From: Bill Lucy 

Out of darkness, Raymond Chuang says...
> Steve,
>
> I personally consider the idea of a terrorist shootdown or an accidental US
> Navy missile launch causing the crash of TWA 800 to be totally ridiculous
> for the following reasons:
>
> 1. The altitude where the plane exploded was 13,800 feet. That is above the
> maximum operational altitude of all MANPAD systems except for the Swedish
> RBs 70 and possibly the BAE Starstreak system.

The SA-7 and SA-14 are actually capable of greater than the 13,800 feet altitude of
Flight 800, according to some reports. The problem is the distance from land. The
flight was more than 3 miles from any land at the time of the incident.

> 2. There are no blast fragmentation patterns consistent with the type of
> warhead used on Stinger, SA-7/14/16/18, Blowpipe, Javelin or RBs 70
> missiles.

All "blast fragmentation patterns" were determined by the NTSB.
Do you really know
if this information is accurate?

> 3. Given most MANPAD's home in on IR emissions, there is no signs of any of
> the JT9D engines being hit by a MANPAD missile.

Actually most successful IR launched missiles *don't* hit engines. The design of
the missile is to get *to* the larger target.

> 5. Given that there were over 1,000 people involved in the TWA 800 crash
> investigation, it'll be pretty much impossible to cover up the idea of a
> shootdown by a SAM. Bill Clinton can't be powerful enough to completely shut
> up the Department of Transportation, the National Transportation Safety
> Board, Boeing and the FBI all at the same time....

Supposedly, it *hasn't* been possible to cover it up, which is why we're discussing
it now. There have been people within the NTSB who have said the rulings
(note: more than one) are biased.

I frankly don't believe the missile theory, BTW. I haven't followed the
whole affair. But even a cursory look on the web shows it isn't necessarily
as you say.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4