Unlike hydrogen gasoline will ignite over a relatively narrow
 range of mixtures. 10:1 to about 18:1. The tank environment is
 always too rich to ignite the mixture.

 Paul Lamar

 Brings to mind the TWA 747 loss a number of years ago where government
 investigators concluded shorting wires in empty tank ignited jet fuel
 vapors
 causing explosion. I was skeptical from the start. Seems to me all 747
 aircraft that vintage would have been grounded immediately for
    inspection.


 Al K

 My wife Robin worked for TWA in those days as a mechanic. All 747's
    were
 inspected
 for loose or bare wires. Robin, due to her small size, spent many hours
 crawling
 around in fuel tanks. A nasty job. Nothing was found. It was common
 practice to take
 off with empty center tank if you did not need it. This reduced the
 stress on
 the wing spar. That meant thousands of successful
 747 take offs were made with empty center tanks. They also did their
 damnedest to
 ignite the mostly empty center tank on an old 747 with out success.

 IMHO it was shot down in error by the Navy and covered up by the
    Clinton
 administration.
 Think of the political fall out if they admitted shooting it down in
    error.

 Heck cars would be blowing up all over the place. Fuel flows through
 the pump past the armature and past the brushes.

 What they do with a fuel air bomb is first blow up the tank to
    distribute
 the fuel in the air to roughly the proper mixture and then ignite the

 mixture
 with a flare. Then you get the really big bang. Forget the movies of
 cars and
 gasoline tank trucks blowing up.

 A can of gas will put out a match but don't ask me to demonstrate :)
 Do it with a robot.

    Paul Lamar


 NOT a Match, but a cigarette, Virg


    I've seen it done without igniting the fumes (cigarette).
    Harold Lunt

  If i remember correctly several days before the 747 was shot down the
  Palestinians said if we did not stop backing Israel they would give us
  something to think about.
  Steve Hudson



  The aircraft destroyed as TWA Flight 800 was reconstructed and is at
 the NTSB training facility in
  Virginia (I don't recall the exact location, and I have not seen it
 since shortly after the
  reconstruction was accomplished).  Although I often (in fact, usually)
 have differences with NTSB
  findings, they appear correct on this one.  I certainly love conspiracy
 theories as well as the next
  guy, but they don't fit in this instance. The physical evidence reveals
 an explosion from inside the
  center tank.

  ~ Nick Jilek


  Where you involved in the investigation or are you restating what you
 read?
  Using the word "conspiracy" does not apply in this case. It is an attempt
  to discredit the people that might disagree with the official findings.

  All the TWA mechanics that inspected all 747's after the 1996 crash
 disagree with
  you. No "shorts" were found.Thousands of 747 flights had occurred with
 empty
  or near empty center tanks and none "exploded" except that one. Flying
 with
  an empty center tank was SOP.

  It reduced the stress on the wing. No modifications or AD's were
 mandated having
  anything to do with the center tank fuel system. My wife was a TWA
 mechanic at the time.
  IMHO the accidental shoot down  was covered up by the Clinton
 administration
  (1993 to 2001).  IMHO the truth will come out sooner or later.

  I doubt a terrorist shot it down as it was obviously hit by a radar guided
  missile and not infra red guided missile. If infra red it would have hit
  an engine.

  In 1988 a guided missile cruiser (Similar to the one in the Atlantic at
 the time
  of the TWA shoot down.) shot down an airliner in the Persian Gulf by
 mistake.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655


  Paul Lamar


  Paul, I beg to differ on the Persian gulf incident being a "mistake".
 The Aircraft was intentionally
  targeted by the guided missile cruiser because it appeared to be on an
 attack vector to the cruiser,
  which was at the time, engaged in multiple surface actions. The
 aircraft did not respond to attempts
  at radio communication, was not squaking transponder code.
  CMDR Will C. Rogers acted in the defense of his crew and vessel. The
 Iranians intentionally sent the
  aircraft, filled with martyrs for the Islamic revolution, into the hot
 zone to provoke an
  international incident.
  Will C Rogers was my CO aboard the USS Cushing, DD985, previously, and
 I never met a more
  professional naval officer in my short career with the military.
  C. Smith

  I can believe that.

  Paul Lamar

 The launch and target intercept results of a radar-guided missile from a
 USN ship off the coast of the US would be known to literally hundreds of
 people (those aboard the vessel,
 those monitoring the airspace, those monitoring the exercise, etc).  All
 these people would need to be be silent, despite media inquiries, etc,
 in the wake of the well-publicized
 loss of hundreds of lives.  Very unlikely.

 It's hard for anyone who has worked in a large organization and who has
 seen how secrets are(n't) kept to believe a plan/coverup of any kind
 that involves more than 3-4 well motivated  people would remain
 unpublicized.

 Mark W.

 I have heard that scenario before.
 When I was in the military  dealing with secret projects we were threatened
 with treason if we revealed anything to anybody including our own
 family. The
 guided missile cruisers can shoot down an aircraft out of sight miles away
 with the Aegis Combat System. SM-1ER/SM-2ER, an extended range
 surface-to-air missile.

 As I understand it target drones were launched
 about the same time from land for a military exercise off the Jersey coast.
 The personal aboard ship may not know what they shot down.

 Have you read all of this yet? http://twa800.com/documents.htm

 My wife was a TWA mechanic and she worked at LAX with 200 others.
 Some are close friends of ours. They had to inspect several 747 fuel
 tanks. I am taking what they say above at face value.

 I suggest you run a test where a small amount of diesel fuel is in a sealed
 atmospheric pressure small tin can and try to ignite it with a spark. DO
 NOT pressurizes the can as that could be ignited by getting the mass air
 fuel ratio in  the correct 10:1 to 20:1 air:fuel dangerous proportions. In general fuel
 in a  tank is difficult to explode due to an overly rich fuel air ratio as
 mentioned  above. However do it in a safe place.


 Paul Lamar

I might add if a spark in a fuel tank could cause an explosion
cars would be blowing up all over the place as every car in the
world now has a DC motor fuel pump with arcing brushes inside the
tank itself. Take a close look at this picture. The fuel passes
through the pump motor no less.

Paul Lamar