TWA Flight 800 Investigation

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: azsynthetic

One thing that was not taken into consideration is midair collision with an UFO. There are a lot of classified and unknown stuffs flying out there. From first flight to first public exposure was ten years for the F-117, and that was over 20 years ago. Some of the current DoD drones were developed over 30 years ago and some are invisible to 99.99% of the radars out there.

The NTSB was trying to prove or disprove various theories with known physics facts and data. Besides, why would the military be flying drones in a high traffic area? My personal opinion is that one of two things happenend: 1. A directed energy missile hit the plane, not one with an explosive warhead, 2. Some disgruntled TWA employee set up the conditions necessary to eventually cause an explosion.

 

[Astro14]

"Directed energy" and "missile" are mutually exclusive terms, so I really don't understand your conjecture...

 

[dickwells]

A mixture of fuel and air has to be within a fairly narrow range to be explosive/flammable. With any liquid fuel still in an enclosed space the mixture will be over the upper flammability limit (a little under 6% IIRC) . This is analogous to a car engine being flooded. I don't know how they handled it in the test I saw on TV where the tank detonated but I am suspicious that they doctored the mixture.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: Astro14

"Directed energy" and "missile" are mutually exclusive terms, so I really don't understand your conjecture...

Not conjecture and they are not mutually exclusive terms. You are thinking of one class of DEWs in terms of the exotic weapons such as electromagnetic and sound weapons. DEW can include missiles of high kinetic energy which can deliver destructive power at the time of collision by virtue of their mass and velocity.

 

[azsynthetic]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule

Originally Posted By: azsynthetic

One thing that was not taken into consideration is midair collision with an UFO. There are a lot of classified and unknown stuffs flying out there. From first flight to first public exposure was ten years for the F-117, and that was over 20 years ago. Some of the current DoD drones were developed over 30 years ago and some are invisible to 99.99% of the radars out there.

The NTSB was trying to prove or disprove various theories with known physics facts and data. Besides, why would the military be flying drones in a high traffic area?

The NTSB does not have access to all the known facts and data. Hence the meaning of the word "Classified". I gave you an example of the F-117 because it was sighted many times prior to its disclosure by the DoD. All classified sightings were hum-haw by the DoD as something else and not the actual aircraft. "Why would the military be flying drones in a high traffic area" would require a classified answer beyond your need to know. Drones are tested under all conditions in all areas of application and at maximum capabilities. Not all tests are successful nor according to plans.

 

[azsynthetic]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule

Originally Posted By: Astro14

"Directed energy" and "missile" are mutually exclusive terms, so I really don't understand your conjecture...

Not conjecture and they are not mutually exclusive terms. You are thinking of one class of DEWs in terms of the exotic weapons such as electromagnetic and sound weapons. DEW can include missiles of high kinetic energy which can deliver destructive power at the time of collision by virtue of their mass and velocity.

You are wrong. Directed Energy Weapons cannot have a projectile. What you are referring to are Kinetic Energy Weapons and not Directed Energy Weapons. The Department of Defense defines directed energy as "a beam of concentrated electromagnetic energy or atomic or subatomic particles" that can "damage or destroy enemy equipment, facilities and personnel." You can search DoD Joint Publication 1-02 for more info. http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp1_02.pdf

 

[MolaKule]

Think again, as in SM-3 Block X anti-satellite. A directed energy weapon can have a projectile, whether it be an electron, photon, proton, simple nosecone or body mass, or a neutron.

 

[azsynthetic]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule

Think again, as in SM-3 Block X anti-satellite. A directed energy weapon can have a projectile, whether it be an electron, photon, proton, simple nosecone or body mass, or a neutron.

I help designed the SM-1 to SM-3 while I was at Raytheon so you are WRONG. If you want to define the term Direct Energy Weapons to suit your purpose then so be it. I will stick with what the DoD and the weapon designers define it to be, which is without a projectile. There is no such thing as SM-3 block X. What you are thinking off is called the EKV. Yeah, I worked on that too at Raytheon and it is not classified as a Directed Energy Weapon. http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/ekv/

 

[MolaKule]

Quote:

The NTSB does not have access to all the known facts and data. Hence the meaning of the word "Classified".

I disagree. They DO have access or can obtain access from the Military. They do however have to keep classified data classified. A kinetic energy weapon is subclass of DEW. Block X refers to any of the Block developments and its variants, such as the Antisatellite missile.

 

[azsynthetic]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule

Quote:

The NTSB does not have access to all the known facts and data. Hence the meaning of the word "Classified".

I disagree. They DO have access or can obtain access from the Military. They do however have to keep classified data classified. A kinetic energy weapon is subclass of DEW.

A subclass of Directed Energy Weapons based on what? Show me where the DoD or any weapon designer/producer that stated that in writing? You're making it up as you go. If the weapon is classified as part of a black project then no one would know what it is except the DoD and the manufacturer. I gave you an example of the F-117 specifically for that reason. The B2 was another one. When I was installing the radar system on the B2 back in the late 80's, I had no idea what it was even though I was sitting inside it. Not until 10 years later that I was told it was a B2 prototype. The NTSB come to us all the time for our opinions since we are the world largest producer of FMS and FC for all the major airlines and then some. They don't have access to classified data unless the DoD let them.

 

[Astro14]

The understanding that I have of the term "Directed Energy Weapon" matches this from Wikipedia: A directed-energy weapon (DEW) emits energy in an aimed direction without the means of a projectile. It transfers energy to a target for a desired effect. Intended effects on humans may be non-lethal or lethal. These effects have been categorised as physical, physiological and psychological.[1] DEW's are used on people who are the targets of operations such as Information Operations (Info Ops) by countries including the UK and the USA.[2][3] Info Ops are stated to be used by militaries domestically as well as abroad.[4][5][6] The technology has been available for several decades in the United States Department of Energy National Laboratories,[7] NATO and Czech Ministry of Defence.[8] The energy can come in various forms: Electromagnetic radiation, in lasers or masers Particles with mass, in particle-beam weapons (technically a form of micro-projectile weapon) Sound, in sonic weapons The SM-3 has a kinetic kill vehicle. But hit to kill clearly requires a projectile, which directed energy weapons lack. Hope this clears up the confusion about the terms.

 

[Astro14]

Now, to Occam's Razor.... The idea that the US DOD was responsible for TWA 800 is simply not plausible. It is the most complex answer, requiring still-secret technology, a degree of cover-up and secrecy never successfully demonstrated, and it contradicts the preponderance of the physical evidence. The simplest explanation: fuel tank explosion, is the hardest to accept for the reasons that I previously discussed. But in this case, the simplest answer is the right one.

 

[Mr Nice]

Astro, Just wondering how many flight hours you have in the 747 ? I would love to fly for a living, unfortunately I don't.

 

[Astro14]

I flew it for 5 years at United, during which time I was an instructor on the 747-400. So, I only have 1100 hours in the airplane itself, but I lived and breathed it for those 5 years; in the simulator nearly every day, teaching (and checking) systems and procedures, working with our engineering and with Boeing, Honeywell, etc.... It is a great airplane, wish I was still part of the fleet training dept....

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: Astro14

The Navy had a P-3 in the area, and several ships at sea on that night...which is meaningless...Look, I can't go into technical details (capabilities and limitations are still classified), but the Navy didn't shoot down TWA 800, of that I am certain. Look at it this way: In the days before cell phones and internet, the Navy shoots down an Iranian airliner halfway around the world, and it's in the press in hours...(USS Vincennes) Now, with all the connectivity, all the new technology for communication, and all the whistle-blowers, the Navy shoots down a US airliner, on our own shores, and not one sailor says anything? Nothing? There is no way the Navy could have kept TWA 800 quiet if it were responsible. But the Navy wasn't responsible...and people are more accepting of pernicious action and dark forces than of random chance and bad luck...it's a psychological pre-disposition...and it plays heavily in the theories surrounding TWA-800.

Please. This is absurd. The media will report what they are instructed to report. An incident like this could easily be covered up. Witnesses saw a projectile that left a smoke trail hit the the plane. From what I've read the actual investigators were told what direction to take the investigation,basically tying their hands. I read last night that someone on the investigative team,or more than one believes it was a projectile yet they were not allowed to take the investigation in that direction and the DOD refused to answer any relevant questions about assets in the area with weapons that could fit the eyewitness accounts. And I'm sure I read that tesla invented a directed energy weapon. A "death ray" for lack of a better term,and members of covert units have admitted using this weapon,so just because Uncle Sam says it ain't so doesn't mean its true. Domestic terrorism is nothing new and New York is big brothers favorite target. Heck even weeks after the towers were being cleaned up firefighters found molten metal in the basements,that "jet fuel" melted. Right. People believe what they are told to believe no matter how absurd or what eyewitnesses saw or heard. What happened shortly after that plane went down. What policy was trying to be implemented or pushed and did that policy gain traction afterwards. Its like gun control. It almost seems like every time the subject is brought up some kind of massacre happens,which seems to affect public opinion a bit more each time. Sooner or later the public is going to need saving from themselves and will beg for new laws to "help"

 

[Kestas]

Originally Posted By: Clevy

Witnesses saw a projectile that left a smoke trail hit the the plane.

What the witnesses saw was explained in a post I made earlier in this thread. You need some basic understanding in psychology, human nature, and witness reliability to understand it. It just makes too much sense to me that there was no missle. Beyond that, one can choose what they want to believe.

 

[MolaKule]

Originally Posted By: azsynthetic

Originally Posted By: MolaKule

Quote:

The NTSB does not have access to all the known facts and data. Hence the meaning of the word "Classified".

I disagree. They DO have access or can obtain access from the Military. They do however have to keep classified data classified. A kinetic energy weapon is subclass of DEW.

A subclass of Directed Energy Weapons based on what? Show me where the DoD or any weapon designer/producer that stated that in writing? You're making it up as you go. If the weapon is classified as part of a black project then no one would know what it is except the DoD and the manufacturer. I gave you an example of the F-117 specifically for that reason. The B2 was another one. When I was installing the radar system on the B2 back in the late 80's, I had no idea what it was even though I was sitting inside it. Not until 10 years later that I was told it was a B2 prototype. The NTSB come to us all the time for our opinions since we are the world largest producer of FMS and FC for all the major airlines and then some. They don't have access to classified data unless the DoD let them.

From your previous posts, you intimated you worked for Boeing Helicopters or Raytheon, not Honeywell. It looks like we will agree to disagree, but the scientific community and the military community sometimes diverge on the definitions, but I think you are being too narrow in your view. The AIAA has a series of publications entitled, Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics. Searching for Keywords such as: DEW, Directed Energy, Direct Energy Warheads, High Velocity Impact Dynamics, Terminal Encounter Kinematics, Target Detection Mechanics, LSDYNA3D, Tactical Missile, Tactical Missile Warheads, and Terminal Ballistics, might help to broaden your view.

Quote:

The idea that the US DOD was responsible for TWA 800 is simply not plausible.

I would agree, but a rogue nation would have this technoloy, and I think the exact cause is still up for debate.

 

[cbear]

I was in the Navy at the time, and I was friends with a crew member of the cruiser that many people initially blamed. He worked in CIC, and stated they they were A) not in the imidate area, and B) weapons cold. IF there was a missile, it couldn't have come from the cruiser. The weapons systems were offline. Readying a VLS launcher is a little more involved that turning on a light switch.

 

[Wilhelm_D]

Relative to the jet fuel's volatility, it is my understanding that in places like Russia and India it is not unknown for jets to be accidentally refueled with avgas. Relative to the NTSB, when it comes to DOD, CIA, and FBI NTSB gets spoon fed whatever they are given. If they were spoon fed fuel vapors igniting, that is all they would know. Finally, while an IR shoulder held missile would home for the engine, a laser guided missile like the Swedish RBS-70 would perform just as the witnesses describe the "skyrocket" performing. I have an open mind on the issue.

 

[azsynthetic]

Originally Posted By: MolaKule

From your previous posts, you intimated you worked for Boeing Helicopters or Raytheon, not Honeywell.

Discounting my Army Aviation career, I have over 35 years in the aviation industries working direct or as a consultant with GD (which is now Lockheed), McDonnell Douglas (which is now Boeing), Boeing, Rockwell (which is now Collins), 3M Defense, Raytheon, Logicon (which is now Northrop Grumman), and several smaller companies. I am now a consultant/project manager for Honeywell Flight Control System and part time consultant for GE Aviation. I prefer to stick with the people that are actually in the business and not just internet hearsay. For those that don't think it is possible for the DoD to have involved I will remind you: http://www.naturalnews.com/019189_human_medical_experimentation_ethics.html And some really dangerous experiments that we know so far: http://listverse.com/2011/06/12/10-secret-us-military-intelligence-projects/