Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Okie Corral (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=29)
-   -   Report claims new cause for the TWA #800 crash in 1996 which killed 230 (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1491752)

Mr981 06-18-2013 19:57

Report claims new cause for the TWA #800 crash in 1996 which killed 230
 
Former NTSB investigators claiming they were under a gag order to go along with the official cause (fuel tank explosion) of the crash, when they believed all along it was caused by explosions outside the aircraft.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/18...laim-original/

Could Pierre Salinger have been right all along?:whistling:

Dalton Wayne 06-18-2013 20:02

I have said all along it was a missile, so have many eye witness

Restless28 06-18-2013 20:02

Whatever. My halfsister's mother died on this flight. Why tin foil morons look for a conspiracy in everything is crazy.

czsmithGT 06-18-2013 20:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Restless28 (Post 20384784)
Whatever. My halfsister's mother died on this flight. Why tin foil morons look for a conspiracy in everything is crazy.

I'm sorry for your loss. But the possibility it was shot down can't be discounted.

Tiro Fijo 06-18-2013 20:14

Let's see what Slick Willie has to say since it happened on his shift.

:popcorn:

FLIPPER 348 06-18-2013 20:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Restless28 (Post 20384784)
Whatever. My halfsister's mother died on this flight. Why tin foil morons look for a conspiracy in everything is crazy.



It does matter because 747s were busy flying since 1969 without center fuel tanks blowing up.

Mr981 06-18-2013 20:29

When some of the guys that were on the investigation--6 of them--say that the official cause was BS, the notion that there might be something going on here other than a tin-foil hat conspiracy starts to gain credibility. We'll see where this goes..

DanaT 06-18-2013 20:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr981 (Post 20384771)

Could Pierre Salinger have been right all along?:whistling:

Not at all.

The number 1 thing I have learned on GT is the government is 100% honest and there is no more honest being in the universe than a government employee or official. So by extension, there is no way that anything other than an official government report could be truthful; anything else is just a bunch of conspiracy theories espoused by tin-foil hat wearing nut-jobs.

RenoF250 06-18-2013 20:44

Regardless of cause, putting that puzzle back together had to be a PITA. It sure appears from the picture of the remains that the explosion happened right under the center of the wing. If it was a missile wouldn't it hit an engine?

Snaps 06-18-2013 20:46

This is glocktalk, anybody who doesn't believe the official govt story is a nut job in a tin foil hat. Never ins eye witnesses or the man laying on the ground surrounded by cops pointing the gun at him.... When they tell you what happened you don't question it you communist

AK_Stick 06-18-2013 20:47

Anyone even passably familiar with MANPADS, already knows it wasn't one.



Not many terrorists running around with mobile SAM sites in 1996......

Restless28 06-18-2013 20:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK_Stick (Post 20384912)
Anyone even passably familiar with MANPADS, already knows it wasn't one.



Not many terrorists running around with mobile SAM sites in 1996......


You're killing the dogpile, bro.

AK_Stick 06-18-2013 20:54

I know, I know, all these facts getting in the way of a good dogpile.

Tiro Fijo 06-18-2013 21:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK_Stick (Post 20384912)
...Not many terrorists running around with mobile SAM sites in 1996......


Who said it was necessarily a terrorist missile?


Let these six men have their day in court, so to speak. The best we can do is be objective.

*ASH* 06-18-2013 21:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by danat (Post 20384885)
not at all.

The number 1 thing i have learned on gt is the government is 100% honest and there is no more honest being in the universe than a government employee or official. So by extension, there is no way that anything other than an official government report could be truthful; anything else is just a bunch of conspiracy theories espoused by tin-foil hat wearing nut-jobs.

spoken for troof .

AK_Stick 06-18-2013 21:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo (Post 20384966)
Who said it was necessarily a terrorist missile?


Let these six men have their day in court, so to speak. The best we can do is be objective.


The problem, is that I am objective.


It wasn't a MANPAD, and the only system in the neighborhood that could have made that shot, was a USN Ticonderoga class Guided Missile Cruiser, and if she'd fired a missile that night, there would have been about 364 crew members who'd have known exactly what happened.

Six guys, out of how many investigators, came up with this, and they waited till they retired to spill the beans? :upeyes:


No, they're looking to cash in. If they'd really known something, they'd have quit their jobs and said it long ago.

CAcop 06-18-2013 21:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tiro Fijo (Post 20384966)
Who said it was necessarily a terrorist missile?


Let these six men have their day in court, so to speak. The best we can do is be objective.

You going with the "Navy ship blew it up with a missile" group?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app

bunk22 06-18-2013 21:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dalton Wayne (Post 20384781)
I have said all along it was a missile, so have many eye witness

Often, the eye witness reports are not trust worthy at all. There is zero proof of a missile. If it were, what type? Fired from what? Certainly not a US Naval ship, can't hide that at all, from the crew, from the inventory. The missile theory is a tin foil, conspiracy idiotic theory.

This:

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK_Stick (Post 20384974)
The problem, is that I am objective.


It wasn't a MANPAD, and the only system in the neighborhood that could have made that shot, was a USN Ticonderoga class Guided Missile Cruiser, and if she'd fired a missile that night, there would have been about 364 crew members who'd have known exactly what happened.

Six guys, out of how many investigators, came up with this, and they waited till they retired to spill the beans? :upeyes:


No, they're looking to cash in. If they'd really known something, they'd have quit their jobs and said it long ago.


frank4570 06-18-2013 21:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK_Stick (Post 20384912)
Anyone even passably familiar with MANPADS, already knows it wasn't one.



I had to googe what a MANPAD even is, that tells you how familiar I am with them.
So, why could it not have been a MANPAD?

DISREGARD. You answered the question while I was typing it.

AK_Stick 06-18-2013 21:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by frank4570 (Post 20384983)
I had to googe what a MANPAD even is, that tells you how familiar I am with them.
So, why could it not have been a MANPAD?

DISREGARD. You answered the question while I was typing it.

There was not a system in place at the time, that could have made that shot. ACFT was too high to engage, was moving too fast to engage, and the damage to the target aircraft, was too great for a shoulder launched missile to inflict, even if it could hit.

Today, only the very best MANPADs can fly high enough to make that hit possible, and that system didn't come online until nearly 10 years later. Not to mention, it still wouldn't address several other issues.


Its just outside the limitations of a MANPAD to make that shot. Didn't and couldn't happen.

bunk22 06-18-2013 21:30

Again, this. The rocket motor would have burned out "if" it had reached the aircraft as well and people most likely would not have seen a missile streak.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK_Stick (Post 20384996)
There was not a system in place at the time, that could have made that shot. ACFT was too high to engage, was moving too fast to engage, and the damage to the target aircraft, was too great for a shoulder launched missile to inflict, even if it could hit.

Today, only the very best MANPADs can fly high enough to make that hit possible, and that system didn't come online until nearly 10 years later. Not to mention, it still wouldn't address several other issues.


Its just outside the limitations of a MANPAD to make that shot. Didn't and couldn't happen.


frank4570 06-18-2013 21:31

I wondered if maybe the height had something to do with it.
Thanks for taking the time to answer my question.


Quote:

Originally Posted by AK_Stick (Post 20384996)
There was not a system in place at the time, that could have made that shot. ACFT was too high to engage, was moving too fast to engage, and the damage to the target aircraft, was too great for a shoulder launched missile to inflict, even if it could hit.

Today, only the very best MANPADs can fly high enough to make that hit possible, and that system didn't come online until nearly 10 years later. Not to mention, it still wouldn't address several other issues.


Its just outside the limitations of a MANPAD to make that shot. Didn't and couldn't happen.


AK_Stick 06-18-2013 21:32

Absolutely.

Restless28 06-18-2013 21:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by AK_Stick (Post 20385007)
Absolutely.

Kudos for bringing the logic to kill this nonsense.

HKLovingIT 06-18-2013 21:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by CAcop (Post 20384977)
You going with the "Navy ship blew it up with a missile" group?

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app


You know it. :rofl: This thread will not disappoint. :thumbsup:


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 18:42.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.