a ballistic arc of fall, the distances are completely consistent with that ballistic arc. But more importantly, the last radar return of the fuselage occurred on the sweep that was made 36.94 seconds after the initiating events. It had vanished by the next return. Somewhere in the next 4.65 seconds, TWA-800's fuselage splashed down into the Atlantic. Again completely consistent with a ballistic fall. Ergo, no time for an additional ~32 seconds of Zoom climb and fall back to 13,800 feet. Had the CIA's scenario of a Zoom Climb occurred, the wreckage would have been on at least 6 more radar returns before splashdown... it wasn't.

The NTSB's cartoon, recognizing the impossibilities of the CIA's cartoon version, halved the altitude gain and the time ... now adding 16 seconds instead of 32... but still using the same rate of climb... However, it still is inconsistent with the facts... it would have at least been on the next two primary radar returns and possibly the next after that... but it wasn't. The radar horizon for the Islip Radar station at that distance is under 35 feet. Again... no time for a zoom climb to have occurred.

Claim about "no 747 pilot" is simply bogus.

Find and cite one who says that the zoom climb is what happened.

[MindBender26]

I'm sorry, but your answer is so full of technical errors to be completely meaningless.

For a few early examples, you are completely ignoring the vector and angle of attack deltas regarding the stall. Your definition is correct, but your conclusion ignores the fact that the pitch rotation was not instant, thereby totally invalidating it.

You do not understand the concept of "flight idle" for fanjet engines, and are ignoring it. Tjat's like saying 2+2 is 7 (if there is a 3 you don't tell anyone about.)

You are amazed by a 200 feet a minute climb, but ignore the fact that 200 fps is approximately 144 mph and the rotational conversion of horizontal speed to vertical speed with the resulting negative speed delta is completely on target.

Where did you ever get these 4000 fps and 2000 fps numbers. Completely bogus. Climb rates are completely driven by weight, temp, altitude, speed tradeoff (deltas) and other factors. There are conditions under which a 747 could be made to climb at a rate of 20,000 or 25,000 feet per minute for a few seconds.

You are combining the ISP radar performance for primary and secondary targets and ignoring the Doppler clutter erasure. Again, I'm sorry, but as you are neither pilot or ATC controller, you may not understand why your figures are meaningless, but they are.

Finally the BS that some ship's captain had a magic computer program that gave him flight patterns for a 747. Even if he had such a program, multiple flight parabolas will give the same impact point.

Easy to understand example?

Take a garden hose and turn it on. Raise the arc and watch point of impact move away, up to about 47 degrees off horizon, where it begins to move back towards you. At 90 degrees, you get all wet... just like the theories here posted here by the amateur conspiracy engineers.

Take a few flying lessons. All will become very clear.

[Swordmaker]

For a few early examples, you are completely ignoring the vector and angle of attack deltas regarding the stall. Your definition is correct, but your conclusion ignores the fact that the pitch rotation was not instant, thereby totally invalidating it.

I am aware of it... but to get the amount of climb the CIA cartoon claimed required ALL , 100%, of the forward momentumm, to be instantly converted into upward momentum... so to show how ridiculous that is, I used instantaneous translation.

You do not understand the concept of "flight idle" for fanjet engines, and are ignoring it. Tjat's like saying 2+2 is 7 (if there is a 3 you don't tell anyone about.)

Yes, I do indeed understand the concept of "Flight Idle" but like all the other levels of idle for a fanjet engine, it is CONTROLLED from the cockpit by, on the Boeing 747, an electronic signal. In the absence of that signal... the engine drops to its lowest idle... which is not flight idle... but probably what is called ground idle... the amount of thrust from a running fanjet that can be overcome by brakes. Boeing SPECIFICALLY stated that absent the signal, the engines revert to "idle"... not to flight idle. The engine would have know way of "knowing" that it should drop to any idle except the lowest. There are detents on the throttles that prevent the throttles from being lowered below the safe level of idle for each purpose.

You are amazed by a 200 feet a minute climb, but ignore the fact that 200 fps is approximately 144 mph and the rotational conversion of horizontal speed to vertical speed with the resulting negative speed delta is completely on target.

It may be on target... but then the aircraft would have spent more time in "flight" after the initiating event... which IT DID NOT. It was in the Atlantic Ocean between 38 and 44 seconds AFTER the initiating event. You cannot break the laws of physics merely because you want it to be that way. If it had converted all 100% of its forward momentum into a zoom climb, there IS no forward momentum left to carry it north eastward the distance for it to fall where it did. It would have fallen CLOSER to the initiating event. The higher it goes, the longer it takes to fall.

In addition, If TWA800 had gained altitude, it would have had to have traded forward velocity (your negative speed delta) for altitude... but the radar returns show that it did not slow down any where near the amount that a zoom climb would have required. Instead, the first three radar returns show that the distance covered between sweeps was only slightly slower on the second and slightly faster on the third, consistent with the velocity reported in the last secondary transponder return.

After the loss of the approximately 47,000 pounds of the nose, the Center of Lift of the wing will no longer be over the center of mass (The balance point) but some distance forward of it. What counter acting force would there be to prevent the aircraft from continuing to respond to the force of lift which is being applied like a lever forward of the center of mass? Also consider the drag being applied to the wide open, gaping front of the plane (20ft in diameter). Engines at idle (Essentially adding little to no thrust to the aircraft), Wing no longer in the proper angle of attack, lift beyond the center of mass, the aircraft will pitch up and the wing will stall.

You are combining the ISP radar performance for primary and secondary targets and ignoring the Doppler clutter erasure. Again, I'm sorry, but as you are neither pilot or ATC controller, you may not understand why your figures are meaningless, but they are.

No, I am not. There were several radars painting TWA800 that night. The secondary returns from the transponder stopped after the last return at 21:31:12 - for our purposes that secondary ATC radar is irrelevant after that return except that it gives us a time at which the aircraft was still operating normally. After that the only radars that could see TWA-800 were primary radars... which provided a vector and a distance but not altitude. As I said, the radar sweep was 4.65 seconds... and therefore we got a strobe like look at the vector and distance of the wreckage of TWA-800 as it fell into the ocean at quantum like steps. We KNOW where it was once on each of those sweeps. IF it had climbed, or flown, to any higher altitude, the time it would have taken BEFORE it splashed into the ocean would have been greater than it was... 32-34 seconds longer for the CIA Zoom climb... 15-17 seconds longer for the NTSB Zoom climb. We know for a fact that TWA-800 disappeared from the Radar after the 8th sweep which was sweeping past the vector where TWA800 was at about 37 seconds after the initiating event. On the next sweep, at 41.59 after the IE, TWA800 was gone from the radar. If it had climbed it would have been on several more sweeps before splashing in.

Finally, the Captain of the NOAA ship"Rude" got the last secondary radar transponder information from ATC, got the estimated weight of the 747, etc. and plugged that information into a computer that had a standard ballistic program... There are many available, nothing magic about it, I've got one on my computer and it gives the same answer given the same input... calculated the splash down point using the data from the computer and took his ship to that location. This testimony is in the NTSB reports. It is not BS.

[MindBender26]

I'm sorry, but there are so many foundational technical errors in your presentation, driven by lack of knowledge, that I'm not going to take time to explain them again.

Please, take a few flight lessons. It will all become much more understandable. Sort of the old "mile in his shoes" thing.

Until then, all I can say is "AAAAIIIIIEEEEEEE!"

[MindBender26]

And also, aren't we a bit old to believe in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and "Secret people" like "Mr. Washington?"

It's all so phony.

[MindBender26]

Finally, regarding the claim that Boeing said engines would go to "ground idle" not flight idle.

Searched entire NTSB report for word "idle." My Adobe PDF says it is not there.

[The Sons of Liberty]

I believe Boeing may have had to pay a fine in this case, not to mention the insurance companies' liabilities. It seems that they would have a strong interest in the truth coming out about this.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

The vast amount of experience that Afghanistan rebels had with these types of weapons shooting down very fast and rather high flying Russian aircraft would give me cause to believe a terrorist could do it. Also, a portion of the aircraft that could very well answer the question of whether there was a missile strike or not, has either never been recovered, or has yet to be revealed.

Actually, you've got it a bit backwards. They didn't shoot down high-flying aircraft. The presence of Stingers in the rebels' hands forced the Russians to stay at higher altitudes, which really mattered, since the Russians were primarily using unguided munitions.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

No offense, but the investigation has already been done.

IOW, it has been put to bed.

The only difference between the TWA800 conspiracy theorists and the 911 conspiracy theorists is the President they hate.

If all you really want is some final resolution of TWA800 to silence the cranks, joining their amen chorus is an odd way to go about it.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

The conspiracy theorists on a conspiracy theory thread looked at the thread's keywords and found....


A conspiracy



Go figure.

[Swordmaker]

And also, aren't we a bit old to believe in the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and "Secret people" like "Mr. Washington?"

Ok, Mr. Tooth Fairy... how long was TWA-800 in the air after the Initiating Event... whatever it was? 43 seconds? 59 seconds? 75 seconds? And if it was either of the last two, where did it go in the 9th through 15th or X number of Islip primary radar returns?

[phoenix0468]

Yes, I understand that. The fact remains that Russian aircraft were still being shot down after they changed their approach. Not as many, of course, but there were some. I am not saying this validates the terrorist theory, but it does lend some credit.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

I am not saying this validates the terrorist theory, but it does lend some credit.

Very little credit, given the altitude at which TWA800 was flying.