User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 10:55:50 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
. This Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I don't think the government shot it down. At least not on purpose, could have been an accident, but that requires a lot of people keeping a big secret. Could have been a terrorist that got hold of something more substantial than a manpad and the ability to launch from sea. The only thing I believe for certain is that the official explanation is not the truth and that it was a missile. . This This. And that 300 that went down in NY because the tail fell off because it took off into the turbulence of the jet before it was a bit hard to swallow. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 10:57:31 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ponder this: There were TWO main center fuel tanks on flight 800. One was empty???!!! Aside from "MINOR" weight and balance considerations, one must ponder whether sufficient fuel was on board to make the destination with required reserve.... Strange how simple facts can be ignored for so long. Distance from NYC to Rome is 4,300 miles. Range of 747-100 is 6,100 miles. 747-100 Fuel Tanks: 
There's only one center wing tank, BTW. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 11:06:32 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Distance from NYC to Rome is 4,300 miles. Range of 747-100 is 6,100 miles. 747-100 Fuel Tanks: http://i.imgur.com/TaxiZTM.gif There's only one center wing tank, BTW. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ponder this: There were TWO main center fuel tanks on flight 800. One was empty???!!! Aside from "MINOR" weight and balance considerations, one must ponder whether sufficient fuel was on board to make the destination with required reserve.... Strange how simple facts can be ignored for so long. Distance from NYC to Rome is 4,300 miles. Range of 747-100 is 6,100 miles. 747-100 Fuel Tanks: http://i.imgur.com/TaxiZTM.gif There's only one center wing tank, BTW. But Goddammit he has FACTS that have been ignored!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 11:07:14 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryI gauge the merit of other members solely based off of if they're retarded enough to start your typical Sandy Hook, Flight 800, Chemtrail, 9/11 type conspiracy theory threads. Posting that type of shit to this site does infinitely more damage to the ARF community than your run of the mill non paying member. . . but I guess someone would have to be pretty fucking stupid if they didn't already know that 
Since you are now calling people fucking stupid. Let's take a look at your wonderful contributions (in terms of thread topics, since you are FSA when it comes to supporting the site) In the last 30 days you've given us: A WTB thread in the EE A 'how much is this gun worth' thread in the handgun sub forum and this gem: "What vehicles did private security contractors normally drive in Iraq?" Yup, lots of stimulating, thought provoking content by you!  You should probably refrain from calling others names for their choice of discussion topics.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 11:12:15 AM EDT
[#5]
I wish to know more about this topic
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 11:17:32 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This. And that 300 that went down in NY because the tail fell off because it took off into the turbulence of the jet before it was a bit hard to swallow. Turbulence didn't bring AA 587 down. Overzealous application of the rudder and poor training scenarios were the major contributing factors.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 11:20:22 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This has been done to death. I've never heard it suggested that our government wanted to shoot down TWA800. That troofer shit didn't emerge until after 2001. The fact that YOU are suggesting it, means that you are probably trolling. What was this documentary you watched? Put your thinking cap on and try to think rationally: Who had a motive? Who had the ability? Who had the ability? That's a much shorter list.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 11:21:40 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Turbulence didn't bring AA 587 down. Overzealous application of the rudder and poor training scenarios were the major contributing factors. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This. And that 300 that went down in NY because the tail fell off because it took off into the turbulence of the jet before it was a bit hard to swallow. Turbulence didn't bring AA 587 down. Overzealous application of the rudder and poor training scenarios were the major contributing factors. How can we know? There was no materiel evidence to analyze, well except for the actual flight data recorder, and the vertical stabilizer that separated. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 11:28:27 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How can we know? There was no materiel evidence to analyze, well except for the actual flight data recorder, and the vertical stabilizer that separated. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This. And that 300 that went down in NY because the tail fell off because it took off into the turbulence of the jet before it was a bit hard to swallow. Turbulence didn't bring AA 587 down. Overzealous application of the rudder and poor training scenarios were the major contributing factors. How can we know? There was no materiel evidence to analyze, well except for the actual flight data recorder, and the vertical stabilizer that separated. I accept that investigation as fact, but I have to admit that I'm not thrilled about riding on an aircraft where the pilot can rip the tail off with his feet.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 11:31:15 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I accept that investigation as fact, but I have to admit that I'm not thrilled about riding on an aircraft where the pilot can rip the tail off with his feet. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
This. And that 300 that went down in NY because the tail fell off because it took off into the turbulence of the jet before it was a bit hard to swallow. Turbulence didn't bring AA 587 down. Overzealous application of the rudder and poor training scenarios were the major contributing factors. How can we know? There was no materiel evidence to analyze, well except for the actual flight data recorder, and the vertical stabilizer that separated. I accept that investigation as fact, but I have to admit that I'm not thrilled about riding on an aircraft where the pilot can rip the tail off with his feet. It takes a pretty substantial effort to accomplish it. Imagine cruising down the highway at 60mph and then slamming the steering wheel from full lock to full lock. Think you might break something? 
We had at least 3 Boeing 737s crash and kill everyone on board due to rudder hardovers caused by a poorly designed dual concentric servovalve. That one was great for the pilot since you pushed left and got full deflection right instead. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 12:32:00 PM EDT
[#11]
I put TWA 800 with Sandy Hook.
They happened, but something is left out or not strictly true about 'how'. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 1:19:46 PM EDT
[#12]
Chuck Norris shot it down with a rubber band
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 1:21:50 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I put TWA 800 with Sandy Hook. They happened, but something is left out or not strictly true about 'how'. I can get behind that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:09:20 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Since you are now calling people fucking stupid. Let's take a look at your wonderful contributions (in terms of thread topics, since you are FSA when it comes to supporting the site) In the last 30 days you've given us: A WTB thread in the EE A 'how much is this gun worth' thread in the handgun sub forum and this gem: "What vehicles did private security contractors normally drive in Iraq?" Yup, lots of stimulating, thought provoking content by you! You should probably refrain from calling others names for their choice of discussion topics.Quote HistoryQuoted:
I gauge the merit of other members solely based off of if they're retarded enough to start your typical Sandy Hook, Flight 800, Chemtrail, 9/11 type conspiracy theory threads. Posting that type of shit to this site does infinitely more damage to the ARF community than your run of the mill non paying member. . . but I guess someone would have to be pretty fucking stupid if they didn't already know that
Since you are now calling people fucking stupid. Let's take a look at your wonderful contributions (in terms of thread topics, since you are FSA when it comes to supporting the site) In the last 30 days you've given us: A WTB thread in the EE A 'how much is this gun worth' thread in the handgun sub forum and this gem: "What vehicles did private security contractors normally drive in Iraq?" Yup, lots of stimulating, thought provoking content by you! You should probably refrain from calling others names for their choice of discussion topics.Lol way to list all my gun related posts. . . on a gun forum no less! imagine that, How fitting! So apparently my thread about appraising a Browning 40 might not be "stimulating or thought provoking" but you’re sitting here telling me this in a conspiracy theory thread based off a youtube video you just watched! WHICH for the record has been posted thousands and thousands of times on here resulting in more bans, locks, and 9/11 thread sliding than anyone here could possibly quantify. Please enlighten us with your “stimulating and thought provoking” thoughts on the real causes of 9/11. Plenty of hack job documentaries out there that will give you all the REAL facts. The only thing you can ascertain from these threads is who would be the most likely to invest their life savings with Lear capital. . . assuming they were a contributing member of society to begin with. I’m out, enjoy your circle jerk. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:13:35 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can get behind that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I put TWA 800 with Sandy Hook. They happened, but something is left out or not strictly true about 'how'. I can get behind that. There aren't many ways to lose credibility quicker than to start talking about Sandy Hook coverups. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:28:09 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There was another one a couple years prior as well. It's always the same thing: Every aviation professional agrees that the official story is a lie. Three or four people incessantly chime in to say "I was in the NAVY, it couldn't have been a Manpad". Basically, every thread serves only to provide this same cast of characters a forum in which to say "I was in the NAVY". And "Manpad, Manpad". - It's like the John Kerry campaign, but with more Manpad. We don't know exactly what caused it, and likely, we never will. The interesting thing about those navy people saying it's not a missile is that they are combat systems experts. They know characteristics and capabilities of our own missiles as well as other people's missiles. They know what has to take place for a successful engagement. They know what sort of damage those various missilescapable of successful engagement would cause. They know how absolutely ridiculous it is to believe that either that navy shot it down, or a third party managed to cobble together some hoopty sam system and shoot it down with no evidence. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:42:26 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There aren't many ways to lose credibility quicker than to start talking about Sandy Hook coverups. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I put TWA 800 with Sandy Hook. They happened, but something is left out or not strictly true about 'how'. I can get behind that. There aren't many ways to lose credibility quicker than to start talking about Sandy Hook coverups. Who said anything about a coverup? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:43:45 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Who said anything about a coverup? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I put TWA 800 with Sandy Hook. They happened, but something is left out or not strictly true about 'how'. I can get behind that. There aren't many ways to lose credibility quicker than to start talking about Sandy Hook coverups. Who said anything about a coverup? If the report doesn't match the reality, that's a coverup. If you think the report intentionally does not accurately reflect what happened with TWA or Sandy Hook you must, by definition, believe there was a coverup. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:50:15 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This. And that 300 that went down in NY because the tail fell off because it took off into the turbulence of the jet before it was a bit hard to swallow. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I don't think the government shot it down. At least not on purpose, could have been an accident, but that requires a lot of people keeping a big secret. Could have been a terrorist that got hold of something more substantial than a manpad and the ability to launch from sea. The only thing I believe for certain is that the official explanation is not the truth and that it was a missile. . This This. And that 300 that went down in NY because the tail fell off because it took off into the turbulence of the jet before it was a bit hard to swallow. If it was a bigger timeframe after 9/11 I would have a easier time believing that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:52:19 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's on Netflix. I watched it about a month ago. It is very interesting. Just punch "TWA 800" into the search field on Netflix. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
What was the documantary ?. It's on Netflix. I watched it about a month ago. It is very interesting. Just punch "TWA 800" into the search field on Netflix. I'm about halfway through it. Pretty damning stuff for the FBI. I believe it was shot down as well and there are a whole bunch of smart, educated, experienced, people involved in that documentary that feel the same. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:55:45 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm about halfway through it. Pretty damning stuff for the FBI. I believe it was shot down as well and there are a whole bunch of smart, educated, experienced, people involved in that documentary that feel the same. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What was the documantary ?. It's on Netflix. I watched it about a month ago. It is very interesting. Just punch "TWA 800" into the search field on Netflix. I'm about halfway through it. Pretty damning stuff for the FBI. I believe it was shot down as well and there are a whole bunch of smart, educated, experienced, people involved in that documentary that feel the same. Shot down by what? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:56:04 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If the report doesn't match the reality, that's a coverup. If you think the report intentionally does not accurately reflect what happened with TWA or Sandy Hook you must, by definition, believe there was a coverup. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I put TWA 800 with Sandy Hook. They happened, but something is left out or not strictly true about 'how'. I can get behind that. There aren't many ways to lose credibility quicker than to start talking about Sandy Hook coverups. Who said anything about a coverup? If the report doesn't match the reality, that's a coverup. If you think the report intentionally does not accurately reflect what happened with TWA or Sandy Hook you must, by definition, believe there was a coverup. It's possible to just say "something just doesn't add up". |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:58:24 PM EDT
[#23]
Iran getting even for Flight 655 shot down by USS Vincennes
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 2:58:42 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
<a href="http://www.smileyvault.com/" target="_blank">http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/userpics/10172/tinfoilhatsmile.gif</a> hows that? eta: http://www.smileyvault.com/displayimage.php?album=50&pos=176 Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
And another thread passes where I lament the lack of a tinfoil smiley. <a href="http://www.smileyvault.com/" target="_blank">http://www.smileyvault.com/albums/userpics/10172/tinfoilhatsmile.gif</a> hows that? eta: http://www.smileyvault.com/displayimage.php?album=50&pos=176 Fabulous!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 3:01:16 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Shot down by what? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
What was the documantary ?. It's on Netflix. I watched it about a month ago. It is very interesting. Just punch "TWA 800" into the search field on Netflix. I'm about halfway through it. Pretty damning stuff for the FBI. I believe it was shot down as well and there are a whole bunch of smart, educated, experienced, people involved in that documentary that feel the same. Shot down by what? I don't know, but what typically has a bright light with a smoke trail? Missiles? I don't think it was the U.S Navy as some have suggested as it would be impossible to cover-up that type of accidental shoot down. Eta: LOL at the CIA produced video shown in the documentary. Yeah I trust a CIA produced video.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 3:03:22 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistorySo apparently my thread about appraising a Browning 40 might not be "stimulating or thought provoking" but you’re sitting here telling me this in a conspiracy theory thread based off a youtube video you just watched! WHICH for the record has been posted thousands and thousands of times on here resulting in more bans, locks, and 9/11 thread sliding than anyone here could possibly quantify. Please enlighten us with your “stimulating and thought provoking” thoughts on the real causes of 9/11. Plenty of hack job documentaries out there that will give you all the REAL facts. The only thing you can ascertain from these threads is who would be the most likely to invest their life savings with Lear capital. . . assuming they were a contributing member of society to begin with. I’m out, enjoy your circle jerk. Exactly where did I claim to have watched a youtube video about TWA 800?? So not only have you called people names in this thread you've also failed miserably in actually reading the thread. Your fail is complete. Congrats.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 3:10:17 PM EDT
[#27]
I thought TWA flight 800 conspiracy threads were on Fridays; Thursday is supposed to be chemtrails.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 3:11:42 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I thought TWA flight 800 conspiracy threads were on Fridays; Thursday is supposed to be chemtrails. Combi-thread. TWA800 was carrying chemtrails. Super Freedom Patriots™ shot it down with a bomb strapped to a remote controlled aircraft. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 3:13:30 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It was a missile. No doubt in my mind. What kind of missile? Fired by whom? For what purpose? If not fired by the U.S., what is the purpose of the cover up? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 3:38:58 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What kind of missile? Fired by whom? For what purpose? If not fired by the U.S., what is the purpose of the cover up? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It was a missile. No doubt in my mind. What kind of missile? Fired by whom? For what purpose? If not fired by the U.S., what is the purpose of the cover up? Fuck I don't know, just talking shit. If I had to guess, I'd say shoulder fired SAM fired by hadjis, and covered up to not scare the sheep away from airports. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 3:55:13 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What kind of missile? Fired by whom? For what purpose? If not fired by the U.S., what is the purpose of the cover up? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
It was a missile. No doubt in my mind. What kind of missile? Fired by whom? For what purpose? If not fired by the U.S., what is the purpose of the cover up? I can't and won't try to answer those questions, however this documentary is very compelling and these aren't conspiracy nuts claiming this it's NTSB, FBI, Commercial and Military pilots, WW2 veterans, aviation experts, crash investigators, and over 200 eye witnesses saying TWA 800 was brought down by an explosion outside of the aircraft. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:03:00 PM EDT
[#32]
Quoted:
So why did our government shoot down one of our own planes? Someone on board they didn't like?? Thoughts?? our govt did not. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:03:43 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Fuck I don't know, just talking shit. If I had to guess, I'd say shoulder fired SAM fired by hadjis, and covered up to not scare the sheep away from airports. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It was a missile. No doubt in my mind. What kind of missile? Fired by whom? For what purpose? If not fired by the U.S., what is the purpose of the cover up? Fuck I don't know, just talking shit. If I had to guess, I'd say shoulder fired SAM fired by hadjis, and covered up to not scare the sheep away from airports. A MANPAD (your shoulder fired SAM) can't get to the altitude that TWA 800 was at. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:04:43 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And another thread passes where I lament the lack of a tinfoil smiley. I got you 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:06:40 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A MANPAD (your shoulder fired SAM) can't get to the altitude that TWA 800 was at. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It was a missile. No doubt in my mind. What kind of missile? Fired by whom? For what purpose? If not fired by the U.S., what is the purpose of the cover up? Fuck I don't know, just talking shit. If I had to guess, I'd say shoulder fired SAM fired by hadjis, and covered up to not scare the sheep away from airports. A MANPAD (your shoulder fired SAM) can't get to the altitude that TWA 800 was at. Not to mention the ~7 lb warhead won't do much to a heavy other than take out whichever engine it guides on. Ask the C-17, C-5, and Airbus crews that ate MANPADs in Iraq and landed safely. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:10:03 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Fuck I don't know, just talking shit. If I had to guess, I'd say shoulder fired SAM fired by hadjis, and covered up to not scare the sheep away from airports. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It was a missile. No doubt in my mind. What kind of missile? Fired by whom? For what purpose? If not fired by the U.S., what is the purpose of the cover up? Fuck I don't know, just talking shit. If I had to guess, I'd say shoulder fired SAM fired by hadjis, and covered up to not scare the sheep away from airports. The problem with that theory is that the engagement would have taken place either at or beyond the edge of virtually anything shoulder fired. You would have to have a damn near perfect setup, have a lot of luck, and to cause the sort of damage found, get a very low probability hit. I think it's (remotely) possible something portable could have hit the plane, but given the systems available at the time and the evidence available, I thinks it's extraordinarily unlikely. The damage found doesn't match up with really any small missile hit. It doesn't really add up to a large missile hit either, but the probability of that happening and us not finding out about it is even lower than that a manpads engagement |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:11:45 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I can't and won't try to answer those questions, however this documentary is very compelling and these aren't conspiracy nuts claiming this it's NTSB, FBI, Commercial and Military pilots, WW2 veterans, aviation experts, crash investigators, and over 200 eye witnesses saying TWA 800 was brought down by an explosion outside of the aircraft. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It was a missile. No doubt in my mind. What kind of missile? Fired by whom? For what purpose? If not fired by the U.S., what is the purpose of the cover up? I can't and won't try to answer those questions, however this documentary is very compelling and these aren't conspiracy nuts claiming this it's NTSB, FBI, Commercial and Military pilots, WW2 veterans, aviation experts, crash investigators, and over 200 eye witnesses saying TWA 800 was brought down by an explosion outside of the aircraft. Watched this and discussed with a person who has 30 years in AF and flying for a mainline carrier. Missile theory is not plausible, SA7 will not operate at that altitude, someone in the navy would notice a standard missile not showing up. someone would disclose firing , not like a crew of people wouldn't notice. As for foreign powers, who why? Nitrogen is now pumped into fuel tanks. This coming from people who are more conspiracy inclined than I am, they didn't buy it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:12:04 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
our govt did not. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So why did our government shoot down one of our own planes? Someone on board they didn't like?? Thoughts?? our govt did not. Someone did because IMO the explanation the gov. presented is bullshit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:14:46 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This has been done to death. I've never heard it suggested that our government wanted to shoot down TWA800. That troofer shit didn't emerge until after 2001. Just because you either didn't know about it or ignored it prior to 2001 doesn't mean it wasn't there. This shit was all the rage back in 96/97. I believe the theory at the time is that another aircraft(and the intended target passenger(s) was supposed to be the target but because of scheduling delays TWA800 was in the wrong place at the wrong time and was shot down accidentally. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:14:46 PM EDT
[#40]
also, SA7 hits cause engine detachment or failure in other cases with commercial aircraft, DHL landed one in Baghdad. There are procedures for engine sep on 7 body from same discussion.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:15:18 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Someone did because IMO the explanation the gov. presented is bullshit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So why did our government shoot down one of our own planes? Someone on board they didn't like?? Thoughts?? our govt did not. Someone did because IMO the explanation the gov. presented is bullshit. But how did they shoot it down? What sort of system is capable of engaging and causing that specific damage while leaving evidence different from other missile hits? I think a bomb is much more likely, and imho that's a pretty damn low likelihood |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:17:21 PM EDT
[#42]
I have a difficult time believing that there was a mass hallucination moments before the aircraft decided it should transform into fire.
I'd like to see the DSP data for the event. It would at least put the missile debate to bed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:35:51 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I have a difficult time believing that there was a mass hallucination moments before the aircraft decided it should transform into fire. I'd like to see the DSP data for the event. It would at least put the missile debate to bed. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. That was a key point taught in both of my Aircraft Accident Investigation courses. If you see a flash of light out on the horizon (TWA800 was at 15K feet and about 10 miles offshore at the time of the explosion) and then you hear the distant sound of the explosion a minute later, the flash coming from the wreckage vs. going towards it would be easy to confuse in the aftermath. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:36:40 PM EDT
[#44]
I was working for TWA at the time and I believe the official story.
Too much to type, but the short version is that the center tank blew....decapitating the 747...throwing the center of gravity way off. The headless jet continues to climb (smoke trail) until it finally exploded. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:43:06 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
also, SA7 hits cause engine detachment or failure in other cases with commercial aircraft, DHL landed one in Baghdad. There are procedures for engine sep on 7 body from same discussion. Proximity fuse missile was used which detonates before impact. In fact the radar signature of the blast recorded the debris flying at greater than Mach 4. It's in the documentary and all backed up by experts who were involved in the investigation not your buddy who wasn't involved. No disrespect meant. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:43:54 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But how did they shoot it down? What sort of system is capable of engaging and causing that specific damage while leaving evidence different from other missile hits? I think a bomb is much more likely, and imho that's a pretty damn low likelihood Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So why did our government shoot down one of our own planes? Someone on board they didn't like?? Thoughts?? our govt did not. Someone did because IMO the explanation the gov. presented is bullshit. But how did they shoot it down? What sort of system is capable of engaging and causing that specific damage while leaving evidence different from other missile hits? I think a bomb is much more likely, and imho that's a pretty damn low likelihood I agree. If you think something nefarious went on, then a bomb on board seems far more likely than a missile. A missile would imply a state power (either the U.S. or another state) since a MANPAD really isn't viable. So, you're left with either saying the U.S. shot it down (which I don't think is likely in the first place nor likely to remain secret) or you're left with fingering someone like Iran or Libya. For terrorist states like that I don't see them going to the trouble of using a sea launched surface to air missile, when a Lockier style bomb on board would have been so much easier. In fact, if you wanted to bring down a specific airliner a bomb on board just seems like a much more certain and logical choice no matter who you are. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:44:12 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I was working for TWA at the time and I believe the official story. Too much to type, but the short version is that the center tank blew....decapitating the 747...throwing the center of gravity way off. The headless jet continues to climb (smoke trail) until it finally exploded. How does a jet liner with no nose and it's center of gravity completely out of whack still manage to climb?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:44:54 PM EDT
[#48]
I was working for American Airlines then, and I too believe the story.
We know from reconstruction of the wreckage that it exploded from the center tank area outwards, that pretty much rules out a heat-seeking missile, which would home in on one of the engines. Lack of explosive residue on the wreckage largely rules out high-explosive radar guided missile anyways. Not 'residue' like simple burn marks or something that could be washed off in the ocean... think HE impregnating stuff into the metal, and folding it in distinctive ways. So distinctive that it's apparently pretty easy to prove or dis-prove. Eyewitness testimony is proven to be the least reliable, especially when describing something that you don't see everyday, like 30,000 gallons of jet fuel on fire in the sky, or a 767 flying into the WTC. (Check out how many people describe the 9/11 planes in crazy ways - if it wasn't for the video, what would we have?) What pilots on the scene in real time seem to be describing is an airplane exploding on it's own in mid-air. If there was a radar guided missile large enough to reach that altitude and do this damage without explosives, they'd have seen it. Plenty of motive out there, especially with the El Al mix-up, but the evidence just doesn't point to anybody shooting 800 down.  "God bless 'em." |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:45:55 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. That was a key point taught in both of my Aircraft Accident Investigation courses. If you see a flash of light out on the horizon (TWA800 was at 15K feet and about 10 miles offshore at the time of the explosion) and then you hear the distant sound of the explosion a minute later, the flash coming from the wreckage vs. going towards it would be easy to confuse in the aftermath. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I have a difficult time believing that there was a mass hallucination moments before the aircraft decided it should transform into fire. I'd like to see the DSP data for the event. It would at least put the missile debate to bed. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. That was a key point taught in both of my Aircraft Accident Investigation courses. If you see a flash of light out on the horizon (TWA800 was at 15K feet and about 10 miles offshore at the time of the explosion) and then you hear the distant sound of the explosion a minute later, the flash coming from the wreckage vs. going towards it would be easy to confuse in the aftermath. But by a pilot that was at equal altitude a few miles away? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/27/2014 4:47:19 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. That was a key point taught in both of my Aircraft Accident Investigation courses. If you see a flash of light out on the horizon (TWA800 was at 15K feet and about 10 miles offshore at the time of the explosion) and then you hear the distant sound of the explosion a minute later, the flash coming from the wreckage vs. going towards it would be easy to confuse in the aftermath. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
I have a difficult time believing that there was a mass hallucination moments before the aircraft decided it should transform into fire. I'd like to see the DSP data for the event. It would at least put the missile debate to bed. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable. That was a key point taught in both of my Aircraft Accident Investigation courses. If you see a flash of light out on the horizon (TWA800 was at 15K feet and about 10 miles offshore at the time of the explosion) and then you hear the distant sound of the explosion a minute later, the flash coming from the wreckage vs. going towards it would be easy to confuse in the aftermath. Hence the DSP remark. But I didn't get any fancy plane crash training, I just did SATCOM at missile warning bases. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
