close

Privacy guaranteed - Your email is not shared with anyone.

Report claims new cause for the TWA #800 crash in 1996 which killed 230

Discussion in 'The Okie Corral' started by Mr981, Jun 18, 2013.

  1. Mr981

    Mr981

    2,337
    330
    Dec 27, 2000
    N. Central OH
  2. Dalton Wayne

    Dalton Wayne Epic mustache Millennium Member

    12,633
    7
    Apr 5, 1999
    Central Florida
    I have said all along it was a missile, so have many eye witness
     

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

    czsmithGT

    11,561
    1,942
    Jan 8, 2004
    I'm sorry for your loss. But the possibility it was shot down can't be discounted.
     
  5. Tiro Fijo

    Tiro Fijo

    6,281
    8
    May 31, 2011
    Let's see what Slick Willie has to say since it happened on his shift.

    :popcorn:
     
  6. FLIPPER 348

    FLIPPER 348 Happy Member

    23,740
    4,189
    Oct 7, 2000
    Bend Oregon


    It does matter because 747s were busy flying since 1969 without center fuel tanks blowing up.
     
  7. Mr981

    Mr981

    2,337
    330
    Dec 27, 2000
    N. Central OH
    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..
     
  8. DanaT

    DanaT Pharaoh

    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.
     
  9. RenoF250

    RenoF250

    7,548
    1,325
    Feb 23, 2008
    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?
     
  10. Snaps

    Snaps Hail 2 The King

    3,793
    100
    Apr 8, 2004
    SWPA sticks
    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
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2013
  11. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    18,179
    1,874
    Jan 20, 2004
    Alaska, again (for now)
    Anyone even passably familiar with MANPADS, already knows it wasn't one.



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

  12. You're killing the dogpile, bro.
     
  13. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    18,179
    1,874
    Jan 20, 2004
    Alaska, again (for now)
    I know, I know, all these facts getting in the way of a good dogpile.
     
  14. Tiro Fijo

    Tiro Fijo

    6,281
    8
    May 31, 2011

    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.
     
  15. *ASH*

    *ASH*

    3,211
    3,099
    Jan 12, 2008
    barbed
    spoken for troof .
     
  16. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    18,179
    1,874
    Jan 20, 2004
    Alaska, again (for now)

    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.
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2013
  17. CAcop

    CAcop

    20,659
    3,280
    Jul 21, 2002
    California
    You going with the "Navy ship blew it up with a missile" group?

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Ohub Campfire mobile app
     
  18. bunk22

    bunk22

    3,820
    501
    May 25, 2009
    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:

     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2013
  19. frank4570

    frank4570

    15,508
    8
    Jun 25, 2004
    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.
     
    Last edited: Jun 18, 2013
  20. AK_Stick

    AK_Stick AAAMAD

    18,179
    1,874
    Jan 20, 2004
    Alaska, again (for now)
    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.