Is it aerodynamically possible for an aircraft to have its front 1/3 blown off, but continue to climb for another 3200 ft in the manner illustrated in the CIA animation? Why would the CIA deliberately misrepresent that?
Not sure what you mean. Initial inertia of the climb force would naturally propel the plane up esp. since it still had its wings. This film could just have been speculation on the CIA’s part - I’ve read some of the conspiracy authors blogs and they ask more questions than they answer. Again as I said, this disaster comes up every couple of years or so. Why hasn’t the media jumped on it? The plane was 25 years old at the time it went down in 1996 seventeen years ago. If it was such a government coverup and the MSM feeds on that stuff, why no “in-depth” reporting and investigation?