It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

TWA Flight 800 investigators break silence in new documentary, claim original conclusion about caus

page: 4
165
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 08:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by superluminal11
lol....747 is prob one of the top 3 airplanes out there that are flawless with even the basic maintenance schedule.


there is no such thing as a flawless aircraft.


That tank didnt blow up because of faulty nothing.


I did checks on some aircraft center wing tanks after TWA 800 - there were plenty of potential problems with the wiring and pumps - some of them visible to the naked eye.




posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 


are you saying the whistleblowers are lying? im confused lol



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 08:50 PM
link   
I'm not really sure what this video is suppose to show, since it's small and I can't download it or zoom in to have a better view...Seems the guy has found something here...Just to clarify, I can't get what is going on on this video...

www.wnd.com...
_________________________________
"In the new unedited version, however, the cameraman does not stay with the known debris field. In each of the two short sections, on five separate occasions, he pans the camera about three miles off to the northwest, back towards JFK where TWA Flight originated, and focuses on another burning object.

This second object appears to the viewer as a large black spot. What catches the cameraman’s eye is a substantial smoke plume wafting high into the sky from this obviously burning object.

In no subsequent government report is there any mention, let alone clarification, of what this object might be."



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by NickDC202
 


I found an unedited copy of the 7/17/96 MSNBC coverage someone recorded on VHS that very night and it never mentions or shows the video. The FBI may have confiscated a video but I can't find an evidence it was ever aired to the public. I don't know how to post an anonymous link to the converted VHS video I found, but if you know how to access the "other" side of the internet search for "7/96 Breaking News MSNBC" and you should find it pretty easily. It's broken up into a few parts scattered around a video hosting site and covers from 9pm-2am EDT 7/17/96 and 7/18/96.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 


No, I'm saying that the evidence that I've seen to date points to a mechanical failure. The whistleblowers haven't said it was shot down, and haven't released any evidence to show that it was anything but a mechanical failure that I've seen yet. Expert doesn't always mean right, but I'll wait to see what new evidence they bring to the table.

I've seen a number of mechanical failures over the years, including fuel tank failures that have led to crashes, similar to this one. I've read up on just about every major commercial and military accident that I could get my hands on, and while fuel tank failures aren't common, they also aren't unheard of.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by EViLKoNCEPTz
 


I KNOW what I saw.


Edit: And not to be that guy, but I did say it was somewhere between midnight and 3am; wish I could be more specific,

Edit 2: EViLKoNCEPTz I REALLY appreciate and admire your sleuthing abilities; thank you for doing what you're doing.


edit on 6/18/2013 by NickDC202 because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/18/2013 by NickDC202 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by smurfy
 


FBI's removal of wreckage without following good procedure is pretty well known and was criticized at the time (or soon after) - see the wiki page on alternative theories


Yes, I wouldn't disagree with that.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by NickDC202
 


It's been 17 years. The memory is notoriously faulty even after a short time. I'm not saying you did or did not see a video, but you may have mixed up another video with the memory of that night. I've done it a few times associating things with the wrong event because they happened around the same time years prior. Hell I once mixed up things that happened on two separate trips to Disney World and they were 3 years apart. If you can find someone else that can corroborate what you saw that may help us track it down. I haven't seen any of the conspiracy angles mentioning anything of the video other than the FBI confiscating a video but no one claims to have seen it or know what was even on it. I'm still looking for the video I do know I've seen of the explosion itself. There were two that I know of, one where the explosion occurs out of frame up and to the left of the camera above and to the right of the subject being filmed, and one of the explosion occurring in frame but at a distance of probably 7 or 10 miles from the camera location.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by NickDC202
 


the plane went down around sundown, about 7 or 8 at that time of the year, i remember this because when they activated us it was right about midnight



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 


He's saying they aired the video he saw on MSNBC between 12 and 3am 7/18/96. Not that the crash happened then.

I'm looking everywhere for any evidence of the video so it may take me a little bit to respond. I've even asked for some help looking. You've gotten a few of us interested in this phantom video. I even emailed my cousin who works for the FBI to see what he can find for me.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by smurfy
 


Fuel tank problems have occurred a number of times through the years. A Pan Am flight exploded after a lightning strike ignited one of the fuel tanks in the wing, blowing the wing apart. The Air Force has lost a number of aircraft, including at least two KC-135s to fuel tank explosions, along with several other aircraft that I can think of.

The 747-131 especially had "explosion proof" tanks in the center wing tanks especially, but they were only tested when they were new. Boeing never retested the system to see what effect aging would have on the system. It was found after the crash of 800 that the center wing fuel tank heated more with lower fuel levels in it. As the plane climbed out, the altitude changes, and the air conditioning pack around the fuel tank heated the tank to temperatures that would allow flashover with fairly minimal effort.

The center wing fuel tank when heated, at certain altitudes can have a flashpoint of less than 100 degrees. The CWT spends most of the flight well within the flammability zone, where the 6 wing tanks are only within that zone for a minimal portion of the flight. Add a spark to that, and you have a disaster on your hands.

Yes I have seen the docus all ultimately all going for a fuel explosion, or rather a vapour explosion, that doesn't explain why somebody said that the fuel tank portion was found unbent.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by smurfy
 


There were a number of things said after 800 went down that were later changed. Maybe they saw one of the other tanks and mistook it for the CWT. Every investigation has things said that change over the weeks and months afterwards.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by HomerinNC
reply to post by NickDC202
 


the plane went down around sundown, about 7 or 8 at that time of the year, i remember this because when they activated us it was right about midnight


20.31 EDT



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by minkmouse
I remember this event and I'll never forget a clip I saw on the news showing a surface to air missile being launched. The reporter said it was footage filmed by a tourist. Then...Bam! Never saw this video again, ever, anywhere. Then came the story of the center tank explosion which became the official line. In the back of my mind, I always wondered about the clip I'd seen and where the hell it went



Took the words out of my mouth.

Same experience.


And, it wasn't YouTube, either, I don't even think, but actual cable/network news(!) They were taking feeds from EVERYwhere, and anyone, because up to that time, it was the largest (or close to the record) loss-of-life Airplane tragedy for the US, in History. [ah, just checked: second largest in history up to it, and almost 20 years removed from the record holder: AA 191 (1979, 258 passengers)] - big deal. Space Shuttle Challenger kind of feel. Nothing like 9/11, that was the game changer. [food for thought]

(But, now I think about... USS Cole, Trade Center '93, Okla City, and on and on... Head spinning)

Tip of Whisteblower iceberg?!

Uh, oh... surely they're onto me by now...

all those key words...

see ya






posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:41 PM
link   
You're forgetting an important witness!!! Remember the high ranking military guy who saw the missle as he was fishing or something on the shores of Long Island as he was on vacation? He screamed to the rafters when the false story came out. He explained over and over again that he had the experience to know what he saw. I'm thinking he might have been retired military.

And I might be making this up in my head as its been so long, but didn't he die under suspicious circumstances later on?

This was my first conspiracy event. I knew the "official story" was purely a lie because I, too, had seen the missile on television. And when I read about that retired military witness I was completely in shock.

It was the first time in my young adult life that I began to realize the government doesn't tell the truth. It changed my life and my politics.

Let's try to find evidence of that witness I am speaking of. I am absolutely positive about this.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Zaphod58
 

The effective range on a Stinger is in the 13,000 foot range.

The flight crew were given instructions to ascend to 15,000 feet when it apparently exploded for whatever reason, so if it was a stinger, it would have still been in range and where are the photos of the engines?

ETA: edit to correct typo on altitude as pointed out in post below.
edit on 18-6-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by jmdewey60
 


They were given instructions to climb to 15,000 feet, not 1500 feet. The aircraft that spotted the explosion reported it as being near 16,000 feet at the time.


TWA 800 then received a series of heading changes and generally increasing altitude assignments as it climbed to its intended cruising altitude.[20] Weather in the area was light winds with scattered clouds,[21] and there were dusk lighting conditions.[22] The last radio transmission from the airplane occurred at 20:30 when the flight crew received and then acknowledged instructions from New York Center to climb to 15,000 feet (4,600 m).[23] The last recorded radar transponder return from the airplane was recorded by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) radar site at Trevose, Pennsylvania at 20:31:12.[24]
Thirty-eight seconds later, the captain of an Eastwind Airlines Boeing 737 reported to Boston ARTCC that he "just saw an explosion out here," adding, "we just saw an explosion up ahead of us here...about 16,000 feet [4,900m] or something like that, it just went down into the water." Subsequently, many air traffic control facilities in the New York/Long Island area received reports of an explosion from other pilots operating in the area. Many witnesses in the vicinity of the crash stated that they saw or heard explosions, accompanied by a large fireball or fireballs over the ocean, and observed debris, some of which was burning, falling into the water.[24]

en.wikipedia.org...

www.fromtheflightdeck.com...

There are pictures, as well as descriptions of the damage to the engines on that page.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by MRuss
 


Over 200 people saw the "streak" - the NTSB ran the witness statements collected by the FBI and determined that they all occurred after the explosion, when the a/c was still flying and before it broke up.

none of the witness statements included a launch signature, nor was there any low level exhaust seen - it was all at high altitude and consistent with the explosions shortly followed by breakup theory.
edit on 18-6-2013 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 10:00 PM
link   
So am I the only one currently watching the phenomenal EPIX documentary on TWA 800 that the news in the OP originated? It is outstanding and I'm only an hour into it.



posted on Jun, 18 2013 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Here's some interesting testimony from eye witnesses, although I haven't found my guy yet:


Almost at once, eyewitnesses were being interviewed on radio and TV who reported that something strange had preceded the explosion of the 747. Witnesses, many on the ground, reported seeing a bright object "streaking" towards the 747. The object in question turned in midair as it closed on the jumbo jet. Witnesses reported horizontal travel, as well as vertical. The broad geographical range covered by the eyewitnesses eliminates foreground/background confusion. To be seen as being near the 747 from so many different directions, the bright object had to actually be in the immediate vicinity of the 747. Other pilots in the air reported seeing a bright light near the jumbo jet before it exploded. In the days following the disaster, many industry executives privately concluded that TWA 800 had been shot down.


Found here: whatreallyhappened.com...



new topics

top topics



 
165
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join