Date: 27 Dec 96 19:09:39 From: jfmezei <firstname.lastname@example.org> Organization: SPC References: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
Chris Jardine wrote: > real authoratative comments on this. Some people have said that the > fuel/fumes in the center tank were solely responsible for the > accident. Jim Kalstrom (sp?) the FBI guy, stated that they know that the centre fuel tank exploded and that it was at the centre or close to the explosion which began the destruction cycle. He stated that they had NOT ruled out criminal acts such as missile or bomb. (I guess bomb would include a device wich would have detonated the tank). My guess is that in the process of investigating TWA800, the NTSB found weakenesses in the tank design of later 747 models and released the recent findings. Media reports did state that the some/all the recommendations did NOT apply to the 747-100 whose centre fuel design is different (more robust) than the later models. So, some media like to sensationalize and blame TWA800 on a static discharge or empty fuel tank. In fact, all this recent finding told us is that the 3 air conditioning packs below the fuel tank may have contributed to heating up the almost empty fuel tank to a level where the fumes were warm enough to explode GIVEN A CATALYST. There are speculations on what that catalyst would have been, but no conclusive evidence. > seems really hard to believe that NOTHING from the critical area of > this plane hasn't been found. Are the searchers not looking in the > right place? Has some of this material been found? If so, why doesn't > anybody seem to know about it? Just because the newscasts don't report on TWA800's daily progress like they did during the first week of the investigation does not mean that the NTSB is taking a long coffee break. For instance, I have not heard about the results of that supposed dredging operation. Or seen recent pictures of the reconstructed hull.