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
<ttp://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
<ttp://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


I have no theories as to what brought the plane down, but the spark in
the fuel tank explanation does not satisfy me.

A couple of pilots from the 102nd Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Squadron
out of Sufflok county airport  flying an Air Force H-60 reported that
they saw something streaking UP to the plane before the crash. I worked
for  a sister squadron out in Oregon at the time. That does not lead me
to any theories, but between the gas tank spark and witness reports, I
don't think the NTSB got it right.

Brian Trubee