Reassembling TWA Flight 800

Was TWA Flight 800 brought down by US friendly fire?

Filed under Conspiracies

Skeptoid #99
May 06, 2008
Podcast transcript | Listen | Subscribe
Bookmark and Share

July 17, 1996 — My wife and I were on our honeymoon, flying out of New York City. We got out all right, but one of the planes just behind us wasn't quite so lucky. TWA Flight 800, an older Boeing 747 jumbo, took off and headed out over the Atlantic Ocean. About twelve minutes after its departure, at about 13,700 feet, an explosion broke the aircraft in half just forward of the wing. All 230 people on board were killed.

The NTSB (National Transportation and Safety Board) managed to recover all 230 bodies, and over 95% of the wreckage from the ocean floor, which is pretty incredible. They reconstructed the aircraft to understand what went wrong. What was found, and what nobody disputes, is that the principal destruction was caused by an explosion of the fuel in the center wing fuel tank. What has never been determined is what triggered that explosion. Conspiracy theorists immediately jumped on this, and concluded that the aircraft must have been shot down by the US government, either deliberately or as accidental friendly fire.

Fuel was thrown on this fire from two principal sources. The first source was a number of eyewitness reports from people who saw a second brightly lit object going up into the sky and contacting the aircraft, a description which certainly sounds like a missile attacking the aircraft. The second cause of conspiratorial speculation was triggered by the government itself. The FBI, who was investigating the crash to see if it was a criminal act, engaged the CIA to produce a computer animation showing what the aircraft did after it exploded, in order to answer the questions of the families of the victims. According to the NTSB, when the nose broke off the aircraft, that made it tail heavy and it veered sharply upward for several thousand feet, burning all the way, thus looking like a missile. The FBI had no available computer animation resources of their own, so they had the CIA do it. And, once the CIA became involved, that screamed out to every conspiracy theorist in the world that the whole operation was a clandestine government coverup.

The aircraft was two and a half miles up, and about nine miles offshore, when it exploded. That puts the coastline just about exactly one minute away at the speed of sound. The vast majority of the eyewitnesses were between one minute and two minutes away, as sound travels. The majority of the 38 eyewitnesses who reported a skybound streak that's been described as a missile trail only turned to look after they heard the explosion. This means that for at least two minutes after the plane exploded, something happened that looked to many eyewitnesses like a missile going up. Remember, the majority of people who reported that it looked like a missile struck the aircraft, did not start watching until at least one minute after the explosion happened. Therefore, in most cases of people who said it was absolutely a missile, the laws of physics make it impossible that they could have seen such a missile. We know for a fact that what the aircraft did one minute after it exploded, looked enough like a missile to convince many eyewitnesses that it couldn't possibly have been anything else. In all of these cases, whatever they saw happened after any theorized missile would have detonated.

One of the conspiracy web sites, Flight800.org, has a page giving testimony from witnesses who believe that they distinctly saw two separate objects, a missile and a plane, converge. As you listen, pay attention to when the witnesses heard the sound relative to what they saw:

Witness 73: ...While keeping her eyes on the aircraft, she observed a 'red streak' moving up from the ground toward the aircraft at an approximately a 45 degree angle. The 'red streak' was leaving a light gray colored smoke trail... At the instant the smoke trail ended at the aircraft's right wing, she heard a loud sharp noise which sounded like a firecracker had just exploded at her feet. She then observed a fire at the aircraft followed by one or two secondary explosions which had a deeper sound. She then observed the front of the aircraft separate from the back.

Witness 88: ...All of a sudden he heard an explosion. He glanced over to the southeast and observed what he thought was a firework ascending into the sky. All of a sudden, it apparently reached the top of its flight... At this point he observed an airplane come into the field of view. He stated that the bright red object ran into the airplane and upon doing so both the plane and the object turned a real bright red then exploded into a huge plume of flame.

Witness 675: ...Noticed an orange flare ascending from the south... trailing white or light gray smoke. He then observed the flare strike what looked like an eastbound Cessna airplane on the port side... Within five (5) seconds... he heard what sounded like thunder and felt the ground shake.

Witness 145: ...She saw a plane and noticed an object spiraling towards the plane. The object which she saw for about one second, had a glow at the end of it and a gray/white smoke trail... She heard a loud noise and saw an explosion just as the object hit the plane. The plane dropped towards the water and appeared to split in two pieces. A few seconds later, she heard another explosion.

Whether you're a conspiracy theorist or not, the 1-minute minimum delay required by the speed of sound clearly makes it impossible to corroborate what these people heard with what they think they saw. This illustrates why the witness testimony, while still valuable, cannot be relied on as the definitive explanation for what happened. Anecdotal evidence has value for suggesting directions to research, but it does not by itself constitute evidence, and cannot reasonably be treated as such.

Anyway, who could have fired a missile? The FBI did identify some military assets that were in the area at the time, including a US Navy P3 Orion aircraft, and a US Coast Guard cutter. Neither asset has an anti-aircraft or missile capability. Radar data from four different sites also found four unidentified boats within 6nm of Flight 800, all but one of which responded to assist in search and rescue. Shoulder launched weapons do not have anything like the range required to reach the aircraft from the shore.

There's one final loose end that nobody has been able to definitively tie up, and that's the discovery of explosives residue on the debris. Although the conspiracy theorists charge that the NTSB has covered up this discovery, in fact the NTSB has freely and openly disclosed everything about it. It's known that no high energy explosives detonated on board the aircraft, because there is zero evidence of explosives damage anywhere. The best theory is that this residue is left over from exercises conducted with bomb-sniffing dogs on board the plane several months before. Conspiracy theorists charge that no such tests were conducted aboard this plane, but all available records indicate that they were. As a result of this theory, the NTSB made recommendations changing the procedures of such tests to prevent such explosives residue from contaminating other aircraft in the future.

If you do a Google search for "TWA Flight 800", most of the results are from conspiracy web sites that uncritically start with the assumption that the US government shot down the aircraft. These web sites then present opinion, conjecture, and hypothetical extrapolation that support that assumption. Sometimes you'll hear conspiracy theorists charge that the NTSB ignores eyewitness reports, or suppresses anything that doesn't agree with their official story of an accident. Anyone who's a pilot or an aviation nut knows that this couldn't be further from the truth. Go to NTSB.gov and click on Aviation Accident Database. Search for some recent accidents, as these will show you what an investigation looks like in progress. What you'll see are the facts that are known, and you'll see any eyewitness reports there might be. What you won't see is anything like an explanation or a theory, and certainly nothing like an "official story" that anyone is sticking to.

If you want to see what a final report looks like, go to NTSB.gov. The final report is a huge 341-page PDF document with 17,000 pages of supporting documentation. Here's a quote from the summary:

The source of ignition energy for the explosion could not be determined with certainty, but, of the sources evaluated by the investigation, the most likely was a short circuit outside of the CWT (center wing fuel tank) that allowed excessive voltage to enter it through electrical wiring associated with the fuel quantity indication system.

$2/mo $5/mo $10/mo One time

In the full report, the NTSB goes through other possible causes for the explosion of the center fuel tank, including:

A lightning or meteorite strike; a missile fragment; a small explosive charge placed on the CWT; auto ignition or hot surface ignition, resulting from elevated temperatures produced by sources external to the CWT; a fire migrating to the CWT from another fuel tank via the vent (stringer) system; an uncontained engine failure or a turbine burst in the air conditioning packs beneath the CWT; a malfunctioning CWT jettison/override pump; a malfunctioning CWT scavenge pump; and static electricity.

There's no need to repeat their findings on each of these causes here, if you're interested you can grab the full report and read section 2.3.1. In each case, the potential cause was found to be unlikely, unsupported by any evidence, and lacking evidence that would have resulted. Section 3.1 of the report lists their findings, which are facts that were determined with certainty. Among these: "The in-flight breakup of TWA flight 800 was not initiated by a bomb or a missile strike."

Of course, this doesn't change the mind of a die-hard conspiracy theorist, because this government-produced paper is simply part of the conspiracy. In fact, they consider the report's very existence as further evidence of the conspiracy. When you hear a conspiracy theory that provides no testable evidence of its own, but relies only on anecdotal testimonies, extrapolations of possible motivations, and non-evidenced claims of implausible coverups, you have every good reason to be skeptical.

Follow me on Twitter @BrianDunning.

Brian Dunning

© 2008 Skeptoid Media, Inc. Copyright information

References & Further Reading

Barreveld, D. The Spark That Killed 230 People: The Scary Details of the NTSB's Final Report of the Crash of TWA Flight 800. Lincoln, NE: iUniverse Inc., 2002.

Hall, J., Hammerschmidt, J., Goglia, J., Black, G., Carmody, C. NTSB Abstract AAR-00/03. Washington, DC: National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), 2000.

Krause, Shari Stamford. Aircraft Safety : Accident Investigations, Analyses, & Applications, Second Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2003. 399-415.

Van Natta Jr., D. "Navy Retrieves 2 Black Boxes from Sea Floor." New York Times. 25 Jul. 1996, Newspaper.

Vankin, Jonathan, Whalen, John. The 80 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time. New York: Kensington Publishing Corp., 2004. 447-457.

Wald, Matthew L. "T.W.A. Crash Investigators Ridicule a Missile Theory and Pin Hopes on Research." New York Times. 14 Mar. 1997, March 14, 1997: B1.

Reference this article:
Dunning, B. "Reassembling TWA Flight 800." Skeptoid Podcast. Skeptoid Media, Inc., 6 May 2008. Web. 18 Apr 2014. <http://skeptoid.com/episodes/4099>

Discuss!

10 most recent comments | Show all 44 comments

so I just watched a documentary on Netflix about this called twa: flight 800. im 26 I never heard of this and I have an open mind so I watched. you talk about the bomb sniffing dogs so do they. you talk about witnesses so do they. what I don't get what doesn't make any sense is fbi involvement with different aspects of the investigation. moving tags guys banging on wreckage aka evidence. to give your skeptoid website any credibility you need to address this documentary. everybody wants a clear straight forward answer and nobody wants to hear that a missle shot down an American airliner . conspiracy or not our government consistently lies to us. guys in power in the government lie to congress and get away with it not even a slap on the wrist. most recent memory of this is james clapper lying about prism to congress. I honestly believe you would have called prism a conspiracy before snowden. you should redo the "episode" only refuting the documentary

another nick?, usa
November 16, 2013 10:53am

Watched the Twa 800 documentary on Netflix. From the evidence presented, I believe there is a government coverup going on. From past experience in the government/military, there are cover stories and black op answers for anything / problem that our country faces.

JD, LV,Nv
November 17, 2013 9:16am

Also just saw the "TWA: Flight 800" documentary, and to be honest Brian, I don't think those testifying in it count as cranks, crackpots, or even conspiracy theories; they seem to be the real NTSA investigators, other authorities that deal with the case, and the witnesses whose testimonies were ignored to produce that infamous CIA animation.

By the way, where is the comment in which you said those cranks on the new video can't possible provide anything worthy to watch, and my response saying that you are clearly biased because you are dismissing something that you haven't even watched?

Adam Freeman, Springfield
January 12, 2014 3:38pm

Brian Dunning has zero credibility. Flight 800 was long ago proven to be a missile shootdown as all the evidence the government criminally covered-up showed.

There's a new video by Thomas Stalcup and Kristina Borjesson showing several of the NTSB investigators from the crash testifying that they were ordered to conceal evidence and evidence of missile damage was removed from the hangar. Borjesson was fired by CBS for trying to tell the truth. NTSB investigators never protested a cover-up before.

Sanders had the purple reddish residue from the seats tested as PETN rocket propellant. FBI arrested him and confiscated all samples. The NASA scientist FBI claimed tested it as seat glue, Charley Bassett, protested he never did any such test.

The nose gear assembly had blast gouge striations in it that were impossible for a fuel explosion.

The investigation never found any evidence of a fuel tank short circuit that normally leaves very visible wire insulation burn boils.

Stalcup found evidence of ejecta exiting Flight 800 at mach 4. Impossible for a 300 foot per second fuel explosion. It also all exited on the opposite continuing starboard side from the missile witnessed zig-zagging and homing towards Flight 800. Stalcup's video is coming out on Amazon.

Mike Wire's bridge could not violently shake from a 300 foot per second fuel blast. However 2000 foot per second ordnance high explosive would shake a bridge.

Jetblast, New York
April 03, 2014 1:43pm

At least Brian doesn't hide behind some made up name like jetblast..When your AFRAID of posting your name ..you have no credibility. ..Dave Festa. Apatriot4usa@gmail.com..

dave festa, florida
April 03, 2014 3:44pm

What makes you so angry about the true evidence behind Flight 800? Do you honestly think your embarrassing response does anything other than make the evidence Mr Dunning is in denial of look even stronger? Me and my evidence have plenty of credibility, as is shown in your inability to either recognize or answer it. It seems Skeptoid is another way of saying license for untruth and denial. What I wrote is the facts. Mr Dunning ain't nowhere to be seen. You don't honestly think what you wrote is an adequate answer to this issue? I can't see what point you possibly think you're making? More and more backwards, authority-obeying opinions originate from certain regions of the US where truth, democracy, rule of law, and yes, credibility, don't seem to be the first concern. What? Government criminality doesn't bother you? You have no issues with its affect on American democracy? Dunning's obviously not including the whole truth and the whole premise of Skeptoid is a Machiavellian, CIA psy-ops-like disinformation site. I think we know who's really afraid here. Afraid to take on the big powerful crooks so they pose as Skeptics or patriots instead. You can see the arrogance of these types because, like Dave, they don't necessarily deny the facts. Facts are "irrelevant" to their form of political "patriotism". Brave Viet Nam Navy pilot Commander Donaldson was most-likely murdered by CIA because he wasn't going to quit pursuing justice with Flight 800. Try answering the facts.

Jetblast, New York
April 03, 2014 5:26pm

Hide behind a fictional name..it negates the source as credible or reliable. ..regardless of the information ..its like hiding behind a hostage. ..If its the truth or you believe its the truth and its your post..stand behind it. After all its what you stand for, or isnt that important to you? Are you afraid of representing what you believe?

dave festa, florida
April 05, 2014 10:57am

There is no proof that the name dave festa is in fact your proper name, and not just another false name.

With the sort of "patriotic" fanaticism that you often have posted here on Skeptoid, why should anyone take the name "dave festa" as the truth ?

Even if it is the truth it means nothing, because no sensible person who posts clear evidence contrary to the Official Story would ever think of searching you out and confronting you personally over the issue.

They are only interested in the presentation of the truth, that is all.

Try answering to the clear evidence that the person who signs in as Jetblast has presented to Skeptoid, instead of the usual personal attacks that have come to characterize the "arguments" that someone called dave festa continues to present, and which underline a mindless form of patriotism bordering on fanaticism.

Macky, Auckland
April 05, 2014 5:06pm

Mr J. Blast. ,Its hilarious, when the officail story says terrorist hit ,9-11..the wackos say oh no, no terrorists. ..though when the official story Fl800 says no terrorists. The same wackos say. Oh yes terrorists. ..

Problem with fl800 missille theory is there was no missile. There wasnt any damage to the plane that would be consistent with holes from impacts that were formed from the outside to the inside of the aircraft the damage was 100% consistent with a explosion that originated from the inside of the aircraft ..the directions of the holes in the plane and how the holes were formed proves no missille. Sorry mr J.Blast. no missile ,have a nice day... good bye...you know its probably is a good idea to use a fake name in your case after all.. maybe next time do your homework. ..

dave festa, florida
April 05, 2014 6:49pm

Since you mention 9-11 on this thread, dave, there is no public evidence for terrorists, especially on Fl77.

There is no evidence that the 9-11 plot was masterminded by Osama Bin Laden et al.

The FBI had no solid evidence Bin Laden was ever involved with 9-11, otherwise the DOJ would have taken the FBI evidence and indicted him, as it did for other offences.

Bin Laden was "indicted" in fact by Bush and the govt-controlled media.
Very similar to the unproven and completely unevidenced allegations that Hanjour piloted Fl77 after "terrorist hijack".

The Taliban actually offered to Bush that they would find Bin Laden and hand him over.
Bush rejected their offer and the illegal war in Afghanistan still continues.

But of course dave, you believe everything that the newspapers say, pipelined through from the US govt, because you are such a patriot that all sense of critical analysis is suspended in lieu of a belief system that "America can do no wrong", and, echoing Skeptoid "skeptics", that the Official Story is always right.

And like anyone whose faith is akin to a religious fanatic, your response to anything outside said Official Story is a personal attack on anyone who dares to question the Official Story, even when those questions are backed up by solid evidence.

As for "hiding behind a fake name", you have continuously hidden behind your pronouncements of beliefs masquerading as facts, by your refusal to present any evidence for them.

Macky, Auckland
April 05, 2014 7:28pm

Make a comment about this episode of Skeptoid (please try to keep it brief & to the point). Anyone can post:

Your Name:
City/Location:
Comment:
characters left. Discuss the issues - personal attacks against other commenters, posts containing advertisements or links to commercial services, nonsense, and other useless posts will be deleted.
Answer 3 + 1 =

You can also discuss this episode in the Skeptoid Forum, hosted by the James Randi Educational Foundation, or join the Skeptalk email discussion list.

What's the most important thing about Skeptoid?

Support Skeptoid
 
Skeptoid host, Brian Dunning
Skeptoid is hosted
and produced by
Brian Dunning


Newest
The Black Eyed Kids
Skeptoid #410, Apr 15 2014
Read | Listen (11:18)
 
Oil Pulling
Skeptoid #409, Apr 8 2014
Read | Listen (12:24)
 
Skeptoid Media is a 501(c)(3) Public Charity
Apr 4 2014
Listen (1:13)
 
15 Phreaky Phobias
Skeptoid #408, Apr 1 2014
Read | Listen (12:44)
 
The Death of Mad King Ludwig
Skeptoid #407, Mar 25 2014
Read | Listen (11:49)
 
Newest
#1 -
Listener Feedback: Alternative Medicine
Read | Listen
#2 -
The JFK Assassination
Read | Listen
#3 -
Asking the Socratic Questions
Read | Listen
#4 -
5 False Arguments for Raw Milk
Read | Listen
#5 -
The Vanishing Village of Angikuni Lake
Read | Listen
#6 -
The Riddle of the L-8 Blimp
Read | Listen
#7 -
The Secrets of MKULTRA
Read | Listen
#8 -
Who Discovered the New World?
Read | Listen

Recent Comments...

[Valid RSS]

  Skeptoid PodcastSkeptoid on Facebook   Skeptoid on Twitter   Brian Dunning on Google+   Skeptoid RSS

Members Portal

 
 


"Stuff We Eat"
inFact with Brian Dunning


Support Skeptoid