Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: TWA 800 back in the news

  1. #1
    Moderator mirrodie's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Me like the Robert Downey Jr of cooooooookies!
    Posts
    5,746

    TWA 800 back in the news

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


    Its been speculated since day one....
    And I, I took the path less traveled by
    and that has made all the difference......yet...
    I have a feeling a handle of people are going to be very interested in what I post in the near future.

    http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=187

  2. #2
    Senior Member moose135's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    8,040
    Some of us never believed the story they came up with, nor the cartoon the CIA produced...

  3. #3
    Senior Member megatop412's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Philadelphia(south Jersey, actually)
    Posts
    3,277
    After I read James Sanders' book, for several years I was convinced we shot down our own plane and covered it up.

    Since then, I've retreated back into the more plausible theory that electrical arcing from chafed wiring on a 25-year-old 747 tragically combined with the circumstance of a vapor-filled fuel tank that was adjacent to a/c packs that had been running for several hours on the hot JFK tarmac. Sooner or later, across a world full of aircraft under the same circumstances, your number comes up. Not saying that's what happened, just that it's more plausible. That, and the fact that after 17 years, not a single person has come forward with the damning evidence of a cover-up. I doubt this film is that evidence.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Zee71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Queens, NY
    Posts
    4,348
    A neighbor down the block from where I grew up was a lead maitenance supervisor for TWA, and according to him he didn't by the theory of a chaffed wire and vapor from the fuel tank, but insisted that is was some sort bomb that brought the aircraft down. I personally think it was a cover up as well.
    Mark
    Queens, NY

    My website: http://mbsphotography.smugmug.com
    My photos at: JetPhotos and ANet

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Houston, Texas
    Posts
    123
    In the years after that happened I was working for an airline that had a furloughed TWA pilot in the training department. His wife was still actively flying for TWA at the time. I remember him telling me that some of the TWA ALPA accident investigators wanted additional access to some of the wreckage that was key in the "missile" theory. They had been given access to it once, but had some questions about what they had seen and wanted to look again. In a very unusual move, they, who were legitimate parties to the investigation, were denied access to the evidence. Cover up of a missile, or bomb, or little green men from Mars? I don't know...

  6. #6
    Senior Member Aviation.High.Guy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    1,042
    I personally believe it was a cover up as well. Don't for one minute underestimate what the gov't is capable of hiding. And as long as we are on the subject, I think it was the US military that shot down UAL 93 over Pa on 9/11 in order to prevent larger collateral damage and major loss of life. Sorry if I offend anyone, but I don't buy the story that passengers fought the terrorists and reported the occurrence by cellphone. Have you ever tried to use a cellphone from an airliner? It simply doesn't work. The cellphone isn't capable of locking into a cell tower for transmission because it's picking up literally dozens of towers at that altitude. You'd be lucky stay connected for one second if it were even possible.
    -Don B.

  7. #7
    Senior Member yankees368's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    1,562
    I have indeed made a cell phone call at altitude before (don't tell the FAA/FCC), but it lasted only seconds before cutting out. I also believe that making calls for any extended period of time just isn't possible.
    Follow me on Twitter and friend me on Facebook.

  8. #8
    Senior Member moose135's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    8,040
    Quote Originally Posted by Aviation.High.Guy View Post
    Sorry if I offend anyone, but I don't buy the story that passengers fought the terrorists and reported the occurrence by cellphone. Have you ever tried to use a cellphone from an airliner? It simply doesn't work.
    While there were reports of cell phone calls from some of the hijacked planes, Todd Beemer and several other passengers on Flight 93 used an Airfone to make those calls:

    http://old.post-gazette.com/headline...ainstoryp7.asp

  9. #9
    Senior Member megatop412's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Philadelphia(south Jersey, actually)
    Posts
    3,277
    If I remember correctly Betty Ong made a call from Flight 11 that lasted several minutes

  10. #10
    Member rkfast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Wantagh, NY
    Posts
    95
    Im sorry...Ill take the over 17,000 pages of official evidence and testimony over the "eyewitness" accounts from the same class of folks who cant tell the difference between an F-18 and a B-17 at JBAS in broad daylight.

  11. #11
    Senior Member NIKV69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    IFP, ISP, JFK, IGM, SAN, VCV, LGA, LAX, SEE, LAS
    Posts
    4,258
    How many people saw a missile hit the plane? Of course we shot it down with friendly fire. I mean it's not even close.
    'My idea of a good picture is one that's in focus and of a famous person doing something unfamous.' Andy Warhol

  12. #12
    Senior Member RomNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Away from home
    Posts
    499
    Quote Originally Posted by megatop412 View Post
    If I remember correctly Betty Ong made a call from Flight 11 that lasted several minutes
    In-flight pay phone?

  13. #13
    Senior Member Delta777LR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Poughkeepsie, New York, United States
    Posts
    2,844
    I thought about the UA93 theory too, I for one dont think those passengers actually fought the terrorist, where's the proof? It's all cover up. Im sure yes many made phone calls from the air phone etc, as Don said too, cellphone dont really work at high altitudes, and as for the TWA800 thing, I can't say for sure what if it was a missle or faulty wiring that caused that explosure but, It can still be possible that it was mainly the wiring that caused the explosion, I remembered hearing people say it was a missle. I actually thought it was a missle myself, I was 14 at the time it crashed, again where's the proof? Just because those that saw what looked like a missle dont mean it actually was as investigators think. Look at KAL007 back in 1983, there was proof of that flight being hit by a missle. Same for Iran Air in 1988.
    Sergio has been a huge Delta Air Lines fan since 1992!!

    Sergio Cardona

    http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos....e=1&display=15

  14. #14
    Member clear_prop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    SJC
    Posts
    46
    There have been several fuel tank fires on the ground. A fuel tank fire on an old worn out 747 isn't hard to believe. I'm really surprised all the people believing the missile theory.

  15. #15
    Senior Member gonzalu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Bronx, New York
    Posts
    6,028
    ALL eyewitness reports are for the last few seconds of a multi-minute incident according to the flight data recorders and radar tracking data from ground. Those who say saw a missile go up first are smoking unless we are being lied to about the flight data and radar data ...

    I think to cover something up of this magnitude would be a HUGE undertaking. TOO MANY eyes on it, too many people to shut up... too many weak and poor souls that can be bought to leak the real info. I am not buying a cover up right up to the president. Like I said, too many eyes.

    Even Watergate was a disaster in covering it up. Now we have Snowden... there are just too many links to keep in check... no way this could still be covered after 17 years LOL.

    I bet most here who believe it is a cover up also think WTC was a planned internal demolition conspiracy?
    Manny Gonzalez
    Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
    BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •