TWA Flight 800?

Question

I'm not big on conspiracy theories and cover-ups but I question the conclusion that TWA 800 was brought down by a short in the fuel tank. Ever notice that this doesn't happen to cars? And certainly planes are built to a higher standard. The reason it doesn't happen is there is not enough oxygen in a fuel tank to support combustion. Not to mention that everything on an aircraft would be protected by a circuit breaker. I would like to see this 'fuel tank explosion' reproduced. Unless they are pumping air into it I think it is impossible.

Answer 1

Jack Cashill and James Sanders wrote a very good book on the subject and I think you will be surprised by its content. As I am not a conspiracy fan either, I am not one to easily suggest that there was a government inspired cover-up. However, after reading this book, I have concluded, personally, that it was a cover-up.
Frankly I think the world should know that TWA Flight 800's destruction was apparently due to be an act of terror. The sworn testimony, among other things, does not fit the official report of what happened. The sad part is that the only one who knows the entire story is probably Bill Clinton.
The problem with the fuel tank scenario is, among other things, that there would never be enough explosive power for what witnesses experienced, but you can read the book and see if you agree. The entire account will leave you feeling moderately ill, even if he is only partly correct. I feel sure that a guided missile was involved, but even that may surprise you as to whom it belonged.
What I cannot understand is why the government to such great lengths to keep it hidden from the public. Of course, we might have been more ready for "later things" had we known, but then the Clintons are made from Teflon.

Answer 2

A little known fact: The aircraft in TWA flight 800 was the 16th 747 to come off the production line. Beginning with number 17, Boeing changed the wiring scheme inside the fuel tank to make it less susceptible to internal shorts and explosions. Of the first 16, all 15 have since exploded. (I believe the first one is in a museum)

Not all of them have been due to fuel tank explosions. One was Pan Am 103 over Lockerbie, one was the Korean Air 747 shot down by the Soviet military, one was operated by Iran and shot down by US forces. Two were destroyed at Tenerife. Some of these however have been fuel-tank explosions though TWA 800 was the only one to occur in flight.

The problem with fuel tank explosions does not translate to cars because there is no internal wiring inside a car's fuel tank. It is a much larger problem in aicraft because the center tank is not normally used, and therefore does not contain enough fuel inside to maintain a non-combustible fuel-air mixture. Over time, vapors can build up and a flammable ratio can be obtained. This has been a problem for years and it is certainly not unique to the 747-100.

Contrary to what the conspiracy experts would have you believe, this is an easily reproducible scenario and the correct fuel-air ratio can exist very easily inside these tanks. There was absolutely no evidence of a missile, either from RADAR images or otherwise. Eye-witness reports are notoriously inaccurate. The type of missile that supposedly hit the plane was a heat-seeking type. That missile would have impacted at a hot point right? Like an engine? Not at the relatively cold center fuel tank where the explosion originated.

Answer 3

Serveral things:

First. This is a scenario that IS easily reproduced, and the faulty wiring is a perfectly reasonable explanation.

Second. Aircraft fuel tanks and auto fuel tanks are similar in name only. That's it, there's almost nothing else the same about them, so that comparison does not work.

Third. Regarding conspiracy theories, they have been around for a long time. People use them to explain everything that they don't want to believe. They cannot believe that someone's carelessness (not finding shorted out wires) could result in the death of several hundred people, and so it is actually easier for them to believe it was a terrorist. Terrorists are capable of this sort of disregard for life, and so that explanation helps them cope.

Fourth. Bill Clinton couldn't even cover up getting a BJ at his desk. Do you really think that there wasn't a single person in the government that wouldn't think that the public should know about a terrorist attack that killed 250+ people? Be reasonable about this. Remember, usenets were gaining popularity at that time, and the internet was becoming a place for people to talk. Information like that does not just go away.

Lastly. There has been no VERIFIABLE data that says there ever WAS a missile. Eyewitness testimony is always the least accurate form of evidence. Radar tapes show "an object" which could not be proven conclusively what it was. Abscence of proof that it WASN'T a missile is NOT proof that it was. It could have been anything at all. Besides, TRACON Radar is not accurate enough to detect a surface-to-air missile with enough definition to clearly say that's what it is.

Conspiracy theories, while often based on several actual facts, never tie those facts together with a clear adhesion. And usually they get the facts wrong. They can be interesting to listen to, but are most often proven completely false.

P.S. - We really did land on the moon, Lee Harvey Oswald did shoot JFK, 9/11 was actually perpetrated by Al Qaeda, and there are not now, nor ever were, aliens in Roswell.

Answer 4

There have been in EXCESS of 40 fuel tank explosions in aviation. In Vietnam, this was feared so much( partly because you were shot at, but not entirely) that tanks were pressurized with nitrogen.

And last time I checked when was a car taken up to 16,000ft? Air Density my friend. The NTSB did indeed get it right. The NTSB also provided explanations to the streaks. Also ever wonder why Boeing has been making a fuss about Inerting systems? Boeing offered an inerting system option BEFORE TWA 800.

Pumping air into it? The Tanks are vented pressure is allowed to equalize. The content of O2 is the same up there as down here. COmbustion is not affected.

EDIT: I too have heard the 1-16 story just like Jason said. Although I havent heard that EVERY one ( excluding other causes) has blown up. But none the less it IS true.

Answer 5

I was an aircraft mechanic for 20 years, and I worked on 747's for about 8 of those years. My airline had to go through a very thorough inspection and replacement program on all their 747's. I spent many weeks inside of the fuel tanks changing wire harnesses, fuel pumps, bonding wires, etc.
We didn't find anything even remotely able to cause the fuel to explode, no broken wires, no damaged fuel pumps, etc. I am sure if anyone had found anything all of us would have been able to see it.
I am completely convinced this was one of the most successful examples of a coverup in US history. Bill Clinton's election was that fall, and he wanted to keep the nation as satisfied and complacent as possible, so this act of terrorism on American soil had to be covered up.
If the center tank exploded, like the officials tell us, it would have been shattered, but it wasn't, look at the diagrams from the NTSB in the link below. The left wing is shattered in the area of #2 engine, which is where the missle hit.
The Bush administration doesn't expose this fraud, because his administration has plenty of secrets that subsequent admininstrations will be expected to keep hidden. That is how they run things in the Establishment.
Here is a great link to learn all about TWA 800:

Answer 6

I bear in options seeing the television information pictures of the NTSB piece at the same time of surviving TWA Flight 800 debris--and obviously talked about supportive information that said a a threat missile strike delivered this airplane down. those whistle blowing investigators are professionals of their forensic technology field; any efforts to push aside or debunk their new claims are going to be next to no longer a threat difficult, a lot less credible. imagine the flying Civil courtroom courtroom circumstances from surviving relatives of TWA 800 victims, IF it ever were given shown the authorities shot this airplane down, because they needed someone on board lifeless. that is a touch logical reason the authorities needs to keep the reality about TWA 800 silenced.

Answer 7

"Unless they are pumping air into it I think it is impossible"
If air did not replace the fuel pumped out it would create a vacuum and them no fuel could be pumped.

Also the short was caused by a crack in the wire shielding so short bypassed any safety devices.

One more thing the front half of the plane was blown off and the back half continued to fly for a short time leaving a fire trail.

Oh wait it was a missile that hit the Pentagon, NOT

The sky is falling!! The sky is falling!!

Answer 8

In Tenerife you are able to do anything you're feeling like any time of the entire year thanks to their environment, normal surroundings and tourist infrastructure designed for enjoyment for the household so this place is the right area for an excellent vacation and with hotelbye you can get it. In Tenerife are lots of points waiting for you yourself to discover and one of those is in the south west coast of Tenerife. A location that is a spectacular spot for watching whales free in the ocean. As much as 26 species are observed just down the coast, including baleen whales, killer whales, dolphins, pilot whales and also blue whales. In Tenerife you may also see The Teide National Park. At 3,718 metres, Teide volcano is Spain's best maximum and its two ecosystems make the rise an event saturated in contrasts.

Answer 9

I don't go for the conspiracy theories and I find the fuel tank explanation rather thin. But it has happened before, on the ground, and it doesn't take much to destroy a 747 from the inside.

But still... I just never found the accident investigation convincing. Not to say they weren't right in the end, but the evidence isn't compelling.

Answer 10

Where is the 'little known fact' about aircrafts 1-16 to be found? Thx.